Level 6 Strategic

Yo u r road to success
Your road to success
LEVEL 6 STRATEGIC
STAKEHOLDER
RELATIONSHIPS
BE •
• A
OF
IDE
FICI
GU
L
STUDY
abeuk.com
A
© ABE 2017
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or

transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
photocopying and recording, or held within any information storage and
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or under
licence from the Copyright Licensing Agency Limited. Further details of such
licences (for reprographic reproduction) may be obtained from the Copyright
Licensing Agency Limited, Barnard’s Inn, 86 Fetter Lane, London EC4A 1EN.
This study guide is supplied for study by the original purchaser only and must
not be sold, lent, hired or given to anyone else.
Every attempt has been made to ensure the accuracy of this study guide;
however, no liability can be accepted for any loss incurred in any way
whatsoever by any person relying solely on the information contained within
it. The study guide has been produced solely for the purpose of professional
qualification study and should not be taken as definitive of the legal position.
Specific advice should always be obtained before undertaking any investment.
ABE cannot be held responsible for the content of any website mentioned in
this study guide.
ISBN: 978-1-911550-27-3
Copyright © ABE 2017

First published in 2017 by ABE
5th Floor, CI Tower, St. Georges Square, New Malden, Surrey, KT3 4TE, UK
www.abeuk.com
All facts are correct at time of publication.
Author: Caroline Foster

Reviewer: Sarah Pamphilion BA (Hons), Cert.Ed, A.Inst.BA
Editorial and project management by Haremi Ltd.

Typesetting by York Publishing Solutions Pvt. Ltd., INDIA
Every effort has been made to trace all copyright holders, but if any have
been inadvertently overlooked, the Publishers will be pleased to make the
necessary arrangements at the first opportunity.
The rights of Caroline Foster to be identified as the author of this work have
been asserted by her in accordance with the Copyright, Design and Patents
Act 1998.
The publishers gratefully acknowledge permission to reproduce the following

copyright material: p9 Pressmaster/Shutterstock.com; p21 Rawpixel/
Shutterstock.com; p36 Blend Images/Shutterstock.com; p45 Africa Studio/
Shutterstock.com; p52 Rawpixel/Shutterstock.com; p54 Matej Kastelic/
Shutterstock.com; p75 Vasily Smirnov/Shutterstock.com; p82 WAYHOME
studio/Shutterstock.com
ii © ABE
Contents
Using your study guide iv
Chapter 1 Strategic Influence of Stakeholders 2
1.1 The importance of stakeholder analysis4

1.2 The range of stakeholders, their strategic influence and potential impact17
Chapter 2 Engaging with stakeholders 32
2.1 Critically analysing the strategic relationship and how best to engage with stakeholders34
2.2 Prioritising resources for an engagement plan from a strategic perspective43
2.3 Reviewing the success of engagement plan objectives50
2.4 Recommend strategic changes53
Chapter 3 Communication with Stakeholders 60
3.1 Key components of the message that need to be communicated62

3.2 Justifying recommendations for communications that will engage the key
strategic stakeholders70
Chapter 4 Managing Stakeholder Resistance 78
4.1 Assessing the response to your engagement campaign 80

4.2 Practical ways of managing and resolving conflict85
Glossary
90
© ABE iii
Using your study guide
Welcome to the study guide for Level 6 Strategic Stakeholder Relationships, designed to support
those completing an ABE Level 6 Diploma.
Below is an overview of the elements of learning and related key capabilities (taken from the
published syllabus).
Element of Learning Key capabilities
Element 1: Strategic Influence of Ability to assess the strategic significance of an

Stakeholders organisation’s stakeholders in relation to a specific
project
Commercial acumen, stakeholder awareness
Element 2: Engaging with Stakeholders Ability to analyse a project’s stakeholders in

order to prioritise the use of resources for the
engagement plan
Stakeholder awareness, prioritisation, stakeholder

engagement strategies, resource and budgetary
planning
Element 3: Communication with Ability to develop relevant messaging and

Stakeholders media selection for each stage of a stakeholder
engagement plan
Targeted communications, campaign planning and

media selection
Element 4: Managing Stakeholder Ability to deal with the stakeholder resistance that
Resistance might be encountered during the implementation
of an engagement plan
Listening, negotiation, assertiveness, conflict

management, sensitivity to social diversity
This study guide follows the order of the syllabus, which is the basis for your studies. Each chapter
starts by listing the syllabus learning outcomes covered and the assessment criteria.
L6 descriptor:
Knowledge descriptor (the holder…) Skills descriptor (the holder can…)
• has advanced practical, conceptual or • determine, refine, adapt and use

technological knowledge and understanding appropriate methods and advanced
of a subject or field of work to create ways cognitive and practical skills to address
forward in contexts where there are many problems that have limited definition and
interacting factors; involve many interacting factors;
• understands different perspectives, • use and, where appropriate, design relevant
approaches or schools of thought and the research and development to inform actions;
theories that underpin them;
• evaluate actions, methods and results and
• can critically analyse, interpret and evaluate their implications.
complex information, concepts and ideas.
iv © ABE
The study guide includes a number of features to enhance your studies:
’Over to you’: activities for you to complete, using the space provided.
ase studies: realistic business scenarios to reinforce and test your understanding of what
C
you have read.
REVISION
‘Revision on the go’: use your phone camera to capture these key pieces of learning, then
on the go
save them on your phone to use as revision notes.
‘Need to know’: key pieces of information that are highlighted in the text.
‘Examples’: illustrating points made in the text to show how it works in practice.
Tables, graphs and charts: to bring data to life.
Reading list: identifying resources for further study, including Emerald articles (which will be
available in your online student resources).
Source/quotation information to cast further light on the subject from industry sources.
Highlighted words throughout denoting glossary terms located at the end of the
study guide.
Note
Website addresses current as at August 2017.
© ABE v
Chapter 1
Strategic Influence
of Stakeholders
Introduction
Business stakeholders include anyone who has an interest in what the organisation is doing or the
outcomes of its activities. This chapter will focus on stakeholder relationships that have a strategic
significance to the business, be they beneficial or potentially damaging. The difficulty about
stakeholder management is that stakeholders have different agendas, and in seeking to satisfy
one group you can alienate others. Stakeholder engagement seeks to build collaborative
relationships, which requires an integrated approach. By its nature, it has to be proactive rather
than reactive, and at its best it reflects long-term corporate culture rather than being done on a
project-by-project basis.
Learning outcome
On completing the chapter, you will be able to:
1 Critically assess an organisation’s stakeholders in order to determine their strategic influence
and impact in relation to a particular project.
Assessment criteria
1 Critically assess an organisation’s stakeholders in order to determine their strategic influence
and impact in relation to a particular project.
1.1 Critically discuss the importance of stakeholder analysis.
1.2 Analyse the range of stakeholders for their strategic influence and potential impact in
relation to specific projects.
© ABE
Level 6 Strategic
Stakeholder Relationships
Background
When it comes to sustainable organisation performance, stakeholders are an important part of
the equation. Every organisation needs to have the support of its stakeholders, but who is seen
as a stakeholder will be different depending on the context in which the organisation operates.
In today’s complex and globalised business environment, strategic stakeholder relationships
are even more important. Stakeholders can use their influence to support the organisation in
resolving issues it faces in responding to environmental pressures. Stakeholder management
recognises that there had been a shift in concept from shareholder to stakeholder, moving
beyond simple financial responsibilities of organisations to a wider concept relating to the
organisational system and strategic management.
The stakeholder notion is indeed a deceptively simple one.

It says that there are other groups to whom the corporation is responsible
in addition to stockholders: those groups who have a stake in
the actions of the corporation.
Freeman and Reed (1983)
Stakeholder impact can either affect or be affected by the achievement of an organisation’s

objectives, or it is a group or individual upon which the organisation depends for its survival.
Therefore, understanding the strategic influence of stakeholders is a key part of strategic
management.
In your current job role, or if you’re a full-time student, you may feel that you are not directly
impacted by stakeholders that are external to your organisation, but you will be involved in
relationships as a stakeholder on a day-to-day basis. For example, your family might have a stake
in your completion of this course or, if you are working, on your promotion prospects. As an author
I am affected by feedback you might provide in relation to this study guide as part of your studies,
which makes you one of my stakeholders. The device upon which you are reading this study guide
is made by an organisation, whose long-term prospects are in part affected by how often you
upgrade, use or recommend their device. As a customer you are regularly taking on the role of
stakeholder for a variety of businesses.
© ABE 3
Chapter 1 Strategic Influence of Stakeholders
Over to you
Activity 1: Identifying your stakeholders
Consider either your job in the workplace or your studies, as applicable. Make a list
of stakeholders who impact your work and/or studies. Expand the list to include
stakeholders who have an interest in the issues that your work touches upon.
1.1 The importance of stakeholder analysis

Stakeholder analysis involves identifying anyone who has an interest in what you or your
organisation is doing. The level of concern or interest that a stakeholder has with a situation, event
or project, and their power or ability to impose their will over people or events relating to that
situation is important to ascertain. Stakeholder analysis enables the organisation to assess the impact,
support and expected behaviour of stakeholders in regards to their buy in to a given situation. This
includes understanding the level of support or resistance that stakeholders may exhibit.
Methods of identifying stakeholders in relation to a project

There are numerous methods for identifying stakeholders. Common methods include:
Method Description Pros and Cons
Brainwriting A simultaneously individualistic and • simple

collective group activity involving
• everyone participates
everyone in the group generating ideas
on paper. Each participant writes their • focuses on the issue
own idea on a card, which is then shared • the quality depends on the
with a second participant who reads the formulation of the question
idea and adds their contribution before
passing it on. The result is a free flow of
ideas that builds with each turn.
4 © ABE
Strategic Influence of Stakeholders Chapter 1
Stakeholder A formal record that captures the details • can be time-consuming to

Lists / and analysis of your stakeholders including construct
Register any activities you have completed to
• requires active ownership
engage the stakeholder in the project.
The register includes the stakeholder’s: • needs to be updated as new
information is found
• name
• contact information • all the information is in one
place
• organisation
• easy to capture any changes
• expectations, interests and
in stakeholder priorities
requirements
• evaluation of impact on the project
• rating versus other stakeholders at
specific stages of the project
• type and frequency of communication
• reporting relationship
Scenarios Scenarios are descriptions of a sequence • useful for facilitating

and of events within a particular situation collaboration around
Storytelling or task but are generally generic and stakeholder management
avoid detailed descriptions. Stories are • identifies the value that
specific and give substance to plotlines stakeholder management
containing detailed characters, settings brings to the project team
and the drama of the situation.
• captures contextual detail
relating to both people and
function
• encourages cross-functional
working
Task-by-Task Documents themed relationships • breaks down the stakeholder

Assessment between project tasks and stakeholders. relationship for each task and
Clayton (2014) offers the following stage of the project
themes regarding task to help identify • highlights areas where
stakeholders: stakeholder management is
• those involved in making a task happen required
• interested parties, especially those • develops a risk profile for each
whose opinion counts task and each stakeholder
• stakeholders who need to be • maps the priority
informed or are affected by the task stakeholders at each stage of
• stakeholders impacting the progress the project lifecycle
of a task, positively or negatively • creates an analysis of
• stakeholder impacted by the outcome stakeholder needs and
of the task interests
• those who will evaluate the success of

the task
• risk of complaints if the task fails
© ABE 5
Horizon A systematic analysis of information • long-term strategic approach

