A multiple stakeholder approach to nonprofit board effectiveness: the employee perspective

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 42
Author(s):  
Nina Nguyen ◽  
Denise M. Jepsen
Keyword(s):  
Board Effectiveness ◽  
Employee Perspective ◽  
Stakeholder Approach ◽  
Multiple Stakeholder

scholarly journals Freedom camping in Aotearoa New Zealand: an exploration of stakeholder perceptions

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-76
Author(s):  
Sabrina Seeler ◽  
Michael Lueck
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Tourism Industry ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Stakeholder Perceptions ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Stakeholder Approach ◽  
Multiple Stakeholder

The global COVID-19 health pandemic has shaken the most stable political systems, and left deep economic scars across industries. With global and national travel at a standstill, the tourism industry is among the most heavily hit. The gradual lifting of restrictions has already fuelled tourism demand, and previous hopes of rebuilding and transforming tourism more sustainably are vanishing. To ensure that pre-COVID-19 situations of unsustainable development do not resurface, it is of critical importance to go beyond economically driven crisis recovery. Instead, governments need to reconsider pre-crisis challenges, such as imbalances between tourists and residents, infrastructure shortages, and questions around the efficiency of regulations and policies. In New Zealand, issues related to freedom camping have fuelled these debates, with headlines relating to tourists defecating in public space, dropping garbage, and being ‘freeloaders’ with little economic value. Adopting a multiple stakeholder approach, this research note empirically explores stakeholder perceptions of challenges associated with freedom camping in the context of New Zealand. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 stakeholders representing host communities, local councils, national agencies, tourism businesses, and regional tourism organisations. Qualitative data analysis reveals positive changes and reduced impacts as results of additional infrastructure funding, educational measures, and locally enforced bylaws. However, participants also noted the need for a national framework, and clear statements and messages regarding domestic demand. Considering that nature-based experiences that allow for social distancing, such as (freedom) camping, have grown significantly during the pandemic and that domestic tourists will be crucial to post-COVID tourism recovery, this original multiple stakeholder approach delivers policy-relevant insights and provides avenues for future research with regard to a responsible and sustainable tourism restart.

scholarly journals The Multiple Stakeholder Approach to Real-world Evidence Generation: the Results of the Jandhyala Method in Observing Expert Consensus on Quality Indicators of Rare Disease Patient Registries (RDRs) by Stakeholder Group

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ravi Jandhyala
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Real World ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Disease Patient ◽  
Stakeholder Approach ◽  
Stakeholder Groups ◽  
Regulatory Affairs ◽  
Multiple Stakeholder ◽  
Real World Evidence ◽  
Rare Disease Patient

Abstract Background:Evidence is valuable to inform decision making. Understanding stakeholder needs from the evidence of key stakeholders is empirically important to those involved in its generation. Where multiple stakeholders exist, an understanding of whether their questions are homogenous or heterogenous necessitates a dedicated approach that will be of value to those invested in the outcomes of their decisions.The pharmaceutical industry engages with non-pharmaceutical industry stakeholders: Payors, Prescribers and, under carefully controlled circumstances, patients when commercialising its medicines. This original research focussed on the differences between these groups and their pharma aligned stakeholders: Regulatory Affairs, Market Access, Commercial and Medical Affairs using measures of their common quality indicators (QIs) from rare disease patient registries.QIs were solicited using the Jandhyala method for observing item awareness and consensus from list generating questioning. They were compared for homogeneity between individual stakeholder groups and the combined pharma and non-pharma stakeholder group population.Results:All stakeholder groups were unique and suggested items peculiar to their own group.One hundred and eleven discrete QIs were identified: Commercial (8/111; 7.21%), Market Access (6/111; 5.41%), Medical Affairs (4/111; 3.60%), Regulatory Affairs (6/111; 5.41%), Patients (14/111; 12.61%), Payors (6/111; 5.41%), and Prescribers (9/111; 8.11%). Each stakeholder's proportion of unique QIs to the total was not statistically significant to the group as a whole.Non-pharma stakeholders generated 29/111 (26.13%) unique QIs, while pharma stakeholders generated 24/111 (21.62%). The total unique QIs across both stakeholder groups were 53/111 (47.75%). Two QIs were unanimously suggested and agreed upon by all stakeholder groups (7/7; 100%): 'Engages with patients and gains their buy-in' and 'Includes a core data set as part of outcomes'.There was homogeneity in consensus on common QIs between Commercial – Market Access (P=0.006), Market Access – Regulators (P=0.006), Commercial – Prescribers (P=0.001), Market Access – Prescribers (P=0.033), and Commercial – Medical Affairs (P=0.020).Conclusions:There is sufficient evidence to support a multiple stakeholder approach for generating real-world evidence. There was a mismatch between pharma and non-pharma stakeholders of 47.75% indicating redundancies of QIs on each side of this divide. Patients and Payor (non-pharma) groups have been highlighted for greater alignment with pharma stakeholder groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document