Skip to main content

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.