Stakeholder map
Do now
Build a stakeholder map identifying everyone affected by emergency room design and their needs.
- Hand in
- Stakeholder map with six or more ER stakeholders, their primary needs, relationship arrows, and a labeled conflict point.
- Where
- Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not.
You get two school days for every day you were absent, so this deadline moves with you.
In one ER visit, a scared patient, a nurse making split-second calls, a physician juggling ten cases, a worried family, an EMS crew that needs to leave, and an administrator watching the budget all want something different. Who are they all, and where do their needs collide?
Build a stakeholder map identifying everyone affected by emergency room design and their needs.
- • Your map names at least six distinct stakeholders with needs.
- • You can identify at least one conflict between stakeholder needs.
- List three different people who are affected by how an emergency room runs.
- Pick two of them and name one thing they would disagree about.
- 1List ER stakeholders: patients, nurses, physicians, families, EMS, administrators.
- 2For each stakeholder, note their primary need or goal.
- 3Mark where two stakeholders' needs conflict.
- 4Draw the map showing relationships and flows between stakeholders.
- 5Submit the stakeholder map as evidence.
What did this day actually feel like?
Stakeholder map
Everyone affected by the ER, not just patients. Nurses, triage, registration, cleaning staff, families in the waiting room, the ambulance crew who cannot leave until they hand off.
The ambulance handoff is the one nobody in my group had thought of, and it turns out to be a real bottleneck.
Turned in: notebook → Lab Notebooks folder
Fiction. There is no such student. The lessons, labs and dates are the real planned course; the student, the classmates and the conversations are invented.
The same day, drawn.
Everyone affected by the ER, not just patients. Nurses, triage, registration, cleaning staff, families in the waiting room, the ambulance crew who cannot leave until they hand off.
TEAMMATE
Nobody thought about the ambulance crew. They cannot leave until they hand off.
Fiction. There is no such student. The lessons, labs and dates are the real planned course; the student, the classmates and the conversations are invented.
🛠 Get unstuck · pick your level
🔑 Today's words · 5
Tap a word in the lesson for a plain meaning and one example. Recycled into next week's Do-Now.
Do the work · 80-minute blockfirst 5 min = hook▸
💡 Big idea: A stakeholder map makes invisible needs visible so that conflicting needs surface as constraints early, because a need you never named cannot be designed for and will break the system later.
- 0-10Introduce stakeholder mapping: what it is and why designers do it before brainstorming solutions
- 10-30Individual brainstorm: list all ER stakeholders and their primary needs
- 30-50Build the map: draw relationships and information flows between stakeholders
- 50-65Conflict identification: mark where two stakeholders' needs pull in opposite directions
- 65-77Submit the stakeholder map as evidence
- 77-80Exit check: name one conflict and explain why it matters for design
- • Every system serves multiple groups of people with different -- and sometimes conflicting -- goals.
- • Today you will map every person who has a stake in how the emergency room is designed.
- • A thorough stakeholder map is the foundation for every design decision you will make this week and next.
- • Human-centered design starts here: understand the people before you touch the .
- • Who the primary stakeholders in an emergency room are and what each group needs from the system.
- • How to represent stakeholder relationships and information flows in a visual map.
- • How conflicting stakeholder needs become the constraints that shape design criteria.
Triage, patient flow, stakeholder needs, systems constraints. Debate: speed vs equity. · Stakeholder map
Day 2 of this lesson. Open this exact section in myPLTW (find it in Clever, Microsoft sign-in), then do the work below.
Do this: Open Problem 1 in your myPLTW course shell and locate the stakeholder-analysis activity to review the expected map format.
Mark the stakeholder activity complete in your tracker after submitting your map.
The debate artifact from Monday is done; by end of today your stakeholder map with at least six stakeholders and one conflict should be submitted.
Stakeholder map showing at least six stakeholders, their needs, relationships, and one labeled conflict point.
The official PLTW activity stays inside myPLTW. If myPLTW will not open, use F1 and E1-E3 on this page to complete today's local evidence decision, then make up the official activity when access returns. Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not.
Check things off as you work, then submit. This tells Mr. Mendoza how you're doing so he can help the class. It does not replace turning in your producible through the submission route shown below.
Use the code Mr. Mendoza gave you, not your name. Saved on this device.
Triage, patient flow, stakeholder needs, systems constraints. Debate: speed vs equity. · Stakeholder map
Open Problem 1 in your myPLTW course shell and locate the stakeholder-analysis activity to review the expected map format.
