Switch to an Alternative

Description

When a system, product, or environment is inaccessible, some users are forced to abandon it entirely and search for an alternative. This act of switching in this scenario is not convenience -- it's compensation. It's not a preference -- it's survival. It comes with high emotional, social, financial, and cognitive costs.

For those with the means, switching might mean using a different app, device, or service. For others, there may be no viable alternative -- or switching may not be permitted, especially in institutional, educational, or workplace settings. In these cases, the user faces exclusion, reduced opportunity, or harm.

Role in the ENABLE Model

This is the last line of compensation. It occurs when no pre-launch intervention has succeeded, and all other compensations have been exhausted or are insufficient. “Switching” is not a resolution -- it's a reflection of structural failure and displaced burden. The builder avoids responsibility; the user bears the consequence.

Why it happens

Users are forced into switching when:

• The original system is inaccessible and unfixable from the outside.
• Feedback loops are ignored or ineffective.
• Legal or policy protections are too slow or difficult to invoke.
• Other compensations (extensions, scripts, human help) fail or introduce their own burdens.

warning

Switching depends on privilege -- digital literacy, financial resources, time, and energy. Those without these privileges may have no way out. Worse, some users cannot switch due to workplace mandates, institutional requirements, or vendor lock-in. In these cases, switching isn't an option -- it's an impossibility. The result is exclusion.

In some scenarios, switching to an alternative can still result in exclusion, for example an employee switching to remote work due to lack of on-premise accommodations can result in exclusion from water-cooler conversations and serendipitous conversations with colleagues.

Examples

• A blind user leaves a grocery delivery app with unlabeled buttons and switches to one with better screen reader support.
• A student with ADHD abandons a learning platform with distracting animations and uses a plain-text version of course materials from a peer.
• A Deaf user stops using a video platform without captions and switches to one where every video is reliably subtitled.
• A user with limited mobility switches from a drag-and-drop web app to a keyboard-accessible competitor.

Compensation sounds like

"I had to use a different app. The original one wouldn't let me sign in without solving a visual CAPTCHA."
"I moved all my files to another service because the sharing screen was impossible to navigate by keyboard."

Burden sounds like

"The alternative doesn't have the same features. It costs more. It takes longer. I shouldn't have to work harder just to do the same thing."
"Switching means I'm no longer part of the same conversation. I miss context. I miss opportunities."

Real-world Scenario

Larry is locked out of their bank account because the fraud protection system uses a speech recognition phone bot that cannot understand their stutter. They attempt to resolve the issue through support channels but encounter barriers at every turn. Eventually, they switch banks -- but it comes at a cost: hours of effort, disrupted payments, stress, and mistrust. Not everyone has the privilege to switch banks. And even when switching is possible, it shouldn't have to be.