Scanning relating to opportunities, threats, risks
• future-orientated
and issues to improve decision making
relating to stakeholder management. • identifies emerging trends
Encourages the development of new and their impact on the
insights regarding the identification and project
analysis of stakeholders and possible • helps to manage risks
changes which may emerge in the future.
• can be used to develop
contingency plans for
potential issues
Over to you
Activity 2: Brainwriting
• If you studying with a class, working in a group of about 6–8 people, sit in a circle
and hand out an A4 sheet of paper or card to each person in the group.
• Consider the following question: “How can you clearly identify what a stakeholder
wants from a project?”
• Write your response to the question at the top of your paper/card.
• When you have written your suggestion, hand the sheet of paper/card to the
person on your left.
• Read what has been written on the piece of paper/card that you were handed by
the person on your right. Write an entirely new suggestion below the last suggest
on the paper/card. When you have finished, hand it to the next person on the left.
• Continue with this process until you receive your original paper/card back.
• Discuss the ideas that have been gathered by your group.
6 © ABE
Methods of identifying stakeholders
Brainwriting
Horizon Stakeholder
scanning lists/register
Methods of
identifying
stakeholders
Task-by-task Scenarios and

assessment storytelling
Figure 1: Methods of identifying stakeholders Revision

on the go
Characteristics of stakeholders
Freeman (1984) offered two definitions of a stakeholder. The first is a narrow definition relating to
stakeholders whose relationship and impact is essential to the long-term survival and success of the
organisation. Although oversimplified because each stakeholder category could be broken down
further, Freeman (1984) identified six vital stakeholder categories in his narrow definition:
Owners Owners have a financial stake in the organisation. In return for their
investment in the organisation, there is an expectation that they will
receive a financial return on that investment.
Employees The employees stake their livelihood on the success of the organisation.
They exchange their skills for job security, a fair wage and promised
benefits for their labour and meaningful work.
Managers Managers have a similar stake to that of employees but in exchange

they are tasked with balancing the needs of competing stakeholders to
protect the long-term health of the organisation.
Suppliers Suppliers impact upon the quality and price of the organisation’s product
and/or through the supply of their products or services. This stake into
the input of the organisation’s operations is provided in return for a
responsive relationship between supplier and organisation, which in turn
ensures the long-term performance of the supplier.
© ABE 7
Customers Customers provide resources to the organisation in the form of financial

resource. They have a stake in the supply, availability and desired quality
of products and services that they require.
Local An immediate beneficiary of the presence of an organisation receiving

Community economic and social advantages in regards to tax receipts, employment
opportunities, and the accompanying perks associated with having
investment in an area. In return for this, there is an expectation that
the organisation will act as a good citizen, contributing positively to
infrastructure and services beyond the organisation’s facilities.
Table 1: Six vital stakeholder categories (Freeman, 1984) Revision

on the go
A stakeholder model of the organisation
Management
Local
Owners
community
The
Organisation
Suppliers Customers
Employees
Figure 2: A stakeholder model of the organisation (Freeman, 1984) Revision

on the go
8 © ABE
Wide definitions of stakeholders

Freeman (1984) offered a second definition of stakeholders which concentrates on the inclusion of
those who affect or are affected by the organisation in any way. For example, a factory in Beijing
contributes to global warming and climate change, which may result in the melting of the Arctic ice
shelf that in turn could lead to flooding in coastal areas across the globe. Therefore, in Freeman’s
wider definition, everyone who lives in New York who could be affected by rising sea levels is a
stakeholder in the Beijing factory.
Although stakeholder theory presents the exchange as a transaction, Freeman and Moutchnik
(2013) argue that the focus is actually on the interdependency between stakeholders and the
organisation. The emphasis is, therefore, on the relationship and co-operation between the
organisation, its owners, employees, managers, suppliers, customers and local communities. The
outcome of this co-operative relationship transcends finance, and exists to align the organisation
and its stakeholders in the creation of mutual value and trade for each other. Consequently,
stakeholder theory is founded in a belief that most people in the system are fundamentally good
and our capitalist economic system is one that values creation and social co-operation.
Stakeholders are those who have a stake in an organisation’s

process and or outputs.
Lewis (2011)
Adhering to the wider definition of stakeholder, Lewis (2011) highlights that stakes might be,
but are not limited to, financial, environmental, physical or symbolic. In her stakeholder theory
perspective, she emphasises the role of the strategic communication and interaction between
stakeholders within a change context. Lewis (2011) offers a communication model of change,
which focuses on the social construction of the organisation as a result of communication between
internal and external stakeholders. In this model, Lewis (2011) highlights four specific roles that a
stakeholder might play in an organisation’s change process, which include:
• opinion leader, influencing others;
• connectors, acting as a bridge between groups of stakeholders;
• counselors, providing support;
• journalists, gathering and reporting information during the change process and offering an
interpretation of events.
The communication model of change offers an overview of the strategic dimensions of

communication with stakeholders that can fulfill, deny or be used in the negotiation of stakes with
and between stakeholders during a complex change process.
CASE STUDY: Engaging Opinion Leaders

Julia engages change agents
As a learning and development advisor for an energy provider,
Julia was responsible for designing a customer service excellence
programme, which was aiming to improve the customer
satisfaction scores for the organisation. The programme was
high-profile and was being sponsored by the finance director.
© ABE 9
One of the objectives of the programme was to break down silos between different parts of the
organisation, removing communication barriers between teams and increasing understanding of
the roles each function played in delivering excellent customer service.
Co-opting opinion leaders

In order to gain buy in for the programme from the employees who would attend the
customer service excellence training, Julia sought out key opinion leaders in each of the
functions being trained. The opinion leaders were invited to be part of the design team for
the programme in order to increase their personal stake in its successful implementation and
delivery. This involved several meetings where the opinion leaders were able to contribute
their ideas regarding what content should be included in the training and how that content
should be delivered.
Influencing others during the design process

A surprise benefit of having the opinion leaders in the design team was that much of the design
process was made easier because of their influence within the organisation. For example, the
design team organised a video to be recorded of a particular scenario demonstrating the
difference between making a good impression and making a bad impression on a customer’s
site. This involved influencing marketing to record and edit the video on behalf of the training
and getting a group of employees to act in the film.
Following a design decision to include a competitive element across the entire training
programme, it became possible to offer the team that won a prize of tickets to a major event in
London, and budget secured for travel, hotel and food expenses. This is something that would
never have been possible previously.
Attendance
The opinion leaders worked hard as change agents for the customer service excellence
programme, ensuring that managers released employees to attend the training, removing
many of the logistical issues usually associated with an organisation-wide training programme.
They also influenced employees who were invited to the training to turn up, resulting in a 97%
attendance rate.
Embedding the training

Even after the training was delivered, the opinion leaders continued to influence the successful
transfer of training back in the workplace. They embedded the training by providing regular
customer service excellence seminars in team meetings to drive home the key learning points.
The support of the marketing department was also secured to produce a regular newsletter that
captured stories of where the training had been used in the field.
The result
The target for customer satisfaction set by the board of directors was to increase net promoter
scores from 20% to 35%. Within four weeks of the training programme being delivered, net
promoter scores had increased to 60%.
10 © ABE
Specific stakeholder roles
Connectors Counselors
Opinion leader Journalists

Specific stakeholder
roles –
communication
model of
change
Figure 3: Specific stakeholder roles (Lewis, 2011) Revision

on the go
Characteristics of stakeholders
The “Big Six”

Clayton (2014) highlights that some stakeholder characteristics will have a greater influence on
the level of priority you assign to a stakeholder. However, he identifies the “Big Six” stakeholder
characteristics as:
Interest This relates to activities of the organisation or subjects that concern a

stakeholder and directly affect their decision making. Examples include
the amount of financial leverage that an organisation has, the political
manoeuvring of different parties, ethical and moral responsibilities,
commercial concerns, adherence to regulatory regimes and care for the
environment or security.
Needs Needs are connected to who the stakeholder is rather than stakeholder
activities or decisions they have made. For example, an employee
who is a parent of small children may need flexibility of working hours
to accommodate their family, or an auditor may need access to all
information such as records and documents relating to the review.
© ABE 11
Attitude Attitude is concerned with how stakeholders feel or think about a

particular activity of the organisation or subject, and results in either
supportive or resistive behaviours. For example, if a director of an
organisation believes that a particular training course is essential for the
long-term health of the organisation, they will ensure a budget is allocated
to that activity. If the local government officials believe that the opening
of a particular organisation in their community is not desirable, they can
refuse planning permission or the necessary licences required for the
organisation to trade locally.
Impact Stakeholders can impact the outcomes of a project or the operations of

the organisation positively or negatively. Ignoring a stakeholder or failing
to meet a stakeholder’s requirements can be very costly. For example,
failing to pay a supplier’s invoices on time may result in them refusing to
supply raw materials that are essential to the production of a product.
However, a supplier might go the extra mile to fulfil an urgent order
because the organisation has nurtured a long-term mutually beneficial
relationship over time.
Power A stakeholder’s ability to take action in relation to the organisation’s

activities or interests can have help a project succeed or threaten the
survival of an organisation. For example, individual employees on their
own have limited power, but if they organise in the form of a trade union,
their bargaining power increases significantly as they can choose to bring
the organisation to a standstill through strike action, or slow down an
organisation’s business by choosing to work to rule.
Influence Influence can be subtle or overt but different stakeholders have the
capacity to affect, positively or negatively, the behaviour of others or
something in relation to the organisation activities. For example, the
owners of the business will have a significant influence over the direction,
purpose and strategy of the organisation. Managers will influence how the
strategy is interpreted and how successfully it is implemented.
Table 2: The “Big Six” stakeholder characteristics (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Over to you
Activity 3: Stakeholder assessment
Assess someone who has been a leader of a group or club you have been involved in
from the perspective of their strengths and weaknesses as a stakeholder in your group.
Consider the following questions:
• Who is the leader?
• Who is the leader connected with?
• What resources does the leader command?
• What do you want from the leader?
12 © ABE
• What information does the leader want from us?

