Technical and Professional Communication (TPC) scholars and practitioners (TPCers) see a need to intervene in a range of complex problems. Yet scholars such as Leah Ceccarelli and Lauren Cagle have noted a gap between scholarly research findings and policy changes. To address this gap, I theorize a strategic grounding framework, consisting of multiple, linked tactics that over time enable TPCers to make a case to gain a seat at the table to shape policy. I theorize this framework through a case study of Stephen J. Pyne, founder of the subfield of Fire History, who influenced national and global fire management policy. I examine Pyne's professional papers, housed in the Stephen J. Pyne Papers Collection at the Arizona State University Archives. The framework offers TPCers a series of tactics that position TPCers as change makers as they place their expertise to shape policy that addresses complex problems.

<bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Introduction:</b> This case study examines the efficacy of Sushil Oswal's model of Accessible User Experience (AUX) as a diagnostic and planning tool for Technical and Professional Communicators (TPCers) to interrogate approaches to accessibility and disability inclusion in their practices by analyzing Microsoft's Inclusive Design Toolkit (“toolkit”) through the principles of AUX. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">About the case:</b> As a technology giant recognized for its disability inclusion work, Microsoft provides an intriguing test case via its toolkit to consider the practical application of AUX principles to interrogate workplace practices. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Situating the case:</b> In the past five years, three technical and professional communication (TPC) journals published special issues focused on accessibility, noting a lack of sustained attention to accessibility and how to practically apply it in the workplace. Multiple calls have been made for a paradigm shift in the way TPCers consider accessibility in their work. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Methods/approach:</b> I conduct a case study using thematic coding to analyze foundational texts in the toolkit to demonstrate how TPCers can use Oswal's model of AUX to diagnose current practices by examining them through an AUX lens and identify opportunities to achieve greater accessibility. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Results/discussion:</b> Applying an AUX framework as an analytical tool illuminated strengths within the toolkit's methodology and practices, and identified opportunities to expand its practices for greater accessibility. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Conclusion:</b> AUX holds promise as a tool for TPCers to analyze current approaches to accessibility and plan for even more inclusive practices.