How “accessible” are your digital contracts, really? Many organizations proudly adopt digital signing solutions or contract platforms advertised as “accessible,” then add an e-signature button, believing the job is done. But true accessibility goes far beyond converting paper to PDF or ticking a compliance box. If a large segment of your customers can’t understand or navigate your contract process, then it isn’t truly accessible. In this post, we’ll explore the hidden barriers that prevent people from engaging with contracts, where most platforms fall short, and how applying universal design principles can ensure everyone – regardless of literacy, language, or neurodiversity – can confidently say “I agree”.
What this blog contains:
Digital contract processes often assume that every user can read and understand lengthy legal text – an assumption that leaves many people behind. In reality, numerous hidden barriers can prevent someone from fully grasping a contract:
Because these barriers are usually hidden, users rarely ask for special accommodations. A client with low literacy or other challenges is unlikely to raise their hand and request a simplified contract – often due to embarrassment or fear of judgment. The result is that many signers simply “get by” or click “agree” without fully understanding what they’re agreeing to. This isn’t just a personal issue; it’s a systemic problem with how contracts are presented.
Too often, “accessibility” in contract platforms is treated as an afterthought or a separate, specialized process. If a user has trouble, the solution might be offering a different version or a human assistant – but only if the user explicitly asks for help. Most platforms effectively say, “Here’s the standard contract for most people, and if you can’t handle it, we have an accessible option somewhere.” This approach is flawed. In reality, the alternative path (if it exists at all) is usually underutilized or ineffective. Many companies don’t even offer simplified contracts, and among those that do, very few make them readily available to users.
In practice, the majority of digital signing solutions – even those marketed as accessible contract platforms – simply replicate old paper forms in electronic form. In fact, most digital contracts today are just static PDFs with a scribble signature or tickbox on top – a 17th-century paper ritual dressed up in 21st-century clothing. They might look modern, but the content remains lengthy, jargon-filled, and difficult to navigate. Studies back this up: one landmark analysis of 500 popular websites found over 99% of their user agreements were essentially unreadable to the average person. The average terms of service was written at a level comparable to an academic journal, requiring more than 14 years of education to fully comprehend. It’s no wonder that only about 9% of adults actually read online terms and policies before clicking “I agree” – the rest skip it because the text is just too long and complex.
In short, most e-signature and contract platforms focus on getting the signature, not on ensuring understanding. They offer a one-size-fits-all, text-heavy workflow and consider their job done. Technical accessibility (like screen reader compatibility or font size options) might be addressed, but cognitive accessibility – making the content clear and usable for everyone – is largely overlooked. This is where traditional platforms get it wrong: they prioritize form over understanding. For instance, neurodiversity in e-signature design is usually overlooked – the standard scroll-and-sign interface assumes everyone processes information the same way, which just isn’t true.
True accessibility means creating a single, inclusive process that works for everyone, rather than a separate “normal” and “special” version. This is the philosophy of universal design – an approach originally born in fields like architecture but just as powerful in digital services. When we say contracts should follow universal design, we mean building understanding into the default experience for every user, not bolting on fixes later for those who struggle.
A useful analogy is the “curb cut effect” from city design. Sidewalk curb ramps were initially installed for wheelchair users, but ended up benefiting many others – parents with strollers, travelers with luggage, cyclists, and more. In other words, solving for the needs of people with disabilities improved convenience for everyone. The same principle applies to contracts and legal communication. If we design contract workflows to accommodate low literacy, non-native speakers, or neurodivergent users, the process becomes easier for all users. Simplifying language, adding visual aids, and breaking information into digestible pieces doesn’t only help the most vulnerable; busy professionals and well-educated users appreciate clarity too. No one ever complained that a contract was too easy to understand!
As one accessibility advocate noted, challenges like low literacy or neurodivergent thinking are often “hidden disabilities,” and making a product accessible inherently makes it more inclusive for everyone. This is the core of inclusive design. By lowering the comprehension barrier, we raise overall understanding for all participants. Universal design in digital contracts means we stop expecting users to adapt to archaic, difficult documents and instead adapt our documents to the diverse needs of users. The goal is to have one journey that everyone can follow confidently, without anyone being singled out or left behind.
What would a truly inclusive, accessible contract platform look like? It would incorporate design features that make the process understandable and usable for as broad a range of people as possible, by default. Instead of waiting for someone to say “I’m confused, I need help,” the platform itself would proactively support comprehension. Key features might include:
All these elements “bake in” accessibility from the start, rather than treating it as an add-on. The contract experience becomes flexible, adapting to different user needs without anyone having to ask for a “special” version. When done right, inclusion isn’t a feature – it’s the foundation of the entire approach. Every user, from a seasoned lawyer to a first-time customer with reading challenges, goes through the same core process and arrives at the same outcome: genuine understanding of the agreement.
Designing contracts with accessibility and clarity in mind isn’t just altruism – it delivers tangible benefits to both users and organizations. For users, the advantages are clear: they have a far better experience, with less frustration and uncertainty. People actually know what they’re signing. They feel respected and empowered rather than overwhelmed. This builds trust. Clients are more comfortable proceeding when they truly understand the deal, and they’re less likely to be surprised later by “fine print” they missed.
The business gains are significant as well. Fewer misunderstandings upfront mean fewer complaints and disputes down the line. Misunderstandings are one of the most common causes of customer complaints, so eliminating confusion preempts a lot of problems. Clear communication leads to fewer contract disputes and less time spent by staff resolving issues, which saves money and protects reputations. It also strengthens client relationships – a customer who feels informed is more likely to stay loyal and satisfied.
An accessible contract process also reduces legal and compliance risks. When someone truly gives informed consent, there’s less room for them to later claim “I didn’t know what I was signing.” Organizations that use plain language, interactive confirmations, and other inclusive practices can demonstrate that each user had every opportunity to understand the terms. This makes agreements more defensible if they’re ever challenged. In fact, regulators are starting to expect this level of clarity. Recent rules – such as the UK Financial Conduct Authority’s new Consumer Duty – emphasize that firms must ensure customer understanding, not just collect signatures. Privacy laws like GDPR similarly require consent to be informed and unambiguous, putting the onus on businesses to communicate terms intelligibly. Simply put, the writing is on the wall: the era of “tick-box” consent is ending, and transparent, user-friendly agreements are the new standard.
Finally, making your contracts accessible to all is just good business. When people find the signing process easy and clear, they are more likely to complete it rather than abandon it midway. You also widen your potential customer base – fewer people are alienated or excluded by a daunting contract. And the innovations that improve accessibility (videos, summaries, Q&A, etc.) tend to streamline the experience for everyone, not just those who might strictly “need” them. It’s a win-win: better user experience, better compliance, and often faster deal closures. As one of our other posts put it, “Confusion is expensive. Clarity is far cheaper. It builds trust, reduces risk and helps businesses stay on the right side of regulators and clients alike.”
Reimagining the contract experience along these inclusive lines might sound like a tall order – but it’s exactly what we’ve set out to do at
This “one journey for all” approach isn’t just theory; it’s working in practice. As we discussed in our blog post Accessibility is inclusion: One process for everyone, forward-thinking platforms like
In the end, making your digital contracts truly accessible is about respecting your users and protecting your organization. It means showing that every client’s consent matters, and proving it by designing a process everyone can navigate. Platforms like
Learn more about our mission and approach on our Our Principles page, check out our FAQs for common questions, or read how clear communication can reduce disputes in our post Clear communication: the key to fewer complaints and disputes. An accessible future of digital contracting is within reach – and we’re building it, one informed consent at a time.