• What does the leader want?
• How does the leader like to receive information?
• What does the leader like to communicate?
• What risks does the leader pose to your activities?
• What opportunities does the leader offer to your activities?
Adapted from Clayton (2014: p. 55)
The “Big Six”
Needs Interest
Influence Attitude
Power Impact
Figure 4: The “Big Six” (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
© ABE 13
Stakeholder interest
Clayton (2014) offers a mnemonic for remembering the eight different sources of stakeholder
interest – SPECTRES:
Social This examines the social impact and community effects of a project.
For example, the development of a dementia garden by a housing
association has a positive effect on the welfare of dementia sufferers,
enabling them to remain living at home for longer.
Political Organisational activities can have political ramifications, both in terms of

internal organisational politics, but also in the wider political sphere. For
example, political pressure was applied from European governments on
global corporations, such as Starbucks and Amazon, to pay more tax at a
country level when it was found that their tax arrangements were helping
them to avoid paying national taxes.
Economic Stakeholders who provide funding, whether in regards to capital

investment, grants or budgets, will have an interest in your project.
Those stakeholders who are affected economically by project outcomes
will also have an interest. For example, the International Olympic
Committee (IOC) receives its income from global sponsors and selling
the media rights to the Olympic games. This income is distributed to
host nations, national delegations and international sports federations.
Therefore, the IOC has an interest in maintaining the reputation of the
Olympic games. In the run up to the Rio 2016 Olympic Games, there was
a huge emphasis from the IOC on the social role of athletes, specifically
in relation to honouring clean athletes and the exclusion of athletes who
were under suspicion of doping offences.
Commercial Stakeholders who have a commercial interest are those people and
organisations in the organisation’s supply chain and others who are
impacted commercially by your activities. For example, a supplier will
become concerned if your organisation has made a decision to stop
making a particular product range for which they supply raw materials,
since that decision will reduce their own sales.
Technological This relates specifically to the technology used within an organisational

system and the interest a stakeholder has in regards to who will have
responsibility for evaluating, supplying, configuring and maintaining
the technology used. For example, in 2013 the Kenyan Government
established the ICT Authority had an interest in increasing Kenya’s
recognition as an IT hub and was actively supporting organisations in the
tech industry who are focused on developing East Africa’s IT ecosystem.
Regulatory All organisations are subject to some level of regulatory regime and
stakeholders will be aware of what your regulators do and say and the
impact that will have on their interests in your organisation’s activities.
For example, in 2015 the French Parliament adopted the Energy
Transition law, which sought to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. This would have had a direct impact on any stakeholder
interest in coal-fired power stations, which will be affected by the
targeted 30% reduction in fossil fuel consumption.
14 © ABE
Environmental Various stakeholders will have an interest in how your project might
affect the environment, and you need to understand which stakeholders
particularly care about the impact your project or organisation is having
on it. For example, the Prime Minister of Sweden set out a target for
100% of Swedish energy consumption to come from renewable energy.
However, competing interests negotiated to save nuclear power and the
target is now for Sweden to be completely fossil-free by 2040.
Security The safety or security source of stakeholder power is focused on who

will be affected by your project, especially in regards to fears about
their safety and security. For example, the decisions being made by
governments in the European Union over the opening of their borders
since the beginning of the migration crisis are directly linked to citizens’
fears of migrants settling in their country. This citizen stakeholder interest
therefore directly impacts upon the work of aid agencies and refugee
support organisations such as the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), who are
working with refugees escaping wars in Yemen and Somalia.
Table 3: SPECTRES (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Over to you
Activity 4: Mapping stakeholder interests (SPECTRES)
Consider a project that you are working on, or have worked on in the past. Complete the
SPECTRES table below to map the stakeholder interests relating to the project.
Social
Political
Economic
Commercial
Technological
© ABE 15
Regulatory
Environmental
Security
Stakeholder interests: SPECTRES
Social
Environmental Political
SPECTRES
Economic
Regulatory
Technological Commercial
Figure 5: Stakeholder interests: SPECTRES (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
16 © ABE
1.2 The range of stakeholders, their strategic

influence and potential impact
The development of the objectives for a project or the organisation’s strategy will be shaped by how
much is understood about the key stakeholders. It is important that you can identify the impact
and the influence different stakeholders use to determine the possible threat they pose to the
successful completion of the project, or opportunities for support that a stakeholder could offer.
The strategic influence and potential impact of different stakeholders

Stakeholder mapping can help you to understand and prioritise the different demands of the
various stakeholder groups who are affected by, or affect the project. It provides a structured
analysis of stakeholder expectations and the likelihood of the stakeholder choosing to exercise the
power they have in relation to the project.
The Mendelow Matrix (Mendelow, 1981) offers a useful mapping tool to help identify the
strategic influence and potential impact that different stakeholders have on a project. The matrix
has two dimensions:
The level of interest in Determines whether the stakeholder will likely choose to
the project exercise their power. For example, an owner with a high level of
investment in an organisation will have a high level of interest.
The level of influence/ Determines whether the stakeholder has the influence/power
power over the project to impact the project. For example, a key customer could
choose to cancel an order which would negatively impact the
organisation’s turnover.
Table 4: The Medelow Matrix (Mendelow, 1981) Revision

on the go
NEED TO KNOW: Mendelow Matrix
HIGH POWER, HIGH POWER,

Influence/Power
of stakeholders
LOW INTEREST HIGH INTEREST
LOW POWER, LOW POWER,

Interest of stakeholders
Figure 6: The Mendelow Matrix (Mendelow, 1987) Revision

on the go
© ABE 17
The matrix enables you to plot the position of the stakeholder group, and, in doing so, anticipate
how likely it is that stakeholder resistance will derail the success of the project. The matrix also
offers recommendations of what policies can be enacted to improve the chances of stakeholder
acceptance of the project.
The stakeholder group can take one of four positions in the matrix, based on their level of interest
and power or influence:
Low power, Stakeholders in this quadrant are likely to offer little resistance in relation
low interest to the project because their lack of interest and low influence/power means
they are susceptible to influence.
Low power, This stakeholder group have a high level of interest in the project. Although
high interest they have little personal power, they may seek to increase their power by
joining other stakeholder groups because of their interest level.
High power, Although these stakeholders may show little interest in the project, they are
low interest a group with a lot of influence/power.
High power, This group of stakeholders exhibit both high influence/power and high
high interest interest. They are also capable of opposing your project actions effectively
and are able to drive change if they desire it.
Table 5: Stakeholder groups in the Mendelow Matrix Revision

on the go
Over to you
Activity 5: Stakeholder mapping
In Activity 1, you developed a list of stakeholders. Revisit the list and add any
stakeholders you may have missed. Once you have made your list, complete the
below Mendelow matrix based on their influence/power and interest in relation to
your work or studies.

Influence/Power
of stakeholders

18 © ABE
Apex stakeholders
Clayton noted that it was strategic influence (not power) that dominated the impact that a group of
stakeholders could have on a project or organisation.
A small number of stakeholders can influence many other stakeholders,

yet seem themselves to be very little influenced by other stakeholders
around them. They are therefore hard to influence, but can create a lot
of leverage if you can do so.
Clayton (2014)
Clayton labelled this small group as apex stakeholders, who can influence many other
stakeholders but are little influenced by others. Although apex stakeholders may not always be
present, when they are they are hard to influence. However, a lot of attention must be given to
them in the hope that you can influence many others through them.
Clayton went on to describe three types of apex stakeholder:

• Apex supporters – those apex stakeholders who had the potential to act as advocates and
become powerful allies of the project or organisation.
• Apex agonists – are the opposite of apex supporters, and pose a significant threat as an
individual who has the potential to become a dangerous enemy.
• Apex neutrals – this final form of apex stakeholder can be persuaded to be either a support
or agonist.
Apex stakeholders
Apex
This diagram shows the flow of influence from the apex stakeholder to many other
stakeholders and stakeholder groups. Notice that the flow of influence is one way, and
that the apex stakeholder is not influenced by anyone else.
Figure 7: Apex stakeholders (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
© ABE 19
Over to you
Activity 6: Identifying apex stakeholders
Revisit your revised list of stakeholders from Activity 5. List the apex stakeholders below.
Clayton (2014) also identified four other forms of stakeholders:
Basal stakeholders Those who have changeable views and are easily influenced by
others. They are not particularly reliable and have little impact,
unless they have control of a crucial resource.
Neutral stakeholders A stakeholder who is undecided about an issue.
Primary stakeholders A primary stakeholder is readily influenced, but they are also
good at influencing others and can therefore have a significant
impact on perceptions. They may be influenced from someone
other than the apex stakeholder.
Secondary Are important to the project and are readily influenced by both
stakeholders apex and primary stakeholders. They may also have influence
over others but in a limited way.
Table 6: Forms of stakeholders (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Basal, apex, primary and secondary stakeholders
P S S S S
B B B
B B B B
B
B
B
B B
Figure 8: Apex, primary, secondary and basal stakeholders (Clayton, 2014) Revision
on the go
20 © ABE
CASE STUDY: Primary stakeholder

Shané manages her new manager as a
primary stakeholder
Shané had been working with her new manager for several
months and was getting frustrated by the way in which he
would constantly change direction. In team meetings and in
one-to-one discussions, her manager would agree a set of
activities that needed to be completed. Shané would begin
work on the activities only to be told at the next meeting
that the plan had changed, meaning that she had wasted
time and effort.
A confusing trip to Paris

A few months ago, Shané had been sent to Paris to work with her counterparts in the marketing
department on an important, multi-country product launch. It was high-profile and the budget
was significant. Shané’s manager had set a specific goal of a unified European approach rather
than the normal approach of each country creating their own campaign. After several days of
work, Shané had secured an agreed unified approach to the campaign and an agreed project
plan was developed. However, on her return from the trip, her manager informed her that the
desired approach was for each country to create its own campaign.
A bleak prospect
Shané felt annoyed at being put in a situation where her line manager was causing her to waste
time. On a professional level, she was embarrassed at finding herself in a situation where,
having persuaded everyone that a unified campaign was the best thing for the organisation, she
was required to backtrack and deliver country-specific campaigns. She also began to receive
some off-the-record feedback from colleagues that her manager was impacting upon the
perception other people and departments had in regards to her competence and the viability of
the project.
Identifying what was happening

Working through the situation with her coach, Shané realised that the times her manager
had seemingly changed his mind were directly after he had met with someone else who had
a stake in the projects she was working on. Others were influencing her manager and as a
consequence the decisions he was making about her work would change depending on the
person he had last spoken to. Her manager was also negatively influencing the perception
others had of her, positioning her lack of progress on her lack of capability to do the job.
Urgent action was needed to get things back on track.
Co-opting an apex stakeholder

Fortunately for Shané, she had a good working relationship with the operations manager,
who was an apex supporter. A close ally and someone with a significant stake in her work
projects, he agreed to be Shané’s advocate. Shané could co-opt the operations manager
whenever her manager was making decisions which were derailing progress, ensuring he
would also influence those influencing her manager to get everyone aligned. The operations
manager took the opportunity to highlight the skills and knowledge Shané demonstrated in
the execution of her duties, which in turn meant that her manager was speaking about her
positively to other people.
© ABE 21
Over to you
Activity 7: Label your stakeholders
Building on the work you completed for Activity 6, group your stakeholders into the final
three categories: primary, secondary or basal.
Primary stakeholders Secondary stakeholders Basal stakeholders
Diffusion of innovation
Rogers (2003), in his book The Diffusion of Innovations, explores how new ideas are adopted and
spread between many people to become known an as a consequence adopted among the wider
population. Normally associated with technology, the model can explain the consequences of
change that lead to stakeholders supporting or rejecting a particular project or strategy.
Consequences can be classified as desirable versus undesirable

