| Abstrakt: |
An accessibility monitoring or audit of an environment provides information at a given point in time (static view of accessibility). But accessibility, to be really effective, must be maintained over time. Therefore, it must be considered throughout all phases of the design process (different phases of the project) and construction (different phases of the work). But it is also essential that, once built, it is possible to maintain or even increase the level of accessibility initially achieved. There are many cases in which, despite a good accessible project, during the life of the building the accessibility conditions worsen substantially because the need for a system that guarantees the permanence of accessibility over time is not contemplated. This requires the adoption of a Universal Accessibility Management System (UAMS) which, as is done with other disciplines such as Quality or Sustainability, allows those responsible for the management of this environment to implement, prevent or correct the accessibility actions that correspond in each case. For the development of a UAMS, the first thing to be defined is the scope to be considered and the scope. Furthermore, from the point of view of use, accessibility can be considered from the visitor's point of view (customer service; customer's perspective) or from the worker's point of view (workstation; employee's perspective). In this article we will take as a reference two methodologies that have been widely used on numerous occasions, to analyse the strengths and weaknesses of each of them and their parts from a deep theoretical (processes and indicators) and practical (disruptors) knowledge. The ultimate aim of this work is to identify the aspects to be considered in the definition of a UAMS, in order to be able to define and specify the keys to approach an accessibility audit from a dynamic perspective, that is to say. one that really guarantees the sustainability of the accessibility of that place over time. |
