Introduction to Lyft Silver

Rideshare company Lyft announced a new service aimed at older adults called Lyft Silver. The company says it’s about giving seniors "the gift of independence, without the weight of worry." The service features larger text, simpler menus and prioritizes matching riders with vehicles that are easier to enter and exit. It even offers live human support when needed.

According to Lyft’s announcement, they’ve "poured their hearts" into this design, thinking about "those we cherish most." They’ve worked with experts on aging to create what they call a "groundbreaking feature." It all sounds thoughtful and well-intentioned. But when I look at the list of features, I can’t help but wonder: Why are these improvements only available to seniors? Wouldn’t many of them be just as useful for riders of any age?

When Good Design Gets Age-Restricted

Let’s examine what Lyft Silver actually offers. According to Fast Company, the service uses a font that’s 1.4 times larger than the standard app. It has a cleaner, simpler interface. It connects users with rides that are easier to get in and out of. (Apparently, Lyft’s data showed seniors are twice as likely to cancel when matched with pickup trucks.) And it offers access to phone support with real human beings.

Are any of these features that only older adults would benefit from? Wouldn’t many people of all ages struggle to read tiny app text on a sun-drenched phone screen while standing on a street corner? Who hasn’t been frustrated when an app update buries an essential function three menus deep? Might other users prefer to be matched with vehicles that are easier to enter? And who wouldn’t want to connect with a live human when things go south?

The Paradox Of Specialized Design

Design legend and usability expert Don Norman puts it perfectly: "Designing for people with disabilities almost always leads to products that work better for everyone." The irony is that making these features "special" actually reinforces a problematic mindset about design. I don’t think I’ve ever quoted former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer about anything. But he was absolutely right when he stated, “Accessible design is good design.”

When companies create separate, specialized interfaces for different user groups, they’re often implicitly acknowledging that their main product isn’t as usable as it could be. Instead of fixing the core experience, they create an alternate path that often gets less attention and fewer updates over time. There’s also something mildly patronizing about age-segregated design. Only 5.6% of Lyft’s riders are over 65, according to Fast Company. Today, that age bracket makes up 18% of the U.S. population. Lyft’s low senior usage rate likely revealed a usability problem, not a lack of need or interest among older adults.

The Business Case For Universal Design

From a business perspective, making your product more usable for everyone isn’t just the right thing to do, it’s smart strategy. When curb cuts were mandated for wheelchair accessibility, they ended up benefiting parents with strollers, travelers with luggage, delivery workers, and countless others. Lyft’s own data points to the business upside. Older adults are 57% more likely to miss their rides, Fast Company reported. That’s lost revenue, not to mention frustrated drivers and riders. By making the service more accessible, Lyft stands to increase successful rides across all demographics.

Moving Beyond Age-Restricted Design

What would a truly inclusive Lyft app look like? Perhaps it would offer customizable font sizes and contrast options for everyone. It might let any user select vehicle preferences based on ease of entry. And imagine offering a "Get Help" button for all users, not just those over a certain age. Design that accommodates diverse needs doesn’t have to mean designing for the lowest common denominator or sacrificing aesthetic appeal. In fact, as Don Norman argues, there’s no reason assistive devices can’t be beautiful and elegant. The same applies to digital apps.

Lyft Silver for All?

Lyft deserves credit for identifying gaps in their service for older users. But the real innovation would be recognizing that the improvements they’ve created for Lyft Silver shouldn’t be age-restricted at all. When good design gets labeled as a specialized option for a particular demographic, we all lose out. Isn’t it time we stopped treating ease of use as a special feature?

Conclusion

In conclusion, while Lyft’s introduction of Lyft Silver is a step in the right direction, it raises important questions about the nature of design and accessibility. By restricting these features to seniors, Lyft may be reinforcing a problematic mindset about design. Instead, the company should consider making these improvements available to all users, regardless of age. This approach would not only benefit seniors but also enhance the overall user experience for everyone.

FAQs

Q: What is Lyft Silver?
A: Lyft Silver is a new service offered by Lyft that is designed for older adults, featuring larger text, simpler menus, and easier-to-enter vehicles.
Q: Why is Lyft Silver only available to seniors?
A: According to Lyft, the service is designed to give seniors "the gift of independence, without the weight of worry." However, many of the features may be beneficial to users of all ages.
Q: What are some potential drawbacks of age-restricted design?
A: Age-restricted design can reinforce a problematic mindset about design, imply that the main product is not usable, and create a separate, potentially less-maintained path for certain users.
Q: What are the benefits of universal design?
A: Universal design can benefit all users, regardless of age or ability, and can also be a smart business strategy, increasing accessibility and usability for a wider range of users.

In 2025, the landscape of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) is undergoing significant transformations. While some organizations are scaling back their DEI initiatives due to political and legal pressures, others are reaffirming their commitment to fostering inclusive workplaces.