(functional or dysfunctional), direct versus indirect (immediate result
or result of the immediate result), and anticipated versus unanticipated
(recognized and intended or not).
Rogers (2003)
22 © ABE
Rogers (2003) also focused on the importance of communication channels, highlighting the
importance of interpersonal communication and relationship channels in achieving mutual
understanding, as well as successfully navigating the decision-making process to persuade
individuals to adopt an innovation. There are five stages to the adoption process, which
include:
Knowledge In this stage, the individual finds out that the innovation exists
and begins the process of discovery. The purpose is to develop an
awareness of the innovation in order to explain how and why it works.
In regards to stakeholder management, the essential part of this phase
is to provide the stakeholder with a how and why experience of your
project plans.
Persuasion The persuasion stage occurs when the individual begins to shape
either a positive or negative attitude toward the innovation. The
attitude adopted at this stage does not determine whether the
individual will ever adopt the innovation. This stage is focused on
how the individual feels about the innovation. From a stakeholder
perspective, the outcome of the process will depend on uncertainty
and the influence of others.
Decision It is at the decision stage that the individual will make a choice
on whether to adopt or reject the innovation. From a stakeholder
perspective, it is important to note that group influence can make this a
collective decision rather than a personal one.
Implementation In this stage, the innovation is put into practice, although this may
be affected if uncertainty levels are high. Once implemented, the
innovation-decision process is complete. At the implementation stage,
it is usual for reinvention to occur, such as the increase in smartphones
following the launch of the iPhone. For stakeholder management, it is
important to support the stakeholder in reducing their uncertainty.
Confirmation The final stage of the innovation-decision process involves the

individual seeking confirmation that the decision they have made is
supported. Conflicting messages at this stage could lead to decisions
being reversed. For example, the faltering 3D market, which is
being superseded by VR technology. It is at this stage in stakeholder
management that support for your project and the attitude of the
stakeholder might be discontinued.
Table 7: The five stages of the adoption process (Rogers, 2003) Revision
on the go
© ABE 23
Five stages in the innovation – decision process
Confirmation
Implementation
Decision
Persuasion
Knowledge
Figure 9: Communication channels (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Model of the diffusion of innovations

Rogers (2003) categorised members of the social system as adopters of innovations based upon
their innovativeness, introducing five classifications:
Innovators Individuals who are open to new ideas and the uncertainty that comes
with them. Often gatekeepers with complex technical knowledge,
innovators bring innovation from outside the system, therefore they can
be regarded with suspicion by others.
Early adopters Early adopters are likely to hold a leadership role and work within the
boundaries of the system. They are role models and their attitude toward
an innovation is important. Their adoption of a new innovation will
decrease uncertainty for the rest of the population.
Early majority Although lacking the leadership role of early adopters, the early majority
still have interpersonal networks and connections which are important for
in the innovation-diffusion process.
Late majority The late majority wait until the majority of their peers have adopted an
innovation before peer pressure and economic necessity compel them to
adopt the innovation.
24 © ABE
Laggards These traditionalists both lack awareness and are sceptical about
innovations. Laggards tend to occupy a small cohesive group within
the system. The lack of economic resources and leadership roles within
the group means that they take a long time to make a decision about
innovation.
Table 8: Classifications of members of the social system (Rogers, 2003) Revision

on the go
Over to you
Activity 8: Strengths of weaknesses of adopters
Watch the video “Diffusion of innovations”: www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yONaekStnw

If possible, discuss in pairs each type of adopter’s role in shaping events and change within
an organisational context of your choosing. Consider the opportunities and threats that
each classification could have if they were stakeholders on a project you were working on.
How might this influence your approach to managing different stakeholder groups?
Classification Opportunities Threats
Innovators
Early adopters
Early majority
Late majority
Laggards
© ABE 25
Links to stakeholder management

There are many social, organisational and personal factors which contribute to the adopter category
that an individual would be classified as. It is also worth noting that an individual’s classification
may differ depending on the innovation under consideration. Someone may be an early adopter
of new camera technology if they are an enthusiast, yet may be a laggard when it comes to the
latest mobile phone or computer technology. In this respect, understanding the interests of your
stakeholders will determine whether they are earlier supporters of your project. What is significant
about the diffusion of innovation processes is the influence of early adopters as opinion leaders in
the wider system, and the speed at which the early majority and late majority adopt an innovation
will determine the momentum an innovation has. In the same way, opinion leaders and momentum
will determine whether your project is ultimately supported or rejected by your stakeholders.
The distribution of adopters

Number of adopters
Innovators
Early Early Late

Adopters Majority Majority Laggards
2.5% 13.5% 34% 34% 16%
Time
Figure 10: The distribution of adopters (Rogers, 2003) Revision

on the go
Apex stakeholder strategy

The independence of apex stakeholder means that it is not simply a case of being persuasive,
but developing trust and taking time to understanding their ideas and concerns. Incorporating
apex stakeholder contributions and supporting them when they show enthusiasm for your project
requires a delicate balancing act to avoid offence.
Sociograms
Clayton (2014) suggests that sociograms, sometimes called a “social network diagram”, are
a simple way to map relationships between stakeholders. The sociogram uses nodes to depict
the different stakeholders and lines to represent the connections between stakeholders. The
proximity of the nodes is used to represent the influence of different stakeholders within the
organisation. Additional information such as the direction of influence can be included through
the use of arrows; the thickness of the arrow can be used to indicate greater levels of influence
and power. Colours and symbols can also introduce notions of stakeholder authority, power,
support or opposition towards a project.
26 © ABE
Over to you
Activity 9: Your social network diagram
Referring once again to the list of stakeholders you made in Activity 7, draw a map of
relationships between the stakeholders using the sociogram tool.
For example:
Carrie
H&L
Foster
Swan
PH
YD JB
ETG L&Q
HA
Level of
influence JG
Support
Oppose BL
Direction of
influence
Strength of
relationship NAZ
This sociogram depicts the relationship I have with some of my clients.
I work for H&L and therefore they influence me in regards to opportunities I have for work.
Both H&L and I have a relationship with JB, who we influence as a supporter of our work.
In turn, JB is a positive influence on L&Q in regards to the work we do, which in turn has an
influence on ETG.
H&L have a strong mutual relationship with YD, who is the managing director for ETG, and
therefore has a greater influence over ETG than it has over her in regards to decision making
about the work that H&L and I do. I sometimes meet with YD as H&L’s resident “expert”, and
therefore influence decisions that YD makes.
PH, L&Q and Swan are a positive influence on HA. Both ETG and HA have an influence on
JG, who sometimes is a barrier when decisions are being made about possible work that I
do. I influence PH, who has a mutual relationship with NAZ. PH has a positive influence on
BL, who can sometimes negatively impact the work I do. BL has a stronger relationship with
NAZ than I do, which means I have to use my relationship with PH and direct relationship
with NAZ to work against the negative influence of BL to get things done.
© ABE 27
Inter-relationship mapping of stakeholders

Clayton (2014) introduces the possibility of visualising how stakeholders are assembled around
project issues. An inter-relationship map is useful to examine the independent themes relating to
project issues, which enables you to cluster stakeholders who have issues in common.
28 © ABE
Issue inter-relationship map
A F
2
B 1
G
M
C D
3
4
H L
E K
J
Figure 11: Issue inter-relationship map (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Contractograms
Clayton (2014) recognised that the complexities of the modern workplace, with myriad contractors,
suppliers and subcontractors working on a large project, can lead to confusion as to who is
contracted to whom. A contractogram is a form of sociogram that captures the relationships of
those who are contracted to one another. The direction of the arrow captures who is providing the
goods or services to who. Where you do not have knowledge of a contractual relationship, a dotted
line can be used to indicate where you believe one exists; formal joint ventures can represent
ownership by the use of a strong single line.
Contractogram
E F
C
B D G
A
Service contractor Mobile services
H J
Enterprise ICT Comissioning Operational

contractor organisation technology contractor
Data centre Communications

director
Contract Joint venture

Inferred contract Subcontractor
Ownership Inferred subcontractor
Figure 12: Contractogram (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
© ABE 29
Over to you
Activity 10: Investigating who is contracted to whom
If you’re studying with a class, work in a group of 4–6 and research a large infrastructure
project in your local community.
1 Develop a list of the suppliers, contractors and subcontractors working on the
project, using the internet to find evidence of contracts awarded.
2 Once you have completed the list, develop a contractogram to show the
contractual and supply relationships on the infrastructure project.
Reading list
• Arun Abraham Elias, (2016) “Stakeholder analysis for Lean Six Sigma project management”,
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 7 Issue: 4, pp. 394. (This article will be available
in your online student resources.)
• Emerson Wagner Mainardes, Helena Alves, Mário Raposo, (2012) “A model for stakeholder
classification and stakeholder relationships”, Management Decision, Vol. 50 Issue: 10,
pp. 1861–1879. (This article will be available in your online student resources.)
• Heiko Spitzeck, Erik G. Hansen, (2010) “Stakeholder governance: how stakeholders influence
corporate decision-making”, Corporate Governance: The international journal of business
in society, Vol. 10 Issue: 4, pp. 378–391. (This article will be available in your online student
resources.)
• Paul Walley, (2013) “Stakeholder management: the sociodynamic approach”, International
Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 6 Issue: 3, pp. 485–504. (This article will be
available in your online student resources.)
30 © ABE
Summary
Stakeholders have a significant impact on the performance of an organisation and/or project. They
can be supportive, giving access to scarce resources, or they can be resistive, creating barriers and
blocking progress. This can have serious consequences as to the success of any endeavour. It is
important that you are able to understand who your stakeholders are, their interest in the project
you are working on and the potential impact they can have, through an analysis of the influence
and power that they hold. Using the tools provided in this chapter, it is possible to identify and
begin the analysis of relevant strategic stakeholder relationships. The purpose of such analysis is to
recognise the interpersonal communication and relationship channels that will need to be used to
achieve mutual understanding and successfully navigate the decision-making process, encouraging
support from early adopters and taking advantage of a positive diffusion of innovation processes to
co-opt different types of stakeholders.
© ABE 31
Chapter 2
Engaging with Stakeholders
Introduction
This chapter will take you through a step-by-step process that will enable you to identify, analyse
and prioritise an organisation’s stakeholders from a strategic perspective, and then to plan,
implement and review the stakeholder engagement process in relation to a specific project. You will
explore the concepts of power and influence, deploying a range of stakeholder engagement
strategies including relationship management techniques, strategic communications, personal
leadership, influence and lobbying.
Engaging effectively with stakeholders needs to be at the heart of strategic management, not an
optional extra; without it many strategies fail and, in extreme situations, cost organisations dearly
through reputational damage. It does take resources to engage effectively with stakeholders, but
the benefits are usually more than worth the investment.
Learning outcome
2 Critically review the process of engaging with stakeholders and develop an appropriate
engagement plan.
Assessment criteria
2 Critically review the process of engaging with stakeholders and develop an appropriate
engagement plan.
2.1 Critically analyse the strategic relationships that an organisation has with the stakeholders
of a particular project in order to decide how best to engage with them.
2.2 Prioritise the use of resources for an engagement plan in relation to a particular project
from a strategic perspective.
2.3 Review the success of the engagement plan objectives including from the perspective of
the organisation and its stakeholders.
2.4 Recommend strategic changes that could be made in order to respond to stakeholder
perceptions and/or adapt to changing conditions.
© ABE
Level 6 Strategic
Background
Engaging strategic stakeholders and developing relationships with them does not happen by
accident. Engaging with stakeholders requires that you develop a framework in which you analyse
the strategic relationships that the organisation has, and develop a plan as to how best to engage
with them. Due to the complex and varied nature of the stakeholders that are involved at any
one time in the delivery of a project or organisation strategy, and the scarcity of resource, it will
be necessary for you to prioritise the resources you have available to set strategic objectives and
deliver a strategic engagement plan.
However, these plans cannot remain static, but must be monitored and remain responsive to
changing stakeholder perception and be able to adapt to changing conditions.
Stakeholders are about the business, and business is about stakeholders.

