Who are the NSTIC Stakeholders?

The Scope of People
The vision of NSTIC touches all sectors of US society and extends beyond the US because of the international nature of cyberspace. The protocological (from  Alexander Galloway’s Protocol: “The limits of a protocological system and the limits of possibility within that system are synonymous.”) landscape (the range of options enabled by the protocol stack choice) and policy frameworks must be very broad to meet the needs of US citizens and global netizens. Protocol is political because it shapes what is possible in the network (Appendix 11 goes into greater detail).
The number of individual stakeholders for systems of identity online stretches to everyone who uses network systems, and with there now being five billion phones on the planet, that is fast approaching every person on the planet.  The diversity of the world population in terms of life experience is huge (see Appendix 3: People Diversity) . The vast majority of people are not privileged in one or more aspects of life and the freedom to participate in cyberspace with anonymous and psuedonymous identifiers that enable them to transcend or set aside “real world identity” is a key freedom that must be maintained even as more systems-level accountability is developed (To understand these issues please see Appendixes 8: Anti-pseudonym bingo  9: On Refusing to Tell You My Name  and 10: Who is Harmed by a “Real Names” Policy?)
Organizational Stakeholders
I have compiled a list of types of stakeholder types in Appendix 3 representing various interests and points of view in society that are essential to include early on.

Identity Commons leaders Mary Ruddy and Kaliya Hamlin worked with other participants at the NSTIC Privacy and Usability Workshop at MIT to brainstorm and then cluster over 50 organizations who are directly participating in and paying attention to NSTIC developments because they have some explicit focus or sub- group focused on “identity”. They were subsequently made into a Wikipedia Book: NSTIC Stakeholder Organizations.  NSTIC is not just about the identity of people and their identifiers in cyberspace, but also the identity and identifiers of organizations. The range of associations and businesses is also vast.
2.3 How can the government be most effective in accelerating the development and ultimate success of the Identity Ecosystem?
The NSTIC NPO should, as soon as possible, host a space online where all known/participating stakeholders who want to be listed can be listed.
The starting point for this could be the list that came out of the MIT workshop and the Wikipedia book could be a starting point for their basic information. There should be a simple standard set of information on each organization, including how they see themselves as a stakeholder in NSTIC, what they hope to contribute to it, what they are most concerned about, and what they want to collaborate with other stakeholders on. There might be a matchmaking role that the NSTIC NPO could play, proactively introducing stakeholders to one another so that potentially synergistic collaboration is enabled.
Supporting the stakeholder groups in learning more about one another is very important. One way to do that would be via a 2-3x weekly podcast, perhaps increasing it to a frequency sufficient to interview all known stakeholders.
All major industry conferences that are related to the industry or focus of the organization should be listed on a calendar that has some sophisticated search with queries on cities, dates and industry.  This will help with cross-pollination which is essential right now for the proactive development of shared language and understanding.
There should also be a way for people who are actively working to collaborate to find one another both online and off.  NSTIC can use the list of all the conferences in all industries that are significantly touched by NSTIC as a starting point to encourage/enable “meet-ups” amongst professionals to connect around NSTIC.

• Having a way for people going to a conference to find other interested people on your site, and from there self-organize.
• Contact the program organizer and see when it works to have a meetup and get it on the program even if Jeremy isn’t going.
• Give people who want to have a BOF at a conference a package of study materials for professionals that the leader can hand out, following with a discussion. Jeremy could also make a video inviting people to participate.
• Encourage cross-pollination between industries. One way might be to pick a conference in a particular city. Organize the professionals from within the conference and the local interested professionals from a broader range of industries to meet up (perhaps for dinner).

If this sort of informal connecting, socialization and learning is happening, then there should be a way for interested professionals to report back from the meeting, post notes, record a video, send in a diagram.  This could create some interesting cross-stakeholder conversations.
Socialization of NSTIC in IT professional communities is very important right now, because they are going to need to know something about this when it becomes time to socialize NSTIC with the public.  They also can be a pool of not-directly-involved stakeholders to be tapped to participate in things like the Community Insight Council.
Stakeholder Insight Combined with Ecosystem Maps
Because these processes are public and the outputs published on the web, they create a level of systems accountability and increase the likelihood of earning legitimacy in the eyes of a vast majority of United States citizens and residents along with international stakeholders.
The initial consensus can be developed amongst diverse stakeholders using the systems mapping tools in the previous section.  Consensus will not be on “the solution to the problems” but on the polarities inherent in the system and a shared map of the roles and value flows in the existing and proposed ecosystem.  These will support effective dialogues that don’t go in circles but actually get to real conversations about system needs from the perspectives of various stakeholders. Shared understanding with the maps as a common ground means that stakeholders with very different perspectives can agree on key pulse points to measure to see if the ecosystem is working in balance.
I believe the systems insight provided by the dialogue processes outlined in this section combined with a steering group whose mandate is to respond to the outputs of those regular stakeholder dialogues relative to the shared maps will be effective, within a few years, of a thriving Identity Ecosystem.
This is from pages 48-49 of Kaliya’s NSTIC Governance NOI Response – please see this page for the overview and links to the rest of the posts. Here is a link to the PDF.