The debate artifact from Monday is done; by end of today your stakeholder map with at least six stakeholders and one conflict should be submitted.
This is how Mr. Mendoza sees the class keeping pace with PLTW. Be honest, it only helps if it is accurate.
🎯 Build a stakeholder map identifying everyone affected by emergency room design and their needs.
- List ER stakeholders: patients, nurses, physicians, families, EMS, administrators.
- For each stakeholder, note their primary need or goal.
- Mark where two stakeholders' needs conflict.
- Draw the map showing relationships and flows between stakeholders.
- Submit the stakeholder map as evidence.
Notebook check: Stakeholder map with six or more ER stakeholders, their primary needs, relationship arrows, and a labeled conflict point.
Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not. Use the checklist just below and upload by 11:29 PM for full credit. Absent with an excused absence? You get two school days for every day you were absent, so this deadline moves with you.
| Task | Who |
|---|---|
| List ER stakeholders: patients, nurses, physicians, families, EMS, administrators. | _______ |
| For each stakeholder, note their primary need or goal. | _______ |
| Mark where two stakeholders' needs conflict. | _______ |
| Draw the map showing relationships and flows between stakeholders. | _______ |
| Submit the stakeholder map as evidence. | _______ |
Working solo? Put your own name in "Who" for every row.
- Your map names at least six distinct stakeholders with needs.
- You can identify at least one conflict between stakeholder needs.
- 1Do thisBuild a stakeholder map identifying everyone affected by emergency room design and their needs.
- 2Use this resource
- 3Submit thisNotebook check: Stakeholder map with six or more ER stakeholders, their primary needs, relationship arrows, and a labeled conflict point.
- 4Submit it here
- 1Open the drop folder.
- 2Sign in with your district Microsoft account, not a personal one.
- 3Upload the file, named Lastname_Firstname__Assignment Title.
- 4Your own upload panel says Uploaded with a green check: that is your receipt.
Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not. Biotechnology for Health (Biomedical Innovations) › Triage, patient flow, stakeholder needs, systems constraints. Debate: speed vs equity. › Notebook checkOpen the drop folder
Learn it · deck, reading, and vocabulary▸
The deck carries the prior idea forward, lets you inspect an analogy, maps the rule to biology, and ends with the same evidence decision and exit ticket used on this page.
Generated from this lesson's canonical data with a red-team citation check.
Every design forces tradeoffs, so naming them explicitly with evidence is the first honest move of the design process, because a solution that claims to help everyone equally is usually hiding who it costs.
A stakeholder map makes invisible needs visible so that conflicting needs surface as constraints early, because a need you never named cannot be designed for and will break the system later.
A bridge prototype is tested against a load limit, cost limit, and user need before revision.
- Which requirement is a criterion?
- Which limit is a constraint?
- What test result should trigger a redesign?
A design improves when evidence is compared with explicit criteria and constraints.
Biomedical designs also require , ethics, and biological validation beyond a physical prototype test.
- • Bridge requirements map to design criteria.
- • Load results map to E1-E3.
- • Revision maps to the next evidence-based iteration.
Driving question: In one ER visit, a scared patient, a nurse making split-second calls, a physician juggling ten cases, a worried family, an EMS crew that needs to leave, and an administrator watching the budget all want something different. Who are they all, and where do their needs collide?
What you already know: Every design forces tradeoffs, so naming them explicitly with evidence is the first honest move of the design process, because a solution that claims to help everyone equally is usually hiding who it costs.
New idea: A stakeholder map makes invisible needs visible so that conflicting needs surface as constraints early, because a need you never named cannot be designed for and will break the system later.
Visual or model: F1. F1. A lesson illustration or teaching diagram for Stakeholder map. Use it with E1-E3; it is a model or context image, not experimental or patient data. What to notice: Trace the labeled system, test, or design relationship and identify which evidence should trigger revision.
- Observe or measure the relevant feature in Stakeholder map.
- Organize the observation with a stable evidence ID.
- Apply this rule: A design improves when evidence is compared with explicit criteria and constraints.
- Choose the option the evidence supports and state the limit of the conclusion.
Real biomedical example: In one ER visit, a scared patient, a nurse making split-second calls, a physician juggling ten cases, a worried family, an EMS crew that needs to leave, and an administrator watching the budget all want something different. Who are they all, and where do their needs collide?
What the evidence supports: E1-E3 and F1 support the daily take-home when the response meets the stated success criteria.
What it cannot prove: The package does not support claims beyond this lesson's or any real patient diagnosis.