John Kay (1997)
There are a number of tools available to support the analysis of stakeholder relationships, and
although these instruments are useful in providing information about the relational position of the
stakeholders you have identified, it is essential that something is done with this information. The
merit of developing an engagement plan is that organisational effort can be given to engaging the
right stakeholders in the right way at the right time.
Over to you
Activity 1: Why should we engage with stakeholders?
Read “A Stakeholding Society – What Does it Mean for Business?” by John Kay:
https://www.johnkay.com/1997/12/10/a-stakeholding-society-what-does-it-mean-for-business/
• What reasons do you believe there are for a business to develop a stakeholder
engagement plan?
• What are the consequences of not having a stakeholder plan in place?
© ABE 33
Chapter 2 Engaging with Stakeholders
2.1 Critically analysing the strategic relationship

and how best to engage with stakeholders
In this section, we will explore how to critically analyse the strategic relationships that an
organisation has with the stakeholders of a particular project in order to best engage with them.
The stake of different stakeholders

In Chapter 1, we identified a number of ways of mapping stakeholders based upon their interest
and power/influence. Mapping tools such as these help to identify who your stakeholders are and
their interest in different parts of the organisation or project tasks. However, stakeholder analysis
allows you to develop a greater understanding of how the stakeholder views the project and the
key strategic issues that impact or are impacted by the stakeholder. This includes what drives
stakeholder attitude and the behaviour that accompanies a stakeholder’s interest or concern.
It is also important to begin to build an understanding of the process needed to develop coalitions
of support with stakeholders and develop an engagement plan for those stakeholders who might
oppose the plans.
In regards to understanding the stake of different stakeholders who have an interest in a particular
project, Clayton (2014) suggests that the following areas need to be explored in detail:
Nature This analysis seeks to understand the interests and needs of the
stakeholder, specifically in relation to what a stakeholder might
want and what they have a right to in regards to ownership
and control over scarce resources. Ultimately, this is about
understanding the consequences of the type of stakeholder who
has an interest in the project.
Intensity As explored in Chapter 1, some stakeholders have low interest

and lower influence/power in a project, therefore they will have
little impact on it. However, a stakeholder’s attitude, commitment
and influence will be important if the intensity of the stake is
higher. As a result, it is important that plans are in place to
manage the agenda of the stakeholder, moderating any negative
effects of partisanship, legitimacy, connection power and urgency
that the stakeholder may have.
34 © ABE
Engaging with Stakeholders Chapter 2
Background and Analysing the background and attitudes of the stakeholder, the
attitudes purpose is to learn from their past behaviour, experience and
knowledge to be able to manage their current expectations and
prejudices. It also provides the information required to engage
positively in line with their preferences, motivations and values.
Additional factors This final analysis covers the additional factors such as internal
dynamics, internal dependencies, connections, key players and
positions. It also explores how history, background, values, culture
and style effect the way the stakeholder behaves. Other factors
included in this analysis are strengths, weaknesses, mission, vision
and goals.
Table 1: Factors influencing the stake of different stakeholders (Clayton, 2014) Revision
on the go
Over to you
Activity 2: The stake of different stakeholders
Working with a study partner if possible, discuss the types of stake that different
stakeholders might have. Capture your ideas and provide examples for each of the
four areas identified by Clayton (2014).
Nature Agenda
For example, the employee needs wages. For example, a concert-goer will expect their
ticket to be delivered in a timely fashion
ahead of the event.
Priorities and salience Motivations

For example, it may be more important for For example, it may be important for the
the investor that the company operates managing director to present a united front
ethically rather than deliver a large dividend. with the other directors on the board, even
if there is conflict in the team behind closed
doors.
© ABE 35
CASE STUDY: An impossible situation

Bohai is forced to part ways with his marketing manager
Head office has contacted Bohai, the managing director for

Asian markets, to tell him that a complaint has been made
through the whistle-blowing website for the organisation and
an investigation is being launched. To begin with, no one
knows who the complaint has been made about or the problem
that is being investigated. However, once the interview process
begins, Bohai is visited by his marketing manager, who asks to
speak with him in private.
In his office, the marketing manager is visibly upset, and says, “I think I have just done
something that will cost me my job.” The marketing manager is a trusted member of the senior
management team and Bohai is shocked by the revelation.
The investigating team had asked the marketing manager whether he had any relatives working
for the organisation. He had answered “no”, but had failed to disclose that although he had no
relatives working in the organisation, his daughter’s boyfriend and the son of his new partner
both worked in his department.
Technically the marketing manager had not lied in answering the question, since the two
individuals were not blood relatives. However, he had not told the whole truth when he should
have informed the investigating team of his family association to these two employees.
The whistle-blowing allegation was regarding favouritism towards these individuals by

the marketing manager. The marketing manager was well liked and a high performer. The
investigation found no wrong doing.
As a managing director, Bohai was firm but fair and he had a zero tolerance approach to wrong
doing, which meant that despite the outcome of the investigation, he had felt he was in an
impossible situation. He had dismissed other people for similar infractions and if he did not
sack the marketing manager it would seem like he was showing favouritism. His reputation for
fairness was at stake.
Secondly, truthfulness and being able to trust his team was of particular salience for Bohai and
he felt that this had been violated. Eventually Bohai decided to sack the marketing manager.
Stakeholder mapping
As explored in Chapter 1, a stakeholder map is a commonly used visual tool that represents a
stakeholder’s characteristics. Johnson and Scholes (1999) adapted the Mendelow Matrix (see
Page 17) to assign a stakeholder relationship strategy that the organisation should adopt to
manage particular stakeholder groups according to their level of influence/power and interest.
36 © ABE
NEED TO KNOW: The power and interest matrix

Meet their needs Key player

Keep satisfied Engage closely
Influence/Power
of stakeholders

Least important Show consideration

Minimal effort Keep informed
Figure 1: The power and interest matrix (Johnson and Scholes, 1999) Revision
on the go
High power, It is important that this group is kept satisfied. Keeping this stakeholder
low interest: group from developing a high level of interest means reassuring them that
Keep satisfied the project is progressing as planned.
Low power, You should keep this stakeholder group informed because they have a
high interest: high level of interest in the project. In order to manage this stakeholder
Keep informed group, it is necessary to provide enough information to the stakeholder to
justify project plans and avoid resistive behaviours.
Low power, The management of this stakeholder group requires minimal effort
low interest: because they will accept what they are told by others and can be easily
Minimal effort influenced.
High power, This group of stakeholders are “key players”. It is important to invest in
high interest: the relationship with this stakeholder group and educate them on the
Key players project plans in order to get them on board. Management of this group
requires consultation and strong communication to avoid restrictions in
project implementation.
Table 2: Stakeholder relationships Revision

on the go
In many ways, these stakeholder relationship strategies are obvious but it is the stakeholders who
have high power and seemingly low interest, which are, according to Johnson and Scholes (1999),
the most difficult to develop an engagement plan for. Although they may appear as if they have
little interest in your project, if they start showing more interest in your project or organisation they
pose a greater risk from underinvestment in the stakeholder relationship.
© ABE 37
Furthermore, mapping stakeholders in this way assumes that stakeholders have a static
position, which is fixed throughout the life cycle of a project or the organisation. The reality
is that a stakeholder’s interests may change because of a changing context. So, for example,
shareholders have shown in the past little interest in the levels of executive pay, approving the
recommendations of remuneration committees. However, the increased interest and discontent
with the gap between pay and performance has meant that more recently shareholders as a
stakeholder group are rejecting recommendations and putting pressure on organisations to
manage excessive executive pay.
Over to you
Activity 3: Why would stakeholder positions change?
Consider the stakeholder list you used in Activity 7 in Chapter 1. Think about reasons
why these stakeholders may change their position in the future. What issues are most
likely to change the stakeholder positions? How does this help you build a picture of
the issues that are important to the stakeholder groups?
Stakeholder triage
Clayton (2014) introduced the concept of stakeholder triage to provide a quick way of grouping
stakeholders by evaluating them against a limited but salient range of criteria. This analysis method
seeks to help you prioritise which stakeholders to focus on. Clayton (2014) concentrates on two
dimensions:
Stakeholder impact The stakeholder’s ability to affect your project or organisation

through their power or influence.
Stakeholder attitude The emotional state that accompanies a stakeholder’s interest or

concern.
Table 3: Stakeholder triage (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
38 © ABE
NEED TO KNOW: Stakeholder triage
SUPPORT AND ENGAGE AND

ENCOURAGE HARNESS
Attitude
MONITOR AND WOO AND

OUTVOTE WIN
Impact
Figure 2: Stakeholder triage (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Clayton (2014) offered four strategies to proactively manage strategic stakeholder relationships to
negate possible resistance to your project or organisational strategy:
Woo and win This involves spending time with the stakeholders and focuses on
building a close relationship that goes beyond simply informing them,
but still keeping them involved in discussions regarding areas of
influence. Ensuring your actions are ethical, the purpose is to win over
the stakeholder to avoid resistance.
Support and Although these stakeholders are unlikely to obstruct your project, they
encourage do require your support to help them promote what you are doing.
Engage and The group has the potential to have a significant impact on your project.
harness Invest time to win their support and co-opt them into endorsing you as
part of your woo and win campaign.
Monitor and Although these stakeholders have a low potential impact, you should
outvote be prepared to spend some time influencing a group that, although has
weak power and can be outvoted, may have a greater impact if their
resistance increases.
Table 4: Strategies to manage strategic stakeholder relationships (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
© ABE 39
Over to you
Activity 4: How to woo and win
Watch the video “How to Manage a Great Project – Stakeholder Triage”:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cNZvFPSHwk
Working in pairs if possible, consider methods that you could adopt to woo and win
stakeholders.
For example, inviting the stakeholder to a corporate away day activities such as a sporting
fixture.
Forcefield analysis
Developed by Lewin (1951), Force Field Analysis is a method which can be used to inform your
decision making in regards to your strategic stakeholder relationship management plan. It provides
a visual overview of the strength of different forces and their source, which impact upon a project
or organisational change issue. For example, an organisation may be driven to change to remain
competitive in the market place and avoid their product or service becoming obsolete. At the same
time, a lack of resources or the cost of new product development may be a restraining force.
NEED TO KNOW: Force field analysis
Driving forces Restraining forces

(for change) (against change)
2 3
5 Present 3
state or
1 Desired 2
state
4 3
Total = 12 Total = 11
Figure 3: Force field analysis (Lewin, 1951) Revision

on the go
40 © ABE
Lewin’s Force Field Analysis was adapted for stakeholders by various authors including Connelly (2015).
When you have identified the particular project area of change that will affect your stakeholder group,
which you are going to conduct a force field analysis on, you will need to consider all the forces that
impact upon the project or strategy and capture them as common themes. These will be captured
as driving forces that support the project, policy or restraining forces, which will impact the change
negatively. Once all the themes have been captured, categorised force field analysis weighs the
magnitude of that force in relationship to the other forces. This can be done using a Likert scale from
one (weak) to five (strong). The totaled scores will provide you with an understanding as to whether the
restraining forces are greater than the driving forces, or vice versa, which can help inform your decision
making as to whether the project or policy may face too much opposition for it to be viable. If the forces
are out of balance then there will be change in what Lewin termed as the social equilibrium. However,
depending on the strength of the force, this will determine whether the change that occurs is desired.
Force field analysis provides another tool that assesses which stakeholders are a driving force or a
restraining force and the strength and impact of their opposition. Like the sociogram captured in
Chapter 1, it also brings the opportunity to cluster the stakeholder support and resistance around
particular themes, which would enable you to develop an engagement plan to woo and win over
specific stakeholders and move them through change.
Over to you
Activity 5: Conduct a force field analysis
Pick a project task or policy change related to your workplace or studies.

