Safe Speed Forums

You started it! Anyway, one idea is to say that the quality of a process is generally measured by the level of stakeholder satisfaction with the outcome from the process. If satisfaction is low, that means the quality is low, and if it’s high, that means the quality is high. Different type of stakeholders will be satisfied by different attributes of the driving process. The Jeremys of this world might be satisfied only when they can open it up to full throttle whenever they want, whereas the basingwerks would only be satisfied when all the Jeremys are in jail!

In the driving process, let’s focus on one driver, and see what stakeholders he involves. Clearly, all the other drivers in his vicinity are stakeholders, and all the road users and pedestrians, and residents near where he passes are all stakeholders to a degree. Then his activity influences the highway engineers, the gritters and the local NHS, the insurance companies, and all the other drivers who buy policies from those companies, the local scouts and Old Farmer Giles. The influences ripple out from the driver to immediate stakeholders (those whose lives he can directly effect) to lesser stakeholders (lives less influenced). There are zillions of these I haven’t considered.

Now let’s consider the type of influence. If the government is influenced, it might be economic or strategic concerns. If other drivers, the pedestrians or residents are influenced, it will be safety, noise, pollution and congestion, inconvenience etc.

Pretty soon, it is clear that the network of stakeholders is huge and interconnected, at which point, the measurement of quality as I define it (i.e. level of stakeholder satisfaction) can only be conducted in a political way. Which is where we are, and of course, government processes depend on laws which specifically determine what is not allowed. Libertarian ideas have been rejected thus far, and rules, limits, tests etc. are in. So. In summary, firstly quality of driving is measured by how satisfied (or dissatisfied) people are with the system, not by technical measurements of driving ability nor by quantitative terms (!?!) And, secondly, assessing satisfaction is political because the stakeholders are so many. Isn’t that odd/mad (delete as appropriate).

Question: is it a good thing? Possible answer: it doesn’t matter, because it is inevitable.

_________________
I stole this .sig

Thanks for your interesting and comprehensive reply. I've heard this term 'stakeholder' in a political context increasingly frequently, but I've never seen it expressed in such terms. Now I have it scares the hell out of me. It's a social conscience and a busybodies' charter. It's a way of claiming a piece of something that happens to co-exist in the same environment.

In a tolerant society we need to keep our noses out unless the issue is personally significant and outside our own control.

I'm guessing that the political use of the term 'stakeholder' is used to enable all manner of interference in matters that only have an insignificant or peripheral influence. <shudder>

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

More like something from the likes of politicians question time, when the person questioned does not want to give a straight answer so uses gallons of fudge to confuse the issue

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

It’s good that we have thrown some light on this particular piece of the ontology.



Yes. It’s a political term for ‘those involved to a greater and lesser degree’. Systems cannot be created without consultation.

I assume you are afraid because it identifies two groups - those with a legitimate stake and those without one. One party in a dispute usually prefers to ignore others with legitimate stake, although it doesn’t wash and creates intolerance.



There is a precedence to ‘stakeholders’, so you should be reassured about that.

PS: Which of the following concerns you mostly – a) the use of the term 'stakeholder', b) how suitable stakeholders are identified, c) the democratic processes of consulting stakeholders or d) something else?

_________________
I stole this .sig

Yes, or where a person gives a meaningful answer, but the audience is too dumb or selfish (or both in some cases) to understand it.

_________________
I stole this .sig

You either didn't think about that before you said it or you are exceptionally naive. Systems can be imposed if the person or bodies imposing them are in a powerful enough position to do so. How that power exists or is obtained (through extreme force or even taking advantage of a weak opposition) can vary, but it is still possible.

The idea of 'stakeholders' and modern day 'consultation' in this context is merely a facade that the power is somehow being shared. Very often the 'stakeholders' who are consulted are merely the cherry-picked sample the persons enforcing the system know will capitulate.

Hi, r11co. I was wondering when you’d say something unpleasant!



The systems you mean are poor and do not fully pass the test of time.



You can’t have your cake and eat it. Either you want consultation between stakeholders, or you don’t. Which is it, man?!

_________________
I stole this .sig

[quote="basingwerk

Yes, or where a person gives a meaningful answer, but the audience is too dumb or selfish (or both in some cases) to understand it.[/quote]
( I seriously hope that was not meant in a personal tone B/W)
Now with answers like that, like SS, I get very worried with very obtuse statements like this.
Lets go back in time to the late 60's/early 70's - those old enough will remember the tactics - spout enough garbage at union meetings - make it comrade friendly, only those hard core will get involved - till one by one the branches get taken over and ultimately the top of the tree.
The power gets taken by apathy.





And this is possibly how the lunatics now in charge of "safety" have taken over the asylum

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

We were both talking about Question Time, unless you admit to indulging in Ad Hominem nonsense, which is banned.

_________________
I stole this .sig

I refer you to your answer to me B/W - IT CAME IN A REPLY TO ME, NOT ANYONE ELSE/

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Please - it was in thrid person, to whom ever it was adressed.

OK Roger - will accept your judgement -the AH comment was a little near the belt.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Is this a sign of strength, or is your caps lock on?

_________________
I stole this .sig

B/W -there was a request to cool it - if you decide to ignore that - carry on - i intend to respect it.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Yeah, thanks Rog, we were just about to start rucking ! It's been a few months now since I last had a ruck with a bloke. Anyway, now that we've all had a laugh, let's find out if anyone else has some way to define quality. You have my best shot - quality is measured by the level of satisfaction that the users experience. Or stakeholders, although SafeSpeed hates that word.

Who can find a better definition of driving quality? And let’s drop all this rucking bullshit – I’m not driving hundreds of miles to get my face smashed in by the mighty botach!

_________________
I stole this .sig

Botach: "And this is possibly how the lunatics now in charge of "safety" have taken over the asylum"

Sore subject at the moment Botach, am a member of two 'safety professionals' organisations, one has become chartered and is now trying to get a monopoly for it's members by suggetsing to the insurance industry and DWP that competance should be defined by being a corporate chartered member of said body, everyone else is being told to F!*! off (albeit politely).

Is doing nought for safety but a lot for the gong hunters.

End off rant, sorry for hijacking thread.

_________________
Gordon Brown saying I got the country into it's current economic mess so I'll get us out of it is the same as Bomber Harris nipping over to Dresden and offering to repair a few windows.

Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.

http://www.wildcrafts.co.uk

I'm not even going to bother, BW. FIrst of all you say systems cannot be created without consultation, and then you back-track and say that ones that are introduced by compulsion are poor.

I'll just sit back while you blunder towards your next suspension.

Come back, r11co, there's still more nit-picking for you to do!

_________________
I stole this .sig

It is important to expand the consultation to include all involved, not just those who stand to make a buck by limiting competition. Unions (the old name for the type of organisation you describe) are just one part of that.

_________________
I stole this .sig

I dislike the term "stakeholder" - personally I hold my steaks with a fork.

However, in the context of project development/management there is a very definite place for what people insist on calling "stakeholder analysis" - the important thing about this is it takens into account not just the views of various people and the impact a development may have on them, but also the influence that various groups may have on a development and the importance of the group in terms in aiding/impeding the developments goals.

It's something I have to do a lot of professionally.

An example (NOTHING to with me I stress) can be seen on:

http://www.enterprise-impact.org.uk/inf ... ysis.shtml

link corrected.. RP