1.1 Goals

As part of the Service Modernisation Roadmap, the updates to the Digital Service Design Standard (DSDS) and the creation of a new Digital Accessibility Standard (DAS) have been supported and informed by research conducted by Ackama.

The research was conducted to support evidence-based decision-making to inform changes to the DSDS and DAS, and to identify barriers that are preventing newly created digital services, products, and information from meeting the current standards.

This research gathers insights from people involved in the creation and delivery of accessible government digital services, products and information, and the people who use these services.

The research included ideas from research participants for ways to increase the adoption of service design and accessibility across government, and how to provide better support to practitioners to improve government services, and the experience of the people who use them.

The research approach has been defined and planned in collaboration with product owners of the standards, as a cross-functional and cross-organisational team. Initial reverse briefs were written to confirm the project goals and were used as the starting point for the project. This research was planned and conducted from late March to early August 2025.

1.2 Business values

This research aligns with, and is designed to support a number of ongoing goals within DIA:

• Improving New Zealand’s ranking for service delivery within the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
• Aligning and informing New Zealand standards with international ones, such as standards for service design, and the European EN 301 549 standard for accessibility.
• Increasing and enabling support for the Accessibility Charter, currently managed by Whaikaha.
• Identifying ways in which DIA may support other government agencies in meeting New Zealand standards.
• Supporting refinements and changes to the Digital Service Design and Digital Accessibility Standards as work progresses in the coming months.
• Aligning with other ongoing initiatives within DIA’s Service Modernisation Roadmap, and helping to inform other initiatives such as an improved New Zealand Government Design System.
• Helping to identify high value work programmes and research for upcoming budgets.

1.3 Process

Initial research questions were identified based on the DSDS and DAS teams’ initial hypotheses, early questions, and requirements specified in the reverse briefs. These initial questions were refined and validated through a series of prioritisation sessions with the team stakeholders.

Research sought to understand overall barriers to accessibility and usability, current successes and ideas for improvement, and changes that are needed to ensure good practice.

1.3.1 Research methods

Research questions were grouped into three research methods that best suited the responses required, by either survey, workshop or 1:1 interview.

• Surveys to allow for efficient gathering of more binary data from a larger and broader participant audience
• Workshops to allow for facilitated discussion about barriers and collaborative problem solving to a smaller targeted group of participants
• Research Interviews to allow for in-depth exploration of individual experiences and perspectives

1.3.2 Research participants

Key research participants were identified that were best suited to answer the research questions and give a suitable and robust perspective from both the providers and the consumers of the services.

Participants were identified for engagement across government, private sector suppliers, and the disability community.

Participants were recruited by several methods. The community of practices for accessibility and service design were contacted with a request for research participants, and a wider list of contacts from across government agencies and institutions were identified by product owners and invited to participate.

DPOs in New Zealand were contacted by email with a request to participate. Key stakeholders within Whaikaha were contacted and recommendations were received from them for potential staff interviews and workshop participants.

A recruitment form was created and linked from a page in Digital.govt.nz containing the draft principles and blog posts. This was shared in the community of practice meetings, and respondents were invited to complete surveys related to their interest and expertise.

The research participants were identified and segmented into a number of groups:

• Practitioners within government agencies who work in designing, delivering, and providing services for New Zealanders. These practitioners had practical and pragmatic experience of the process of delivering services inside a government agency.
  • 70 practitioners participated in 1 of 6 90-minute online workshops.
• Supplier practitioners providing and supporting the delivery of government services. These practitioners had experience of working with government clients to design, build and deliver digital services to a defined brief, and responding to Requests for Proposal (RFP).
  • 5 practitioners attended 1 of 3 1-hour research interviews, from across three different supplier organisations.
• Subject matter experts (SMEs) from both government agencies and the private sector. These were SMEs with a deep knowledge of accessibility, and all SMEs that were interviewed had years of advocacy experience in the government delivery of digital services space.
  • 4 SMEs participated individually in a 1-hour online research interview.
• Leadership within Whaikaha. These leaders were able to provide a view from a decision maker perspective and share their views on barriers to the delivery of accessible services, and ideas for improvement at a leadership level.
  • 2 people participated individually in a 1-hour online research interview.
• Employees within Whaikaha. These participants were people with a lived experience of disability and were able to provide a perspective on both the experience of using government services and working as an employee within a government agency.
  • 18 participants attended 1 of 2 90-minute workshops. 12 participants attended the online workshop, and 6 participants attended the in-person workshop.
• Disabled people within New Zealand. These participants shared their experiences of interacting with government services online, the barriers they had trying to navigate inaccessible websites and content, and the impact that has on their life. Participants included members from 6 different DPOs— SeniorNet, Blind Citizens NZ, Blind Low Vision NZ, Access Matters Aotearoa, The Muscular Dystrophy Association of New Zealand, and People First NZ.
  • 26 participants attended 1 of 7 60 to 90-minute online workshops. 2 people participated in 1-hour research interviews — 1 online and 1 in-person interview.

A total of 127 participants took part in the workshop and research interview process, and 119 participants completed surveys.

1.3.3 Workshop and research interviews

Early workshops conducted online used Miro as the centralised tool for white-boarding and note taking with participants. This format was used to encourage participants to add their own thoughts onto the Miro board during brainstorming exercises, followed by the opportunity to discuss and ideate as a group discussion. For later sessions, this approach transitioned away from using Miro due to accessibility barriers, and exercises were conducted using conversational prompts led by a facilitator.

