IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v16y2013i3p251-266.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A framework for capturing the hidden stakeholder system

Author

Listed:
  • John Wood
  • Shahram Sarkani
  • Thomas Mazzuchi
  • Timothy Eveleigh

Abstract

As programs rise in intricacy and scope, the number of stakeholders involved also increases, often driving an exponential growth in program complexity. This complexity is caused by the $n^*(n - 1)/2$ stakeholder relationships which form an underlying system that influences all aspects of the program. Understanding, managing, and leveraging this stakeholder system will greatly increase a program's probability of success. This paper provides a framework for capturing this stakeholder system in a series of architectural views. These architectural products document the program's stakeholder concerns and also illustrate how those stakeholders interrelate over the system's lifecycle. The ultimate objective for the framework and use of the resulting products is to allow for right‐sized stakeholder involvement, promote effective use of resources, and increase the probability of overall program success with the assurance of lasting stakeholder commitment. Additionally, this unique insertion of Stakeholder Analysis and Social Network Analysis into an Architecture Framework fulfills an original intent of Architecture Framework, capturing the entire sociotechnical enterprise system. ©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 16

Suggested Citation

  • John Wood & Shahram Sarkani & Thomas Mazzuchi & Timothy Eveleigh, 2013. "A framework for capturing the hidden stakeholder system," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 251-266, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:16:y:2013:i:3:p:251-266
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.21224
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21224
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.21224?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. Amihud Hari & Joseph E. Kasser & Menachem P. Weiss, 2007. "How lessons learned from using QFD led to the evolution of a process for creating quality requirements for complex systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 45-63, March.
    2. Chris Piaszczyk, 2011. "Model Based Systems Engineering with Department of Defense Architectural Framework," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 305-326, September.
    3. Shawn T. Collins & Ali A. Yassine & Stephen P. Borgatti, 2009. "Evaluating product development systems using network analysis," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 55-68, March.
    4. Don P. Clausing & Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos, 2008. "Rationality in systems engineering: Beyond calculation or political action," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 309-328, December.
    5. Amira Sharon & Olivier L. de Weck & Dov Dori, 2011. "Project management vs. systems engineering management: A practitioners' view on integrating the project and product domains," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 427-440, December.
    6. George Friedman & Andrew P. Sage, 2004. "Case studies of systems engineering and management in systems acquisition," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(1), pages 84-97.
    7. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    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. Yiwei Gong & Marijn Janssen, 2023. "Why Organizations Fail in Implementing Enterprise Architecture Initiatives?," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 1401-1419, August.
    2. Melissa Garber & Shahram Sarkani & Thomas Mazzuchi, 2017. "A Framework for Multiobjective Decision Management with Diverse Stakeholders," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 335-356, July.

    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. Timothy D. Blackburn & Thomas A. Mazzuchi & Shahram Sarkani, 2012. "Using a TRIZ framework for systems engineering trade studies," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 355-367, September.
    2. Bert George, 2017. "Does strategic planning ‘work’ in public organizations? Insights from Flemish municipalities," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 527-530, November.
    3. Martin Luštický & Martin Musil, 2016. "Stakeholder-Based Evaluation of Tourism Policy Priorities: The Case of the South Bohemian Region," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(3), pages 3-23.
    4. Jolanta MAJ, 2015. "Diversity Management’S Stakeholders And Stakeholders Management," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(1), pages 780-793, November.
    5. Franco-Trigo, L. & Fernandez-Llimos, F. & Martínez-Martínez, F. & Benrimoj, S.I. & Sabater-Hernández, D., 2020. "Stakeholder analysis in health innovation planning processes: A systematic scoping review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(10), pages 1083-1099.
    6. Kik, M.C. & Claassen, G.D.H. & Meuwissen, M.P.M. & Smit, A.B. & Saatkamp, H.W., 2021. "Actor analysis for sustainable soil management – A case study from the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    7. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.
    8. Christophe Favoreu & David Carassus & Christophe Maurel, 2015. "Strategic management in the public sector: a rational, political or collaborative approach? [Le management stratégique en milieu public : approche rationnelle, politique ou collaborative ?]," Post-Print hal-02152509, HAL.
    9. Sandra Ricart & Antonio M. Rico-Amorós, 2022. "Can agriculture and conservation be compatible in a coastal wetland? Balancing stakeholders’ narratives and interactions in the management of El Hondo Natural Park, Spain," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 589-604, June.
    10. Ashton W. Merck & Khara D. Grieger & Alison Deviney & Anna-Maria Marshall, 2023. "Using a Phosphorus Flow Diagram as a Boundary Object to Inform Stakeholder Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-10, July.
    11. Ogunlowo, Olufemi O. & Bristow, Abigail L. & Sohail, M., 2017. "A stakeholder analysis of the automotive industry's use of compressed natural gas in Nigeria," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 58-69.
    12. Austen Agata, 2012. "Stakeholders management in public hospitals in the context of resources," Management, Sciendo, vol. 16(2), pages 217-230, December.
    13. Sandra Ricart & Anna Ribas & David Pavón, 2016. "Qualifying irrigation system sustainability by means of stakeholder perceptions and concerns: lessons from the Segarra‐Garrigues Canal, Spain," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 40(1-2), pages 77-90, February.
    14. Cathy Macharis & Peter Nijkamp, 2013. "Multi-actor and multi-criteria analysis in evaluating mega-projects," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), International Handbook on Mega-Projects, chapter 11, pages 242-266, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Amira Sharon & Dov Dori, 2017. "Model‐Based Project‐Product Lifecycle Management and Gantt Chart Models: A Comparative Study," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(5), pages 447-466, September.
    16. Maciej Dobrzyñski & Krzysztof Dziekoñski & Arkadiusz Jurczuk, 2015. "Stakeholders Mapping - A Case Of International Logistics Project," Polish Journal of Management Studies, Czestochowa Technical University, Department of Management, vol. 11(2), pages 17-26, June.
    17. Szymaniec-Mlicka Karolina, 2016. "Impact of strategic orientation adopted by an organisation on its performance, as shown on the example of public healthcare entities," Management, Sciendo, vol. 20(2), pages 278-290, December.
    18. Amira Sharon & Olivier L. de Weck & Dov Dori, 2013. "Improving Project–Product Lifecycle Management with Model–Based Design Structure Matrix: A joint project management and systems engineering approach," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 413-426, December.
    19. Carolus, Johannes Friedrich & Hanley, Nick & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Pedersen, Søren Marcus, 2018. "A Bottom-up Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 282-295.
    20. Mingers, John, 2011. "Soft OR comes of age--but not everywhere!," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 729-741, 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:wly:syseng:v:16:y:2013:i:3:p:251-266. 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: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    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.