Suchergebnisse

AbstractGroup Decision and Negotiation methods can help identify optimal, or efficient, solutions to complex problems and so aid decision-makers. However, recommendations depend for their success, in part, on their political feasibility within, usually, complex organisational settings. A part of the complexity of effective implementation derives from understanding the responses of stakeholders to the proposed decisions. The responses of stakeholders can be complex because stakeholders respond not just to the decision but also to the responses of other stakeholders. When the recommendations are very important, and when the possible stakeholder responses are likely to be complex, then the use of some form of modelling ofstakeholder dynamicsis likely to be helpful. This paper proposes such a modelling process designed to aid the thinking of a decision-making team as they seek to ensure their decision is politically feasible. The modelling process is designed to facilitate effective negotiation in groups about the potential impact of stakeholder responses. The modelling process is illustrated through a real case.

Group Decision and Negotiation methods can help identify optimal, or efficient, solutions to complex problems and so aid decision-makers. However, recommendations depend for their success, in part, on their political feasibility within, usually, complex organisational settings. A part of the complexity of effective implementation derives from understanding the responses of stakeholders to the proposed decisions. The responses of stakeholders can be complex because stakeholders respond not just to the decision but also to the responses of other stakeholders. When the recommendations are very important, and when the possible stakeholder responses are likely to be complex, then the use of some form of modelling of stakeholder dynamics is likely to be helpful. This paper proposes such a modelling process designed to aid the thinking of a decision-making team as they seek to ensure their decision is politically feasible. The modelling process is designed to facilitate effective negotiation in groups about the potential impact of stakeholder responses. The modelling process is illustrated through a real case.

Grand challenges require coordinated and integrated responses that draw on different occupational communities' competencies that might otherwise remain in isolation. We theorize how grand challenges can be tackled by mobilizing landscapes of practice – a totality of local communities that constitute a 'living knowledge area' within a given domain. The landscapes of practices concept helps to understand the deployment of participatory architectures, which in the current literature is considered essential for addressing grand challenges. To this end, landscapes of practice emphasize the mutual accountability between networks and communities across informal and institutional settings and the need to learn about the landscapes of practice rather than focusing only on developing local competencies. Thus, landscapes of practice mobilization is complex and requires collective practical judgment while facing the arising socio-political tensions. Drawing on a study focused on Australian mental health care, we propose four pillars enabling the mobilization of landscapes of practice, and constituting general guiding principles – determining and legitimizing the landscapes of practice's purpose, deploying landscapes of practice-based governance structures, motivating and connecting membership across the landscapes of practice, and demonstrating the value of the mobilized landscapes of practice. Thereby, we propose a framework of mobilizing landscapes of practice that serves as a reference for network leaders and managerial practice while advancing the academic debates on grand challenges and situated learning.