[Micky Hingorani]

With regards to engagement I feel online communication and social media have not only made communication and engagement more convenient, but it also allows stakeholders to voice concerns or issues easily and more confidently in that each member can communicate their thoughts and feelings freely without fear or concern of being judged by other stakeholders i.e. concerning views/ opinions on sensitive issues such as MSM,etc. such communication also allows for followup questions in real time and stakeholders are able to attend to meetings without having to be physically present. With regards to planning, social media and online communication have made it easier as stakeholders use social media and can therefore read respond and pass on communication faster and cheaper and also get responses in a similar pattern. This is important as stakeholders have jobs and families to attend to and therefore benefit from the convenience of using social media.

[Micky Hingorani]

I disagree with the statement in that individuals or stakeholders who may not agree with the intervention in their area, could be individuals who do not see the intervention as beneficial to them hence disagreeing with the intervention. Furthermore in such a case it would be ideal to know the reasons behind their feelings and therefore see if these cannot be resolved so that all or most stakeholders reach consensus this can be done through extended engagement . I overall feel that it can be difficult to get all stakeholders to agree on one direction and that is where the importance of dividing stakeholders into priorities is beneficial so it can be noted which stakeholders agree or not to the intervention.

[Micky Hingorani]

Using social media is an important tool to interact and advocate with community. Using some social medias as Facebook, tweeter, instagram and some mobile devices applications can be relevant for improving clinical trials knowledge and access to study information. The social networks have a wide range of uses: dissemination of information in different format ( images, Gifs, videos, statements), recruitment, collecting and analyzing data and etc..

[Micky Hingorani]

As our research team is currently based in the US, we are not able to interact with our targeted population (MSM in China) in person very often, LGBT/MSM/HIV-focused accounts, pages and groups on Chinese social media websites have provided our research team a great opportunity to get to know current events, community dynamics and potential concerns around biomedical HIV prevention research within the community, which I believe will be helpful particularly for our development of communication plan and engagement strategies. However, we are also aware that MSM community in China is highly heterogeneous, information regarding MSM population we see on social media may not be very representative to the whole group as some marginalized MSM in China may not have access to social media or choose not to use them. So in addition to using social media as a source for understanding communities and developing engagement strategies, we also try to develop other engagement strategies that could potential reach to more marginalized vulnerable MSM in China.

[Micky Hingorani]

Social media has become a powerful tool to disseminate information (good or bad). Using social media to communicate the trails policies and strategies could reach a large number of individuals with one post. It could also be used to identify new community stakeholders.

[Micky Hingorani]

Our site has been approved to have a Facebook page, its in progress. What is really fascinating about Facebook is when your friends like what you have posted, the information spreads.
Our newspaper AD is published weekly and it has an influence on peoples interest, because voluntarily participants are coming to site, verbalising that they saw a newspaper AD, its distributed at their houses.
We created cell phone line where everyone can just make a please call me- to cater for financially challenged community members who wants to contribute or enquire without using their airtime. So far its productive.
Our appointment cards and pamphlets have a Scan register Online- when you scan the link using a cell phone it takes you to the interest page- very productive plus downloading is free.

[Micky Hingorani]

First and fore most, you have to know exactly what you are looking for,and as for the stakeholders versus another,this will depend on their level of education, how they understand the topic at hand and how influential they are in the catchment area they are coming from

[Micky Hingorani]

I strongly disagree.The word all seems to be a problem dear Sinazo. I would prefer a majority rule rather. It is important for the research team to weigh up on the stakeholder consensus. A deeper analysis of input or concerns perceived by those not in agreement with the trial is also required prior to taking the course of the majority.

[Micky Hingorani]

The social media is a useful tool in the research agenda and has greatly contributed to stakeholder communication planning and engagement strategies.
My setting is resource limited but the use of WhatsApp platform has become wide as it is cheap. I personally initiated a pilot District level HIV Research WhatsApp Advisory Platform in the West South West(WSW) District of Harare in Zimbabwe in liaison with the District AIDS Coordinator. Community stakeholders working under the purview of the decentralized structure of the National AIDS Council(NAC) or District AIDS Committee Framework directly access research information on the platform. We have used the WhatsApp platform to convey messages on upcoming protocols, stakeholder meetings, sharing research results,providing updates from research conferences and issues management. The platform has enabled the WSW community to have access to accurate and updated research information thereby, creating a research literate community/stakeholder base. The WhatsApp platform in WSW is now being used to convey other HIV/AIDS and health information relevant to the community and pointing to HIV research.
Interestingly, I work as Community Advisor with a sex worker focused research institute in Zimbabwe that has a countrywide spread and the availability of a WhatsApp social platform has undoubtedly created my day to day linkage with the group.Research concerns are shared in a timely fashion regardless of distance.
We are looking forward to the use of other social network channels after consultation with stakeholders e.g. facebook and tweeter but the current economic setting is making us more reliant on WhatsApp and has made wonders in my community.
Members of the Community Advisory Board(CAB) and researchers also have seen the benefits of the WhatsApp platforms across the multi-Network research agenda at the collaborative research programme between the Universities of Zimbabwe and California Schools of Medicine.
Social media on the other hand has limitations of control but establishment of ground rules or Standard Operating Procedures at the onset with membership was viewed as noble according to the lessons we have learnt so far from using it.

[Micky Hingorani]

The role stakeholders have in the community help with what type of relationship we seek from them. We normally look at different sectors and how influential they are in the community the research will take place. For examples the religious, the media,Civic leaders and so on.Some are more involved in advocacy, the other can be stronger in influencing grass root or policy makers. This helps to chose which stakeholder to work with than the other. This has been easy especially first we look at the relationships that we have with stake holders and consider CAB members that we have worked with. This is also determined by what our research goals are. The above has helped to determine the importance of involving one stakeholder versus another.

[Micky Hingorani]

To determine the type of relationship we are seeking with each stakeholders, we need to do mapping to understand the various stakeholders in our community as well as be sure we have a great understanding of our project and its impact in the community we are looking to work with. Relationships involve more than one party so it will be based on the needs and desires of the stakeholder as well. Engagement is key to build and maintain a relationship that benefits both parties. In my agency, the importance of involving one stakeholder versus another is largely based on policy and other political factors. The government has fairly strict rules about how to engage and who to engage to avoid perceived and real conflicts of interest.

[Micky Hingorani]

First step is to know what we are looking for, the purpose of research and the importance of each stakeholder.
From there, look for key people in the community. The relationship with each will be different, because each have their knowledge, influence in a particular group.
It’s important to a previous planning to be able to locate key people of stakeholders who have something to add to the search.

[Micky Hingorani]

Hi Piero,
Priority is definitely key to any strategic plan. When you mention the stakeholder priority, how is it determined? What factors contribute to the priority given to a specific stakeholder? Is there more than political influence that would be considered? This is a very important concept and one that I had not really considered. Thank you for sharing.

[Micky Hingorani]

Hi Philister and thanks for your post.
I agree with you. It is possible that more influential stakeholders may want to override the research purpose. This why it’s necessary that the research team maintains balance among the stakeholders ensuring that all individuals and groups represented have a voice. We need to actively encourage and assist marginalized stakeholders. They may be quiet because they are new to this type of research. By improving their research competency they become more influential and their role in the research may even change as a result.

[Micky Hingorani]

Elizabeth, were there any cases of politically influential people that, unlike the Haji you mentioned, had a *negative* influence in the study? If so, how was that handled?