Accessibility, Usability, Safety, Ergonomics:

Concepts, Models, and Differences

Klaus Peter Wegge1, Dirk Zimmermann2

1
Siemens Business Services C-LAB, Fürstenallee 11, 33102 Paderborn, Germany
2
T-Mobile Deutschland GmbH, Landgrabenweg 151, 53227 Bonn, Germany
1
[email protected], 2 [email protected]

Abstract. The purpose of this paper is to clearly point out commonly agreed
definitions of the terms Ergonomics, Usability, Accessibility and Safety, their
relations to each other, overlaps and differences and their influence on the design of
products and services.

Keywords: Accessibility, Ergonomics, Usability, Safety; Differences between

Accessibility & Usability

1 Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to clearly point out commonly agreed definitions of the
terms Ergonomics, Usability, Accessibility and Safety, their relations to each other,
overlaps and differences and their influence on the design of products and services .
It is well recognized that these different terms are often mixed up unintentionally
and replaced by synonyms. "Terms such as design for all, barrier-free design,
inclusive design and transgenerational design are used similarly but in different
contexts" (ISO/IEC Guide 71, chapter 3.2. Note 1 [2]). Also terms like "Universal
Design", "Universal Accessibility" or "Accessibility for All" belong to this category,
underlining the intention that products "are usable by all people, to the greatest extent
possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design" (ISO/IEC Guide 71,
chapter 3.2. Note 2 [2]). A precise definition of these synonyms is often not available.
Therefore they are not covered by this paper.
 Further confusions arise from the word "Usability" which is mostly used in the
sense of the basic "use" or "usage" of products by the user (e.g. ISO/IEC Guide 71,
chapter 1.1.A [2]) but not as a terminus technicus for a design concept called
"Usability" which is defined in ISO 9241-11 [5] (see chapter 2.2.).
The intention of this paper is therefore to stimulate a consistent use of the terms
Accessibility, Usability, Safety and Ergonomics e.g. in standards, guidelines and
regulation and to avoid unnecessary confusion and discussions of stakeholders.

2 Terminology

The concepts of Accessibility, Usability and Safety all have a foundation in or

relation to the area of Ergonomics. However, they all have a different focus in their
specific area e.g. user groups, requirements, methods and legal implication (see
Figure 1).

Accessibility:
Prerequisite for basic Use

• Disability Types
• Accessibility Guidelines
•Dual Channel Principle
Usability: •Data on limited Safety:
Optimized Use human abilities Consequences of Use

• Context of Use • Avoid Harm

• Tasks & Workflows • Health Protection
• User Roles • Risk Minimization
• Mental Models
<5% >95%

Ergonomics: Product Design

Data on Human Abilities (5%-95%)

Design Guidelines
Standardization
Figure 1: Accessibility, Usability and Safety in relation to Ergonomics
2.1. Ergonomics

DIN/EN/ISO 6385 [9] defines Ergonomics as a "scientific discipline concerned

with the understanding of interactions among human and other elements of a system,
and the profession that applies theory, principles, data and methods to design in order
to optimize human well-being and overall system performance".
Ergonomics deals with general design principles, providing design guidance by
using data on human work performance. "Properly applied, ergonomics optimizes the
performance and effectiveness of the work system, including the workers, without
detriment to their health, well-being or safety." (DIN/EN/ISO 6385 [9])
The three areas of Accessibility, Usability and Safety can be seen as specialized
facets of Ergonomic Design

2.2. Accessibility

ISO/IEC Guide 71 [2], which is equal to CEN/CLC Guide 6, defines Accessible

Design as "design focused on principles of extending standard design to people with
some type of performance limitation to maximize the number of potential customers
who can readily use a product, building or service".
Therefore it "widens the scope of users as far as possible" and "is not limited to the
5th to 95th percentiles of working populations." (ISO DTR 22411 [3])
Accessibility is a prerequisite for basic use of products by elderly persons and
persons with sensory, physical or cognitive disabilities. Generally, the Usability
criteria Effectiveness, Efficiency, don't play any practical role in accessible design
yet, let alone Satisfaction.
There are three main strategies (see ISO/IEC Guide 71, Chapter 3.2 [2]) to achieve
accessible products:
1. "designing products, services and environments that are readily usable by
most users without any modification," (Universal Design)
2. "by making products or services adaptable to different users (adapting user
interfaces)," (Adaptive Design)
3. "and by having standardized interfaces to be compatible with special
products for persons with disabilities." (Interoperability with Assistive
Technology).
The European Commission prefers a similar definition, but uses Design for All (DFA)
as a term instead of Accessible Design:
"There are three main strategies for DFA:
1. design for most users without modifications,
2. design for easy adaptation to different users (e.g. using adjustable interfaces),
3. design with a view to connect seamlessly to assistive devices."
(COM2005/425 [10])
ISO 9241-171 [7] and 9241-20 [6] define Accessibility in a very different way as
"usability of a product, service, environment or facility by people with the widest
range of capabilities".
 "The concept of accessibility addresses the full range of user capabilities and is not
limited to users who are formally recognized as having a disability."
"The usability-orientated concept of accessibility aims to achieve levels of
effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction that are as high as possible considering the
specified context of use, while paying particular attention to the full range of
capabilities within the user population." The mixture of the concepts of Accessibility
and Usability may occur for historical reasons. But it is remarkable that even in the
same standardization organization incompatible definitions are used.