• Which stakeholders are affected or could affect the project task or policy change?
• What priorities and concerns do those stakeholders have regarding the project task
or policy change? Group these issues into themes.
• List the themes in two columns: Driving forces and Restraining forces.
• Now weight these themes in accordance to the impact that force will have on the project
task or policy change, from 1 (weak) to 5 (strong), and add these to your analysis.
• Add up the weighting for the driving forces to arrive at a total force weighting, and
repeat for the restraining forces.
• What do the scores tell you about the actions you may have to take to woo and win
over specific stakeholders?
For example, completing a class assignment.
Driving Forces include: achieving a good grade, passing the course, competitive job
markets, job opportunity, sense of achievement, progressing onto the next module, avoiding
getting into trouble with tutor/parents, other coursework deadlines and needing to keep on
top of workload.
Restraining Forces include: part-time job, family commitments, new film at the cinema,
opportunity to go out with friends, commitments to sports club, difficulty in getting hold
of research materials, feeling stressed and procrastination over settling down to do the
assignment.
© ABE 41
Transformers
An additional stakeholder analysis tool offered by Clayton (2014) is that of the stakeholder impact
chart, which allows you to graphically represent the impact on two dimensions: the motivation to
help or hinder and the potential impact. The chart separates the stakeholders who are supportive
and those who are critical of your efforts, as well as examining the strength of the relationship that
you have with the stakeholder. Clayton (2014) offers four levels of stakeholder based on impact:
Bystander Low impact stakeholders who are little more than observers in the process.
Tinkerer Marginally more impactful than a bystander, the tinkerer will make
attempts at improving or repairing elements of the project but their
involvement remains casual.
Modifier The impact of this stakeholder can result in minor changes to the project
but their impact is not as great as that of a transformer.
Transformer These stakeholders have the potential to be game changers,
transforming the project (positively or negatively).
Table 5: Types of stakeholder and their impact (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
42 © ABE
NEED TO KNOW: Stakeholder impact chart
Motivation to help
High 8
1
9
Med 4
2 10 Potential
Low impact
Bystander Tinkerer Modifier Transformer

Low
11
5
7
6
Med
3 Strong relationship
with stakeholder
Minor relationship
with stakeholder
High
No practical relationship
with stakeholder
Motivation to hinder
Figure 4: Stakeholder impact chart (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
2.2 Prioritising resources for an engagement plan

from a strategic perspective
Stakeholder engagement is iterative of the process of activity between the organisation and
the stakeholder, aimed at developing a broad and inclusive consensus of project planning
and performance. During this process, it is important that you prioritise the use of resources
in relation to a particular project to develop an efficient and effective engagement plan.
The strategic plan should seek to develop collaborative partnerships with key players, apex
stakeholders and manage potential risk with stakeholders, who during the initial analysis are
identified as being of low interest and low influence/power.
Stakeholder engagement
A stakeholder engagement plan provides a structure as to how each stakeholder relationship will
be managed, based upon the type of relationship and how strong it needs to be. This is done in
order to achieve your project or organisational strategic objectives, which we identified earlier
using the Mendelow Matrix (Chapter 1.2) and Stakeholder Mapping: Power and interest matrix
(Chapter 2.1).
Clayton (2014) developed a simple stakeholder prioritisation tool to evidence the priority
that should be given to stakeholders in regards to prioritisation. He identified three tiers of
stakeholder:
© ABE 43
Tier One Identified as “customers, shareholders, directors, senior managers and key
managerial and operational staff” (Clayton, 2014: p. 180), these stakeholders
should be treated with greater levels of differentiation with a strategy that is
narrowly tailored and customised to their needs.
Tier Two These stakeholders are “statutory, regulatory and compliance

stakeholders to whom legislation or policy gives you responsibility,”
and although some segmentation is required in regards to stakeholder
engagement, the engagement activities are more consolidated than those
used in Tier One.
Tier Three The remaining stakeholders, classed as “all other stakeholders”, are parties
who you choose to engage with, either because it is ethical, for reasons of
fairness, or because it helps manage a risk. The engagement activities for this
group are broad and generic.
Table 6: Three tiers of stakeholder prioritisation (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
NEED TO KNOW: Stakeholder prioritisation
Differentiation
“Narrowcast”
Tier 1
Customers,
shareholders,
directors, senior
managers, key managers
and staff
Tier 2
Statutory, regulatory and
compliance stakeholders
Tier 3
Stakeholders you must engage for reasons
of ethics, equity or pragmatism
Consolidation
“Broadcast”
Figure 5: Stakeholder prioritisation (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
44 © ABE
Different strategic postures can be used to identify the engagement strategy that will be used for
each stakeholder including:
1 Accommodating – making significant concessions to the stakeholder (for example, including
stakeholder requests for changes in your project plan).
2 Collaborating – working together with the stakeholder (for example, partnerships or alliances).
3 Consulting – active consultation (for example, navigating complex issues to arrive at a mutually
beneficial compromise).
4 Informing – sharing information openly (for example, being transparent in what information is
shared regarding the plans for the project).
5 Promotional – influencing the stakeholder through persuasion (for example, using marketing
material and promotional tactics).
6 Defensive – defending your position with strong counter-arguments (for example, providing a
frequently asked questions sheet).
7 Assertive – fighting to maintain organisational stance (for example, suppressing reports that
contradict your desired position).
CASE STUDY: Staff board gets smart

Aisha develops a plan
The staff board was a newly created internal project group

that had been implemented by the people director. Aisha,
along with six of her colleagues, had been invited to
become members of the staff board. However, the remit
of the board was vague and there was significant debate
among the team as to what it was the staff board were
allowed to do.
Setting a purpose
Following some work with a consultant, the staff board set out a clear vision of what it was that
they wanted to achieve as a team. For many members of the group, this meant that they we
stretching the boundaries of what they thought might be allowed by the senior management
team, but were encouraged to consider how to influence internally to ensure that they got the
necessary buy in, support and budget allocation to achieve their purpose.
The stakeholders
The staff board identified who their stakeholders were and the influence/power and interests
of each of them. They realised that each of the board of directors had a different reason for
potentially supporting the staff board, but if the project group could get all the directors on
board, many of their desired goals could be facilitated. They also realised that they would
need to engage with the employee base and other managers in the business to buy in to their
purpose and temporarily bring people onto the various projects that the staff board wanted to
get involved with.
© ABE 45
A Tier 1 engagement plan
A customised communication plan was devised for each of the individual’s directors. This
included what the content of the communication would be, who would be responsible
for making it happen, and also a plan to engage with the directors’ intrinsic motivation by
appealing to their social nature and matching the staff board members with directors as their
mentors. A communication plan was worked out for different department heads depending
upon their particular interest in what the staff board would have to offer.
Long-term preparation to achieve the desired goal
The stakeholder engagement plan was executed as scheduled and after three months
representatives of the staff board were called upon to present their strategic priorities to the
board of directors. Having spent several months building a coalition of support, the staff board’s
purpose was unanimously signed off, budget was allocated and several managers had already
signed off the secondment of their staff to key project proposals.
Clayton (2014) offers a variety of strategies using the strategic postures measured against two
dimensions: the level of engagement and the level of collaboration. The result is a comprehensive
set of recommended stakeholder engagement strategies (Clayton, 2014: p. 184).
COLLABORATE – Working with stakeholders
Concede Accommodate Assist Coach Empower Collaborate
ENGAGE – Getting involved with stakeholders

AVOID – Withdrawing from stakeholders
Appease Placate Support Consult Involve Build

Coalitions
Notice Take Look for Engage Compromise Negotiate

opportunities opportunities opportunities
Avoid Monitor Respond Inform Accept Compromise Solicit

feedback feedback
Identify risks Guide Scan for Marketing Influence Negotiate

problems
Outvote Counter Defend Inducements Divide and Persuade

Rule
Over-rule Manipulate Dominate Suppress Coerce Attack
COMPETE – Working against stakeholders
Figure 6: Stakeholder engagement strategies (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
46 © ABE
Stakeholder benefits matrix

Atkinson (1999), in reviewing the benefits that could be considered as success criteria in project
management, suggested measurable benefits for the stakeholder community. These include:
• satisfied users
• social and environmental impact
• personal development
• professional learning
• contractors profit
• capital suppliers
• content project team
• economic impact to surrounding community
See the big picture… be aware of the results expected…

and look for long-term benefits.
Shenhar (1997)
The benefits register is a tool that records all the positive outcomes associated with the
programme, usually in relation to particular stakeholders. It involves four key phases:
Identify Identify who the main stakeholders are, how they fit in regards
to their interest, who they are connected with and how they can
influence positively or negatively.
Assess Determine the resources that the stakeholder commands, what you
want from them and what information and/or benefits they want from
you. This is a starting point for understanding why resources should
be allocated to engage different stakeholders.
Plan Clarifying how stakeholders wish to receive information, whether or

not they like to communicate and how often.
Risk/Benefit Finally, a risk/benefit analysis will be needed to identify what

analysis opportunities and threats the stakeholder poses and how this might
be negated.
Table 7: Key phases of the benefits register (Atkinson, 1999) Revision

on the go
Clayton (2014) suggested a key question that needs to be answered: “What is in it for the
stakeholder?” This is where the benefits matrix tool provides a valuable addition to stakeholder
management.
© ABE 47
NEED TO KNOW: Stakeholder benefits matrix
No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5
Programme benefits
Benefit 1 wholly partially wholly
Benefit 2 partially wholly
Benefit 3 wholly wholly
Adverse impacts
Impact 1 partially
Impact 2 wholly
Impact 3 wholly
Figure 7: Stakeholder benefits matrix (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Over to you
Activity 6: What do they want?
Write the name of two stakeholders from your workplace or studies with which you are
familiar. List them in the table below.
Identify what resources these stakeholders command and what it is that you want
from them.
Review the success criteria list offered by Atkinson (1999).
What are the benefits and adverse impacts that are relevant to your stakeholders?
Consider whether the stakeholder is wholly or partially impacted and complete the
matrix below.
Stakeholders Stakeholder 1 Stakeholder 2
Resources they
command
What do we
want from them?
48 © ABE
Programme benefits
Benefit 1
Benefit 2
Benefit 3
Adverse impacts
Impact 1
Impact 2
Impact 3
Inter-relationship between stakeholders

