STAKEHOLDER | IMPACT/ | DESIRED OUTCOME | DEMAND FOR ESIGNATURES | PRIORITIES/ ENABLERS | CONCERNS/ BARRIERS | VALUE PROPOSITION | STRATEGY FOR ACTION | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Who are the people who will be affected by what we want to do? | How can this group affect, positively or otherwise, what we want to do? | What specifically do we want this group to do with regard to our initiative? | What did they say they were interested in during initial meetings? | What is important to these stakeholders? | What are these stakeholders worried about? | Does what we're doing offer any specific benefit(s) to this group? | What do we plan to do to influence/ achieve the desired outcome? | ||
Primary pilot candidates | eSignature team or program office have identified this program as potential pilot |
|
|
|
|
| |||
National Permit System | Serve as a source of learning for our team | We want them to have their solution go through Share their work products and lessons learned with our team. |
| Time. |
| The NPS team is on a very tight schedule. | Anything that might delay completion of their project. | Our focused and methodical approach might lend their proposal additional credibility. |
|
Secondary pilot candidates | eSignature team has had preliminary discussions with these program offices |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Other Potential pilots | eSignature team has not yet "pitched" the idea of a pilot to these program offices |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Internal Stakeholders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
IT Experts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
CIO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Project Management Team for FIS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Office of Policy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Program Offices (i.e., Fisheries) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Regional Offices | must ultimately implement systems using our design | participate in our project |
| efficient operations | fraud | improved customer satisfaction |
| ||
Office of Law Enforcement | Has to review and possibly approve solutions? | Would like them to help shape alternatives and criteria to ensure approval | Necessary to enable electronic reporting and ensure accountability | Accuracy of data and accountability for data submitted | Solution(s) need to withstand judicial scrutiny and be consistent with case law | improves accuracy , makes individuals legally responsible for data they submit regardless of report | Get it right the first time and include OLE staff on team to help with "reach back" into organization and get hands on expertise. | ||
General Counsel | GCF (in conjunction with F/CIO and GCEL) must approve our project outcome | advise, answer questions, and ultimately approve |
| legal sufficiency | increased difficulty of prosecution | no | maintain lines of communication | ||
NOAA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Commerce |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Service providers (examples) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
Professional/Trade Groups (examples) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
Pacific States Fisher Management Council |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Partner Organizations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
States (e.g., Alaska) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Countries (e.g., Canada) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Commissions (e.g., Tuna or Halibut) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
End User Community |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Non-profit organizations (filers) |
| File for themselves or on behalf of others |
|
|
|
|
| ||
For-profit organizations (filers) |
| File for themselves or on behalf of others |
|
|
|
|
| ||
Individuals (filers) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
*Oversight/ Public Interest* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
OMB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Congress (authorizing committees) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Congress (appropriating committees) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
GAO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page Comparison
General
Content
Integrations