{"title":"解释外部利益相关者对NCIC研究项目重组反馈的问题。","authors":"F D Ashbury, D C Iverson, 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":"{\"title\":\"Issues for interpreting external stakeholder feedback on restructuring NCIC's research programs.\",\"authors\":\"F D Ashbury, D C Iverson, 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}","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}
Issues for interpreting external stakeholder feedback on restructuring NCIC's research programs.
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.