Issues for interpreting external stakeholder feedback on restructuring NCIC's research programs.

The Canadian journal of oncology Pub Date : 1995-03-01
F D Ashbury, D C Iverson, P J Shephard
{"title":"Issues for interpreting external stakeholder feedback on restructuring NCIC's research programs.","authors":"F D Ashbury,&nbsp;D C Iverson,&nbsp;P J Shephard","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The National Cancer Institute of Canada surveyed members of its stakeholder groups on a number of issues pertaining to restructuring research programs. While it was hoped that the survey would ensure input from its primary stakeholder groups and thereby facilitate decision-making on critical issues like distribution of funds and research awards, there is reason to believe this may not have occurred. Some of the stakeholder groups seemed to be over-represented in the respondent population and the effect of this on the results was therefore examined. Analysis revealed several important issues: 1) a clear definition of who constitutes a \"stakeholder\" needs to be developed when stakeholder input-gathering is being contemplated; 2) multi-faceted strategies need to be developed to gain input from stakeholders; 3) potential sources of bias can emerge from the various techniques used to gather feedback from stakeholders; and 4) a clear outline of how the feedback is to be used in the decision-making process needs to be determined.</p>","PeriodicalId":79379,"journal":{"name":"The Canadian journal of oncology","volume":"5 1","pages":"328-37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Canadian journal of oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The National Cancer Institute of Canada surveyed members of its stakeholder groups on a number of issues pertaining to restructuring research programs. While it was hoped that the survey would ensure input from its primary stakeholder groups and thereby facilitate decision-making on critical issues like distribution of funds and research awards, there is reason to believe this may not have occurred. Some of the stakeholder groups seemed to be over-represented in the respondent population and the effect of this on the results was therefore examined. Analysis revealed several important issues: 1) a clear definition of who constitutes a "stakeholder" needs to be developed when stakeholder input-gathering is being contemplated; 2) multi-faceted strategies need to be developed to gain input from stakeholders; 3) potential sources of bias can emerge from the various techniques used to gather feedback from stakeholders; and 4) a clear outline of how the feedback is to be used in the decision-making process needs to be determined.

解释外部利益相关者对NCIC研究项目重组反馈的问题。
加拿大国家癌症研究所调查了其利益相关者团体的成员关于重组研究项目的一些问题。虽然人们希望这项调查能确保主要利益相关者群体的投入,从而促进在资金分配和研究奖励等关键问题上的决策,但有理由相信这可能没有发生。一些利益相关者群体在被调查者中似乎代表过多,因此对这对结果的影响进行了检查。分析揭示了几个重要问题:1)在考虑收集利益相关者的意见时,需要明确定义谁是“利益相关者”;2)需要制定多方面的战略,以获得利益相关者的投入;3)从利益相关者那里收集反馈的各种技术可能会产生潜在的偏见来源;4)需要确定如何在决策过程中使用反馈的清晰大纲。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信