Companies that use Eyeable

Source: Analysis of 100 job postings that mention Eyeable

My analysis shows that Eye-able is primarily purchased by sales enablement and HR leadership roles. The Sales Development Representative position accounts for 25% of hiring, with the Head of People at 20%, Communications Specialists at 15%, and Marketing Executives at 10%. These buyers are focused on digital accessibility and inclusion initiatives. The Head of People role explicitly mentions building a "world-class People Function" and embedding culture, which suggests Eye-able supports organizational transformation around accessibility standards. Sales teams are being mobilized to generate qualified meetings with new customers, indicating Eye-able sells through a consultative B2B motion.

Day-to-day users appear to be communications professionals, content managers, and marketing teams who need to ensure digital properties meet accessibility requirements. I noticed multiple roles focused on "content-led commerce," website management, and digital experience creation. These practitioners are implementing Eye-able across websites, apps, and digital platforms to make content accessible to all users, including those with disabilities.

The core pain point emerging from these postings centers on compliance and inclusive customer experience. One role emphasizes "digital accessibility" as a key solution area, while another mentions ensuring "accessible financial solutions to bridge the gap." Multiple positions reference making experiences "accessible to all" and creating "inclusive" environments. Companies are clearly responding to both regulatory requirements and genuine desire to serve diverse customer bases through better digital accessibility tools.

Source: Analysis of tech stacks from 806 companies that use Eyeable

I noticed something striking about Eye-able users: they're deeply focused on compliance and accessibility, particularly around digital regulations. The overwhelming presence of consent management platforms like UserCentrics, consentmanager, CookieBot, and CCM19 tells me these companies are operating in highly regulated environments, likely in Europe where GDPR and digital accessibility laws are strictly enforced. Eye-able itself is a web accessibility tool, so the pattern is clear. These are organizations prioritizing legal compliance and inclusive digital experiences.

The pairing of Eye-able with UserCentrics makes perfect sense. Both tools address different aspects of the same regulatory challenge. If a company is investing in cookie consent management to comply with privacy laws, they're probably also concerned about meeting accessibility standards like WCAG or the European Accessibility Act. The presence of DeskBird, a workplace management tool, suggests many of these companies have hybrid work environments and modern HR practices, indicating they're progressive organizations that take corporate responsibility seriously. MindManager's appearance, though in fewer companies, hints at organizations doing complex project planning, likely managing intricate compliance roadmaps.

My analysis shows these are compliance-led organizations, not necessarily product-led or sales-led in the typical SaaS sense. They're likely established companies with mature operations and legal or compliance departments driving technology decisions. The relatively modest company counts combined with high correlation rates suggest these tools serve a specific niche rather than mass-market adoption.

Source: Analysis of Linkedin bios of 806 companies that use Eyeable

I noticed that Eye-able's customers are predominantly public sector organizations and service-oriented enterprises focused on direct human impact. These aren't tech companies building software products. They're government administrations (Stadt Oldenburg, Hochsauerlandkreis), healthcare providers (University Hospital Regensburg, Malteser hospitals), educational institutions (Akademie Klausenhof), utilities companies (Stadtwerke Tübingen, DOKOM21), social service organizations (AWO networks, BruderhausDiakonie), and membership-based associations (Swiss Tennis, HSMA Deutschland). Many operate physical facilities where accessibility directly affects their ability to serve constituents, patients, students, or members.

These are established, mature organizations. The employee counts skew heavily toward 200-5,000+ staff. Many reference decades or even centuries of history (Christiani since 1886, SCHWAIGER since 1946). There's virtually no venture funding mentioned. These organizations have stable operations, long-term missions, and aren't chasing growth metrics. They're institutions with permanence.