Stakeholder Impact Analysis

STAKEHOLDER GROUP	IMPACT/ RECOURSE	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 other factors might enable these stakeholders' participation?	What are these stakeholders worried about? What other factors might inhibit these stakeholders' participation?	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. Serve as a source of document examples and templates. Provide us with CIO-office access and perspective.	Share their work products and lessons learned with our team. Exercise our evaluation process to test our evaluation criteria. Allow us to cite their approved documents as additional examples in our final report.	Having their methodology plan fully reviewed and analyzed for weaknesses and potential pitfalls. Looking for recommendations on how to make the methodology better.	Time. The NPS team is on a very tight schedule.	Anything that might delay completion of their project.	Our focused and methodical approach might contribute to the quality of their proposal and lend their proposal additional credibility.	Continue working towards developing a business plan that is officially accepted by the agency, followed by full implementation within the NPS.
FIS Electronic Reporting Vendor Certification Guidelines Team	Team will publish e-sig procedures/methodologies in vendor certification guidelines Team can assist in getting solutions out to application developers	Provide criteria for evaluating appropriate and useful e-sig solution for logbook (trusted) reporting	Electronic Reporting Vendor Certification Guidelines require e-sig solution in next revision	Defining e-sig solution that will be appropriate to logbook reporting. Team already has high commitment to this effort.	Too complicated or arduous a solution will discourage fishers from reporting electronically. Not having a solution soon will delay the move to e-reporting.	This is key to moving fisheries participants to reporting electronically	Develop e-signature solution that balances security and usability
West Coast Federal eFishticket	This could be the highest profile "flagship" e-signature application Could be high visibility and high benefit early adopters that would pave the way for many subsequent applications	Participate Ensure alignment between business and technology Provide access to customers and business requirements	can't abandon paper without an adequate e-signature annual transaction volume in six figures significant savings possible in reduced paper handling, improved accuracy and timeliness statutory requirements to end overfishing, 7 stocks currently overfished, paper system takes 6 weeks to reconcile catch, can be reduced to 48 - 72 hours	simplicity, ease of use saving the customer time easy correction cycle integration with customer business systems	small processors have cost concerns state governments fear change, implementation costs, loss of control data loss (data has value for tax revenues as well as fisheries management)	Cost savings for customers and agencies Significantly faster access to data facilitates better fisheries management decision making	Consider adding Dave Colpo to e-signature team Proactive communication
West Coast Federal eLogbook	Could be high visibility and high benefit early adopters that would pave the way for subsequent applications	Participate Ensure alignment between business and technology Provide access to customers and business requirements	can't abandon paper without an adequate e-signature significant savings possible in reduced paper handling, improved accuracy and timeliness statutory requirements to end overfishing, 7 stocks currently overfished	simplicity, ease of use saving the customer time	small vessels have cost concerns	Cost savings for customers and agencies Significantly faster access to data facilitates better fisheries management decision making	Proactive communication
Protected Resources on-line permit	This could provide an interesting contrast to the fisheries-related e-signatures, because the nature of the relationship with the customer would be quite different. (May be a single interaction with a grad student as opposed to long-term ongoing relationship.)	We want to keep this in mind as a contrast with many of our other e-signature use cases.	They are building an online transaction and backend process that includes a holographic signature faxed to the agency; they appear to have a low transaction volume (hundreds per year?).
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	The CIO is one of the approving authorities within the process.	Ensure that our initiative meets the standards of security and other computer related acts that are followed by the agency.	Review products by the group.	Must be kept in the loop.	Release or unauthorized access to confidential data, weak security, development of a solution that is not defensible in court.	Not specifically.	Keep the CIO informed of progress.
Project Management Team for FIS	FIS has provided funds for this and other e-reporting development efforts	Provide subject matter experts and funding	Provide subject matter experts and funding	The FIS community recognizes that e-signature implementations are the major road-block to building cost and time saving information management solutions	Timeliness. The proposed two solutions are needed asap	Defensibility and ease of implementation	E-signature solutions will be of immediate use to the FIS community
Office of Policy	[waiting for response. Author of e-sig procedural directive no longer works in PO]
Program Offices (i.e., Fisheries)
National Information Management Board (NIMB)	NIMB review will likely be required before O/CIO approval	review and approve our final product		effective IT management return on investment	redundant efforts, waste, alignment between business strategies and IT initiatives	eSignature can enable more online citizen-to-government transactions
Regional Offices	must ultimately implement systems using our design may lobby for or against approval may be fast or slow adopters	participate in our project contribute ideas review and comment support the final product in the approval step		efficient operations ease of use (to reduce support burden)	fraud excessive support burden	improved customer satisfaction reduced paperwork faster workflow
Office of Law Enforcement	Has to review and possibly approve solutions? Can help identify possible pitfalls in the implementation.	Would like them to help shape alternatives and criteria to ensure approval. Help avoid loopholes that wil require future LE action or investigation	Necessary to enable electronic reporting and ensure accountability	Accuracy of data and accountability for data submitted. Ability to track the source of the data to ensure the appropriate individual is held accountable.	Solution(s) need to withstand judicial scrutiny and be consistent with case law. Concerns with possible fraud and false reporting.	may improve accuracy and timeliness. makes individuals legally responsible for data they submit regardless of report. Allows LE to access and analyze information in an electronic format.	Get it right the first time and include OLE staff on team to help with "reach back" into organization and get hands on expertise. Try to lessen or eliminate possible loopholes and pitfalls.