- • : Sorting patients by urgency so the sickest are treated first, a core emergency-care skill and a HOSA event topic.
- • stakeholder: Any person or group affected by a project or decision, such as users, patients, families, or the team building a solution.
- • system: A set of parts that work together as a connected whole, where a change in one part can affect the others, such as an or a designed device.
- • constraint: A limit or requirement that a design must work within, such as a budget, available time, materials, or rules.
- • : The ordered sequence of steps and handoffs used to carry a task from start to finish in a consistent, repeatable way.
- • inefficiency: A situation where a process wastes time, energy, or resources, producing less useful output than the input should allow.
Use it now: Choose one decision option. Cite E1 and E3, then explain how the rule connects the evidence to your choice.
Go further, optional: The source links below are optional enrichment. Every fact required for today's local evidence decision appears in this lesson package.
Who the primary stakeholders in an emergency room are and what each group needs from the system.
Limit: E1 supplies context or an observation; it does not by itself establish the explanation.
A stakeholder map makes invisible needs visible so that conflicting needs surface as constraints early, because a need you never named cannot be designed for and will break the system later.
Limit: E2 is a teaching statement or comparison and must be checked against the task evidence.
Your map names at least six distinct stakeholders with needs.
Limit: E3 supports only the result or product criterion named here; it cannot justify a broader clinical or causal claim.
PLTW-BFH-2027-02-04 · Simulated classroom evidence scenario
Your role: biomedical design team member
Decision: Your team must decide what the evidence from Stakeholder map supports before submitting the notebook record named on the lesson page.
- • Keep the current design.
- • Revise the feature that misses a criterion.
- • Run one more fair test before choosing.
Response: State one choice, cite at least two evidence IDs, explain the rule that connects them, and add one limitation. Submit it as the notebook record.
Claim ceiling: The supplied lesson evidence can support an observation, pattern, classroom mechanism, or next-step decision about Stakeholder map. It cannot by itself prove causation, establish a real clinical diagnosis, or justify action outside this classroom task.
Reason for review: Your team must decide what the evidence from Stakeholder map supports before submitting the notebook record named on the lesson page.
Context: You cannot design for people you have not named, so a stakeholder map turns invisible needs into visible constraints before a single design decision gets made.
- • T1: List ER stakeholders: patients, nurses, physicians, families, EMS, administrators.
- • T2: For each stakeholder, note their primary need or goal.
- • T3: Mark where two stakeholders' needs conflict.
- • T4: Draw the map showing relationships and flows between stakeholders.
- • T5: Submit the stakeholder map as evidence.
- • E1: Who the primary stakeholders in an emergency room are and what each group needs from the system.
- • E2: A stakeholder map makes invisible needs visible so that conflicting needs surface as constraints early, because a need you never named cannot be designed for and will break the system later.
- • E3: Your map names at least six distinct stakeholders with needs.
Measurements: No patient measurement is supplied unless it appears explicitly in E1-E3 or F1. Do not invent a value.
Figure finding: Teaching diagram for Stakeholder map. Trace the labeled system, test, or design relationship and identify which evidence should trigger revision. This is a teaching model, not patient or experimental data.
Uncertainty: This is a composite classroom scenario. Missing history, measurements, or confirmation tests remain unknown and limit the conclusion.
- • The solution must address the stated need in Stakeholder map.
- • The decision must be supported by E1-E3.
- • The final product must make the success criteria visible.
- • Complete the work inside the 80-minute block.
- • Use only supplied or teacher-approved materials and evidence.
- • Do not trade , accessibility, or privacy for speed.
- • and evidence quality: must pass before scoring other criteria.
- • User need and effectiveness: highest scored criterion.
- • Time, cost, and ease of use: compare only after and effectiveness pass.
Test evidence: For each option, record the E1-E3 result that supports or fails each criterion. Do not assign a score without a named observation.
- Version or option tested
- Criterion met or missed
- Evidence ID and result
- Revision made
- Reason for the revision
- Need and user
- Criteria and constraints
- Chosen option and evidence
- Test result
- Revision and reason
Students often think Students think the only stakeholder who matters in an ER is the patient, so a good design just needs to make patients happy.. The trap: The trap is that a design tuned only for the patient can break the people the patient depends on. If you speed up patient intake by skipping the EMS handoff, ambulances back up and future patients wait, because every stakeholder's need is wired to someone else's. Ignore one node and the whole system jams.
ER stakeholder map (notebook entry)
Stakeholders and their primary needs:
- Patients: to be seen quickly and treated safely.