Universal Design
The first approach of Accessible Design provides ergonomic data on the limited
abilities of elderly persons and persons with sensory, physical or cognitive
disabilities, aiming at including the widest possible range of user abilities (see
ISO/IEC Guide 71, chapter 4.2.1 [2]).
This general data are e.g. provided in section 9 of ISO DTR 22411 [3]. This
approach should however be limited in its application, in order to avoid disadvantages
to the majority of the user group and discrimination against or stigmatization of
elderly persons and persons with disabilities [13].
Additionally, conflicting requirements may occur from the different types of
disabilities.

Adaptive Design
The second approach of Accessible Design provides design techniques for
"compensation for impaired abilities with alternative modality(ies). This approach is
called alternative format" (see ISO/IEC Guide 71, chapter 4.2.1 [2]) and is also
known as Dual Channel Principle. Adaptive Design aims at allowing users to adapt
the product or service to their specific individual needs (e.g. switch off the child
safety lock for one hand operation). These design techniques are e.g. provided in
section 8 of ISO DTR 22411 [3] (while not interfering with the majority of users).
Very initial recognition of the effectiveness of use of alternative modalities can be
seen in the area of software accessibility.

Interoperability with Assistive technology

The third approach is Interoperability with Assistive Technology; allowing users
with special needs to utilize their commonly used assistive devices (e.g. screen
readers, wheel chairs, and hearing aids). A prerequisite for interoperability is often the
support of standard interfaces by the product.

2.3. Usability

ISO 9241-11 [5] defines Usability as "Extent to which a product can be used by
specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and
satisfaction in a specified context of use."
 Usability deals with methods to assess the effective, efficient and satisfactory use
of a product in a given context of use, i.e. looks at products in regard to their support
for different roles, usage scenarios, tasks or workflows.
To transfer this usability methods to the concept of Accessible Design with its
three main strategies is not possible e.g. because of the wide range of different
disabilities and experience of users with disabilities and their familiarization with
assistive technologies.

2.4. Safety

ISO/IEC Guide 51 [1] defines Safety as "Freedom from unacceptable risk. The
area of Safety is concerned with the intended or unintended consequences of using a
product, e.g. health risks, environmental protection, etc.
Safety requirements apply to the intended user group of the product. There is a
tendency to extend the user group to all users, regardless of ability or age (i.e.
including children or elderly persons).

3 Implementing Accessibility, Usability and Safety

There are usually very different reasons for implementing the three different
principles into product design.

3.1. Why companies implement Accessibility

Accessibility, especially in the fields of ICT, buildings and public transport, is
mandated by national laws, supported by international and national standards and
guidelines, and stimulated by public procurement in many countries. Besides this,
many companies strive to implement Universal Design in their mainstream products
to address a wider market.
There are currently models for labeling and (third-) party certification in the field
of accessibility, which are under discussion and, in some countries, in development.
With the public procurement procedure required by the US rehabilitation act section
508, self declaration of conformity by the bidders is the established method for a
number of years now.
A company has to consider all of these facts during the product design ideally from
the very early beginning. Because of a missing international harmonisation, the
resulting requirements lead to market fragmentation for companies that are active on a
global market. Examples for laws and regulation in the area of Accessibility:
- the Americans with Disabilities Act,
- the US Telecomm. Act Section 255,
- the US Rehabilitation Act Section 508,
- the EU Mandate 376 (M376, 2006),
- the EU Anti Discrimination Directives,
- the EU telecomm. Directives, and
- "Behinderten Gleichstellungs-Gesetz" in Germany.
3.2. Why companies implement Usability
In contrast to Accessibility, Usability is often considered a competitive advantage.
With technology being more and more a commodity that is taken for granted, the
market demand for Usability is increasing. The implementation of usability is
voluntary, i.e. usually happens for business reasons and is rarely mandated by laws
and regulations. The few existing laws (e.g. the BildschArbV in Germany) are vague
in the area of usability and cannot easily be tested against.
Because of the underlying economic motives, the success of usability engineering
is often monitored through tests, market success or Return-on-Investment analyses.
Conformity with standards is not seen as a valuable selling point, therefore standards
and certification (e.g. according to ISO 9241 [4] or ISO FDIS 20282 [8]) only play a
secondary role for manufacturers.

3.3. Why companies implement Safety

Safety is mandatory for the introduction of products, i.e. no product can be
marketed without legal consequences if it doesn't meet safety regulation and standards
of target market (e.g. CE sign).

4 Evaluation Strategies

In order to test against requirements in the different areas described in this paper,
two distinctly different approaches can be taken, i.e. user or expert based. For each of
the areas, there is usually a set of different usage types (e.g. different users, different
settings, etc.), and the goal of user based testing is to utilize participants covering the
different usage types to elicit feedback on the solution with regard to the set of
requirements.
The focus here is on whether the product supports the specific usage types, and if
the system model of the product matches the mental model of the users.
Expert based testing has a different focus, i.e. it mostly focuses on conformity with
standards, as well as general / generic requirements for and expert knowledge of the
specific area.
The evaluation can span different usage types, but will usually not yield as detailed
requirements as a user based test. It does, however, usually produce more overarching
results that cross usage types, which may not be as easy to elicit from representatives
of a single usage type.

