IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/27187.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Stakeholder identification in inter-organizational systems: gaining insights for drug use management systems

Author

Listed:
  • Pouloudi, Athanasia
  • Whitley, Edgar A.

Abstract

Inter-organizational systems operate in an area where there are many interested parties. If the views of these interested parties are not explored and taken into consideration before and during the development of an inter-organizational system, it is likely that the implementation of this system will be disappointing. This paper describes one approach to exploring these views through the use of stakeholder analysis. More specifically, it describes how to identify the stakeholders, a process that has been overlooked in the stakeholder analysis and inter-organizational systems literature, and examines the perceptions of a number of stakeholders in the drug use management field in the UK.

Suggested Citation

  • Pouloudi, Athanasia & Whitley, Edgar A., 1997. "Stakeholder identification in inter-organizational systems: gaining insights for drug use management systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 27187, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:27187
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/27187/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Albert L. Lederer & Aubrey L. Mendelow, 1990. "The Impact of the Environment on the Management of Information Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 1(2), pages 205-222, June.
    2. Preston, Lee E. & Sapienza, Harry J., 1990. "Stakeholder management and corporate performance," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 361-375.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:dgr:rugsom:06a09 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Dibb, Sally & Ball, Kirstie & Canhoto, Ana & Daniel, Elizabeth M. & Meadows, Maureen & Spiller, Keith, 2014. "Taking responsibility for border security: Commercial interests in the face of e-borders," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 50-61.
    3. Sibel Hoştut & Seçil Deren het Hof & Hediye Aydoğan & Gülten Adalı, 2023. "Who’s in and who’s out? Reading stakeholders and priority issues from sustainability reports in Turkey," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Oluwasola Oni & Anastasia Papazafeiropoulou, 2014. "Diverse views on IT innovation diffusion among SMEs: Influencing factors of broadband adoption," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 729-747, September.
    5. Barclay, Corlane & Osei-Bryson, Kweku-Muata, 2010. "Project performance development framework: An approach for developing performance criteria & measures for information systems (IS) projects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 272-292, March.
    6. Siebritz, L. & Coetzee, S., 2022. "Evaluating stakeholder influences on the land use application process in South Africa – Results from an analysis of the legal framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    7. Guido Noto & Lidia Noto, 2019. "Local Strategic Planning and Stakeholder Analysis: Suggesting a Dynamic Performance Management Approach," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 293-310, September.
    8. Wang, Wei & Liu, Wenbin & Mingers, John, 2015. "A systemic method for organisational stakeholder identification and analysis using Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(2), pages 562-574.
    9. Alan Serrano & Javier Garcia-Guzman & Georgios Xydopoulos & Ali Tarhini, 2020. "Analysis of Barriers to the Deployment of Health Information Systems: a Stakeholder Perspective," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 455-474, April.
    10. Jarmila Zimmermannova & Lukas Pavlik & Ekaterina Chytilova, 2022. "Digitalisation in Hospitals in COVID-19 Times—A Case Study of the Czech Republic," Economies, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-15, March.
    11. Boonstra, Albert, 2006. "Stakeholder Management in IOS projects: Lessons from a case study," Research Report 06A09, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    12. Ward, E. John & Dimitriou, Harry T. & Dean, Marco, 2016. "Theory and background of multi-criteria analysis: Toward a policy-led approach to mega transport infrastructure project appraisal," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 21-45.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bazin, Damien, 2009. "What exactly is corporate responsibility towards nature?: Ecological responsibility or management of nature?: A pluri-disciplinary standpoint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 634-642, January.
    2. Nicola Raimo & Filippo Vitolla & Valentina Minutiello & Arcangelo Marrone & Patrizia Tettamanzi, 2022. "Readability of integrated reports: Evidence from worldwide adopters," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 524-534, May.
    3. Lisa Herzog, 2017. "No Company is an Island. Sector-Related Responsibilities as Elements of Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(1), pages 135-148, November.
    4. Franck Aggeri & Aurélien Acquier, 2005. "La théorie des stakeholders permet-elle de rendre compte des pratiques d'entreprise en matière de RSE ?," Post-Print halshs-00645708, HAL.
    5. Viktor Vanberg, 2007. "Corporate social responsibility and the ‘game of catallaxy’: the perspective of constitutional economics," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 199-222, September.
    6. Bergeron, François & Raymond, Louis & Rivard, Suzanne, 2001. "Fit in strategic information technology management research: an empirical comparison of perspectives," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 125-142, April.
    7. ATM Adnan & Nisar Ahmed, 2019. "The Transformation Of The Corporate Governance Model: A Literature Review," Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 8(3), pages 7-47.
    8. Robert Strand, 2015. "Scandinavian Stakeholder Thinking: Seminal Offerings from the Late Juha Näsi," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(1), pages 89-105, March.
    9. Thomas Kimeli Cheruiyot & Daniel Kipkirong Tarus, 2015. "Modeling Employee Social Responsibility as an Antecedent to Competitiveness Outcomes," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(1), pages 21582440145, February.
    10. Jeffrey S. Harrison & Joyce van der Laan Smith, 2015. "Responsible Accounting for Stakeholders," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(7), pages 935-960, November.
    11. Parvez Ahmed & Sudhir Nanda & Oliver Schnusenberg, 2010. "Can firms do well while doing good?," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(11), pages 845-860.
    12. Yafet Yosafet Wilben Rissy, 2021. "The stakeholder model: its relevance, concept, and application in the Indonesian banking sector," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(3), pages 219-231, September.
    13. Carvalho, Cláudia & Brito, Carlos, 2009. "Innovative Public Service Delivery: How to assess the new relationship between public agencies and society?," Working Papers 8/2009, Universidade Portucalense, Centro de Investigação em Gestão e Economia (CIGE).
    14. Neena Sinha & Timcy Sachdeva & Miklesh Prasad Yadav, 2018. "Investigating Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance using Structural Equation Modelling," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 43(3), pages 175-191, August.
    15. Nahed Zghidi & Rihab Bousnina & Samarkand Mokni, 2023. "American Corporate Sustainability and Extra-Financial Performance: Is There an Inverted-U Relationship," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-18, October.
    16. Jahangir Karimi & Toni M. Somers & Yash P. Gupta, 2004. "Impact of Environmental Uncertainty and Task Characteristics on User Satisfaction with Data," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 175-193, June.
    17. Damien Bazin, 2005. "Firms and their Responsibility towards Nature," Post-Print halshs-01070776, HAL.
    18. Glunk, U. & Wilderom, C.P.M., 1996. "Organizational Effectiveness = Corporate Performance? Why and How Two Research Traditions Need to be Merged," Research Memorandum 715, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Rouwette, Etiënne & van Kranenburg, Hans & Freeman, Edward, 2017. "Reviewing the role of stakeholders in Operational Research: A stakeholder theory perspectiveAuthor-Name: de Gooyert, Vincent," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(2), pages 402-410.
    20. Tracey Dodd & Tim Nelson, 2019. "Trials and tribulations of market responses to climate change: Insight through the transformation of the Australian electricity market," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(4), pages 614-631, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J50 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:27187. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.