- Triage nurses: clear information to sort patients by severity.
- ER physicians: time and space to treat the sickest first.
- Families: updates and a place to wait near their patient.
- EMS crews: a fast handoff so they can return to service.
- Administrators: safe care delivered within budget and staffing limits.
Relationships: EMS hands off to triage nurses, who route patients to physicians; families connect to patients and to nurses for updates; administrators set the staffing and budget that limit everyone.
Labeled conflict point: Administrators want to control staffing costs, while physicians want enough staff to treat the sickest immediately. That tension is a constraint my design will have to navigate.
(Map drawn with arrows showing flow from EMS to triage to treatment, with the cost-versus-staffing conflict circled.)
This model shows the level of evidence and organization needed to complete: A visual map naming at least six ER stakeholders with their needs, the relationships between them, and at least one point where their needs conflict.
- Date and label the entry.
- Record the procedure, observation, or design decision clearly.
- End with what the evidence means and the next step.
Keep the structure. Replace the question, facts, measurements, and evidence. Then recheck units, vocabulary, and whether the conclusion goes beyond the evidence.
Also due today: Submit the stakeholder map (photo or digital file) on the class site, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class by end of period.
- CER:
- Claim, Evidence, Reasoning: make a claim, back it with evidence, explain your reasoning.
- SOP:
- Standard Operating Procedure, the exact steps to follow (especially in a lab).
- Tracker:
- Your PLTW progress log where you record completed evidence.
- myPLTW:
- The PLTW course site where you do the online activities. Find it in Clever with your Microsoft sign-in, right next to Schoology.
Tap the speaker to hear a term. Add two of these to your notebook glossary with a definition and an example in your own words.
Pick just 2 or 3 words from today and make them yours: write what each one means in your own words, name the context clue or evidence that helped, then give one example from what you actually did in Stakeholder map. Try your own words first; the glossary is there if you get stuck. This is voluntary and counts as extra credit, so keep it short.
Saved on this device. Show Mr. Mendoza or add these to your notebook glossary to claim the extra credit.
Classroom documents for this lesson are posted in Schoology. Open Clever, then Schoology, and find each one by the name shown on its card.
Open this when the class reaches this activity and use it to complete the required lesson artifact.
Placement rationale
Matched Emergency room design and by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-1_Emergency-Room/1.1_Emergency-Room; keywords:er design. Score 138. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
Open this when the class reaches this activity and use it to complete the required lesson artifact.
Placement rationale
Matched Emergency room design and by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-1_Emergency-Room/1.1_Emergency-Room; keywords:triage, admission. Score 138. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
Use this as the classroom resource for Emergency room design and .
Placement rationale
Matched Emergency room design and by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-1_Emergency-Room/1.1_Emergency-Room; keywords:triage, er design. Score 138. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
How to get there: open Clever and sign in with your Microsoft (district) account. Both myPLTW and Schoology are in Clever. Do the activity in myPLTW. Turn the work in on this site or hand it to Mr. Mendoza, because that is the step that counts as submitted. Schoology only shows your report-card grade later.
Check yourself · commit, then reveal▸
Claim ceiling for this check: The supplied lesson evidence can support an observation, pattern, classroom mechanism, or next-step decision about Stakeholder map. It cannot by itself prove causation, establish a real clinical diagnosis, or justify action outside this classroom task.
Name one pair of ER stakeholders whose needs directly conflict, and state the conflict in one sentence.
Write an answer and pick a confidence to unlock the key.
Fast retrieval with instant answers, not the commit-then-reveal check above. Try each from memory first: write what you remember about the earlier units, then check yourself here.
Go further and get help▸
What today's skills lead to. These are real health-science careers this course builds toward. Tap one to see, on the US Department of Labor's O*NET site, what the job actually involves, what it pays, and how fast it is growing.
Today is individual work you can do from home: complete the same target above, then submit your Notebook check.
Open the drop folderTurn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not.
Class still runs. Complete the online activity above (it's self-guided). Need the concept taught without a teacher? Use this authoritative explainer:
CDC Emergency Department Data- CompleteEvery required part of the artifact is present, nothing left blank.
- AccurateThe science and the data are correct and match the evidence.
- Scientific reasoningYou explain your claim with evidence and reasoning (CER), not just an answer.
- Professional communicationClear, organized, labeled, and written the way a clinician or scientist would.
- SubmittedTurned in the right way, on the class site or handed to Mr. Mendoza in class, and confirmed. Not in Schoology: that is where the report-card grade appears later.