# How to Use Value Investing to Handle Accessibility Requirements in Retail B2B2C
A retail B2B2C enterprise running XP with a team of sixteen to fifty people has an accessibility problem. The company runs a platform that connects retailers with consumers. It also provides logistics and fulfillment services. The platform has been around for fifteen years. It has 4,200 employees. The product development organization has 38 people across two teams of 19 each. (1/24)
For a retail B2B2C enterprise, the accessibility problem is the same. The team focuses on the price of fixing issues instead of the value of preventing them. That costs $147,000 per quarter. Buffett's method says: identify what is truly valuable, invest in what is truly valuable, ignore everything else.
## The Core Principle (6/24)
Buffett's method was built on a simple insight. The best way to handle accessibility requirements is to stop reacting to issues after users report them. Stop spending money on expensive fixes. Start identifying which accessibility requirements deliver the most value. Invest in those first.
The team should be proactively building accessibility into the features that matter most. Not reactively patching issues across all features equally. (7/24)
Buffett did not build Berkshire Hathaway by buying stocks at any price. He identified what was truly valuable, invested in it, and ignored everything else. That created focus. The focus created wise investments.
For this retail B2B2C enterprise, the accessibility requirements are handled reactively. The team focuses on the price of fixing issues instead of the value of preventing them. That costs $147,000 per quarter. (8/24)
## Four Steps to Apply Value Investing to Accessibility Requirements
1. Identify the Intrinsic Value of Each Accessibility Requirement
Buffett identified the intrinsic value of every investment he made. He analyzed fundamentals. He knew what was truly valuable. That let him invest wisely.
You should do the same thing with accessibility requirements. Analyze which requirements affect the most users and generate the most business impact. (9/24)
Here is what that might look like for a retail B2B2C enterprise. The product owner builds a spreadsheet with six columns.
Column one: the accessibility requirement name. Last quarter, the product owner listed 32 requirements from WCAG 2.1 AA. (10/24)
Column two: users affected. This is the total number of users impacted by the requirement. The estimate comes from analytics data. The analytics system tracks user behavior. It reveals which features are used by which users. That shows which requirements affect which users.
Column three: business impact. This is a score from 1 to 10 representing the potential revenue loss if the requirement is not met.
Column four: current compliance. This is either compliant or non-compliant. (11/24)
Column five: fix cost. This is the estimated number of person days required.
Column six: intrinsic value score. The calculation is users affected multiplied by business impact divided by fix cost.
Last quarter, the product owner calculated the intrinsic value score for all 32 requirements. That created a ranking. The top five requirements were: (12/24)
- Keyboard navigation: score of 87. Affected 112,000 users (28% of the user base). Business impact was 9. Fix cost was 12 person days.
- Screen reader compatibility: score of 74.
- Color contrast: score of 68.
- Alt text for images: score of 61.
- Form labels: score of 57.
Prioritizing the top five requirements saved the company $53,000. That was the cost of users that would have been lost without this analysis.
2. Invest in the Highest Value Requirements First (13/24)
Buffett invested in his highest value opportunities first. He allocated capital to the best opportunities. That maximized returns.
You should do the same with pair programming time. Allocate it to the top requirements before moving to lower value ones.
Here is what that looked like last quarter at this retail B2B2C enterprise: (14/24)
Week one: fix keyboard navigation. This was the top priority. The team allocated four pairs for five days. The fix meant 112,000 users could navigate the platform with a keyboard. That saved $24,000.
Week two: fix screen reader compatibility. The team allocated three pairs for five days. The fix meant 78,000 users could use the platform with a screen reader. That saved $18,000. (15/24)
Week three: fix color contrast. The team allocated two pairs for five days. The fix meant 64,000 users could see the platform content clearly. That saved $15,000.
Week four: fix alt text for images. The team allocated two pairs for five days. The fix meant 56,000 users could understand the images. That saved $12,000.
The four weeks of pair programming saved the company $69,000.
3. Ignore Low Value Requirements Until High Value Ones Are Compliant (16/24)
Buffett ignored low value investments. He did not waste capital. That maximized returns.
You should ignore low value accessibility requirements that affect few users and have minimal business impact. Focus on getting the high value requirements fully compliant first. (17/24)
Last quarter, the product owner identified 12 requirements with intrinsic value scores below 20. For example, animation control had a score of 18. It affected only 2,000 users (0.5% of the user base). The business impact was 2. Fix cost was 8 person days.
The team ignored all 12 low value requirements. This freed up effort for the high value work. That saved $31,000 in wasted effort.
4. Run a Feedback Loop Every Iteration (18/24)
Buffett constantly reviewed his investments and reallocated capital based on new data. You should do the same.
The product owner should run a 30-minute meeting at the end of every iteration. It has two parts.
Part one (15 minutes): review the intrinsic value scores. Update the numbers based on new analytics data. User behavior changes over time. That may change the scores and the rankings.
Part two (15 minutes): reallocate pair programming time based on the updated rankings. (19/24)
Last iteration, the feedback loop revealed that the score for form labels had increased from 57 to 72. New analytics data showed form label issues were affecting more users than previously estimated. The team reallocated pair programming time from alt text to form labels. That saved $14,000.
## Closing on Value Over Price (20/24)
agile