Stakeholder Identification | Contextual Inquiry | Section of Psychology, Health & Technology

What is stakeholder identification?

First, it is determined who the relevant stakeholders are, during the stakeholder identification [1, 2]. For example, a scoping review of scientific literature is a suitable way to gain quick insight in the stakeholders that might be present. Such a list is often used as a starting point, from which to further progress towards insight in who the stakeholders for your specific case are. For instance by asking known experts in the field to identify who they perceive as being stakeholders, which is called expert recommendations. Besides the experts, the stakeholders themselves may also have clear ideas about who other stakeholders are, which is referred to as snowball sampling.

What is the aim of stakeholder identification?

The end result of stakeholder identification is a (long) list or visualized map of stakeholders that is generated based on literature, e.g. via a scoping review, and practice, e.g. via expert recommendations or snowball sampling). In many situations, a lot of stakeholders are at play. However, it is often impossible or even undesirable to involve them all in the development process. Therefore, the next step is to determine who the key stakeholders are and what their stakes are by means of a stakeholder analysis.

This is part of an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Routledge/CRC Press in eHealth Research, Theory and Development on 23rd of May, 2018

References

[1] Velsen, L. van, Wentzel, J., & van Gemert-Pijnen, J.E. (2013). Designing eHealth that Matters via a Multidisciplinary Requirements Development Approach. JMIR Research Protocols, 2(1): e21.

[2] Woezik, A.F. van, Braakman-Jansen, L.M., Kulyk, O., Siemons, L., & van Gemert-Pijnen, J.E. (2016). Tackling wicked problems in infection prevention and control: a guideline for co-creation with stakeholders. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, 5:20.

Desk research

What is desk research?

One of the first exploratory activities that is conducted during the contextual inquiry phase is desk research. Within eHealth development, desk research is the non-systematic collection of material that helps the development team to learn as much as possible about the context (Wentzel, Beerlage-de Jong, & van Gemert-Pijnen, 2014). Examples of relevant materials are scientific and non-scientific literature, policy documents, videos, or readily available reports such as the outcomes of employee satisfaction surveys. Desk research can be conducted in several ways, e.g. by means of using search engines, going through relevant websites, asking stakeholders for material, or using the archive of an organization. A prerequisite is that all the collected material should already exist; no systematic data collection or primary research activities are carried out. Since desk research is an exploratory activity and not a systematic research method, the aim is not to publish scientific articles on the results, but to get acquainted with the context.

What kind of results can desk research generate?

Desk research can be used as a first step in the development process in all kinds of settings. An example is the development of a technology in forensic psychiatry, which is the psychological treatment of offenders with the primary goal of preventing recidivism. Desk research can help in answering several questions, like:

what official rules and regulations are relevant when implementing a technology in forensic practice and working with forensic psychiatric patients for research purposes?
what e-mental health technologies are already being used by Dutch forensic psychiatric institutions?
what treatment protocols exist for forensic psychiatry? What kind of psychological tests are being used in the treatment of forensic psychiatric patients?
what organizations are involved in initiatives related to e-mental health in forensic psychiatry?

These types of results are used throughout the entire development process to make sure that, for example, the technology complements the current practice, doesn’t overlap with existing technologies, or is consistent with rules and regulations.

Expert recommendations

What are expert recommendations?

Experts from the field are asked to nominate stakeholders they consider relevant.

What kind of results can expert recommendations generate?

A list of stakeholders that are relevant according to experts from the field.

Scoping review

What is a scoping review?

When gaining insight in the current status quo of scientific literature in a certain field, several methods are available, such as meta-analysis, systematic review, and a scoping review. All of these are based on a thorough and systematic search of literature. However, with a scoping review, a broad field of study, where research questions are relatively unspecific and various kinds of study designs are used, can be addressed within a relatively short amount of time [1]. Thus, a scoping review can help to quickly explore a field, without excluding studies based on their quality.

What kind of results can a scoping review generate?

The results of a scoping review consist of an overview of the literature that is available in a field, which provides the development team with relevant knowledge on the context in which they will be developing an eHealth technology. The exact nature of the results depends on many factors, such as the aims of the study and the field. Scoping reviews in very new or quickly evolving fields (such as eHealth) and with exploratory aims may yield narrative results, offering a more qualitative description of the literature. Fields that have already been more established and more focused aims can yield results that are more quantitative and focused on effectiveness.

References

[1] Arksey, H. & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32.

Snowball sampling with stakeholders

What is snowball sampling with stakeholders?

Once a preliminary list of stakeholders is created, it is valuable to ask these already involved stakeholders to supplement the list. Stakeholders are good sources for identifying which stakeholders are missing.

What kind of results can snowball sampling with stakeholders generate?

This non-random sampling technique offers an opportunity to provide a broader view on the relevant stakeholders. Therewith the list of relevant stakeholders can be supplemented.