-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Practices from the iEMSS 2016 workshop
Joseph Guillaume edited this page Nov 3, 2016
·
32 revisions
This a listing of the practices shared by participants in the iEMSS 2016 workshop held in Toulouse, France.
Each Response should include: What: When: How: Why: (name of contributor)
When: identifying stakeholders
How: literature analysis and interviews (snowball) visualizing and structuring e.g. cntal and peripheral activities dormant
Why: systematic overview on actions to involve (potentially), Example: www.Lima-Water.de
(name of contributor) NA
-
Contacting associations/community groups who seem to indlue people that are responsible / affected by the problem
-
Identify and contact governmental departments who should be doing something about it
When: How: Why: (name of contributor)Elena
When:
How:talk with project partners, then complement this identification with e "business intelligence" exercise, based on tools like Quested Orbit
Why: To identify the actors who operated in the sector, as well as competitors and keep an eye' on what they do, the products they develop, etc.
(name of contributor) Antonio Marugulia
When:
How:
Why:Talking to other researchers to know their demands and problems in research.
(name of contributor) Kai
1.5 What: Internet searches to identify people and then those lead to names of people they know or work with
When:
How: reading publications, when available by the people involved
Why: determine connectivity between people, roles, hierarchy, power structure
(name of contributor) NA
When:
How:
Why:Find out who they interact with, which NGOs, community groups, individuals
(name of contributor) Marit
When: When I am developing my research all the way at the start before framing the research method
How:search and then contact these groups via email and follow-up with a face-to-face meeting to check whether they have a stake in the issue I am looking at.
- face-to-face meetings with individuals (e.g. team leaders) or as a group
- By giving a presentation about my reserarch ideas and discuss that with attendees
- May use semi-structured interviews or surveys depending on stage of the study Why: (name of contributor) Marit
When: It is important to know who values their stakeholder position
How:Wait for stakeholders to come forward
Why: It's useful to find out who thinks their position is important
Example: Spring City Hydropower (name of contributor) Marit
1.9 What: Scoping Analysis for State of the Environment (note contributor thinks this needs better name)
When: Use when contentious needs to be implemented in real world
How: Diagramming and discussion, or analysis | Imagine how will be implemented at each stage who is affected, who can help, who might stop it, etc. (who can talk for groups of stakeholders),
Why: remove blocs
Example: land use policy problems (name of contributor)
When: Look for opportunities to see/hear stakeholders articulate their concerns that I don't need to arrange. Talk to people who are aware of the issues, but who are not stakeholders directly. Gather "community perceptions"
How:
Why:
(name of contributor) Scott Peckham
When: Limitations of talking to individuals because of perceived fairness
How:General environment, scan with individual groups of stakeholders
Why: Gets the big issues identified, the rest will follow
(name of contributor) NA
When:
How:Make a point of going to the meeting and holding informal conversations with them to identify the sensitivities
Why:
(name of contributor) NA
When:
How: Most likely using social network services
Why: Automatically the answers will cover both the expected positive aspects and more likely the adverse effects. The interviewees might be even persuaded into ranking them.
(name of contributor) NA
When: Working with industry and generally know the key issues of concern to clients
How:talk with industry partners
Why: sometimes we can anticipate industry needs when we see that a particular problem has not been solved and we see a potential industrial application
(name of contributor) Antonio Maruglia
When: to get a feeling for challenges, implicit barriers, sensitivities
How: Various informal ways, Identify people from prior related projects who are on the ground 'informants'
Why: gives you insights before you might hurst sensibilities
(name of contributor)Hannah Kosow
When: Typically used at scenario development stage. Identifying sensitive topics is more difficult when in a mixed focus group. People will/may not feel comfortable voicing their sensitivities if other viewpoints are at the meeting.
How: Have a very open discussion on a personal level where I only ask questions. Very important not to show any of your own opinons. Perhaps paint the diversity of opinions and ask people what they think of this.
Why:See above - homogeneity provides a safer environment to voice concerns.
Example: Many research projects where I worked with local interest gruops = farmers, NGOs, etc.
(name of contributor) Marit
When:Almost always use this, but particularly when need someone else to implement the outcome
How: one-on-one (mostly) dialogue, prior knowledge of sensitivities, negotiation of what and also their investment.
Why: some stakeholders will not believe outcomes or process unless they can see something they identify with. Others will be a general process thing (e.g. equity/fairness).
(name of contributor)NA
When: Range of normative assessment criteria of stakeholders needed
How: Worshop & visualization where we actually gain requirements and aims that we have to achieve and if we need more information we talk with them
Why:Instead of discussing policies directly, to include their criteria
Example: Renn, 1994 (?)
