Accessibility Specialist. I focus on ensuring content created, events held and company assets are as accessible as possible, for as many people as possible.
I don't know the details but it sounds like the agency should "take the blame" not you as you did what was right, protected the client's interests and the interests of their customers.
It sounds like someone higher up didn't want to take the blame for it (but it is your recounting so obviously I can only infer whether you deserved a reprimand or not 😋)
ADA litigation is not likely for *most * businesses and people focus too much on the legal aspect (the "stick"). When talking to anything other than a multi national about accessibility run the numbers with them and focus on the increase in profits (the "carrot").
A basic example
If the widget or feature costs less to implement than the revenue it will add to the bottom line in 12 months then push hard as it is a "no brainer".
I tend to look at their current conversion rates with them and then use a 1% uplift in their current rate as a starting point. Run the numbers from visitors to conversions and see if the item pays for itself.
For example: Before:
1,000 visits a day
2% conversion rate
20 sales
average sale £50
Annual Revenue: £365,000
After:
1,000 visits a day
2.02% conversion rate (1% increase)
20.2 sales
average sale £50
Annual Revenue: £368,500
So implementing the feature should add £10 a day in the above fictitious scenario.
Assuming the feature doesn't cost more than £3,650 (1 year return) then the client should go ahead with it.
Then you pile on top of that the fact that their competitors are not meeting the needs of people with disabilities so they can steal clients from them easily (more potential visitors), that it adds to their Corporate Social Responsibility Policy (if they have one) and the moral grounds and I guarantee 99% of business owners will agree.
Obviously I know you are a Dev and it is perhaps "not your place" if that is the culture where you currently are, but that is how I build the case for accessibility (simplified but you get the idea) and I would hope you could take what I do and turn it into your own case (assuming this experience has not put you off too much, I hope it doesn't!).
Oh and as a nice added side effect did you notice that your boss would be happy too, extra revenue in the pot for your company so a win-win!
Sharing an example of how to make the financial case is really helpful.
It's partially why the request to spend time(money) removing an existing feature that could easily have existed in tandem with the client request.
Regardless, with your example and the lessons learned from my experience I, and others, can hopefully better navigate similar situations in the future.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
It should have hurt a lot!
I don't know the details but it sounds like the agency should "take the blame" not you as you did what was right, protected the client's interests and the interests of their customers.
It sounds like someone higher up didn't want to take the blame for it (but it is your recounting so obviously I can only infer whether you deserved a reprimand or not 😋)
ADA litigation is not likely for *most * businesses and people focus too much on the legal aspect (the "stick"). When talking to anything other than a multi national about accessibility run the numbers with them and focus on the increase in profits (the "carrot").
A basic example
If the widget or feature costs less to implement than the revenue it will add to the bottom line in 12 months then push hard as it is a "no brainer".
I tend to look at their current conversion rates with them and then use a 1% uplift in their current rate as a starting point. Run the numbers from visitors to conversions and see if the item pays for itself.
For example:
Before:
1,000 visits a day
2% conversion rate
20 sales
average sale £50
Annual Revenue: £365,000
After:
1,000 visits a day
2.02% conversion rate (1% increase)
20.2 sales
average sale £50
Annual Revenue: £368,500
So implementing the feature should add £10 a day in the above fictitious scenario.
Assuming the feature doesn't cost more than £3,650 (1 year return) then the client should go ahead with it.
Then you pile on top of that the fact that their competitors are not meeting the needs of people with disabilities so they can steal clients from them easily (more potential visitors), that it adds to their Corporate Social Responsibility Policy (if they have one) and the moral grounds and I guarantee 99% of business owners will agree.
Obviously I know you are a Dev and it is perhaps "not your place" if that is the culture where you currently are, but that is how I build the case for accessibility (simplified but you get the idea) and I would hope you could take what I do and turn it into your own case (assuming this experience has not put you off too much, I hope it doesn't!).
Oh and as a nice added side effect did you notice that your boss would be happy too, extra revenue in the pot for your company so a win-win!
I really appreciate this response.
Sharing an example of how to make the financial case is really helpful.
It's partially why the request to spend time(money) removing an existing feature that could easily have existed in tandem with the client request.
Regardless, with your example and the lessons learned from my experience I, and others, can hopefully better navigate similar situations in the future.