IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gro/rugsom/04b32.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An instrument for stakeholder identification: phasing roles of involvement

Author

Listed:
  • Vos, Janita F.J.
  • Achterkamp, Marjolein C.

    (Groningen University)

Abstract

The starting point of the paper is that stakeholders fulfill an important role to stimulate sustainable innovation. The question is ?who are those stakeholders and what should be their role?? This paper describes an instrument, which enables identifying stakeholders and designating specific roles to those stakeholders. The instrument focuses on two key points, i.e. roles of involvement and phasing this involvement within an innovation process.

Suggested Citation

  • Vos, Janita F.J. & Achterkamp, Marjolein C., 2004. "An instrument for stakeholder identification: phasing roles of involvement," Research Report 04B32, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    • Handle: RePEc:gro:rugsom:04b32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://irs.ub.rug.nl/ppn/274756315
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ulrich, Werner, 1987. "Critical heuristics of social systems design," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 276-283, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hart, Diane & Paucar-Caceres, Alberto, 2017. "A utilisation focussed and viable systems approach for evaluating technology supported learning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(2), pages 626-641.
    2. I Georgiou, 2003. "The idea of emergent property," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(3), pages 239-247, March.
    3. Rajneesh Chowdhury, 2023. "Methodological Flexibility in Systems Thinking: Musings from the Standpoint of a Systems Consultant," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 59-86, February.
    4. Ormerod, R.J., 2014. "Critical rationalism in practice: Strategies to manage subjectivity in OR investigations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 784-797.
    5. Valentina Dinica, 2014. "Competing societal and ecological demands for groundwater: boundary judgments and convergence mechanisms in the Netherlands," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 555-573, June.
    6. Syed Arshad Raza & Atiq W. Siddiqui & Craig Standing, 2019. "Exploring Systemic Problems in IS Adoption Using Critical Systems Heuristics," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 125-153, April.
    7. W Ulrich, 2004. "Reply to the comments of Ormerod: the history of ideas of CST," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(11), pages 1238-1241, November.
    8. Anselm Schneider, 2015. "Reflexivity in Sustainability Accounting and Management: Transcending the Economic Focus of Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 525-536, March.
    9. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    10. Morgan, Te Kipa Kepa Brian & Fa`aui, Tumanako Ngawhika, 2018. "Empowering indigenous voices in disaster response: Applying the Mauri Model to New Zealand's worst environmental maritime disaster," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 984-995.
    11. Céline Bérard & L.M., Cloutier & Luc Cassivi, 2017. "The effects of using system dynamics-based decision support models: testing policy-makers’ boundaries in a complex situation," Post-Print hal-02128255, HAL.
    12. Macadam, R. & Van Asch, R. & Hedley, B. & Pitt, E. & Carroll, P., 1995. "A case study in development planning using a systems learning approach: Generating a master plan for the livestock sector in Nepal," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 299-323.
    13. Tanzi Smith, 2011. "Using critical systems thinking to foster an integrated approach to sustainability: a proposal for development practitioners," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, February.
    14. Michael Walker, 2017. "The Search for Viability: A practitioner's view of how the Viable Systems Model is helping transform English local government (and why it has passed unrecognised)," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 313-334, May.
    15. Meinard, Y. & Tsoukiàs, A., 2019. "On the rationality of decision aiding processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1074-1084.
    16. Meinard, Y. & Cailloux, O., 2020. "On justifying the norms underlying decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 285(3), pages 1002-1010.
    17. Thanos Papadopoulos, 2012. "Public–Private Partnerships from a Systems Perspective: A Case in the English National Health Service," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 420-435, July.
    18. Ingmar Meerkerk & Arwin Buuren & Jurian Edelenbos, 2013. "Water Managers’ Boundary Judgments and Adaptive Water Governance. An Analysis of the Dutch Haringvliet Sluices Case," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(7), pages 2179-2194, May.
    19. Sydelko, Pamela & Midgley, Gerald & Espinosa, Angela, 2021. "Designing interagency responses to wicked problems: Creating a common, cross-agency understanding," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 250-263.
    20. Camilo Olaya, 2015. "Cows, agency, and the significance of operational thinking," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 31(4), pages 183-219, October.

    More about this item

    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:gro:rugsom:04b32. 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: Hanneke Tamling (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ferugnl.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.