IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v41y2024i2p368-389.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi‐stakeholder structured dialogues: Five generations of evolution of dialogic design

Author

Listed:
  • Yiannis Laouris
  • Kevin Dye

Abstract

The paper reviews the evolution of Interactive Management, later referred to as Structured Democratic Dialogue, starting from the early 1970s up to this date. The authors propose a generational classification scheme consisting of five periods based primarily on whether some or all stages of the process were implemented synchronously or asynchronously and whether the participants' presence was physical, virtual or hybrid. Other aspects such as modifications in the steps of the process; the evolution of the software; domains of applications; file management; methods of collecting or recording contributions, votes, clarifications and preparation of reports; and key players are also considered and reported within the context of the primary scheme. The paper considers key advances achieved at each generational stage in terms of process or software, discusses associated challenges and concludes with a view towards the future of the emerging fifth generation.

Suggested Citation

  • Yiannis Laouris & Kevin Dye, 2024. "Multi‐stakeholder structured dialogues: Five generations of evolution of dialogic design," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 368-389, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:41:y:2024:i:2:p:368-389
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2971
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2971
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2971?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J Rosenhead, 2006. "Past, present and future of problem structuring methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 759-765, July.
    2. Laouris, Yiannis & Michaelides, Marios, 2018. "Structured Democratic Dialogue: An application of a mathematical problem structuring method to facilitate reforms with local authorities in Cyprus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 918-931.
    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. Romina Laouri & Ilke Dagli & Derya Beyatli & Marios Michaelides & Mustafa Damdelen & Yiannis Laouris, 2024. "Reimagining Famagusta: The Dialogic Design Theory of Change in action," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 1043-1067, December.
    2. Lo Shih-Hui & Lian Shih-Ming & Chang Reed-Joe, 2024. "The Growth Dynamics of the Restaurant Industry from Single Store to Chain Store in Taiwan: A Systems Thinking Perspective," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 1141-1159, December.

    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. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm & Fernando Schramm, 2023. "Problem Structuring Methods in Social-Ecological Systems," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 461-478, June.
    2. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    3. Laouris, Yiannis & Romm, Norma RA, 2022. "Structured dialogical design as a problem structuring method illustrated in a Re-invent democracy project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 301(3), pages 1072-1087.
    4. Michaelides, Marios & Laouris, Yiannis, 2024. "A cascading model of stakeholder engagement for large-scale regional development using structured dialogical design," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(1), pages 307-323.
    5. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    6. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    7. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Ya Li & Zhichang Zhu & Catherine M. Gerard, 2012. "Learning from Conflict Resolution: An Opportunity to Systems Thinking," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 209-220, March.
    9. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    10. Mahmoud Dehghan Nayeri & Moein Khazaei & Fatemeh Alinasab-Imani, 2020. "The Critical Heuristics of Iranian Banking Credit System: Analysis of the Antithetical Opinions of the Beneficiaries," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 363-392, June.
    11. Wright, George & Cairns, George & O'Brien, Frances A. & Goodwin, Paul, 2019. "Scenario analysis to support decision making in addressing wicked problems: Pitfalls and potential," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 3-19.
    12. Gabriela Viale Pereira & Elsa Estevez & Diego Cardona & Carlos Chesñevar & Pablo Collazzo-Yelpo & Maria Alexandra Cunha & Eduardo Henrique Diniz & Alex Antonio Ferraresi & Frida Marina Fischer & Flúvi, 2020. "South American Expert Roundtable: Increasing Adaptive Governance Capacity for Coping with Unintended Side Effects of Digital Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-47, January.
    13. White, Leroy, 2018. "A Cook's tour: Towards a framework for measuring the social impact of social purpose organisations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 784-797.
    14. Khadka, Chiranjeewee & Hujala, Teppo & Wolfslehner, Bernhard & Vacik, Harald, 2013. "Problem structuring in participatory forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 1-11.
    15. William Jones & Mahesh Sooriyabandara & Mike Yearworth & Angela Doufexi & R. Eddie Wilson, 2016. "Planning For 5G: A Problem Structuring Approach for Survival in the Telecoms Industry," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 301-321, July.
    16. 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.
    17. Konsti-Laakso, Suvi & Rantala, Tero, 2018. "Managing community engagement: A process model for urban planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1040-1049.
    18. Ackermann, Fran, 2024. "Managing grand challenges: Extending the scope of problem structuring methods and behavioural operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 319(2), pages 373-383.
    19. Ha TN Hoang & Norma RA Romm, 2020. "Systemic Research Practices Towards the Development of an Eco-Community in Vietnam: some Joint Post-Facto Reflections," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(6), pages 599-624, December.
    20. David Lowe & Louise Martingale & Mike Yearworth, 2016. "Guiding interventions in a multi-organisational context: combining the Viable System Model and Hierarchical Process Modelling for use as a Problem Structuring Method," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(12), pages 1481-1495, December.

    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:bla:srbeha:v:41:y:2024:i:2:p:368-389. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    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.