Stakeholder perspectives and Impact Measurement

1. Stakeholder perspectivesand 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

4. Differing priorities (benefits sought) for different stakeholder groups 2

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 stakeholder’s interest (i.e. the extent to which the stakeholder’s 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

25. E-government impact measurement - a sample salience grid

26. Plenary discussion Towards an Understanding of Stakeholders and Impact Measurement

27. To conclude Thank you for your input