As explored in Chapter 1.2, the inter-relationship between stakeholders can be mapped using an
inter-relationship map. Using language associated with internet networks, Clayton (2014) suggests
several roles in a social network that are played by stakeholder. These include:
Hub (H) The centre of the inter-relationship structure between stakeholders, the
hub has significant influence over other stakeholders and has a high
number of social connections.
Connector (C) The bridge between several distinct stakeholder groups, the connector is
well connected but is less influential than the hub. Their relationship between
stakeholder groups enables them to be conduits of communication, sharing
information and as such influencing perceptions of truth.
Feeder (F) Although often on the outside of a group, the feeder does have the
ability to feed into a group through strong relationships and therefore is
impactful and influential, with their ideas heard.
Outlier (O) An external contributor, their inter-relationship with other stakeholders

is weak.
Table 8: Stakeholder roles in a social network (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
© ABE 49
NEED TO KNOW: Inter-relationship between stakeholders
H
F
Figure 7: Inter-relationship between stakeholders (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Resource planning
In planning your stakeholder engagement campaign, there are three factors that need to be taken
into account:
• People – who will be responsible for engaging with activities, formalised roles and
responsibilities with regards to stakeholder management.
• Time – setting key deadlines when certain actions needs to be completed. These milestones
set out the significant events or stage in the life, progress and development of the engagement
campaign.
• Budget – what financial resources will be allocated to what activities; how much and when.
2.3 Reviewing the success of engagement

plan objectives
The purpose of reviewing the success of engagement plan objectives, including from the
perspective of the organisation and its stakeholders, is to ensure that you are aware of how
effective the implementation of your engagement plan is in comparison to your engagement plan.
This enables you to be in control of the stakeholder engagement process and make adjustments to
ensure that the stakeholders are being engaged appropriately.
Check the receipt and understanding of the message

There are a number of methods that can be used to check the receipt and understanding of the
message by key stakeholder groups. For example:
50 © ABE
Survey One way of getting information from a stakeholder is to conduct a

survey to monitor their attitudes. This is an appropriate method if you
have a large number of stakeholders, for example, a student survey
by a college. Time must be spent ensuring that precise questions are
used which are valid and reliable.
Focus group A focus group is a more personal method of surveying the attitudes
of stakeholder groups. A selection of participants, who are
representative of the stakeholder group as a whole, are invited to a
facilitated discussion that is designed to understand what they think
about a particular topic.
Observation Where you are in close contact with the stakeholder group, it is
possible to observe their actions and monitor their attitudes based on
their behaviour.
Response rates Monitoring the response rate to a survey will enable you to
understand whether the project or organisational strategy is well
received by stakeholders. A good response rate would suggest that
stakeholders believe there is value in responding, suggesting that
they are engaged in the process.
Click through Stakeholder engagement can also be monitored in quantitative terms

rates when reviewing the proportion of individuals who have a followed
a hypertext link to a particular website. This click through rate is a
common measure of success for online campaigns.
Table 9: Methods to check stakeholders’ understanding Revision

on the go
Over to you
Activity 7: A survey of student stakeholders
As students, you are key stakeholders for your educational establishment. If

available, find the student survey results for your college. If not, locate some for an
establishment online.
• Review the questions that were asked in the survey. What do they tell you about the
engagement objectives of the college?
• Critically evaluate the survey results. What do the results tell you about how
engaged the students are with these objectives?
For example: www.topuniversities.com
© ABE 51
Review success of the engagement plan

The strategic stakeholder relationship engagement plan is not a linear process, but requires
monitoring of the successful implementation of the engagement plan over a period of time
against the objectives set. Being aware of how the engagement plan is performing, collecting and
analysing data in relation to progression can be done in a number of ways.
Monitoring the stakeholder engagement progress involves becoming aware of the success of your
implementation versus the desired performance that you planned for. Progress can be monitored
formally or informally, with a regular schedule for reporting progress. A performance audit enables
you to monitor the response to the engagement plan in terms of stakeholder perceptions and
attitudes. Data can be collected using surveys, focus groups and observation (see previous section),
and this can illustrate progress made using a chart showing average attitude over time. This will
give an understanding of the stakeholder engagement trend and the evolution of stakeholder
attitudes over time.
A stakeholder balance sheet can be used to provide an understanding of the position of stakeholders
at a given point in time. This separates stakeholders into two categories:
Assets Liabilities
These are stakeholders that are positive These stakeholders are resisting change and
about the project and supportive of the may provide a barrier to future progress.
objectives laid out.
Table 10: Stakeholders as assets or liabilities Revision

on the go
Over time you can capture those stakeholders who have moved from being liabilities to assets and
examine the work that still needs to be done to maintain stakeholders in the asset category and
invest in the stakeholders who are liabilities.
CASE STUDY: Monitoring staff attitudes during a change

programme
Dhruv conducts an employee opinion survey

The organisation that Dhruv was working for was merging
with another, bigger organisation. The change was significant
and involved a phased integration of systems, teams and
organisational structure. The merger was complicated,
involving a number of restructures and some redundancies.
The concerns for the senior management team were how
to maintain motivation and staff engagement during the
merger process.
The employee opinion survey

Both companies had a history of running an annual employee opinion survey (EOS) to monitor
overall staff satisfaction. It was decided to run a shorter opinion survey specifically focused on
the feelings of staff around the change process. It was decided that a survey would be sent out
prior to the merger starting and then at regular intervals, specifically when key milestones were
achieved, such as the completion of consolidating the finance function.
52 © ABE
Monitoring engagement trends over time

Unsurprisingly, staff engagement and motivation levels dropped once the implications of the
merger were under way. The survey allowed Dhruv and his team to analyse which particular
departments were struggling the most. The senior management team were advised on the
trends emerging; action plans were put in place to increase the use of management availability
to answer questions and present progress reports on the merger. Feedback forums were to be
used to find out what could be done to improve staff morale.
Although the results of the EOS were depressed, the use of the survey allowed Dhruv to
develop action plans to manage areas which were particular struggling and provide advice to
managers as to what support was needed and where.
Following the merger, it became clear that engagement levels were increasing again and that
the work done over the change process was achieved during a difficult period.
2.4 Recommend strategic changes

Each stakeholder engagement project has distinct phases, which leads to needing to make different
strategic changes in order to respond to stakeholder perceptions and/or adapt to changing conditions
The progression through the change cycle stages will dictate what messages should be delivered
and what interventions can be used to deliver those messages. Using Lewin’s (1947) three-step
change model, Clayton (2014: p. 194) identified a progression plan – change programme.
NEED TO KNOW: Progression plan – change programme
Move out of
denial
Consolidate Consolidate
commitment in
recognition
RE-FREEZING UNFREEZING
Move towards
commitment Move towards
resistance
Progression
plan –
Change
programme
Consolidate
acceptance Handle
resistance
Move towards
Move towards CHANGING
acceptance
exploration
Consolidate
exploration
Figure 8: Progression plan – change programme (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
© ABE 53
Revise messaging and/or media

Using the media to ensure that stakeholders receive and/or retain the message for the purposes of
engagement with key stakeholders in line with objectives requires specialist advice and knowledge
from people who have a background in public relations. There are three types of media, which can
be used to engage stakeholders, these include:
• Broadcast media – such as radio and television.
• Print media – such as magazines, newspapers and journals.
• Web media – such as podcasts, blogs, vlogs and social media.
Monitoring the change in stakeholder perspectives means that the sources of change explored in
Chapter 1.1, SPECTRES can be reviewed to understand how your media campaign is impacting
stakeholder engagement.
Stakeholder perceptions can be measured using a number of evaluation methods. This requires you
to adopt a systematic assessment methodology to identify the impact that your engagement plan is
having on stakeholder perceptions in order to provide direction as to how to respond to changing
conditions and adapt the engagement plan. The key question to ask yourself is what evidence
you need to identify perception. There are a myriad of data sources available to gain insight into
stakeholder perceptions.
Qualitative measures
Qualitative measures are based upon opinions, motivations and underlying reasons. This may
include measures such as:
Shareholder reports: providing insights into the opinions of stakeholders who have a vested
interest in your project or organisation.
Stakeholder mapping: identifying shifts in political strength, personal power or hierarchical

authority of groups and individuals of your identified stakeholder group.
Surveys: employee opinion survey, customer feedback, market research data, brand value and
cultural health checks to identify shifting opinions of stakeholder groups.
Proficiency: benchmarking, continuous improvement, productivity, performance management.
Quantitative measures
Quantitative measures are based upon facts and figures. This may include measures such as:
Trading figures: revenue, cost, price and profit.
Customer Insight: number of customer complaints, customer satisfaction, survey and market data,
retention.
Supplier Information: favourable trading terms, supplier feedback survey and fulfilment of orders.
Regulation: compliance levels, regulator reports and recognition of meeting industry standards,
such as quality marks.
54 © ABE
CASE STUDY: Changing perceptions

Carrie makes university a hub of HR
A few years ago I began working as a programme lead on
an MA Human Resource Management (HRM) programme
at a local university. The programme had been running for
nearly 30 years and was in significant decline after years of
mismanagement. My tenure coincided with an opportunity
to change how the programme was run, reformatting the
programme to a blended learning programme that was
in line with market needs. However, the biggest barrier
to recruiting students was the poor reputation of the
programme in the local business community.
A PR campaign
Working with the marketing department at the university, a number of press releases were
created that introduced me as the new MA HRM programme leader, sharing the vision for the
new style programme and the university as a hub of HR and a feature of the new cohort of
students joining the university as the start of the academic year. The website was updated with
similar information and a social media campaign was started to give HR insights via the HR hub
Twitter account. I was filmed for an informational video seminar on “what is Human Resource
Management”, which was broadcasted on an open source learning portal.
The result
The new blended learning programme introduced was successful and the university hosted
a HR panel event, which included the chief executive of the HR professional body in the UK.
Regular HR seminars and learning events were attracted to the university, including the local HR
directors forum, which began meeting on the university campus. Student numbers in Year 2 of
the programme tripled and the reputation of the programme began to improve significantly.
Over to you
Activity 8: The impact of a media campaign
If you are part of a class, work in groups to critically review a recent national or local
political campaign that took place in your country or one that you are familiar with.
Research the broadcast, print and web media that was used by the parties involved in
the campaign.
• What does your research reveal in regards to changes made by the campaigning
parties in their messaging?
• What were the changes made in response to? Refer to SPECTRES.
• What impact did the media used have on stakeholder engagement? It may help to
review opinion polls on voting intentions before, during and after the campaign.
• In your opinion, was the campaign successful or unsuccessful? Give reasons for your
answer.
© ABE 55
Balanced stakeholder engagement scorecard

Kaplan et al (2005) introduced the concept of the balanced scorecard to create measures across
a range of different parameters to ensure that work is not effective in one area at the expense of
effectiveness in other areas.
Using the balanced scorecard means you can consider four distinct perspectives relating to the
stakeholder engagement objectives. Clayton (2014: p. 206) renamed the four criteria to develop a
balanced stakeholder engagement scorecard. He named these as:
Efficacy Efficacy is the ability to produce the desired result. It has some links to
Kaplan et al (2005) internal process evaluation criteria. In the balanced
stakeholder engagement scorecard this is focused on:
• identifying stakeholders
• stakeholder analysis
• stakeholder engagement planning
• actions versus plan
• results
Ethics Ethics relate to the principles guiding behaviour. The areas focused on in
the balanced stakeholder engagement scorecard are:
• monitoring and compliance processes
• training and familiarisation
• practices and complaints
56 © ABE
Impact Impact evaluates the effect that the actions taken during the stakeholder
engagement process have had on stakeholder engagement, positively or
negatively. There is some alignment with the financial evaluation criteria
outlined by Kaplan et al (2005), which monitors the performance and resources
used. In the balanced stakeholder engagement scorecard this includes:
• benefits and burdens
• environment and societal costs and risks
Alignment Finally, alignment refers to the position of various elements of the

stakeholder engagement process. This is similar to the customer/
stakeholder evaluation criteria proposed by Kaplan et al (2005). In this
model it includes:
• the alignment of engagement practices to organisational values
• the alignment of engagement goals to organisational goals
Table 11: Criteria to develop a balanced stakeholder engagement

card (Clayton, 2014) Revision
on the go
Balanced stakeholder engagement scorecard
Alignment
Efficacy Impacts
Ethics
Figure 9: Stakeholder balanced scorecard (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
© ABE 57
Stakeholder engagement management maturing levels

Carroll and Buchholz (2014) offer three maturing approaches to stakeholder engagement
management. The three approaches are:
Strategic This approach considers stakeholders from the perspective of reducing

resistance and avoiding stakeholder reprisals. It is an instrumental view,
which perceives stakeholders as being useful but having to be rendered
as a means to achieving project or organisational goals.
Multi-fiduciary This measures the fiduciary responsibility that an organisation has to its
stakeholders who have economic or legal power that must be managed.
This offers a wider definition of fiduciary responsibility beyond simple
shareholder return on investment.
Stakeholder Reaching beyond the economic impact of the organisations

Synthesis activities, the stakeholder synthesis approach introduces the unseen
responsibilities of the organisation, including its ethical and moral
responsibilities.
Table 12: Approaches to stakeholder engagement (Carroll and Buchholz, 2014) Revision
on the go
Clayton (2014) introduced basic stakeholder engagement management maturity model.

