Identifying and framing potential stakeholders in complex innovation ecosystems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23726/cij.2023.1477Keywords:
Stakeholder mapping, engineering innovation, framing, scaffoldingAbstract
Analysing the types and connections to stakeholders may be daunting for engineering students. Creating stakeholder maps can be scaffolded through prompting for different stakeholder roles, which students may use as a starting point. Drawing from 31 student stakeholder analyses, this case study explores students’ ability to identify different types of stakeholders and the range of roles they could play, when provided with a set of stakeholder roles as a point of departure. Students were able to identify a diverse range of stakeholders as well as the multiplicity of stakeholder roles. The role prompting resulted in 36 unique stakeholders and 63 stakeholders identified by multiple students, particularly in customer, supplier, and possible collaborator roles. As such, combining individual, scaffolded mappings can help to capture innovation ecosystems more systematically and illuminate more diverse collaboration opportunities in development projects.
References
Anderson, J.R., Fincham, J.M. & Douglass, S., 1997, The role of examples and rules in the acquisition of a cognitive skill, Journal of experimental psychology: learning, memory, and cognition, 23(4): 932. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.23.4.932
Andersson, P., 2015, Scaffolding of task complexity awareness and its impact on actions and learning. ALAR: Action Learning and Action Research Journal, 21(1): 124-147. https://alarj.alarassociation.org/index.php/alarj/article/view/148
Atkinson, R.K., Derry, S.J., Renkl, A. & Wortham, D., 2000, Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of Educational Research, 70(2): 181-214. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070002181
Beck, D., Ferasso, M., 2023, Bridging ‘stakeholder value creation’ and ‘urban sustainability’: the need for better integrating the environmental dimension. Sustainable Cities and Society, 89: 104316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.104316
Boonstra, A. & de Vries, J., 2008, Managing stakeholders around inter-organizational systems: A diagnostic approach. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(3): 190-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2008.04.001
Choi, I., Land, S.M. & Turgeon, A.J., 2005, Scaffolding peer-questioning strategies to facilitate metacognition during online small group discussion. Instructional Science, 33: 483-511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-1277-4
Dang, A., Arora, D. & Rane, P., 2020, Role of digital therapeutics and the changing future of healthcare. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 9(5): 2207-2213. https://doi.org/10.4103%2Fjfmpc.jfmpc_105_20
Dasgupta, C., 2019, Improvable models as scaffolds for promoting productive disciplinary engagement in an engineering design activity. Journal of Engineering Education, 108(3): 394-417. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20282
Ertmer, P.A. & Glazewski, K.D., 2019, Scaffolding in PBL environments: Structuring and problematizing relevant task features. The Wiley Handbook of Problem‐Based Learning, pp.321-342. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119173243.ch14
Glazewski, K.D. & Hmelo-Silver, C.E., 2019, Scaffolding and supporting use of information for ambitious learning practices. Information and Learning Sciences, 120(1/2): 39-58. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-08-2018-0087
Jordan, T., 2016, Deliberative Methods for Complex Issues: A typology of functions that may need scaffolding. Group Facilitation: A Research & Applications Journal, 13, pp.57-78.
Khan, A. & Mir, M.S., 2021, E Health and M Health: Future of healthcare. Journal of Anatomy & Physiology 2(3): 38-41. https://doi.org/10.26717/BJSTR.2021.36.005864
Kim, N.J., Vicentini, C.R. & Belland, B.R., 2022, Influence of scaffolding on information literacy and argumentation skills in virtual field trips and problem-based learning for scientific problem solving. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, pp.1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10145-y
Kojmane, J. & Aboutajeddine, A., 2016, Strengthening engineering design skills of first-year university students under resources constraints. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 44(2), pp.148-164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306419016641006
Pitkänen, K., Iwata, M., & Laru, J., 2019, Supporting Fab Lab facilitators to develop pedagogical practices to improve learning in digital fabrication activities. In: Proceedings of the FabLearn Europe 2019 Conference, pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3335055.3335061
Puntambekar, S. & Kolodner, J.L., 2005, Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 42(2): 185-217. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20048
Qadri, Y.A., Nauman, A., Zikria, Y.B., Vasilakos, A.V. & Kim, S.W., 2020, The future of healthcare internet of things: a survey of emerging technologies. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 22(2): 1121-1167. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2020.2973314
Schmidt, H.G., Rotgans, J.I. & Yew, E.H., 2019, Cognitive constructivist foundations of problem‐based learning. The Wiley Handbook of problem‐based learning, pp.25-50. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119173243.ch2
Tallberg, L., García-Rosell, J.C. & Haanpää, M., 2022, Human–animal relations in business and society: Advancing the feminist interpretation of stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 180(1): 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04840-1
Van den Beemt, A., MacLeod, M., Van der Veen, J., Van de Ven, A., Van Baalen, S., Klaassen, R. & Boon, M., 2020, Interdisciplinary engineering education: A review of vision, teaching, and support. Journal of Engineering Education, 109(3): 508-555. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20347
Vasconcelos, L.A. & Crilly, N. 2016, Inspiration and fixation: Questions, methods, findings, and challenges. Design Studies, 42, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.11.001
Veselova, E., Gaziulusoy, I., and Lohmann, J., 2022, Mediating the needs of human and natural nonhuman stakeholders: Towards a design methodological framework, in: Lockton, D., Lenzi, S., Hekkert, P., Oak, A., Sádaba, J., Lloyd, P. (eds.), DRS2022: Bilbao, 25 June - 3 July, Bilbao, Spain. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2022.524
Walther, J., Miller, S. E. & Sochacka, N. W., 2017, A model of empathy in engineering as a core skill, practice orientation, and professional way of being. Journal of Engineering Education, 106(1): 123-148. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20159
Zoltowski, C.B., Oakes, W.C. & Cardella, M.E., 2012, Students' ways of experiencing human‐centered design. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(1): 28-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2021.100311
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Vikki Eriksson, Teo Keipi, Tua Björklund
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
