Digital accessibility for everyone

Modern software should be without barriers. But what kind of barriers can software have and for whom? And how can software companies eliminate them? The general understanding of accessible software mostly refers to the fact that people with disabilities or other physical limitations can use it well. For example, software designed in this way reduces the risk of confusion between color representations on the monitor in the case of red-green vision impairment, or makes it easier for people with Parkinson’s disease to use the mouse. This is an important requirement that modern software should fulfill.

Thinking the approach that all users should not have any barriers in the way of operation consistently further, it quickly becomes apparent that everyone experiences limitations to a greater or lesser extent when using a computer. For example, even for users with normal vision, elements of the program interface can be difficult to recognize on a bad screen, the environment can be too noisy to concentrate, or the mouse cannot be operated due to a current hand injury. Accessibility therefore addresses everyone!

Accessibility as a standard

For consumer software, reducing or eliminating operating barriers has long been standard practice. For example, I can increase the font size on my iPhone or have texts read aloud to me. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) were established early on for the World Wide Web. As an international standard, they provide developers with guidelines for making websites accessible to as many people as possible. They have become the de facto standard for accessible user experiences and are even referenced in legislation on equality for people with disabilities.

Remove barriers – release forces

For me, following these standards does not only mean fulfilling my responsibility as a product designer. It also simply means a guaranteed improvement in product quality – for all users. After all, it’s not just users with special visual impairments who benefit from high-contrast displays or keyboard controls, to name just two examples. Entrepreneur and accessibility advocate Debrah Ruh put it succinctly: “Accessibility allows us to tap into everyone’s potential.” I think that fits perfectly with our claim at CONTACT: Energizing great minds.

Of describing and showing in product development

“I notice you don’t really understand what I’m talking about. Wait a minute, I’ll show you.” Often communication fails when people are forced to describe things instead of showing them. Because they are either out of reach or because they simply don’t exist in real life. Like products that are still in the development stage. That’s why designers are downright DIY experts. With a product idea in mind, they quickly build a prototype with cardboard and glue. In this way, they succeed in showing what is difficult to put into words. This is exactly what efficient product development processes need and can be achieved through deeper integration of 3D visualization functions into the PLM system.

A picture is worth a thousand words

The value added by images over pure text is something we take for granted these days in a multimedia world. On Instagram and elsewhere, text only underscores what has already been captured in the image. But how much of this self-evidence has arrived in the IT systems that support the work of manufacturing companies? In my perception, describing is still more important than showing: The majority of the screens contain characters, words, tables and sentences.

Since the spread of CAD systems, especially in PLM applications, there has been no shortage of images. Hardly any product is manufactured before it has been designed in advance as a (3D) image. The 3D model is a natural tool in product development and in times of increasing product individualization an ideal tool for communication around the product. From chairs to electric cars: across all industries, products can be individually configured online and viewed in 3D before they are ordered and produced.

Why does enterprise software still remain so text-heavy?

CAD software licenses are expensive. Companies therefore often only equip a few workstations with it. In addition, CAD software as proprietary file formats cannot be easily opened by other programs. Thus, access to 3D geometries remains limited to an exclusive club.

If this hurdle is overcome, for example with neutral 3D viewers, the question of how 3D geometry and text can best be combined with the operating UIs of the enterprise software still remains. Beyond the fanciful visions of the future concerning data handling with VR/AR à la Minority Report, there is still a lack of concepts in reality for combining information from 3D models and databases in a uniform operating pattern.

So, where do we go next?

The first step is to bring 3D geometries into the UI alongside the usual textual content. In addition to displaying and rotating, a basic function is the ability to navigate inside the model in order to view individual components in detail by selectively showing and hiding them. Functions such as entering, saving and sharing annotations on the 3D model are also helpful for effective communication within the team. Furthermore, additional Digital Mock Up (DMU) calculation functions can support certain decision-making processes. Such as a neighborhood search to analyze the impact of an engineering change. Or a model comparison to subsequently understand the scope of this change.

In the second step, geometric and textual information must be combined in the UI. This creates an integrated user interface that offers added value in terms of content. Moreover, how would it be if the 3D model in PLM applications no longer served as an illustration of the parts list but, conversely, the parts master data enriched the 3D geometries? Or if tables and textual hyperlinks are abolished and a real geometric or spatial navigation is available? Or if users can visually browse the parts inventory like in a warehouse instead of tracking down numbers in a list? Or, or, or.

We have become so accustomed to working with strings in information technology (I’m thinking of command lines, relational databases, hyperlinks and so on) that other operating patterns seem unthinkable. Here it is time to rethink and unleash the visual power of 3D geometry to communicate quickly and accurately in business processes.

In my German-language webcast on October 7, 2021, you will learn how to make 3D visualization and inspection functionality accessible to all PLM users throughout the product lifecycle and ensure seamless integration of geometric and PLM data – in one interface, without having to jump to expensive standalone viewers.

Time scheduling – The hammer of project management?

If you have only a hammer as a tool, you see a nail in every problem. Mark Twain is credited with the bon mot ” If you have only a hammer as a tool, you see a nail in every problem”. Even if it is not clear beyond doubt who is actually the author of this statement, it remains probably the most succinct formulation for “Maslow’s hammer“

So what does this have to do with project management?

When it comes to project management software, I often observe that users try to achieve a wide variety of goals with just one tool, namely scheduling. You can’t blame them, because many project management tools tempt users to do just that.

In the process, schedules are created from hundreds or thousands of daily tasks. It is not uncommon for me to also encounter tasks in question form, such as “Specification released?”, “Customer presentation done?” and so on, provided with duration, deadline and task links.

Over-detailed planning takes its revenge in the project

The dilemma: Such plans are only pseudo precise, with many detailed deadlines calculated from activity links. Although everyone involved actually knows that in larger projects no activity is completed to the day. Nevertheless, everyone pretends that the plan is exactly right.

Also, the practice of managing resource utilization by linking all the tasks of a particular person one after the other only works well until you have to change the planning. Then the whole scheduling structure is no longer right. But the scheduling tool continues to calculate the dates mercilessly according to the network plan. The more detailed the plan is, the more time-consuming it is to make changes in the course of the project. You move one task and many others move with it – but unfortunately not in the way you would have expected. You no longer understand your own, overly complicated network plan and require a great deal of rescheduling effort for new fake precision. Some people leave the plan unchanged and start improvising instead

Use the entire toolbox

Here it is obvious to think of agile approaches as an alternative. But you don’t necessarily have to change your project management completely. Many experienced project managers say: “Agile is nothing new. With me, it’s just not a task board, but a good old open points list.” And that’s exactly the key. Plan only as precisely as necessary and as really useful. The motto here is: Better good rough planning than poor detailed planning. Even if the rough plan probably doesn’t come in as thought, it’s much easier to correct and makes the impact on the project more readily apparent.

For detailed issues, a list of open items (LOP) with clearly defined responsibilities is the tool of choice. And for anything you want to schedule in question form, checklists that are reviewed regularly as the project progresses are helpful. If not met, put an action on your LOP. And perhaps you record and monitor risks and define countermeasures to take timely and effective countermeasures. This usually puts you in a much better position for a successful project.

So: Only use the hammer for nails. For everything else, feel free to pick up pliers, screwdriver or wrench!