Table 3 Advantages and disadvantages of different methods of generating priorities
| Â | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|
Calls for submission | • Enable a wide range of stakeholders to be reached. | • Requires stakeholders to have a level of written expertise in order to respond. |
• Inexpensive and non-resource intensive for the commissioning organisation. | ||
Stakeholder questionnaires/ surveys | • Potential to reach a large number and wide range of stakeholders. | • Challenges with designing surveys that are appropriate for stakeholders of various backgrounds/expertise. |
• Interpretation may be required to collate responses if open-ended questions asked. | ||
Workshops, focus groups or roundtables | • Increases the likelihood that different views can be openly debated. | • Some individuals may have greater dominance in a group situation leading to views or concerns of individuals being neglected. |
Nominal group technique | • Facilitates equal participation of all group members. | • Structured process can minimise discussion and reduce opportunities for the development and refinement of ideas. |
• Reduces the domination of the discussion by a single person or group of people. | ||
• Results in a set of prioritised solutions or recommendations that are agreed to democratically by the majority of group members. | ||
Delphi technique | • Does not require face-to-face meetings and therefore is relatively free of social pressure, dominance of individuals or groups, and is inexpensive [24]. | • Numerous rounds of questionnaires can be time consuming and requires commitment from individuals over a period of time. |
• Vulnerable to differential response rates and can have high rates of attrition between rounds [17]. | ||
• May force a middle-of-the-road consensus, militating independent judgements [25]. | ||
Public input session | • Promotes public awareness of the topic areas being addressed. | • Public setting may inhibit expression of ideas which could draw criticism or debate. |
• Allows for a wide range of stakeholders to contribute. | ||
• Public setting may disadvantage/discourage non-expert stakeholders from contributing alongside experts. | ||
• Practical/time constraints in receiving input from large numbers of participants. |