Accessibility in digital application tools: What matters for an inclusive candidate journey
.webp){kind=avatar}
Accessibility in recruiting? Sure, we do that too – it's all on the careers page. Anyone who thinks this way has long overlooked the biggest hurdle: their own operational blindness.
Because what looks great on a desktop and high-speed Wi-Fi becomes a dead end for many talented individuals as soon as the screen reader struggles with cryptic buttons or the application form crashes in the middle of uploading. Those who fail to offer an alternative not only lose valuable applicants, but also show how little they really care about inclusion.
Even a small digital hurdle can cause candidates to consciously decide against a company – even if they were highly motivated to apply (CareerTeam 2025). And the figures speak for themselves: only around 10% of companies in Germany, Austria and Switzerland currently meet the digital accessibility requirements of the upcoming Accessibility Enhancement Act (Personalwirtschaft 2024).
This is no longer just a matter of fulfilling obligations. Anyone who wants to succeed in the battle for IT specialists simply cannot afford to push potential candidates out of the process with inaccessible tools. For many, cultural fit does not begin with onboarding – but with the first hurdle placed in their path.
Recognising hidden hurdles in the application process
Not every barrier is visible. And that's exactly what makes them so treacherous. Most companies pay attention to design, brand language and mobile capability when it comes to their career portal. But the technical details that determine participation or exclusion for many applicants are often overlooked... or simply never tested.
A classic example: forms that automatically reset after a few minutes. People with motor impairments or who use assistive technologies simply need more time. Suddenly, everything is gone – CV, cover letter and probably the last spark of motivation. According to a recent analysis, application abandonment due to timeouts or unclear validation rules is increasing measurably (Foxio 2025).
Another example is CAPTCHAs. For users with visual impairments or cognitive limitations, they often present an insurmountable obstacle. This is particularly critical when no alternative verification is offered. No matter how inclusively a job advertisement is worded, a CAPTCHA without an audio version destroys any credibility.
Document uploads also regularly cause problems. Some application forms only accept PDFs of a certain file size, ignore accessible document standards or generate error messages without a comprehensible explanation. People who use screen readers or alternative operating systems regularly encounter dead ends here and move on.
Finally, there are the ‘invisible barriers’ in the code: missing alt text for buttons, illogical tab order or input fields without labels. Tools that appear visually intuitive to UX designers are often simply unusable for screen reader users. A study by myAbility shows that around 70% of all application platforms in the DACH region are not fully usable with screen readers (2025).
What do all these hurdles have in common? They seem small – but they have an impact. And they determine whether talented individuals even make it to the ‘Submit’ button.
What distinguishes accessible application tools
Technically sound. Clearly structured. Usable by everyone – really everyone. This is what application tools that break down barriers instead of creating new ones look like. But what exactly makes a tool truly accessible?
A key feature: compatibility with screen readers. This means clear HTML structures, semantically correct labels, alt texts and descriptive buttons. Candidates must be able to move smoothly through a form – even without a mouse or touchscreen.
Equally important is full keyboard operability. All interactions – from navigation to file uploads – must work without a mouse. Accessible tools do without superfluous animations, rely on clear focus indicators and respond reliably to common keyboard shortcuts. Elster sends its regards at this point!
In addition, error messages must be understandable and accessible. Displaying only a red exclamation mark without text or ARIA prompts causes frustration – not feedback. Application processes thrive on clarity.
Well-designed systems are based on the standards of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.1). According to CareerTeam, only a few recruiting platforms currently meet these requirements in full (CareerTeam 2025).
Tools such as WAVE, axe or Siteimprove are particularly helpful for evaluation. They provide quick pointers to typical weaknesses – from colour contrasts to unlabelled form fields. However, the most reliable method remains a change of perspective: if you send applicants with disabilities through your own process on a trial basis, you will often discover in a matter of minutes what would otherwise be overlooked for years.
Five questions you should ask your tool provider
Accessibility cannot be demanded if you yourself do not know what is important. Many providers claim that their tools are ‘fundamentally accessible’. But is that really the case? If you want your company to make serious progress, you should ask the right questions:
- Does the tool support common screen readers – even in live applications?
A provider who cannot immediately answer this question with specific tests and supported technologies is not prepared. - Are there comprehensible error messages that can also be captured by screen readers?
An accessible tool not only reports that something went wrong, but also explains why. - Are all functions fully controllable via keyboard, including uploads, calendar entries and drop-down menus?
Half accessibility is no accessibility at all. If you promise keyboard operation, you must deliver it in every module. - Which WCAG 2.1 compliance level do you meet – A, AA or AAA?
The benchmark for accessibility is not subjective assessments, but recognised standards. - How and when was the system last tested with people with disabilities?
Technical tests are good – real user experiences are better.
These questions not only show how serious you are about accessibility – they also filter out providers who see inclusion as nothing more than a tick in the requirements specification. You should not compromise, especially when selecting new systems or revising existing processes.
Measurably improve candidate experience
Accessibility not only improves the experience for individual applicants – it improves the entire system. And that can be proven. Companies that make their digital application processes accessible report significantly lower dropout rates, clearer feedback loops and greater diversity in applications (Foxio 2025).
Because what happens when access simply works? More people apply – not just those with visible or registered disabilities, but also parents with little time, mobile-first users, neurodiverse talent or people with English as a second language. Our colleagues at CareerTeam show that platforms that are designed to be completely accessible receive an average of 27% more complete applications – without any additional sourcing effort (2025).
Time-to-hire also benefits: when technology is not a barrier, applications flow through the system faster. A medium-sized software development company in Hamburg reduced its average processing time by over 30% after eliminating captchas, unclear fields and long loading times – without any additional budget.
An underestimated factor is the trust that an accessible infrastructure creates. Candidates often view the application process as the first test of a company's culture. If the application form itself appears discriminatory, why would anyone want to work there? McKinsey sums it up: Diversity is not a goal, but a result of structurally correct decisions(2023).
Accessibility is a driver of efficiency, credibility and reach. Investing in accessible processes today not only improves the experience, but also increases the competitiveness of your entire recruitment process.
Conclusion – Small thresholds. Big impact.
Accessibility is a promise – to candidates, to your own brand and to a recruitment process that wants to be credible.
Digital barriers in the application process often seem trivial: a CAPTCHA that cannot be skipped. A form field that cannot be accessed with the keyboard. An error message without explanation. But each of these thresholds determines who makes it to the application stage – and who is left out.
In a tight labour market where IT professionals can choose their employers, this is more than a technical problem. It is a cultural one. And, of course, it is a competitive disadvantage.
If you are serious about diversity, inclusion and candidate centricity, you have to start with the infrastructure. The tools you use today send a clear message: welcome – or please stay outside.
Do you want to ensure that digital accessibility is not only considered in your application process, but actually built into it? We can help you with that – with tech expertise, recruiting experience and an eye for the details that make it easier for candidates to get started. Get in touch with us – and together we'll see how we can turn your process into a genuine invitation.
Sources
- CareerTeam (2025): Checklist for barrier-free and successful career pages
- Foxio (2025): Disability inclusion in recruiting: These tools will make your candidate journey truly inclusive
- myAbility (2025): Barrierefrei bewerben
- McKinsey & Company (2023): Diversity Wins – Inclusion Matters
- Personalwirtschaft (2024): Barrierefreiheit von der Bewerbung bis zur Einstellung
- RZ-Stellen (2025): Barrierefreiheit auf Karriereseiten – gesetzliche Pflicht
Read more on this topic:
