IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/cejnor/v27y2019i3d10.1007_s10100-018-0573-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of the ANP to the prioritization of project stakeholders in the context of responsible research and innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Ivan Ligardo-Herrera

    (Universitat Politècnica de València
    Universidad Simón Bolívar)

  • Tomás Gómez-Navarro

    (Universitat Politècnica de València)

  • Hannia Gonzalez-Urango

    (Universidad Simón Bolívar
    Universitat Politècnica de València)

Abstract

This paper presents a methodology to assess the stakeholders’ influence in a research project within the context of responsible research and innovation. The methodology is based on a combination of the multicriteria decision making technique analytic network process and the key areas of responsible research. The method allows ranking and ordering the project’s stakeholders based on their influence upon its responsibility. The purpose of such an assessment is to help research teams to more efficiently devote their limited resources to stakeholder management. The procedure is applied to a case study of the Information and Communication Technology business sector. It is an ongoing project at an early phase of development. Influential stakeholders have been identified first, and have been further classified into groups based on their relative importance. The assessment of their influence has been based on up to 16 different criteria, mainly belonging to the framework of responsible research and innovation. In the case study, the most influential criterion was the Capability to promote public engagement, while Developers were found to be the stakeholders most contributing to the research project responsibility. However, as explained, this is a temporary situation, valid for the current project development situation. It may vary over time as criteria vary in weight and stakeholders vary in influence.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivan Ligardo-Herrera & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Hannia Gonzalez-Urango, 2019. "Application of the ANP to the prioritization of project stakeholders in the context of responsible research and innovation," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 27(3), pages 679-701, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:cejnor:v:27:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10100-018-0573-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10100-018-0573-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10100-018-0573-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10100-018-0573-4?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jordi Peris & Mónica García‐Melón & Tomás Gómez‐Navarro & Carola Calabuig, 2013. "Prioritizing Local Agenda 21 Programmes using Analytic Network Process: A Spanish Case Study," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(5), pages 338-352, September.
    2. Claudia Kettner-Marx & Angela Köppl & Sigrid Stagl, 2014. "Towards an Operational Measurement of Socio-ecological Performance. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 52," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47154, March.
    3. Kumar Verma Bhupendra & Shirish Sangle, 2017. "What Drives Successful Implementation of Product Stewardship Strategy? The Role of Absorptive Capability," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 186-198, May.
    4. Antonio Caballero-Luque & Pablo Aragonés-Beltrán & Mónica García-Melón & Carlos Dema-Pérez, 2010. "Analysis Of The Alignment Of Company Goals To Web Content Using Anp," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 419-436.
    5. Miguel Angel Ortiz Barrios & Fabio De Felice & Kevin Parra Negrete & Brandon Aleman Romero & Adriana Yaruro Arenas & Antonella Petrillo, 2016. "An AHP-Topsis Integrated Model for Selecting the Most Appropriate Tomography Equipment," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(04), pages 861-885, July.
    6. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    7. Jaafari, Abolfazl & Najafi, Akbar & Melón, Mónica García, 2015. "Decision-making for the selection of a best wood extraction method: An analytic network process approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 200-209.
    8. Rosso, M. & Bottero, M. & Pomarico, S. & La Ferlita, S. & Comino, E., 2014. "Integrating multicriteria evaluation and stakeholders analysis for assessing hydropower projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 870-881.
    9. Tzay-An Shiau & Ji-Kai Chuen-Yu, 2016. "Developing an Indicator System for Measuring the Social Sustainability of Offshore Wind Power Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-14, May.
    10. Thomas L. Saaty, 1994. "How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 19-43, December.
    11. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    12. Xin Wu & Peng Cui, 2016. "A Study of the Time–Space Evolution Characteristics of Urban–Rural Integration Development in a Mountainous Area Based on ESDA-GIS: The Case of the Qinling-Daba Mountains in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-17, October.
    13. Rob Lubberink & Vincent Blok & Johan Van Ophem & Onno Omta, 2017. "Lessons for Responsible Innovation in the Business Context: A Systematic Literature Review of Responsible, Social and Sustainable Innovation Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-31, May.
    14. Akbari, Negar & Irawan, Chandra A. & Jones, Dylan F. & Menachof, David, 2017. "A multi-criteria port suitability assessment for developments in the offshore wind industry," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(PA), pages 118-133.
    15. Shirish Sangle & P. Ram Babu, 2007. "Evaluating sustainability practices in terms of stakeholders' satisfaction," International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(1), pages 56-76.
    16. Ivan Ligardo-Herrera & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Edurne A. Inigo & Vincent Blok, 2018. "Addressing Climate Change in Responsible Research and Innovation: Recommendations for Its Operationalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    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. Mónica García-Melón & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Hannia Gonzalez-Urango & Carmen Corona-Sobrino, 2022. "Adapting RRI public engagement indicators to the Spanish scientific and innovation context: a participatory methodology based on AHP and content analysis," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 30(4), pages 1483-1512, December.
    2. Andrej Kastrin & Janez Povh & Lidija Zadnik Stirn & Janez Žerovnik, 2021. "Methodologies and applications for resilient global development from the aspect of SDI-SOR special issues of CJOR," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 29(3), pages 773-790, September.
    3. Josefa Mula & Marija Bogataj, 2021. "OR in the industrial engineering of Industry 4.0: experiences from the Iberian Peninsula mirrored in CJOR," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 29(4), pages 1163-1184, 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. Hannia Gonzalez-Urango & Mónica García-Melón, 2017. "A Multicriteria Model to Evaluate Strategic Plans for the Nautical and Naval Industry in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, April.
    2. Hongxun Xiang & Xia Heng & Boleng Zhai & Lichen Yang, 2024. "Digital and Culture: Towards More Resilient Urban Community Governance," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Mehmet Yüksel, 2019. "A Model Proposal for the Evaluation of Chemistry Education in the Context of Learning Environment," Asian Journal of Education and Training, Asian Online Journal Publishing Group, vol. 5(3), pages 488-494.
    4. Murat Ayar & Alper Dalkiran & Utku Kale & András Nagy & Tahir Hikmet Karakoc, 2021. "Investigation of the Substitutability of Rubber Compounds with Environmentally Friendly Materials," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-14, May.
    5. Jochen Wulf, 2020. "Development of an AHP hierarchy for managing omnichannel capabilities: a design science research approach," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(1), pages 39-68, April.
    6. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    7. Luciana Maines da Silva & Claudia Cristina Bitencourt & Kadígia Faccin & Tatiana Iakovleva, 2019. "The Role of Stakeholders in the Context of Responsible Innovation: A Meta-Synthesis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-25, March.
    8. Ivan Ligardo-Herrera & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Edurne A. Inigo & Vincent Blok, 2018. "Addressing Climate Change in Responsible Research and Innovation: Recommendations for Its Operationalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    9. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    10. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Lucie Lidinska & Josef Jablonsky, 2018. "AHP model for performance evaluation of employees in a Czech management consulting company," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(1), pages 239-258, March.
    12. Carayannis, Elias G. & Goletsis, Yorgos & Grigoroudis, Evangelos, 2018. "Composite innovation metrics: MCDA and the Quadruple Innovation Helix framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 4-17.
    13. Rimvydas Labanauskis & Aurelija Kasparavičiūtė & Vida Davidavičienė & Dovilė Deltuvienė, 2018. "Towards quality assurance of the study process using the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 6(2), pages 799-819, December.
    14. M Tavana & M A Sodenkamp, 2010. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis model for advanced technology assessment at Kennedy Space Center," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(10), pages 1459-1470, October.
    15. 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.
    16. Jongseok Seo & Lidziya Lysiankova & Young-Seok Ock & Dongphil Chun, 2017. "Priorities of Coworking Space Operation Based on Comparison of the Hosts and Users’ Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-10, August.
    17. Mirza Sikalo & Almira Arnaut-Berilo & Adela Delalic, 2023. "A Combined AHP-PROMETHEE Approach for Portfolio Performance Comparison," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, March.
    18. Scholz, Michael & Pfeiffer, Jella & Rothlauf, Franz, 2017. "Using PageRank for non-personalized default rankings in dynamic markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(1), pages 388-401.
    19. Rudimar Caricimi & Géremi Gilson Dranka & Dalmarino Setti & Paula Ferreira, 2022. "Reframing the Selection of Hydraulic Turbines Integrating Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Fuzzy VIKOR Multi-Criteria Methods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-26, October.
    20. R. Jothi Basu & Nachiappan Subramanian & Angappa Gunasekaran & P. L. K. Palaniappan, 2017. "Influence of non-price and environmental sustainability factors on truckload procurement process," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 250(2), pages 363-388, March.

    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:spr:cejnor:v:27:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10100-018-0573-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.