Based on request from SuSanA partners, I am attaching my Ph.D. dissertation/thesis for you all to read. I ask that if you use this, please give the proper citation. Also, I am happy to answer any questions.

Elisabeth,

I have bullet-ed your questions and responded to each below.

• I have picked out some more of your results that I deemed important for the readers of this page. Do you agree with my selection, is it balanced? Or would you like to add further key points?

Yes, this is a good selection of the important results. Of course, each member might find other results to be more important depending on their needs and position.

• I have also linked to the Wikipedia page on social network analysis (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network_analysis), is that page fairly good?

This is a very good source. And good for connecting to influential pages such as that one.

• What is the title of your PhD thesis? (perhaps its URL can be added at a later stage then; I understand that your "PhD thesis is under copyright embargo by PhD granting university. It will be made publicly available January 2016 when the embargo is lifted.")

My Ph.D. thesis (called a dissertation in the U.S.) is titled, SHARED MEANING IN NETWORKS: A MIXED METHODS APPROACH TO STUDYING SOCIAL CAPITAL IN AN INTERNATIONAL COALITION. I've attached a draft for member of SuSanA to view if they are interested on my Academia page .

• Can I also upload this report to the SuSanA library so that it can be more easily found in future? I could provide a link to your page as well, and our page also tracks the views and downloads.

Yes, please upload to the library if you'd like. Here is a link to the report .

• How does Figure 2 and 4 in your report differ to the figure that you have added to the forum post? I am still not clear on that.

Figure 2 merely shows all of the connections among partners in the SuSanA network. The visual illustrates the consistency of connections among partners but is also telling of who is central to the network. The more well-connected partners are positioned at the center of the network visual. In Figure 4 the visual is identifying partners others in the network see as important within the SuSanA network. The partners with larger dots (called nodes) have higher communication importance scores. The communication importance score is an aggregate of partners indicating how important their communicative relationships with other SuSanA partners are. For example, we can see Eawag has a large blue dot, which means others who are connected to Eawag indicated find the communicative relationship (the exchange of information, professional knowledge, and support) important to their organization's success in the sustainable sanitation space.

Does that help explain the difference?

• In the interviews are you sure that people answered “as partner representatives” instead of “as individual members”? it could be quite difficult to keep the two "hats" separately, for people who wear both.

Yes, this was an issue for some people but in the interviews I made an effort to ask which "hat" they were wearing. If there is a specific instance you are referring to, I'd be happy to clarify.

Dear Dorothee,
It's a great presentation (I think it should also be put in the SuSanA library? I found it here on the website: www.susana.org/en/about/governance-struc...-eschborn-april-2013).

However, for my purposes on Wikipedia (i.e. trying to cite independent sources that have said something about SuSanA) I cannot really use it. It starts with the fact that the presentation is using the SuSanA template. And in one of the earlier slide it states:

Therefore, the GIZ sector program “Sustainable Sanitation” which manages the SuSanA
secretariat has commissioned a team of specialists to support SuSanA in the process of
developing a strategy / Roadmap, in a collaborative manner with input from the core group and
SuSanA key stakeholders. The team of specialists under the direction of seecon, consists of:...

You and I know that seecon did a great job as an independent consultant, but on paper, it is not an independent review as it was commissioned and steered by GIZ... That was my problem.

However, I could cite it in different parts of the Wikipedia article if it contains content that I have not yet included. Is there anything in particular which you think should be pulled from the ppt and be included in the Wikipedia article about SuSanA?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Sanitation_Alliance

Regards,
Elisabeth

Hi Elisabeth

This presentation which we developed in preparation for the roadmap development 2013 to 2018 might be useful: www.susana.org/images/documents/09-about...short-version-hr.pdf
There is also a (much) longer version that I could share with you upon request.

Regards
Dorothee

Dear Adam,

Thanks a lot for posting this report about your analysis of SuSanA here. For me this turned out to be a pretty important document, as I was searching for publications that say something about SuSanA, not only publications that come from SuSanA. Why am I interested in such publications? Because they can be used to improve the Wikipedia article about SuSanA where we are meant to use also "independent", third party sources:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Sanitation_Alliance

(has anyone else got any publications that mention something about SuSanA? I would be interested to know about those)

For this reason, I had asked you (by e-mail) if you could add something from your report to the Wikipedia article which you have done in the meantime, which is great. I have also taken it a little bit further, so now it reads:

A network analysis study conducted in 2014 assessed the SuSanA network by examining the communication channels used and the quality of relationships among partners.[6] It found that "SuSanA partners have strong levels of trust, cooperation and information exchange with one another". However, partners seem to have low diversity of relationships with partners in different economic zones, such as developing countries versus developed countries.[6] Many of the partners use their membership primarily to receive information from the discussion forum.[6]

(Number 6 in square brackets is of course the reference number to your report.)

