In late 2016, I helped pitch a design system all the way up to executives that included the CEO, COO, CPO, Head of Design, and other peers. The pitch’s mood shifted when accessibility came up:

“Oh, our teams will make accessible products if they use the system? Sold!”

Some embraced accessibility in the design system’s role to optimize quality and promote inclusivity as a core value. Others heralded that the system would cut costs (by solving challenges shared by many) and mitigate risk (by reducing litigation occurrence and/or scale). Together, leadership connected good business with doing the right thing.

However, touting system accessibility can grossly distort expectations. Half a decade into their design system journey, leaders of a similar organization were confounded as accessibility across their portfolio remained incomplete.

“So, we aren’t accessible? I hear we can’t say that, even though everyone adopted the system. How’s this possible? Inclusivity is a part of our identity!”

If accessible experiences are the goal, the role of a design system and the limits of what it provides remain unclear. Beyond the accessibility-ready parts provided, there’s more work to do? If so, what? And who’s supposed to do it?