CANCON 2014-2017 Network Survey

WP2

Report

Part 2

2015

Executive summary

• Response rate 55 % OK (2014: 60 %)

• Networks are reasonably well connected: no separate groups, though more individuals are disconnected

• Most respondents from governmental, NGO’s and hospitals/health care providers

• Contacts between the respondents have increased by 46 % (in average 2 new contacts)

• Organizational types tend to communicate with similar organizations. Universities are the most marginal group. Research institutes and NGO's are still the most often reported contact.

• 32 % wished for more contact with their existing communication partners, last year 66 %: a decrease of 55 % !

• Email, newsletters and website are still the preferred methods for receiving WP2 information

Content

• Aim of the survey • Survey background • Existing communication • Future contact • WP2 information • Organizational types and communication patterns • Observations • Contact notes

• Suggested new contacts • Unsubscribed • Bounced

Aim of the survey

• Map the current communication network in cancer control in Europe

• Map the “wish list” network for communication partners in in cancer control in Europe

• Preferred communication channels in WP2 information dissemination

• 2nd round of survey

• Response time 23rd February - May 1st 2015

• 3 reminder messages

• 226 respondents

• Response rate 55 % (in 2014 response rate 60 %)

• Largest drop in respondents was in Netherlands and Belgium

• Respondents from universities increased

Survey background

22

11

10

5

6

6

6

5

6

6

2

5

3

4

2

3

5

2

2

1

2

3

1

0

1

2

2

1

0

1

0

0

57

25

14

13

13

11

11

11

10

10

9

9

7

5

5

5

5

4

4

4

3

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

N/A

Italy

Finland

EU

France

Netherlands

Norway

Slovenia

Latvia

Spain

Belgium

Germany

Lithuania

Ireland

Poland

Portugal

UK

Croatia

Estonia

Sweden

Austria

Bulgaria

Greece

Czech Republic

Luxemburg

Malta

Romania

Slovakia

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Cyprus

Hungary

Iceland

Message sent Responded

45%

11%

21%

6%

9% 7%

40%

10%

18%

4%

11%

17%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Organizational types

2015 2014

“With whom have you been directly in contact or communicated about cancer control across Europe? This includes person to person emails, face to face meetings, phone calls or other methods.”

Very important communication

Moderately important communication

Not important communication

No contact at all in this matter

Existing communication (“very important communication”) 2015

Finland

?

?

EU? ?

Existing communication (“very important communication”) change

2014 2015

Existing communication between organizational groups – little change

• On average, the respondents have been in contact with 7.5 other people (2014: seven other people)

• All actors have the most contact with their own organizational type (except universities, but the response rate for them was small)

• Research institutes and NGO's are still the most often reported contact. Governmental organizations are popular too.

• Overall, universities are still the most marginal group

“In order to function better in your work and make cancer control across Europe more effective, with whom would you like to have more contact with?”

Weekly contact

Monthly contact

Every three months

No additional contact needed

Future contact – weekly 2015

?

?

?

?

Future contact – weekly change

2014 2015

Future contact

• On average, the respondents felt the need for more contact with 3 other people (last year 8)

• 32 % wished for more contact with their existing communication partners (previous year 66 %)

Future contact between organizational types • All actors need more contact from their own

organizational type. Only exception is hospitals who need more contact with Research institutes.

• The most wanted additional contact is from the group NGO’s and Research Institutes (in 2014 "Other“).

• Governmental actors and NGO’s seek external communication the most

• Universities are the least contacted organizations.

“How would you prefer to receive information regarding the Work Package 2?”

Email Newsletter Twitter Facebook Website

“Weekly” “Monthly” “Every three months” “Not in use”

“How would you prefer to receive information regarding the Work Package 2?”

N=114

• Email and newsletter are still the most preferred media (thought newsletter is not as used)

• Preferred information frequency is between monthly and weekly

• Twitter and Facebook are not popular

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Email Newsletter Twitter Facebook Website

Weekly Monthly Every 3 months Not in use

90%

68%

13% 20%

50%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Preferred media*

28%

52%

20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Weekly Monthly Every 3 months

Info frequency*

*method for calculation different from 2014

Observations

• Networks are better connected than in 2014

• Need for more communication has decreased

• Coordinators are communication hubs

• Email and newsletters are well favored over social media.

• Universities are still in the margin