A systemic method for organisational stakeholder identification and analysis using Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)

Abstract

a b s t r a c tThis paper presents a systemic methodology for identifying and analysing the stakeholders of an organisation at many different levels. The methodology is based on soft systems methodology and is applicable to all types of organisation, both for profit and non-profit. The methodology begins with the top-level objectives of the organisation, developed through debate and discussion, and breaks these down into the key activities needed to achieve them. A range of stakeholders are identified for each key activity. At the end, the functions and relationships of all the stakeholder groups can clearly be seen. The methodology is illustrated with an actual case study in Hunan University.

Digital Threat and Vulnerability Management: The SVIDT Method

“…Thus, the proposed framework should rather be considered as scaffolding that directs different steps of semiquantitative assessments that help analysts acquire insights into the necessary assimilations (i.e., soft adaptations) Sustainability 2017, 9, 554 20 of 26 and the more thorough accommodations. This is in line with other soft-operational research techniques; the problem structuring and the support of decisions are main objectives [22,42,[114][115][116][117].…”

A performance management framework for the public sector: The balanced stakeholder model

“…They can be used to develop key measures of performance in terms of three criteria (the 3E's model) (Liu, Cheng, Mingers, Qi, & Meng, 2010): efficacy (E1), efficiency (E2) and effectiveness (E3). They can also be used to identify key stakeholders at a variety of levels within the organization (Wang, Liu, & Mingers, 2015). The application area for SSM is very broad.…”

“…Performance management has been extended to every aspect of business and management. A large number of researchers and practitioners from different fields are engaged to the exploration and study of performance management, for instance: stakeholder theory (Berman, Wicks, Kotha, & Jones, 1999;Choi & Wang, 2009;Clarkson, 1995;Freeman, 2010;McAdam, Hazlett, & Casey, 2005;Ogunlana, 2010), strategic management (Atkinson, Waterhouse, & Wells, 1997;Freeman, 2010;Grigoroudis, Orfanoudaki, & Zopounidis, 2012;Kald & Nilsson, 2000;Kaplan & Norton, 2001a), human resource management (Farndale, Hope-Hailey, & Kelliher, 2011;Guest, 2011;Huselid, Jackson, & Schuler, 1997;Singh, Darwish, Costa, & Anderson, 2012;Van De Voorde, Paauwe, & Van Veldhoven, 2012) and operational research (Boland & Fowler, 2000;Crawford, Costello, Pollack, & Bentley, 2003;Liu, Meng, Mingers, Tang, & Wang, 2012;Wang, Liu, & Mingers, 2015;White, 2000).…”

“…Some of these stakeholders are important for the successful operation of the organization; some are important because of the effects that the organization has on them. In both cases the organization needs to be aware of these stakeholders and manage them successfully, the former for reasons of effectiveness, the latter for reasons of legitimacy and ethicality (Wang, Liu, & Mingers, 2015).…”

“…Moreover, none of these existing PM frameworks offered the practical procedures to guide us how to identify and balance the key interests of the stakeholders, which is the ultimate driving force of performance management for the public sector (Shapira & Kuhlmann, 2003). Thus, those activities decomposed by the BSC or SSM may not be necessarily balanced with the key interests of the 'involved stakeholders' in the organization, and therefore are often hard, if not impossible, to implement (Wang, Liu, & Mingers, 2015). Furthermore developing well-balanced sub-activities and indicators helps to address wider stakeholders and use the quantitative information with a more informed discussion.…”