Extracted part go guideline for implementing accessibility in retail and interior design:
Ensuring accessible retail stores
Key issues
The aim of this programme is to develop and implement a ‘best practice’ approach to inclusive design, to ensure that all PVH retail stores are fully accessible for disabled customers.
The language used to discuss issues of access and disability can be subjective and open to widely differing interpretation. Therefore, the first objective is to develop the conditions for ‘best practice’ by adopting a shared understanding of the underpinning principles and terminology.
A different way of thinking about disability
To develop a best practice approach to inclusive design there needs to be a different way of thinking about disability.
It is not uncommon for organisations to ask themselves, “what do blind people need in our stores?” or “what should we do for customers with learning disabilities?” While the intention is understandable, these questions assume that people with a same disability face the same problems and barriers. Thinking first about the impairment may lead to assumptions about the implications of that condition, and lays the ground for generalisation and stereotyping. The final challenge is where does the list of disabilities to be considered stop?
It is useful to have a shared understanding of the broad range of functions which, when not working effectively, might lead to a disability.
· Physical, e.g., manual dexterity and mobility limitations
· Mental health, e.g., severe depression or anxiety, bipolar
· Sensory, e.g., sight, hearing
· Learning disabilities, e.g., autism and Aspergers syndrome, cerebral palsy, Downs syndrome
· Learning difficulties, e.g., dyslexia, dyxpraxia, ADHd
These conditions impact different people in different ways and on a scale which ranges from mild to severe. In reality the effect of a disability on an individual is a dynamic balance between the confidence and competence of the individual, the effect of their impairment and the context of whatever they are doing.
A best practice approach does not think about the nature of disability but its effects. For example, some impairments such as Dyslexia or a visual impairment or learning difficulty may make signage hard to read for some people. The designers’ challenge is not to try to counter the effects of each impairment but to minimise the readability barrier for everyone by creating well-positioned signs in plain language in a clear, high contrast typeface.
Trying to design a retail store to be accessible from the perspective of specific conditions is impractical and would not be considered best practice.
The models of disability
To develop a best practice policy an organisation needs to adopt a different methodology and understanding of disability and its implications. Current thinking is that this can only be achieved by using the concepts established in the social model. To understand the social model it is useful to consider earlier models which have not delivered equal access to services, employment and social engagement.
Charity and medical models
Traditionally the way society and organisations managed disability issues was based around the ‘charity’ and ‘medical’ models.
The charity model, while no longer used in terms of policy and management, still plays a strong part in some people’s attitudes towards disabled people which then impacts on their understanding, behaviour and assessment of access requirements of this group. At its core is the perception that disabled people need sympathy, looking after and protecting, and that there is little expectation that they will lead a ‘normal’ life.
As its title implies, the medical model concentrates on disease and impairments and puts what is wrong with someone at the heart of how to address the issue; ‘fixing the problem’ to make the person as ‘normal’ as everyone else. This might be useful when dealing with health but not when thinking about how a disabled person might access an organisation’s services or work for them.
The limitation of the medical model is that it concentrates thinking on the conditions and its symptoms, or more likely, its stereotypical symptoms. Based on these views, judgements are made about what individuals can and can’t do, the types of adjustments that might be appropriate and so on. It also makes it harder for an organisation to deal with disability as a mainstream issue as it is centred on the individual impairment and not on how to identify and address the barriers an individual experiences. Given the range and the variability of the effects of impairments on individuals, this approach cannot deliver a universal solution.
The social model
The social model says it is society or an organisation which creates ‘disability’ by inadvertently limiting access to services, products and employment by the way they go about what they do. If society and organisations worked differently and developed an inclusive approach across the board, a person’s impairment would not be an issue. A good example of the social model in action relates to public buildings. In many jurisdictions, they are required to be accessible and step-free to everyone by law. This means that making a one-off adjustment for a disabled person is not required - such as providing a temporary ramp or a separate entrance for people requiring step-free access. Everyone accesses it the same way. Access is mainstreamed and no one really thinks about this anymore as it is just the way things are. In other words, the social model seeks to deal proactively with the root cause of the barriers and not their symptoms.
Inclusion as business-as-usual
The approach being developed by PVH for the design of its retail outlets needs to be based on the social model. Its an approach that says… ‘our outlets will be inclusive, accessible and facilitate as much independence of shopping for all, irrespective of any access requirement because that is the way PVH design them’. The challenge then is to ensure that approach is adopted consistently across jurisdictions.
Many countries in which PVH operates have legislative and guidance frameworks giving disabled people rights, with consequential obligations for PVH. However, these frameworks vary widely from one country to another, and simply attempting to follow them (the compliance approach) will create significant inconsistencies across the organisation and may expose PVH to PR and legal risk as well as potential commercial loss. The fact that different jurisdictions use different concepts and definitions of what might constitute a disability and how it should be assessed, presents a further challenge to PVH.
If PVH followed the compliance approach it would inevitably create significant variations between jurisdictions and undermine any consistent and coherent global approach to ensuring disabled people’s access to services and products.
Adopting ‘best practice’ as the underpinning principle for any cross-jurisdiction strategy avoids such issues and risks. Best practice seeks to develop barrier-free service provision and product development; in other words, everything that PVH does seeks to be fully inclusive irrespective of any access requirements someone might have; inclusion is business-as-usual.
Inevitably barriers will arise which cannot be addressed quickly or at all. It has to be remembered that one person’s access requirement might be another’s barrier. To address this, ‘best practice’ also takes the view that if someone has an access requirement then that should be met by an adjustment provided by a staff member in-store, and no one should be overly concerned about whether the person has a disability. If it is practical for someone to do something differently then why not facilitate it so long as it is reasonable?
The final strand of a best practice approach considers the impact of someone’s impairment and not the cause. For example, if someone needs to use a mobility aid then that is the issue which needs addressing not what causes that individual to need to use the mobility aid in the first place. Considering the cause is not helpful in identifying and finding a solution to the barrier; think effect, not cause.
Implications for retail partners:
In ensuring an inclusive and accessible retail experience needs to:
· Develop a common understanding of and approach to disability based on the social model
· Develop and implement accessibility design standards to be used in all new retail outlets
· Such standards should cover all customer activity – see Appendix
· The standards should be based on best practice – see above
· Ensure in-house management protocols are in place which makes these standards ‘business as usual’ for both in-house staff and external contractors and people are held accountable to delivering them
· Review existing outlets and plan for them to achieve the design standards over time
· Brief retail staff so they have the understanding and ability to address individual issues with confidence and professionalism
· Once these issues are addressed, consider using this approach as part of its brand marketing