Articulation of stakeholders requirements for complex e-government systems development

Requirements analysis focuses on stakeholders concerns and their influence towards e-government systems. Some characteristics of stakeholders concerns clearly show the complexity and conflicts. This imposes a number of questions in the requirements analysis, such as how are they relevant to stakeholders? What are their needs? How conflicts among the different stakeholders can be resolved? And what coherent requirements can be methodologically produced? This paper describes the problem articulation method in organizational semiotics which can be used to conduct such complex requirements analysis. The outcomes of the analysis enable e-government systems development and management to meet userspsila needs. A case study of Yantai Citizen Card is chosen to illustrate a process of analysing stakeholders in the lifecycle of requirements analysis.

Public-private partnership's procurement criteria: the case of managing stakeholders' value creation in Kazakhstan

The article presents the study of the criteria that Kazakhstan's government used for granting a public–private partnership (PPP) contract to a private investor for construction and operation of eleven kindergartens in the city of Karaganda during 14 years. From the perspective of value creation for critical stakeholders, there was often misalignment between bidders' views of these criteria and the perceived value for citizens and the government. The latter may significantly enhance the creation of shared values in a PPP by actively engaging stakeholders in the design of the bids' assessment criteria.

Investigating the impact of defects on key stakeholders in the UK new housing sector

The UK house building sector is facing dual pressures to expand supply, along with delivering against tougher Building Regulations’ requirements, predominantly in the areas of sustainability. A review of current literature has highlighted that the pressures the UK house building industry is currently under may be having a negative impact on build quality, causing an increase in defects. A review and synthesis of the current defect literature with respect to new-build housing and the wider construction sector has found that the prevailing emphasis is limited to the classification, causes, pathology and statistical analysis of defects. There is thus a need to better understand the overall impact of individual defects on key stakeholders within the new-build housing defect detection and remediation process. As part of ongoing research to develop and verify a defect impact assessment rating system, this paper seeks to contribute to our understanding of the impact of individual defects from a key stakeholder perspective by undertaking the literature review and synthesis phase. The literature review identifies the three distinct, but interrelated, dominant impact factors: cost, disruption, and health and safety. By pulling the strands of defect literature together the theoretical lens and key stakeholder sampling strategy is formed as the basis for the subsequent impact weighting development phase.

Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials

Background Despite the promising benefits of adaptive designs (ADs), their routine use, especially in confirmatory trials, is lagging behind the prominence given to them in the statistical literature. Much of the previous research to understand barriers and potential facilitators to the use of ADs has been driven from a pharmaceutical drug development perspective, with little focus on trials in the public sector. In this paper, we explore key stakeholders’ experiences, perceptions and views on barriers and facilitators to the use of ADs in publicly funded confirmatory trials. Methods Semi-structured, in-depth interviews of key stakeholders in clinical trials research (CTU directors, funding board and panel members, statisticians, regulators, chief investigators, data monitoring committee members and health economists) were conducted through telephone or face-to-face sessions, predominantly in the UK. We purposively selected participants sequentially to optimise maximum variation in views and experiences. We employed the framework approach to analyse the qualitative data. Results We interviewed 27 participants. We found some of the perceived barriers to be: lack of knowledge and experience coupled with paucity of case studies, lack of applied training, degree of reluctance to use ADs, lack of bridge funding and time to support design work, lack of statistical expertise, some anxiety about the impact of early trial stopping on researchers’ employment contracts, lack of understanding of acceptable scope of ADs and when ADs are appropriate, and statistical and practical complexities. Reluctance to use ADs seemed to be influenced by: therapeutic area, unfamiliarity, concerns about their robustness in decision-making and acceptability of findings to change practice, perceived complexities and proposed type of AD, among others. Conclusions There are still considerable multifaceted, individual and organisational obstacles to be addressed to improve uptake, and successful implementation of ADs when appropriate. Nevertheless, inferred positive change in attitudes and receptiveness towards the appropriate use of ADs by public funders are supportive and are a stepping stone for the future utilisation of ADs by researchers.

Cross-sector surveys assessing perceptions of key stakeholders towards barriers, concerns and facilitators to the appropriate use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials

Background Appropriately conducted adaptive designs (ADs) offer many potential advantages over conventional trials. They make better use of accruing data, potentially saving time, trial participants, and limited resources compared to conventional, fixed sample size designs. However, one can argue that ADs are not implemented as often as they should be, particularly in publicly funded confirmatory trials. This study explored barriers, concerns, and potential facilitators to the appropriate use of ADs in confirmatory trials among key stakeholders. Methods We conducted three cross-sectional, online parallel surveys between November 2014 and January 2015. The surveys were based upon findings drawn from in-depth interviews of key research stakeholders, predominantly in the UK, and targeted Clinical Trials Units (CTUs), public funders, and private sector organisations. Response rates were as follows: 30(55 %) UK CTUs, 17(68 %) private sector, and 86(41 %) public funders. A Rating Scale Model was used to rank barriers and concerns in order of perceived importance for prioritisation. Results Top-ranked barriers included the lack of bridge funding accessible to UK CTUs to support the design of ADs, limited practical implementation knowledge, preference for traditional mainstream designs, difficulties in marketing ADs to key stakeholders, time constraints to support ADs relative to competing priorities, lack of applied training, and insufficient access to case studies of undertaken ADs to facilitate practical learning and successful implementation. Associated practical complexities and inadequate data management infrastructure to support ADs were reported as more pronounced in the private sector. For funders of public research, the inadequate description of the rationale, scope, and decision-making criteria to guide the planned AD in grant proposals by researchers were all viewed as major obstacles. Conclusions There are still persistent and important perceptions of individual and organisational obstacles hampering the use of ADs in confirmatory trials research. Stakeholder perceptions about barriers are largely consistent across sectors, with a few exceptions that reflect differences in organisations’ funding structures, experiences and characterisation of study interventions. Most barriers appear connected to a lack of practical implementation knowledge and applied training, and limited access to case studies to facilitate practical learning. Keywords: Adaptive designs; flexible designs; barriers; surveys; confirmatory trials; Phase 3; clinical trials; early stopping; interim analyses