Section 3.4: maturity also depends on how effective the ICT development processes are in producing accessible ICT.

[jasonjgw]

This issue relates to issue #91.
Fundamental to the maturity of any ICT development process in relation to accessibility is the extent to which it results in more rather than less accessible products.

Questions that I have in mind, but which are not addressed by the current proof points, include

• How well and how consistently do delivered products satisfy the accessibility-related requirements that were set for them (e.g., technical/policy compliance, outcomes of user research, user satisfaction)? This question cannot be answered by considering a conformance report for a given product at a single moment in time, such as a WCAG evaluation. However, if the evaluations (across time and across products) consistently show that the organization is meeting the accessibility requirements/standards it set for itself, then this would constitute evidence of maturity in the ICT development process. Of course, standards are only one aspect, which is why I've noted other criteria, such as user evaluations (subjective and objective).
• Is there a tendency for delivered products to require significant remediation of accessibility issues after release? The more this occurs, the less mature the development process is.
• Are the accessibility requirements defined appropriately for each product and updated over time to take into account new knowledge, standards and policies?

In sum, one can assess an ICT development process in part by looking at its "track record" of success.

[jasonjgw]

Also, to what extent does the organization's process address accessibility-related defects in a timely and effective manner?