4.1. Accessibility Evaluation

In the area of Accessibility Evaluation, the different classes of disability constitute
the usage types. There are different requirements depending on e.g. whether the user
is physically or cognitively impaired. In the evaluation, representatives for each group
provide feedback on whether the product supports their specific disability type, if the
product fits their mental model, if it is interoperable with the assistive devices they
commonly use, and if the product supports certain compensation strategies they have
learned to cope with their impairment.
 Sensoric Physical Cognitive
Disabilities Disabilities Disabilities

Evaluation with Users with Disabilities

Support for specific Disability Types

Fit with Mental Models
Interoperability with Assistive Devices
Compatibility with Compensation Strategies

Expert based Testing

Conformity: Laws, Standards, Guidelines, Checklists

General Requirements, e.g. Dual Channel Principle
Experience with Impact of Disability Types
(self-affected experts)
Figure 2: Accessibility Evaluation – Focus on Disability Types

Expert based evaluation focuses on overarching aspects. Conformity with current

laws, standards, guidelines and checklists is one, testing against general requirements
like e.g. the Dual Channel Principle is another.
If experts are self-affected, they can also provide a broader view on the impact of
certain disabilities that goes beyond the pure user role.

4.2. Usability Evaluation

For evaluating Usability, the usage types are usually defined by different contexts
of use. These contexts can either be based on the type or role of the user, or the
specific setting (physical, organizational, etc.) the task is carried out in. Again, the
evaluation focuses on the support for the different contexts of use and fit with the
mental model, but also for compatibility with general learning or problem solving
strategies of the users. The DIN/EN/ISO 9241 [4] Framework for Usability
Evaluation uses Effectiveness, Efficiency and Satisfaction as evaluation criteria.
 Task 1 Task 1 Task 2
Role A Role B Role B

Usability Tests with Users

Support for specific Context of Use

Fit with Mental Models
Interoperability with Problem Solving Strategies
Evaluation of Effectivenes, Efficiency and Satisfaction

Expert based Testing

Conformity: Standards, Styleguides

General Requirements, e.g. Design, Patterns, Heuristics
Experience regarding Design Guidelines

Figure 3: Usability Evaluation – Focus on Contexts of Use

An expert based evaluation in the area of usability focuses on standard and style
guide conformity and commonly known requirements, e.g. patterns or heuristics. It
utilizes the expertise on design guidelines to evaluate against those as well.

5 Summary and Outlook

The accessibility of products and services is an absolute prerequisite for the

inclusion of elderly persons and persons with disabilities in our modern information
and communication society. Currently there are strong efforts on both, the political
and industry's side to support this important goal. The started process only can be
economically reasonable and really helpful for elderly and disabled persons when
regulation and supporting accessibility standardization will follow an international
harmonized approach. This is very important because companies are producing for a
world market and the needs of persons with disabilities are nearly the same in all
countries. Therefore both authors strongly recommend from their professional
accessibility experience to avoid national or local solutions and fragmentation in the
field of accessibility. As standards play an important role in the field of accessibility,
a consistent use of terms and definitions will support implementing accessibility.
Contradictory terms and requirement should be avoided to make the concept of
accessibility successful, all over the world.
References

1. ISO/IEC Guide 51. Safety Aspects - Guidelines for their inclusion in Standards.
International Organization for Standardization, 1999.
2. ISO/IEC Guide 71. Guidelines for standards developers to address the needs of older
persons and persons with disabilities. International Organization for Standardization
(ISO), 2001.
3. ISO/AWI TR 22411 Ergonomic data and guidelines for the application of ISO/IEC
Guide 71 in standards related to products and services to address the needs of older
persons and persons with disabilities, 2004.
4. DIN EN ISO 9241. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display
terminals (VDTs). International Organization for Standardization, 1998.
5. DIN EN ISO 9241-11. Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with Visual
Display Terminals, Part 11, Usability (Principles), 1998.
6. DIN EN ISO 9241-20. Ergonomics of human-system interaction -- Part 20:
Accessibility guidelines for information/communication technology (ICT) equipment
and services, 2006.
7. DIN EN ISO 9241-171. Ergonomics of human-system interaction -- Part 171:
Guidance on software accessibility, 2006.
8. DIN EN ISO 20282. Ease of operation of everyday products, 2006.
9. DIN EN ISO 6385. Ergonomic principles in the design of work systems, 2004.
10. COM 2005/42. Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European
Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the regions, 13.9.2005.
11. PRM TSI. Technical Specification for Interoperability - Accessibility for People with
Reduced Mobility
12. European Commission M376. "Standardization mandate to CEN, CENELEC and
ETSI in support of European Accessibility requirements for public procurement of
products and services in the ICT Domain"
13. State University of North Carolina, Trace Center. The Principles of Universal Design