Details sanitized and shared with appropriate discretion. Specific metrics and artifacts available upon request.
Accessibility 'Shift-Left' Initiative
Embedded accessibility research and evaluation earlier in the product development lifecycle — a shift-left approach presented at CSUN Assistive Technology Conference, March 2026.
Detailed case study available on request
This project contains confidential process details and internal metrics. The full case study — including methodology decisions, process documentation, stakeholder artifacts, and specific outcome data — is available to hiring managers and recruiters.
Summary
This case study documents the research and advocacy work behind United’s “shift-left” accessibility approach — the focus of my CSUN Assistive Technology Conference talk in March 2026. The core argument: accessibility is dramatically cheaper and more effective when it’s embedded in research and design from the start, rather than retrofitted at QA or post-launch.
Role: Lead UX Researcher · Timeline: 2023–2026 · Team: Cross-functional · Methods: accessibility research, inclusive design, stakeholder alignment
Problem & context
[PLACEHOLDER: describe the before state — what did “shift-right” accessibility look like at United, what were the costs (rework, legal exposure, user impact), and what triggered the push to move left?]
Accessibility failures caught late in the development cycle are expensive in multiple dimensions: engineering rework, delayed releases, and — most importantly — real harm to travelers with disabilities who encounter broken or inaccessible experiences. The shift-left approach addresses all three by changing when and how accessibility enters the process.
My role
[PLACEHOLDER: describe your specific contribution — where did you sit in this initiative, what research did you design and run, and how did you drive stakeholder alignment?]
Approach & decisions
[PLACEHOLDER: describe the key methodological and organizational decisions — how did you define “shift-left” in this context, which parts of the research lifecycle did you embed accessibility into, and how did you make the case to engineering and PM stakeholders?]
Process
[PLACEHOLDER: describe the research and advocacy work — what research did you conduct with users with disabilities, how did you train design and product teams, what processes and artifacts did you create?]
Deliverables
- [PLACEHOLDER: list the specific artifacts — guidelines, checklists, training materials, process documentation]
- CSUN 2026 conference presentation materials (March 2026)
Impact & outcomes
- [PLACEHOLDER: describe measurable outcomes — accessibility audit scores, reduction in late-stage accessibility bugs, user research findings with assistive technology users, stakeholder adoption]
Reflection
[PLACEHOLDER: what did you learn about the intersection of accessibility advocacy and research practice? What would you do differently?]