Stakeholder perspectives and Impact Measurement

1
Stakeholder perspectives and Impact Measurement

• Professor Jenny Rowley
• Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

2
Previously (Copenhagen)

• Raised the importance of considering stakeholders
  in e-government
• Undertook an exercise to think about the benefits
  potentially sought by different stakeholder
  groups
• Suggested some commonality in benefits sought by
  different groups, but also concluded that
  priorities might vary between groups (see next
  slides).

3
Differing priorities (benefits sought) for
different stakeholder groups 1
People as service users People as citizens Businesses
Easy to use Transparency, openness and trustworthiness Economic growth and productivity
Accessibility and inclusivity Confidentiality and privacy Cost-effectiveness
Confidentiality and privacy Democracy (citizen-centred) Resource rationalisation, value for money
4
Differing priorities (benefits sought) for
different stakeholder groups 2
Public administrators (employees) Other Government agencies Politicians
Empowers employees Integrations of e-gov processes Transparency, openness and trustworthiness
Reduced admin burden Reduced admin burden Democracy
Continuity and stability Easy to use Standardisation of information and services Accountability
5
Agenda for this session

• Reviewing stakeholder analysis (10 mins)
• Stakeholder analysis and e-gov impact measurement
  (10mins)
• Activity - Stakeholder salience (10mins)
• Plenary session and discussion (10mins)

6
Reviewing stakeholder analysis
7
Who are stakeholders?

• Stakeholders are people or organizations who
  either
• stand to be affected by a project or policy, or
• could make or break the success of a policy or
  project.
• They may be winners, losers, included in or
  excluded from decision making, users of results,
  and/or participants in the development and
  implementation process.

8
Why think about stakeholders?

• Recognition that various stakeholder groups have
  a role to play in ensuring the long-term success
  of the eGov enterprise (Flak and Nordheim, 2006
  Scholl, 2004)
• Future envisaged with increased accountability,
  transparency, open government and participation
  (UN, 2008 Millard, 2008, etc)
• Evaluation starts with objectives to design
  good evaluation tools and processes it is
  necessary to understand the objectives of all
  stakeholder groups.

9
Stakeholder analysis and management

• Stakeholder analysis and management involves
• Identification of key stakeholders (i.e. those
  stakeholders who have significant influence upon
  or importance to an activity, policy, or
  community)
• Assessment of the interests, behaviours,
  intentions, agendas, claims, and perspectives of
  those stakeholders
• Understanding the salience of the stakeholders
• Appreciation of the interaction between
  stakeholders
• Identification of potential conflicts
• Negotiation and management of those conflicts

10
e-Governance and stakeholder theory

• Stakeholder analysis helps to identify
• the organizations and individuals to keep
  informed and involved, and
• what roles they can and should play at each
  stage.
• Stakeholder theory encourages increased
  collective responsibility for e-Governance
• Some believe that e-government involves a
  fundamental realignment of the objectives of
  government and public administrations with the
  needs of primary stakeholders
• Some argue that any analysis of e-governance must
  be underpinned by notions of stakeholder
  management.
• Nevertheless, the effectiveness of stakeholder
  analysis depends upon its being integrated with
  other policy analysis and project management
  approaches and tools.

11
Stakeholder salience

• The concept of salience acknowledges that not all
  stakeholders are equal, and there is
  discrimination in the extent to which the claims
  of different stakeholders are acknowledged.
• Different dimensions of salience
• Relative power, legitimacy, and urgency (of
  claims)
• Influence, importance
• Interest, influence, impact, support
• Interest, power.

12
Defining dimensions of salience 1

• Influence the power a stakeholder has to
  facilitate or impede a policy reform design and
  implementation
• Importance - the priority given to satisfying the
  needs and interests of a specific stakeholder
• Interest the perceived level of interest that a
  stakeholder has in the policy reform ranging
  from commitment to status quo to openness to
  change
• Impact the degree to which the policy reform
  will impact on a stakeholder

13
Defining dimensions of salience 2

• Power - the level of coercive power that a
  stakeholder has to command compliance in the
  policy process
• Resources the level of resources that a
  stakeholder possesses and are able to bring to
  bear in the policy process
• Legitimacy the degree of legitimacy of a
  stakeholders interest (i.e. the extent to which
  the stakeholders claims are see to be
  appropriate by other stakeholders)
• Urgency the urgency that should be attached to
  the competing claims of a stakeholder.