My questions to you today:

1. I have picked out some more of your results that I deemed important for the readers of this page. Do you agree with my selection, is it balanced? Or would you like to add further key points?
2. I have also linked to the Wikipedia page on social network analysis (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network_analysis), is that page fairly good?
3. What is the title of your PhD thesis? (perhaps its URL can be added at a later stage then; I understand that your "PhD thesis is under copyright embargo by PhD granting university. It will be made publicly available January 2016 when the embargo is lifted.")
4. Can I also upload this report to the SuSanA library so that it can be more easily found in future? I could provide a link to your page as well, and our page also tracks the views and downloads.
5. How does Figure 2 and 4 in your report differ to the figure that you have added to the forum post? I am still not clear on that.
6. In the interviews are you sure that people answered “as partner representatives” instead of “as individual members”? it could be quite difficult to keep the two "hats" separately, for people who wear both.

Kind regards,
Elisabeth

SuSanA Partners,

I want to sincerely thank those who took the time last summer to complete the network analysis survey. I appreciate the time you gave to complete the survey that was a part of my PhD dissertation. I have now completed my dissertation and prepared a report for the SuSanA Secretariat.

Attached you will find the completed SuSanA Network Analysis Report. The attached report details the findings from the study and provides some recommendations. If you have any questions or would like further clarification/explanation about the study's findings, I am happy to set up a time to talk via Skype or via email. Here are some highlights from the report:

Overall Strength of SuSanA Network

• SuSanA partners are selective with their relationships to other partners.
• Partners are selective in the sense that not all partners in SuSanA will have an interest or need to have relationships with others.

Patterns of Relationships

• Partners have a fair amount of diversity in their relationships with different types of SuSanA partners.
• Partners have low diversity of relationships with partners in different economic zones. Few relationships exist among partners from different economic zones.

Quality of Relationships

• SuSanA partners have strong levels of trust, cooperation and information exchange with one another.
• When SuSanA partners use rich communication channels, the levels of trust, cooperation and information exchange are stronger.

Again, I am grateful for the support you and the SuSanA Secretariat provided for this study. I believe the study provides some valuable insights for organizing the collective knowledge of sustainable sanitation. Should you find these results insightful, I would be happy to discuss additional research opportunities with you and your organization.

Please contact me here:
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Twitter: @Dr_Saffer
Skype: Adam.Saffer
Phone: +1-919-962-3372

All,

I am posting here in regards to a network analysis survey many of you received via email earlier this week. The survey link you received is part of a network analysis study I am conducting in coordination with the SuSanA Secretariat. Network analysis maps out and assesses the connections among partner organizations within SuSanA. This study shall allow SuSanA to improve its internal communication. On a broader scale, your participation in this study begins to map out the organizations involved in the sanitation sector from around the world, which can be used in the future to coordinate projects.



To conduct this study, I am asking you and other representatives from your organization to complete an online survey that should take approximately 30 to 45 minutes to complete by Monday, May 26, 2014. The study that I am asking you to participate in is a part of my doctoral dissertation at the University of Oklahoma.

By participating in this study, your organization will receive a network map visualizing your organization’s position in the network. Organizations that have participated in similar studies have presented the network visuals and findings to donors. The value of such information highlights an organization’s number of connections, the organization’s centrality in the network, and the quality of the connections to other organizations.

I understand 30 to 45 minutes is a significant amount of time to ask you to complete this survey. The survey allows you to start, stop, and come back. You may start the survey and simply close your browser to stop the survey. Your responses will be saved automatically. To return to the survey, simply copy and paste the below link into the URL address bar in the same browser and computer. The survey will begin where you stopped at previously. Do not click the "Restart" button as your responses will be erased.

If you are ready to complete the survey, please click on the below link. Please begin when you have time to focus on the questions.
Follow this link to the Survey:

oucas.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_eyOq3oBytBq60pn

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at.

EMAIL:Adam.Saffer@ou.edu

PHONE: 1+719-688-3378

SKYPE: Adam.Saffer

Thank you for your participation.

Adam Saffer, 
Ph.D. Candidate

University of Oklahoma