Workshop tool for extracting stakeholder views

Transportforum14 January 2010, Session 42Markus PorthinVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland

04/13/23 2

Why computerised workshops?

Especially suitable for poorly documented complex systems, which are:

hard to overview difficult to obtain data from

Expert workshops overcome the lack of information by exploiting and combining the different types of expertise and knowledge of the participants.

The use of computerised Group Support Systems (GSS) results in: more efficient controlled comprehensively documented workshops

04/13/23 3

Group Support System (GSS)

Computerised collaboration tool Networked computers + software

Enhances group productivity: Simultaneous inputs to shared working environment Anonymity (optional) Easy grouping, editing etc. treatment of information Voting/polling – Instant results both in table and graphic format Automatically generated workshop report Especially advantageous in large (>5 pers.) groups

Internet based program enables different modes of using:

Same place Different place

Different time asynchronous

Same time face-to-face distributed

04/13/23 4

Pre-workshop arrangements

Selection of participants Cover all relevant views and fields of expertise

Tailoring of the workshop process Close co-operation with the problem owner Address all desired questions in an appropriate way Planning of workflow Preparation of clear instructions for each phase

If quantitative assessments are to be provided by voting, each question and the association voting scales must be clearly defined.

04/13/23 5

Workflow

Introduction of: Aims Background information Description of the work process

The actual work consists of different modules, e.g.:

Brainstorming Commenting of inputs Organising Evaluating Prioritising by voting/polling Building consensus

04/13/23 6

Brainstorming

The participants write down new ideas into a shared workspace E.g. Identification of maritime hazards

1. Select category

2. Input hazard

04/13/23 7

Commenting

Commenting of inputs of other participants Further elaboration Questions Agreement/disagreement

04/13/23 8

Voting / polling

Quantitative or semi quantitative assessments, e.g.: Simple ordinal ranking Risk assessment:

Likelihood Consequence (may be multiple categories)

Maritime: People, Property, Environment Logistics: Timeliness, Product quality, Information quality

Assessment of risk control options: Feasibility & Effectiveness

Multi Criteria Decision Analysis, etc.

04/13/23 9

Evaluation of voting results

Top priority items Identification of consensus or

divergence in voting results Standard deviation Discussion on reasons for

divergence

Top priority risks

04/13/23 10

Workshop results

Practical and tacit knowledge in form of: Ideas Comments Quantitative or semi-quantitative assessments Shared conclusions

04/13/23 11

Example: Risk analysis for start-up of a new logistics system within a major export industry company

1 day face-to-face workshop 24 participants representing different parts of the supply chain 58 risk scenarios identified 14 top priority risk selected Risk control ideas for each top priority risk The results form the basis for action plans with:

Time schedules Goals Assigned responsibilities

04/13/23 12

Example: Åland Sea Formal Safety Assessment

Hazard identification 1 day workshop 11 participants Identification of 45 risk contributing factors Prioritisation of risk factors

Identification of potential Risk Control Options 1½ day workshop Participants: 6 (1st session), 15 (2nd session) Identification and further specification of potential risk control measures Grouping of measures into Risk Control Options

Assessment of Risk Control Option effects ½ day workshop 6 experienced navigators Elicitation of numerical estimates for some key factors

04/13/23 13

Example: Survey among the Baltic Sea countries on needs for improvements to the Automatic Identification System (AIS) for

vessel traffic

2 face-to-face and 2 internet-based asynchronous workshops

In total 33 participants representing authorities from 8 Baltic Sea countries, HELCOM and EU / EMSA

Identification of activities within authorities that need AIS information

Identification of 153 potentially relevant information items for AIS (both new ones and ones already included in AIS)

Prioritisation of information items Agreement of themes which were later

processed into proposals for new AIS message types

04/13/23 14

Face-to-face vs. distributed or asynchronous workshops

Face-to-face Group and work process easier to manage Highly motivated and focused participants Challenge to arrange for all desired experts to be at same place at

same time

Distributed or asynchronous More flexibility (time & space), no travelling required Demands higher clarity of the process and quality of the

instructions Active participation more challenging

04/13/23 15

Benefits of computerised workshops

Workshop Combination of the different kinds of expertise in an interactive

setting Emergence of new knowledge which is generally not able to be

produced by any of the experts alone Results easily acceptable by the target group

Since all relevant stakeholders have participated and contributed

Computerisation Makes a workshop more efficient All participants can express their views simultaneously No one can dominate the discussion All inputs are documented in the system

04/13/23 16

Contact information:Markus Porthin, M.Sc. (Tech.)Research Scientist, Risk AnalysisVTT Technical Research Centre of FinlandVuorimiehentie 3, EspooP.O. Box 1000, FI-02044 VTT, FinlandTel. +358 20 722 6883, fax +358 20 722 7000www.vtt.fi, firstname.lastname@vtt.fi