Early written drafts of the DSDS principles were shared with participants ahead of key workshops for reference via email. These were also shared as reference for the DSDS survey.

Research questions were sent to participants before the workshops and interviews to help people prepare for the sessions. Descriptions of the purpose and approach of the research were also supplied in plain language to participants where it was helpful.

Workshop scripts and additional notes were supplied to New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL) interpreters and live captioners ahead of the sessions to ensure they had adequate time for preparation.

Notes were captured throughout the research workshops and interview sessions. Often online sessions were not video recorded, particularly where security and anonymity supported participants in being as honest and forthcoming as possible.

Some sessions were video recorded to assist with notetaking to ensure the information could capture the nuances of what was communicated. Permission was always sought from participants before recording started, with assurance that all personal identifiers would be removed during the analysis stage and all recordings deleted at the completion of the project.

All activities were designed to align with the digital.govt.nz privacy notice, including the deletion of recordings after research has been completed.

Workshops topics

Digital Service Design Standard

• Participants’ use of standards and guidelines
• The definition of a well-designed service
• Required considerations and processes for good service design
• Skills and roles required to meet the standard
• Definition and description of the standard
• Barriers of using the standard and delivering good services
• Ideas for removing barriers and improving the use of the standard

Digital Accessibility Standard

• Current state of delivering accessible government services and products
• Identifying barriers to delivering accessible digital services
• Ideas for removing barriers to delivering accessible services
• Disabled persons’ experience using inaccessible services
• Current state of giving feedback to government agencies
• Barriers to employment due to inaccessible tools
• Defining the ideal state of interacting with government services
• Participants’ previous involvement in research and user testing

Interview topics (Digital Service Design Standard and Digital Accessibility Standard)

• The importance of usability and accessibility in government services
• Barriers to delivering usable and accessible services
• Systems that are currently working well to deliver both usability and accessibility within organisations
• Ideas for improvement and reducing barriers to delivering usable and accessible services
• Organisational support and processes for delivering well designed and accessible services
• Organisational knowledge and skills to deliver accessibility
• Feedback received about usability or accessibility of services
• Procurement processes when services are outsourced

1.3.4 Surveys

When breaking down core research questions into activities and discussion topics that were suitable for different research methods, certain questions were identified as being most suited for a survey format. In particular, these were questions that were appropriate for questions with discrete responses, where a larger representative sample size was most useful, or where questions were less suited for a workshop or discussion format.

Two surveys were prepared together with the DIA project team, one focussing on questions related to the Digital Accessibility Standard, and one for the Digital Service Design Standard. These surveys were sent to lists of suitable participants as identified by the DIA team, as well as self-recruited participants. These participants largely consisted of subject matter experts, practitioners internal to government, and others involved in or responsible for the delivery of accessible government services.

A participation recruitment form was linked from blog posts that were published throughout the course of this project, a page of draft principles, and were shared with communities of practice. This allowed interested parties to volunteer to be involved in research such as surveys and other future research across different subject areas. A total of 89 participants were recruited this way, and included a range of people working within government, as well as a smaller number of supplier representatives, local government employees, and other interested parties.

Survey topics

Digital Service Design Standard:

• Participants’ experience delivering digital services
• Participants’ awareness of, and use of standards in delivery
• The importance of standards’ integrations into delivery, and whether standards should be mandated
• The importance of different draft principles, required resources, and challenges that exist in applying them
• Resources required by participants’ organisations to improve application of standards

Digital Accessibility Standard:

• Accountability of different roles in the accessibility of delivered services, and methods for ensuring accountability
• Methods of testing and tracking services’ accessibility, and how processes leading to accessible services are embedded in organisations’ day-to-day practices
• Whether organisations’ leadership champions accessibility, and methods for doing so
• Gaps in knowledge, and methods of addressing gaps
• Experience of receiving feedback related to alternate formats
• Practices to test and measure supplier capability during procurement, and during the delivery of services

1.3.5 Research analysis process

Research content and data was collated onto boards for sorting, grouping and theming. The process of synthesising looked at common themes and drew connections and insights to inform recommendations.

During the first half of the research, draft analyses of completed workshops were provided to product owners and summarised a running document of ongoing insights. This enabled product owners to review and identify key areas that required further research.

Final recommendations have been grouped and analysed for impact and effort, and to inform an initial prioritisation for suggested next steps.

1.3.6 Research constraints and limitations

The DSDS research was mainly carried out through workshops with Service Designers and some digital practitioners. It did not include people in roles like procurement, leadership, or management positions. Due to time constraints, there were no individual interviews focused solely on the DSDS.

Research with external suppliers looked at their accessibility capabilities to inform the DAS, rather than their use of the DSDS.

Research with the disabled community included disabled people and DPOs. However, not all DPOs where available to take part. The DPO Coalition did not participate, although some of its members were involved either as individual participants or during early planning.

Surveys for both the DSDS and DAS had 119 responses, mostly from service designers. This is small sample size compared to the number of people involved in designing and delivering government services.

People volunteered to participate in the workshops and surveys. This means they may have been more enthusiastic and motivated to drive change than a typical cross-section of practitioners.