(name of contributor)KAS
When:
How: I try to gather as much information as possible from each stakeholder - not just what they think is relevant or important, but what unique perspective or viewpoint does this stakeholder bring that others cannot?
Why:
Example:
(name of contributor)Scott Peckham
When:
How: we search previous literature to identify variables used in similar models and on which we have obviously to collect information. Then as a second step we ask stakeholders what variables are likely to have an influence on the phenomenon we want to study | we use a grounded theory approach, letting them speak
Why:
(name of contributor)Antonio Maruglia
When: Usually the broad community stakeholders are defined in the earlier stages of a project, from them I mostly seek a problem definition (see Q1). Academic stakeholders are defined when writing the proposal. This is a HUGE barrier because if you fail to approach the people at the start it will be very difficult to get other researchers to contribute knowledge (unless you have a paper as a carrot)
How: This is usually already written into the research proposal. Mostly we need information about: 1) what actions would stakeholdders take? and 2) what costs and benefits are associated with these actions?
Why: It's important to identify stakeholders what is in it for them. Why would they give you the information? How would sharing their knoweldge benefit them?
(name of contributor)Antonio Marit
When:
How: Active listening and paraphrasing and follow-up questions. Good communication and explaining skills
Why: It is critical to develop a mutual trust/respect relationship, w/active listening
(name of contributor)Scott Peckham
When: Create joint problem definition by a group
How: (info inputs) presentation rounds; group discussions, rotation, plenary
Why: stakeholder in one room, included into project activities.
(name of contributor) Hannah Keow
When: When people are 'too agreeable"
How: Say negative or opposite position statements
Why: Gets people thinking
(name of contributor) Dan Ames
When:
How: Propose possible solutions after milestones identified and then have a dialogue about getting to those milestones.
Why: having people identify key performance metrics or goals first, helps offset risks of compounding expectations for stakeholders.
(name of contributor) NA
When: Complex, multi-stage had to community simply, open to change (agile)
How:
Why: Because addressing the whole problem is too hard to know or have a clearly explained concept. Stakeholders may not know what they are agreeing to really and need smaller project bites to start down a path to action.
(name of contributor)NA
When:
How: Have stakeholders describe how a solution could potentially improve their life. Make sure you keep in regular contact with them. Showing what's in it for them.
Why:
(name of contributor) Elena
When: Ask stakeholder opinions
How:
Why: This helps us understand if we are on the right track and helps them in formulating the problem in an effective and clear way, so that we give them the feeling that the clearer their formulation of the problem, the better the solution we can come up with.
(name of contributor) Antonio Maruglia
When: Similar to Q1 answers, mostly through iterative meetings at any stage where the focus group or meeting information provides critical input into a project. At that point it is most important to check ....missing rest of comment, looks like it was ripped during the workshop because there is tape on the sticky note.
How: Summarize minutes after a stakeholder meeting and send that to participants to check whether your understanding is correct
Why:
(name of contributor) Marit
5.1 - Prioritise, order your outcomes so that you attempt to resolve problems and show results ?nigre? - early even if it's not the final story.
When: time or other constraints bounded
How: Box it in 1st might be a technical bound then a minimum acceptable and then negotiate
Why: Solution is usually open-ended savehohat??? hard to be clearly identified actual outcomes usually.
Q6 - How do you determine the level of authenticity the stakeholders should have in making decisions about the model?
6.1 - Modelers should exercise some care in not "equalizing" all points of view if that is inappropriate. Decision makers may see a 50/50 situation that should be more like 20/80.
6.2 - Ask who is affected most? Are there any legal bottom lines (reflected in some stakeholders), Structure the stakeholders into groups/categories. Try for consenssus, but need a core group that can make the hard calls.
6.3 - Not a good practice, but reality: Keep their effective influence low by not sufficiently explaining the model to them: Who manipulates the model has the power. "I cannot model poverty - I'm a wastewater modeler"
6.4 - The best approach is a fully participatory modelling where the stakeholders have to be involved since the project definition. In this way the project becomes "their" project. They have to be free to propose whatever is needed from their side. If it is infeasible, we have to explain them why. In this way, finally, if the findings we derive from the model counterdict their original expectations, they will not contest them. (Antonio Marrytia)
Use when: Customer understands requirements of model and does not expect undue influence of process.
Do not use when: customer tries to overrifde detailed implement, or makes decisions at expense of others.
How: elicit feedback on obvious decisions about model.
why: if customer is informed and doesn't impact on procedural justice, then their reques are closest to what the model needs.
e.g. many paritcipatory modelling techniques (PTO - Joseph)
a) - understanding the system (academia)
b) - decision support (practice)
And empower stakeholders, if necessary and do not promise a mandate, they do not have (Hannah Kaow)