General Counsel	GCF (in conjunction with F/CIO and GCEL) must approve our project outcome	advise, answer questions, and ultimately approve		legal sufficiency legal efficiency	increased difficulty of prosecution	no	maintain lines of communication
NOAA
Commerce
Service providers (examples)
Olfish
SiriusIT
Catchlog
Data Harvest Systems	may be early or late adopter	review and comment implement systems using our design		simple to implement simple to use	non-standard approaches too complicated to work excessive support burden	opportunity to add value to product	proactive communication treat vendors equitably
Other vendors	may choose to implement systems using our design	review and comment		ease of use (to minimize support burden)	preferential treatment of other vendors excessive support burden	opportunity to add value to product	treat vendors equitably
Professional/Trade Groups (examples)
At-sea Processors Association
West Coast Seafood Processors Association	represents many end-user organizations may influence industry adoption pattern	support, provide input, and advocate implementation		coordination with state agencies easy, user-friendly, adaptable to multiple platforms	uncoordinated approaches from multiple jurisdictions	enables efficiencies through fully electronic reporting
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations
Pacific Seafood Processors Association
Pacific States Fisheries Management Council	PSFMC developed the electronic fish ticket software currently being used by NMFS in the Pacific Whiting Fishery and currently is piloting software for an electronic logbook for use in West Coast Fisheries.	Support development, incorporate and implement an e-signature into their e fish ticket and e lag book software.	e-signature is essential	an e- signature solution is necessary to expand their e fish ticket program and to implement their e-logbook program.	e-signature not happening, cost issues	Yes, enables expansion of their programs, ultimately means quicker, more accurate data collection.	Find an e-signature solution that will work for all stakeholders
Fishing Vessel Owner's Association, Seattle WA	This organization represents a significant portion of the West Coast fixed gear groundfish fleet, who will be reporting fishing activity through a Federal logbook beginning as early as 2009.	support, provide input, and advocate implementation	Identity theft issues	log book itself is very important, timeliness of reporting is important	system must be user friendly	logbook may produce a better record for their own purposes	meet stakeholders needs, desires.
Partner Organizations
States (e.g., Alaska)
Alaska Department of Fish and Game	vital player in fisheries management and data collection can reinforce and accelerate adoption	engage, review and comment, participate, commit resources	hundreds of thousands of fish tickets per year could possibly be electronically signed	seamless customer experience across agency boundaries, avoiding redundant or conflicting approaches, usable implementations, ease of use, minimizing support calls, collaboration to leverage investments	negative impact on merged data systems, failure to meet public expectations for ease of use or performance, mis-alignment with business needs	meet public expectations, efficiency and timeliness	proactive communication, active participation
Countries (e.g., Canada)
Commissions (e.g., Tuna or Halibut)
International Pacific Halibut Commission	highly credible and influential concerned party	support, provide input, and advocate implementation	e-signature on fish tickets will reduce unproductive paperwork	ease of use	defer to enforcement	possibly	proactive communication
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	Oversight and hopefully funding for new investments, policy oversight for GPEA compliance and keeps Information Collection Budget if projects can demonstrate less paperwork burden. Might have an interest in savings from efficiences.	Support without too much input	N/A	General compliance with E-gov Act and GPEA. Might be interested in whether NMFS considered government-wide e-auth solutions	Unecessary duplication of effort for solutions like e-signatures and e-authentication	Might be willing to promote as "good government" if projects reduce burden on public	Provide materials to NMFS/Commerce to brief OMB if requested or desired.
Congress (authorizing committees)	Oversight of fisheries program and authors of public law for reporting requirements (like quotas, etc). Might have interest in increase data quality and improvement of legal and regulatory enforcement	Support without too much input	N/A	Agency and end-users implement the laws on the books effectively and efficiently.	?	Better data quality might lead to better compliance	Needs to be considered as part of larger NMFS/NOAA Congressional relations
Congress (appropriating committees)	Oversight and funding for new investments. Might have an intersest in savings from efficiencies.	Support without too much input	N/A	Money is well spent and not wasted. Savings are always appreciated.	?	Efficiencies from moving away from paper might generate savings	Needs to be considered as part of larger NMFS/NOAA Congressional relations
GAO	Investigative arm of Congress can create publicity problems and require a lot of energy to follow-up	Support without too much input. Do pilots responde to concerns raised in previous GAO reports?	N/A	Follow the rules and do what you said you would do.	?