Requirements Engineering

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 281–297 | Cite as

Method for stakeholder identification in interorganizational environments

  • Luciana C. Ballejos
  • Jorge M. Montagna
Original Article


Stakeholders are the first emerging challenge in any software project. Their identification is a critical task for success. Nevertheless, many authors consider them as a default product of a non-explained identification process. Several aspects must be considered when the project is carried out in environments where multiple organizations interact. These complex contexts demand extremely hard efforts. Stakeholders must be identified taking into account their attributes (types, roles), which must be extended and defined for these environments. In general, there are no methodologies that allow performing this task in a systematic way for the development of interorganizational information systems. The paper proposes a method for carrying out stakeholder identification considering the diverse dimensions involved in interorganizational environments: organizational, interorganizational and external. It allows the systematic specification of all the people, groups and organizations whose interests and needs can affect or are affected by the interorganizational system. Also diverse stakeholders’ attributes such as types, roles, influence and interest are defined, analyzed, and included in the method. They are all important in later stages of any software project.


Stakeholders Interorganizational networks Interorganizational information systems 


  1. 1.
    Alexander I, Robertson S (2004) Understanding project sociology by modeling stakeholders. IEEE Softw IEEE Comput Soc 21(1):23–27Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alexander I, Stevens R (2002) Writing better requirements. Addison Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Applegate LM (2003) Stakeholder analysis tool. Harvard Business School Exercise 808-161. MayGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ballejos LC, Montagna JM (2008) Identifying interorganisational networks: a factor-based approach. Int J Netw Virtual Organ (in press)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bittner K, Spence I (2003) Establishing the vision for use case modeling. Use case modeling. Addison Wesley Professional, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chatterjee D, Ravichandran T (2004) Inter-organizational information systems research: a critical review and an integrative framework. In: 37th Hawaii international conference on system sciencesGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coughlan J, Lycett M, Macredie RD (2003) Communication issues in requirements elicitation: a content analysis of stakeholder experiences. Inf Softw Technol 45(8):525–537Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coughlan J, Macredie RD (2002) Effective communication in requirements elicitation: a comparison of methodologies. Requir Eng J 7(2):47–60. doi: 10.1007/s007660200004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Evaristo JR, Scudder R, Desouza KC, Sato O (2004) A dimensional analysis of geographically distributed project teams: a case study. Eng Technol Manag 21(3):175–189. doi: 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2003.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Giordano R, Bell D (2000) Participant stakeholder evaluation as a design process. In: 2000 conference on Universal usability, pp 53–60Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hong IB (2002) A new framework for interorganizational systems based on the linkage of participants’ roles. Inf Manag 39(4):261–270. doi: 10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00095-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kelvin A (2000) How stakeholders with various preferences converge on acceptable investment programs. J Eval Program Plann 23(1):105–113. doi: 10.1016/S0149-7189(99)00047-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khalifa G, Irani Z, Baldwin LP, Jones S (2000) Evaluating information technology with you in mind. Electron J Inf Syst Eval 4(1): Paper 5Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kotonya G, Sommerville I (2003) Requirements engineering: processes and techniques. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mintzberg H (1981) Organization design: fashion or fit? Harv Bus Rev 59(1):103–116Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Munkvold BE (1998) Adoption and diffusion of collaborative technology in interorganizational networks. In: 31st Annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 1, pp 424–433Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nuseibeh B, Easterbrook S (2000) requirements engineering: a roadmap. In: International conference on software engineering–conference on the future of software engineering, pp 35–46Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pacheco C, Tovar E (2007) Stakeholder Identification as an Issue in the Improvement of Software Requirements Quality. Krogstie J, Opdahl AL, Sindre G (eds) CAiSE 2007, LNCS 4495, pp 370–380Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pan GSC (2005) Information systems project abandonment: a stakeholder analysis. Int J Inf Manag 25(2):173–184. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2004.12.003 Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pouloudi A (1999) Aspects of the stakeholder concept and their implications for information systems development. In: 32nd Annual Hawaii international conference on system sciencesGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pouloudi A, Whitley EA (1997) Stakeholder identification in inter-organizational systems: gaining insights for drug use management systems. Eur J Inf Syst 6:1–14. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000252 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Qualman A (1995) A note on stakeholder analysis: guidance note on how to do stakeholder analysis of aid projects and programmes. Document prepared by the British Overseas Development Administration (ODA) Social Development Department, JulyGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Robertson S (2000) Project sociology: identifying and involving the stakeholders. The Atlantic Systems Guild. Online:
  24. 24.
    Robertson S (2001) Requirements trawling: techniques for discovering requirements. Int J Hum Comput Stud 55(4):405–421. doi: 10.1006/ijhc.2001.0481 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ropponen J, Lyytinen K (2000) Components of software development risk: how to address them? a project manager survey. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 26(2). doi: 10.1109/32.841112
  26. 26.
    Shah N (2004) Pharmaceutical supply chains: key issues and strategies for optimisation. J Comput Chem Eng 28(6–7):929–941. doi: 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2003.09.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shankar V, Urban GL, Sultan F (2002) Online trust: a stakeholder perspective, concepts, implications and future directions. J Strateg Inf Syst 11(3–4):325–344. doi: 10.1016/S0963-8687(02)00022-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sharp H, Finkelstein A, Galal G (1999) Stakeholder identification in the requirements engineering process. DEXA Workshop 1999:387–391Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Smith LW (2000) Project clarity through stakeholder analysis. Crosstalk J Def Softw Eng, DecemberGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CIDISI, Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo en Ingeniería en Sistemas de Información, Facultad Regional Santa FeUniversidad Tecnológica NacionalSanta FeArgentina
  2. 2.INGAR, Instituto de Desarrollo y DiseñoSanta FeArgentina

Personalised recommendations