If you’ve ever been in a meeting where someone says, “We need to make the website accessible,” you’ve likely seen what happens next. People nod in agreement and add supportive comments like, We should, We will, or Absolutely.
But once the meeting ends, something familiar happens. Everyone thinks someone else will take charge.
It’s like a busy kitchen where skilled chefs come and go, each adding something or making adjustments, but no one is in charge of the recipe. Everyone means well and the ingredients are good, but the final dish never really comes together.
This is what happens with website accessibility in many organizations. People care, but progress stalls because responsibility is spread out, priorities clash, and no one has the full overview.
Most teams don’t struggle because they lack motivation. Many are making an effort by reading articles, joining webinars, updating components, and running audits when possible. The real problem is a lack of clear direction and coordination.
This article explains why accessibility efforts stall when too many people are involved and shows how clearer roles and stronger teamwork turn that chaos into lasting progress.
Why “Too Many Cooks” Happens in Digital Teams
When you look at a typical digital team, the kitchen metaphor fits well. Many teams work on the website, but each faces different pressures, expectations, and ways of thinking.
Compliance teams are focused on risk and timelines. Engineering worries about capacity and technical debt. UX and product teams juggle inclusivity with brand constraints and deadlines. Content and marketing are pushing toward launches, conversions, and SEO. Finance watches budgets and outcomes. Leadership wants clarity on scope, timelines, and how this fits into broader strategy.
All of these concerns are valid and important. But each team works on its own schedule, uses its own language, and aims for different results.
As a result, everyone assumes another team will take charge of website accessibility.
Work moves from one department to another. Decisions are revisited again and again. A simple question like “Who owns this?” can turn into weeks of discussion.
The Hidden Costs of Website Accessibility Gridlock
When ownership is unclear, the effects are widespread, even if they aren’t obvious right away.
Teams create accessibility debt when they layer new pages, features, and campaigns on top of old barriers. Costs rise the longer those issues sit unresolved—especially when a team keeps copying an inaccessible form instead of fixing the original.
There are also legal and reputational risks. Barriers stay in production longer than planned, making complaints or legal action more likely. Even without lawsuits, trust fades when users keep running into the same problems.
Revenue takes a hit, too. About 71% to 73% of users with disabilities will abandon a website immediately when barriers make it difficult to use or navigate. That means fewer completed purchases, booked appointments, and sign-ups, even though analytics rarely identify accessibility as the reason.
Within teams, frustration grows. The unofficial “accessibility person,” usually someone who cares a lot, spends more time seeking approvals and alignment than doing real work. Projects slow down, and the word “accessibility” starts to remind people of stalled projects and extra work.
Finally, organizations can get stuck in endless planning. Meetings repeat the same questions: What’s our goal? Who owns this? What can we do this quarter? All this back-and-forth has its own cost.
The point isn’t to make anyone feel guilty. Almost every organization faces these issues. You’re not alone, and you’re not failing. You just don’t have clear ownership structures yet.
Why Ownership Is Blurry (Even for Teams Who Care)
This gridlock isn’t caused by a lack of effort. It’s caused by how website accessibility has historically been framed.
For years, teams treated accessibility as a “last step” before launch, just another item on a checklist. When everyone pushes it to the end, no one owns it from the beginning.
Leaders often give broad instructions like “Make this WCAG compliant,” but don’t define the scope, metrics, or roles. Each team thinks another group is better suited to lead. Everyone uses different terms: designers talk about usability, compliance teams focus on risk, and marketers care about conversions.
In practice, this leads to vague tickets like “Fix accessibility issues,” QA findings without a clear owner, and stakeholders disagreeing on priorities because there’s no shared framework.
This is where responsibility mapping becomes the turning point.
From Chaos to a Kitchen Brigade: Making Roles Clear
A great way to break the “too many cooks” cycle is to use accessibility responsibility mapping. The idea is simple: divide accessibility work into clear tasks, then assign who leads, who supports, and who should be consulted.
It’s not about adding more bureaucracy. It’s about setting clearer expectations.
The primary owner drives the accessibility task and ensures it is done correctly. Supporting roles contribute the guidance needed to shape the work. Other stakeholders stay involved through consultation or regular updates..
Take headings, for example. UX or content defines structure. Design expresses hierarchy visually. Development implements correct HTML tags. QA verifies assistive technology behavior.
Or consider forms: UX handles flow and labeling strategy; content writes the labels; developers programmatically associate everything; QA checks keyboard and screen reader behavior.
With media, content teams plan captions or transcripts; platform owners ensure video players support accessible controls.
Responsibility mapping doesn’t add more work. Instead, it spreads tasks to the people best suited for each part. Like a well-run kitchen team, everyone knows their role, but they’re all working toward the same goal.
How to Put Responsibility Mapping Into Practice
Getting started is easier than teams expect.
First, bring together the right people: representatives from design, content, development, QA, and those who handle risk or strategy. Focus the conversation on ownership, not on debating every accessibility issue.
Next, list the recurring tasks you handle today: components, content operations, media, core flows, and feature releases. For each one, assign a primary owner, supporting roles, and those who should be consulted or informed.
Then embed this into your actual workflows. Include responsibility fields in ticket templates. Mark design system components with who is responsible for each part. Make it clear who writes and reviews alt text. Start small by applying your new mapping to one important section of the site, like checkout or registration, then refine and expand.
Even small teams benefit. One person may wear multiple hats, but mapping helps distinguish when they’re acting as a designer, developer, or content author. Expectations become visible and realistic.
Collaboration Patterns That Make Website Accessibility Easier
Ownership alone isn’t enough. Teams also need habits that support clarity.
Start by grounding conversations in real user journeys. Instead of diving into tools or checklists, walk through how someone books an appointment or completes a purchase with a screen reader.
Catch issues early by building lightweight, recurring touchpoints into design, development, and QA—not at the end.
Lean on your design system as a shared foundation. Centralize accessible components to prevent barriers from being reintroduced with every new page.
Treat learning as part of the job. Hold quick internal demos, run short show-and-tells, and celebrate when someone removes a barrier. These small habits turn website accessibility from a burden into a shared craft.
And don’t forget to celebrate small wins. They build momentum.
Keeping the Menu Manageable: Sustainable Progress Over Perfection
Teams often worry that starting accessibility means the work will never end. But setting priorities helps keep things manageable.
Begin with the most important flows, like those related to revenue, registration, support, or high-traffic areas. Separate immediate fixes from short-term improvements and long-term changes. Create feedback loops with regular audits, user feedback, and post-release reviews.
Most importantly, change your mindset: website accessibility is ongoing maintenance. Like performance, security, and SEO, it’s part of keeping the site healthy over time, not just a one-time emergency project.
Consistent, steady movement beats big, unsustainable pushes every time.
From Chaotic Kitchen to Well-Run Accessibility Program
Accessibility efforts stall when there’s no clear leader. But things improve quickly when teams clarify roles, base decisions on real user experiences, and use frameworks that help them follow through.
If you feel stuck in “too many cooks” mode, start small. Choose one important user flow and map out who owns accessibility at each step. Or gather a few teammates and assign roles for three to five key components.
If your team has too much on its plate to keep accessibility top of mind, tools like a11y.Radar from 216digital can help. It offers ongoing monitoring, regular scans, and clear dashboards so accessibility stays visible without adding extra work. It quietly finds issues early, before they become rework, barriers, or legal risks, so teams can act on them instead of reacting later.
You don’t have to choose between moving fast and being accessible. With the right structure, support, and tools, your digital team can work smoothly, and accessibility becomes a natural part of everything you deliver—not just another task to juggle.