14
Stakeholder analysis and e-government impact
measurement
15
Some areas for Impact measures

• Economic productivity
• Economic growth
• Jobs
• Competitiveness
• Local and regional development
• Environmental improvement and sustainable
  development
• Inclusion
• Democracy, participation and citizenship
• Quality of life/happiness
• Increased justice and security
• Universal rights and peace (Millard, 2008)

16
Impacts, measures and stakeholders

• Are impacts in all of these areas equally
  important to all stakeholder groups/roles?
• If not, how do we ensure that the interests of
  all stakeholder groups/roles are adequately
  represented in any set of impact measures?
• What is the role of different stakeholder groups
  in developing impact measures?
• What is the role of different stakeholder groups
  in conducting evaluation based on frameworks of
  impact measures?
• What is the unit of impact analysis e.g.
  specific projects, e-government programmes, or,
  the e-government project?

17
Impact relationships

• The dynamic between stakeholders and impact is
  multi-dimensional. For example
• Stakeholders may influence the impact of
  e-government (stakeholder engagement/ management
  can influence the impact of e-government)
• E-government may impact on stakeholders and their
  activities
• Stakeholders may influence impact measurement
• Impact measurement may affect stakeholders and
  their activities.

18
And

• Stakeholder attributes are a function of the
  social networks to which they belong, and the
  multiple roles that they play.
• Stakeholders interact with each other they
  network, negotiate, and influence each other.
• Social network theory
• network density
• centrality
• Alliances and coalitions are continually modified
  to accommodate perceptions of future
  opportunities
• Stakeholder groups/roles are dynamic both
  members and interests change.
• Who selects the stakeholders and who lends them
  the authority to do this?

19
Fortunately

• However, since the e-government endeavour is
  dynamic and ongoing, provided that
• Stakeholders are involved from the beginning of
  the development of e-government
• Objectives (at the impact level, as well as at
  output and outcome levels) for e-government are
  clearly identified at the beginning, and,
• Measurements of impact inform future programme
  objectives.
• there is some hope of a holistic approach to
  stakeholders and impact measurement.
• Perhaps the real challenge is achieving and
  sustaining joined-up planning and policy making
  in a complex and dynamic social, political,
  cultural and economic environment?

20
Activity

• Stakeholder salience

21
Activity

• Aim
• To offer a context for thinking about and
  discussing the challenges associated with
  incorporating a stakeholder perspective into
  impact measurement criteria and processes
• Activity
• In pairs, complete the grids for the general
  project e-government, or, if your prefer, in
  relation to a specific e-government project or
  programme
• Compare your allocation of stakeholders on the
  different grids - how does their relative
  importance and influence change?
• How did you decide on your allocation of
  stakeholders to boxes?
• What lessons are there for impact measurement?
• Report back briefly on key points in the plenary
  session

22
Stakeholder groups

• People as service users
• People as citizens
• Businesses
• Small-to-medium sized enterprises
• Public administrators (employees)
• Other government agencies
• Non-profit organizations
• Politicians
• E-Gov project managers
• Design and IT developers
• Suppliers and partners
• Researchers and evaluators

23
Grids

• The relative salience (influence/importance) of
  different stakeholder groups in promoting their
  interests in the context of
• e-government delivery
• e-government impact measurement.

24
E-government delivery - a sample salience grid
Influence Influence
Low High
Importance Low Other government agencies Suppliers and partners Researchers and evaluators Public administrators Politicians E-Gov Project managers Design and IT developers
Importance High People as service users People as citizens SMEs Businesses Non-profit organizations
25
E-government impact measurement - a sample
salience grid
Influence Influence
Low High
Importance Low People as service users E-Gov project managers Design and IT developers Suppliers and partners Public administrators Other government agencies Politicians Researchers and evaluators
Importance High People as citizens SMEs Businesses Non-profit organizations
26
Plenary discussion

• Towards an Understanding of Stakeholders and
  Impact Measurement

27
To conclude

• Thank you for your input