Teams Transform 36 Representations Enabling Accessibility for Mixed-Visual Ability Workforces

Researchers are increasingly focused on the challenges faced by blind and low-vision (BLV) professionals working within mixed-visual ability teams, particularly regarding inaccessible information formats. Yichun Zhao, Miguel A Nacenta, and Sowmya Somanath, from the University of Victoria, alongside Mahadeo A Sukhai from IDEA-STEM, detail a study investigating how teams transform information to ensure inclusivity. Their work is significant because it moves beyond simply acknowledging accessibility needs to analysing the practical processes of information modification and recreation, revealing how teams proactively and reactively address representational barriers. Through a week-long diary study and interviews with 23 BLV and sighted professionals, the team identified four key patterns of coordination, offering valuable insights for designing better support systems for genuinely collaborative mixed-ability workplaces.

Information access barriers in mixed-visual ability teams often

Scientists have demonstrated a crucial understanding of how mixed-visual ability teams navigate inaccessible information formats in professional settings. Researchers conducted a week-long diary study, coupled with follow-up interviews, involving 23 blind or low-vision (BLV) professionals and their sighted colleagues from five legal, non-profit, and consulting teams, meticulously documenting 36 instances of information transformation. This work reveals that teams frequently encounter PDFs, diagrams, and other materials in formats inaccessible to BLV employees, necessitating modifications or complete recreations to facilitate collaborative work. The study establishes that these transformations are often overlooked, lack dedicated infrastructural support, and contribute to an inequitable distribution of labour within teams.

The research team characterised how these representational transformations for accessibility are performed, examining whether they are initiated proactively or reactively, and how teams either simplify existing representations or create enhanced alternatives. Specifically, the study details how teams manage accessibility issues through solitary fixes, advocacy for improved standards, the creation of parallel representations, and collective assembly of information. These patterns highlight the complex interplay between individual effort and collaborative strategies employed to overcome accessibility barriers.

This breakthrough reveals that accessibility-driven information transformations are not merely technical adjustments, but integral components of knowledge work, impacting team efficiency and equity. Experiments show that the process of transforming representations, while often necessary, can be time-consuming and place additional burdens on team members, particularly those with visual impairments. The findings underscore the need for systems designed to proactively support mixed-ability collaboration, moving beyond ad-hoc accommodations towards integrated solutions. The research establishes a framework for analysing these transformations based on triggers, the initial accessibility mismatch, actions taken by the team, and the resulting consequences for workflow and labour distribution.

The work opens avenues for designing more inclusive representational systems, emphasising the importance of team coordination, shared values, and a supportive culture. By understanding how teams currently address accessibility challenges, developers can create tools that streamline the transformation process, reduce the burden on individuals, and foster more equitable collaboration. This study not only identifies opportunities for improved software design but also reinforces the critical role of human factors in creating truly accessible and inclusive workplaces for all knowledge workers, regardless of their visual abilities.

Diary studies, interviews and focus groups employed

Scientists investigated how mixed-visual ability teams manage information accessibility in collaborative work environments. The research team employed a mixed-methods approach, combining a week-long diary study with follow-up individual interviews and focus group sessions to capture in-situ practices. Twenty-three professionals, representing five legal, non-profit, and consulting teams, participated in the diary study, documenting 36 cases of representational work. Researchers also conducted two focus group sessions with seven additional participants from two separate teams, offering flexible participation for those unable to commit to the diary study.

This comprehensive design enabled the team to gather detailed insights into the evolution of information representations within real-world work contexts. The study pioneered a five-day diary study procedure, structured into pre-study briefings, daily diary entries, and post-study interviews. Prior to data collection, participants underwent a 30-minute briefing, providing informed consent and an introduction to the concept of information representation with illustrative examples. Participants then documented their experiences with information representations over five working days, recording instances of both successful use and accessibility barriers.

They detailed contextual information, including collaborators, the purpose of the representations, their role in modification, and any challenges encountered. Participants submitted entries in their preferred format , word documents, voice memos, screenshots, text messages, or emails , allowing for flexible data capture. To ensure data quality and participant engagement, the first author checked in daily with each participant via their preferred communication method, addressing questions and providing reminders. Following the diary study, researchers conducted 50-90 minute semi-structured interviews with each participant, gathering additional reflections on their experiences.

These interviews began with demographic data collection, including age, gender, educational background, professional experience, and visual ability. Subsequent questioning focused on factors influencing representation transformations, the impact of visual abilities on these choices, team interactions, and strategies for overcoming accessibility challenges. The team analysed data from both the diary study and focus groups, comparing findings to understand the nuances of collaborative accessibility work.

Collaboration patterns resolving representational incompatibility often reveal underlying

The selection process prioritised cases with clear narratives and sufficient contextual detail, favouring diary study data due to its greater granularity compared to retrospective focus group accounts. Results demonstrate that transformations followed two primary mechanisms: enhancement and simplification. Enhancement, observed in 13 cases, involved augmenting representations to improve accessibility without sacrificing core functionality, such as adding alt-text, audio cues, and high-contrast themes to PowerPoint presentations. However, accessibility-driven enhancement frequently encountered technical challenges, with 15 participants reporting difficulties due to inadequate tool support, leading some to abandon enhancement in favour of simplification.

Conversely, simplification, occurring in 19 cases, reduced representations to more basic formats, often at the cost of advanced features, like converting a complex database into a linear Word document. The team recorded that simplification, while practical, often resulted in a loss of information fidelity, as noted by nine participants, but enabled continued work. The most frequent pattern, “Disposable Fixes”, observed in 19 cases, involved an individual transforming an incompatible representation into a temporary alternative for themselves or a colleague, potentially concentrating the workload on a single person. Sighted colleagues also frequently undertook solitary actions to address incompatibilities experienced by their BLV teammates.

Four patterns of inclusive information work emerge

Scientists have investigated how mixed-visual ability work teams manage accessible information sharing. The research characterised how teams address representational incompatibility, examining whether actions were proactive or reactive, simplification versus enhancement strategies, and patterns of coordination between team members. The analysis revealed four recurring patterns of team action: disposable fixes, transformed becomes the standard, parallel representations, and assembly.

These patterns have distinct consequences for labour distribution, collaboration, and equity within teams. Researchers found trade-offs exist, where technically inefficient transformations can yield social benefits like increased trust. The study highlights the often-overlooked ‘invisible access labour’ required to facilitate teamwork in mixed-visual ability contexts. This work contributes to a deeper understanding of collaborative accessibility by detailing how accessibility-driven transformations are triggered, executed, coordinated, and the resulting consequences. The authors acknowledge that judging patterns as inherently positive or negative can obscure contextual factors influencing behaviour. Future research should explore how perceived outcome quality impacts long-term collaboration, building on the identified patterns and their associated trade-offs. By identifying opportunities for system design, this research aims to support proactive accessibility, flexible representations, and balanced efficiency with trust-building in mixed-visual ability work environments.