Corporate Retrenchment and Rebranding

Several major corporations have reduced or rebranded their DEI efforts. For instance, Rolls-Royce has ended its formal DEI programs across global operations, replacing them with a new “employee voice network” open to all staff, reflecting a broader retreat from DEI initiatives amid political pressures . Similarly, Goldman Sachs has removed race-specific language from its diversity initiative web pages, particularly those promoting its “One Million Black Women” and “Black in Business” programs, amid increasing legal scrutiny and DEI rollbacks. 

Continued Commitment to DEI

Contrastingly, some companies are steadfast in their DEI commitments. Marriott CEO Anthony Capuano reaffirmed the company’s dedication to DEI, emphasizing that Marriott welcomes all and creates opportunities for all, values that will not change regardless of political climates. His public remarks drew widespread praise, resulting in 40,000 emails of support from Marriott employees worldwide.

Legal and Regulatory Developments

In the UK, the Business Disability Forum (BDF) faces criticism for not taking a clear stance on proposed disability pay-gap reporting reforms. The government seeks to mandate companies with 250+ employees to report pay disparities by disability and ethnicity, akin to gender pay-gap reporting. Although the BDF’s purpose is to dismantle barriers for disabled individuals, it has neither supported nor opposed the policy, citing concerns about unintended consequences.

Conclusion

The evolving DEI landscape in 2025 presents both challenges and opportunities. Organizations must navigate political, legal, and societal pressures while striving to create inclusive environments. By reaffirming commitments, adapting strategies, and engaging in transparent practices, companies can foster workplaces that value diversity and inclusion.

Remember the phrase, “If you don’t have anything nice to say, then don’t say anything at all.” This saying has been encountered by many in various life experiences. Polite, kind, pleasing, and agreeable are terms Merriam-Webster uses to define nice. Those favorable terms can go awry if over-indexed. Amira Barger, Communications Expert, DEI Executive, and Author of The Price of Nice: Why Comfort Keeps Us Stuck—And 4 Actions for Real Change, unpacks the impact of niceness and provides solutions and frameworks anyone can benefit from.

The Price of Nice: An Interview with Amira Barger

Amira Barger’s upcoming book, The Price of Nice: Why Comfort Keeps Us Stuck—And 4 Actions for Real Change, explores how the social construct of “niceness” preserves the status quo and often stifles real progress. In it, she provides a practical four-part “Think-Feel-Do-Revisit” framework for readers to shift from defaulting to “nice” to acting with “nerve”—boldness, audacity, and courage to disrupt and take necessary action.

Defining Inclusive Leadership

Inclusive leadership is defined as leadership that is clear, honest, and growth-oriented because it doesn’t avoid hard conversations or dilute necessary feedback. It prioritizes the long-term development of the people entrusted to your care over short-term harmony or comfort. It is also about growing the ability, potential, and opportunity for the entirety of the organization and the team.

Understanding the Concept of Being Entrusted to Care

Being entrusted to care means seeing, understanding, and knowing the whole person and understanding that people have lives, dreams, and desires outside of the four walls of the workplace. This includes understanding the needs of employees, such as those who need to start their workday at 9:45 instead of 9:00 am because they are caregivers to children, or an ailing parent, or a spouse.

The Impact of Niceness on Feedback Conversations

An overly “nice” approach can prevent managers from being brave and clear during feedback, thus impeding employee growth. Nice can get in the way because it keeps us from being brave. A truly inclusive and impactful leader is someone who is intent on being clear, naming the behavior and the impact, and sharing specific examples of what needs to be done differently.

Choosing Nerve over Niceness

Nerve challenges, Nerve disrupts, and Nerve holds boundaries. Even if people call you difficult, disruptive, or angry, that’s Nerve. Inclusive leaders have the opportunity to utilize the insights shared in this interview to help better navigate the workplace as a change agent.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the concept of niceness can be detrimental to inclusive leadership and effective feedback conversations. By choosing nerve over niceness, leaders can create a more inclusive workplace and foster growth and development among their employees. As a next step, reflect upon and document the scenarios and interactions where niceness played a pivotal role and essentially impacted the ability to be as inclusive as desired.

FAQs

Q: What is the definition of niceness according to Merriam-Webster?
A: Polite, kind, pleasing, and agreeable.
Q: What is the title of Amira Barger’s upcoming book?
A: The Price of Nice: Why Comfort Keeps Us Stuck—And 4 Actions for Real Change.
Q: What is the definition of inclusive leadership?
A: Leadership that is clear, honest, and growth-oriented because it doesn’t avoid hard conversations or dilute necessary feedback.
Q: What is the concept of being entrusted to care?
A: Seeing, understanding, and knowing the whole person and understanding that people have lives, dreams, and desires outside of the four walls of the workplace.
Q: What is the definition of nerve?
A: Nerve challenges, Nerve disrupts, and Nerve holds boundaries.