There are 1.3 billion disabled people in the world. We navigate systems, services, and workplaces that were not designed with us in mind. When those environments get better, it is rarely because someone decided to be generous. It is usually because a law made them.

Regulation matters. Legal frameworks establish the baseline and create accountability. Without them, the floor disappears entirely and disabled people are left relying on goodwill. That is not inclusion. That is charity.

But a baseline is not a destination. And the organisations that treat it as one are missing something significant — not just for their employees, but for their customers, suppliers, and every stakeholder they serve.

In February 2026, Valuable 500 and Baker McKenzie published something that makes this tension impossible to ignore.

The Global Disability Legislation Index

The Global Disability Legislation Index is the first comprehensive, comparable analysis of disability law across 106 countries. It was built through 1,400 hours of pro bono legal research by more than 350 volunteers. For any multinational organisation, it answers questions that have previously required expensive, piecemeal legal advice: what constitutes disability in your operating markets, what reasonable adjustment obligations apply, and how enforcement mechanisms differ across jurisdictions.

This is a genuinely useful tool. Having consistent, comparable information across markets removes a common excuse for inaction.

But the most important thing the index reveals is not what the law requires. It is how far beyond the law the best organisations have already moved.

The Compliance Trap

Angela Vigil, Pro Bono Partner at Baker McKenzie, put it plainly during the SYNC25 panel discussion where the index was launched:

“It is important to know that the law is always the floor, not the ceiling.”

Angela Vigil, Pro Bono Partner, Baker McKenzie

Too many organisations treat disability inclusion as a legal checkbox exercise. Meet the quota. Provide the accommodation. Document the process. Move on. That approach misunderstands both what the legislation is trying to achieve and what opportunity it represents — for employees, yes, but equally for customers and the wider market.

The global disability economy is worth $23 trillion. Companies that are genuinely leading on inclusion are not asking “what must we do?” They are asking “how does this make us stronger?” Those two questions lead to entirely different outcomes.

What Going Beyond Compliance Actually Looks Like

Accessibility compliance typically means meeting minimum legal standards — for example, ensuring a website meets the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), the internationally recognised standard for making digital content usable by disabled people. Or ensuring a workplace can make reasonable adjustments for employees who need them.

But compliance only addresses what is directly in scope of the law. It does not guarantee that a disabled customer can actually use your product. It does not mean a disabled job candidate has a fair experience of your recruitment process. It does not ensure that a disabled supplier or partner can engage with your systems and communications without barriers.

The index highlights reasonable accommodation as a useful example of where compliance thinking falls short. In most jurisdictions, the legal requirement focuses on individual adjustments: modified equipment, flexible schedules, adjusted duties. That framing treats accommodation as an exceptional measure. A response to a problem.

Forward-thinking organisations are doing something different. They are redesigning work environments, digital products, and customer experiences to be accessible by default. When systems are built from the start to accommodate multiple ways of working and interacting, individual requests become simpler, costs decrease, and the benefits extend to everyone.

That is not compliance. That is inclusion built into the architecture of the organisation. And it is a competitive advantage.

Takeshi Yoshida, Partner at Baker McKenzie, framed it clearly: “Understanding these issues helps companies move faster, attract excellent talent, and become more profitable with a creative working culture.”

My Take

Laws matter. Regulation is how you establish a baseline, create accountability, and ensure that inclusion is not left entirely to goodwill. I wrote earlier this year about how 2026 will expose which companies still treat accessibility as a side issue — and the Global Disability Legislation Index makes that reckoning more concrete. Organisations can now see exactly what is required across every major market. There is no hiding behind complexity.

But there is a meaningful difference between organisations that treat accessibility and disability inclusion as a compliance function and those that treat it as a strategic priority. That difference shows in culture, in product quality, in the experience of disabled customers, and ultimately in business performance.

The smart organisations use the law as their foundation. Then they ask what it would look like to be genuinely excellent. To design products that disabled customers actually want to use. To build workplaces where disabled employees do not have to fight for what they need. To communicate and engage in ways that include every stakeholder, not just those who happen not to be disabled.

The Global Disability Legislation Index gives leaders the knowledge to understand the landscape. What they choose to do with it will define whether they treat disability inclusion as a compliance manual or a competitive strategy.

The law is the floor. Build higher.

Takeaway: Ask your leadership team one question: are we building to the floor, or building beyond it? The answer will tell you a great deal about where your organisation is headed.

Sources:
Why Compliance is Just a Starting Point for Disability Inclusion in Business, Valuable 500, 5 February 2026
Global Disability Legislation Index, Valuable 500 and Baker McKenzie
2026 Will Expose Which Companies Still Treat Accessibility as a Side Issue, BBEB