← Use cases

For accessibility leads

You are accountable for accessibility across the organization and you manage none of the teams who ship. limena gives you the one thing that closes that gap: attributable, prioritized, visible work.

Your programme this week7 teams · 4 products
On track
28
findings routed
none sitting with you
6
awaiting your verdict
judgment calls only
5
of 7 teams on track
2 behind, named
↑ 14
points this quarter
evidence attached
CS
Checkout squad
8 open · 3 shipped this sprint
On track
DS
Design system
4 open · component fixes
On track
CT
Content team
11 open · alt text backlog
Behind
MA
Mobile app
5 open · no movement in 3 weeks
Stalled
MS
Marketing site
0 open · verified at last release
Clear

Accountable for everything, in charge of nothing.

The role is almost always one person, or a very small team, responsible for an obligation that only other people can discharge.

You cannot prioritize their backlog

Every team has its own roadmap and its own pressures. Accessibility arrives as a request from outside, competing with work their manager set.

You become the bottleneck

When findings have no owner they route to you by default. You end up triaging thousands of items for work you are not staffed to do.

Progress is invisible

Nobody upstairs can tell whether the programme is working. Without a trend, budget conversations start from zero every year.

01 · Stop being the queue

Findings go to owners, not to you.

Without routing, every barrier lands in your inbox and you become the bottleneck for work you cannot do. limena assigns each finding using the W3C ARRM roles and pushes it into that team's tracker.

Your job shifts from triaging a list to steering a programme.

Routed this sprint28 findings · 0 to you
  • DEVCard field labelsLINEAR
  • DESIGNFocus ring on buttonsFIGMA
  • CONTENTAlt text, 214 imagesCMS
  • DEVHeading order on templatesJIRA

02 · Your expertise, recorded

The calls only you can make, logged as evidence.

limena handles the mechanical sweep and queues everything that needs judgment. Your verdict is attached to the criterion with your name and the date, so the conformance claim has a person behind it.

That is also the record that protects you if the decision is ever questioned.

Needs your verdictIs the error message clear enough?

What automation found

The field has an associated error message and it is announced. WCAG 3.3.1 is technically satisfied.

"Error: invalid input in field 3."

Why it is queued for you

Whether that message actually helps someone recover is a judgment call. limena will not pass it as conformant on automation alone.

Not sufficientAcceptRecorded against 3.3.1 with your name and the date

03 · The quarterly update

Something to show, without building a deck.

Leadership does not want a finding count. They want to know whether this is getting better, who is behind, and whether the organization is exposed. limena keeps that view current so the update is a link rather than a fortnight of screenshots.

Executive view · liveShare link

Maturity

  1. Reactive
  2. Aware
  3. Organized
  4. Operational
  5. By design
  • Open findings, all products↓ 41%
  • Products meeting target3 of 4
  • Teams behind schedule2, named

From chasing people to running a programme.

  • Every finding has a named owner in their own tracker, so you are steering rather than forwarding.
  • The teams that are behind are visible by name, which does the persuading for you.
  • Your judgment calls are recorded against the criterion, so conformance has a person behind it.
  • A live executive view, so the quarterly update is a link instead of a fortnight of screenshots.

Bring the product you worry about most.

We will show you what is blocking people, who owns each fix, and what your next quarterly update could look like.

Book a demoTest a page free