This includes five levels of stakeholder management that an organisation or project leader may
progress through as their stakeholder engagement process becomes more sophisticated:
1 Ad-hoc Informal process owned by individuals as there is no formal

recognition of the need for stakeholder management.
2 Novice Developing awareness of the need to systematise stakeholder

management. Some generic guidelines issued but no formal training
or uniformity of tools.
3 Repeatable Documented stakeholder management processes and policies, clear

responsibilities and limited training offered. A simple, centrally held
tool kit is available.
4 Managed Stakeholder management is formalised with the establishment of

clear metrics and implementation and decision-making guidelines.
Formal best practice procedures are followed with formal training and
sophisticated tools being made available.
5 Embedded Stakeholder management and the engagement process is part of the

culture of the organisation. Skills, knowledge, techniques and tools
are all reviewed and updated on an ongoing basis. Recognition is
given to individuals demonstrating expertise.
Table 13: Levels of stakeholder management (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
58 © ABE
Stakeholder management maturity model
Ad-hoc Novice Repeatable Managed Embedded
Figure 10: Stakeholder management maturity model (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Reading list
• David Foster, Jan Jonker, (2005) “Stakeholder relationships: the dialogue of engagement”,
Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, Vol. 5 Issue: 5,
pp.51–57. (This article will be available in your online student resources.)
• Lynda Bourne, (2008) “Advancing theory and practice for successful implementation of
stakeholder management in organisations”, International Journal of Managing Projects in
Business, Vol. 1 Issue: 4, pp.587–601. (This article will be available in your online student
resources.)
Summary
Making time to critically analyse the strategic relationships that an organisation has with its stakeholder
in order to decide how best to engage with them will enable those involved to understand what is
driving the behaviour of stakeholders throughout the project or organisational strategy life cycle. Very
often, it can seem like particular individuals or groups are being deliberately obstructive and resisting
change without good reason. However, most people want to succeed and their attitude may be driven
by misunderstanding or a genuine belief that the actions being taken are detrimental to success.
Analysing stakeholder relationships therefore is simply about understanding the response of

stakeholders to a particular situation and how that response can impact, positively or negatively, on
the progress of the project.
An engagement plan needs to be devised to prioritise resources in relation to managing

stakeholder perspectives and making a plan for how best to utilise the people, time and budget
allocated to the project.
The constantly changing nature of the organisational context means that it is necessary to review
and recommend changes in order to successfully engage with stakeholders and respond to
changing conditions. As the approach that an organisation takes to stakeholder management
matures, the process of stakeholder engagement will become more embedded in the way things
are done within the organisation.
© ABE 59
Chapter 3
Communication with
Stakeholders
Introduction
A stakeholder engagement communication plan considers what communication methods will be
used and what message will be delivered at what point in the communications schedule, which
runs throughout the entire project or organisational strategy. Stakeholders should be segmented to
receive messages, which vary in frequency, method and content. It is important that communication
happens throughout each phase of a project and it is a fundamental part of stakeholder
management and engagement.  
Learning outcome
3 Develop relevant communication approaches and messages that would be used at each
stage of the stakeholder engagement plan.
Assessment criteria
3 Develop relevant communication approaches and messages that would be used at each
stage of the stakeholder engagement plan.
3.1 Justify the key components of the message that need to be communicated, customising it
for different stakeholder groups as necessary in relation to a specific project.
3.2 Recommend, with justification, communications that will engage the key strategic stake-
holders for a particular project in line with its objectives.
© ABE
Level 6 Strategic
Background
A communication plan encompasses more than simply deciding whether the communication
method should be face-to-face, written, online or broadcast in order to ensure your message
reaches your stakeholders.
A communication plan builds upon the analysis of strategic stakeholder relationships (see Chapter 1
and Chapter 2). It helps to describe the nature of the message, the scope of the communication and
the meaning behind the communication plan choices made. Through the life of the project or the
organisational strategy the communication strategy will overlay, the stakeholder engagement plan
identifies what interests the communication needs to address directly, defining what information is
shared with the stakeholder and how often they receive communication. These decisions are based
upon stakeholder priorities and the level to which they affect, or are affected by the project or
organisational strategy.
Strategic thinking in terms of forms of communication, degree of collaboration,

development of policies or programs, and allocation of resources, will need to be
thought through very carefully.
Carroll and Buccholtz (2014)
The communication plan therefore defines how you choose to engage with different stakeholder
groups, dictating the format, frequency and content of the communication you choose to utilise.
Over to you
Activity 1: Communication strategy
Read the article by Sherry Finney, (2011) “Stakeholder perspective on internal

marketing communication: An ERP implementation case study”: (This article will be
available in your online student resources.)
Finney (2011) states that “Communication strategy, particularly, is one area that requires
a tailored approach to meet stakeholder needs.” Critically evaluate this statement.
© ABE 61
Chapter 3 Communication with Stakeholders
3.1 Key components of the message that need to

be communicated
When developing stakeholder communications, you must be prepared to justify the key
components of the message that you need to communicate, ensuring you customise it for different
stakeholder groups as necessary in relation to a specific project.
Crafting the message to achieve strategic intent

Communication planning requires that you start with what Stephen Covey (1989) calls “the end in
mind.” This means deciding what outcome you want in regards to stakeholder engagement with
the communication and what tone you need to set in order to achieve that outcome. When crafting
your communication message, you need to ensure it is:
Clear The message needs to be unambiguous, easy to understand and avoids

language which can be misinterpreted.
Consistent Different messages to the same and different stakeholders must be

compatible, avoiding conflicting information or contradictions.
Targeted The communication is aimed at a specific audience, both in terms

of a communication channel and in a way that they would like to be
communicated with.
Compelling The message should invite stakeholders in, arousing their curiosity to find
out more and be meaningful.
Persuasive The message should be crafted to change how the stakeholder thinks about
the project or organisational strategy.
Powerful As well as being memorable, a powerful message will be a call to action,

resulting in the stakeholder doing something, or doing something
differently, as a result.
Table 1: Crafting a communication message Revision

on the go
62 © ABE
Communication with Stakeholders Chapter 3
Over to you
Activity 2: The strategic intent of corporate communications
Choose an organisation with which you are familiar. Search the website for investor
information and download a copy of the shareholders’ annual report. Working with a
partner, critically review the document to identify the stakeholder message.
• What is the strategic intent behind the messages in the annual report?
Critically evaluate the message against the following criteria. Is it:
• Clear? • Persuasive?
• Consistent? • Powerful?
• Targeted?
Crafting the message to achieve strategic intent
Clear
Powerful Consistent
Crafting a message
to achieve strategic
intent
Persuasive Targeted
Compelling
Figure 1: Crafting a message to achieve strategic intent Revision

on the go
© ABE 63
Adapting messaging
If stakeholder communication is to be effective, the message will need to be adapted to ensure it
is relatable to the targeted stakeholder group. The stakeholder pyramid illustrates how to change
your engagement and communication strategy according the importance of the stakeholders:
NEED TO KNOW: The stakeholder pyramid
Partner
Collaborate
The Few
The Many
Involve
Engage
Inform
Figure 2: The stakeholder pyramid (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Another way to make your message compelling to the audience is to challenge the stakeholder
with a question, which can be repeated throughout the message and engages with them to want to
find out more. A provocative question can cause stakeholders to want to seek out an answer, and as
such, structured communication around questions and answers will incite curiosity.
Frequently asked questions (FAQs) are a list of common questions and answers which relate to a
specific topic.
Over to you
Activity 3: Questions and answers
Write a list of questions and answers relating to your favourite film or book.
Craft these into a compelling communication to persuade someone to see the film or
read the book.
64 © ABE
Storytelling
Stories can be used as a gentle form of persuasion because they build trust whilst allowing the one
telling the story to control perceptions. Stories have been used to develop culture memories for
as long as human society has existed. Stories record our history in a memorable way, establishing
context and creating a curiosity in the listener to want to know more.
According to Heath and Heath (2007), stories are one of six key principles that contribute to ‘sticky’
(memorable) compelling communication. The remaining five principles are:
Simplicity Keeping the communication simple and focused on fundamental points.
Unexpectedness Surprise and unexpected twists.
Concreteness Rich in detail with relevant examples.
Credibility The story is trustworthy and believed not necessarily because it is true
but because it echoes the aspirations of the listener/reader. Credibility
lends ethos.
Emotions A sticky story stirs strong emotions. Emotion leads to pathos.
Table 2: Key principles contributing to compelling communication

(Heath and Heath, 2007) Revision
on the go
Over to you
Activity 4: Develop a story
Write a short story about your studies. How would you persuade a potential student
to sign up to take the ABE Level 6 Diploma in Business Management? When you have
finished writing your story, work with a partner to critically review your story against
the five principles outlined by Heath and Heath (2007). Give your story a rating,
marking it from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strong agree) against each of the principles.
© ABE 65
Principles of compelling communication
Simplicity
Emotions Unexpectedness
Principles of
compelling
communication
Credibility Concreteness
Figure 3: Principles of compelling communication Revision

on the go
Going beyond logic

The whole point of stakeholder communication is to create messages that appeal to the
stakeholder audience. Three modes of persuasion are identified within the framework of
stakeholder communication. They are:
Ethos Relates to the credibility of the messenger and whether it has the authority and
expertise, which is assessed by the stakeholder to be trustworthy. Messages
therefore need to be honest, consistent and credible.
66 © ABE
Pathos Is the use of messaging to appeal to the stakeholder’s emotional needs? This
appeal will either pull the stakeholder towards something by tapping into their
desire, or push the stakeholder away from something through the use of fear. It
consists of engaging with the self-interest of the stakeholders on an emotional
level.
Logos Logical appeal is linked to using rational argument and intellectual authority
based upon facts and evidence. Messages using logos develop the case to
support your argument.
Table 3: Methods of persuasion in stakeholder communication Revision

on the go
Effective stakeholder messages will use a balance of all three elements to engage
with what the stakeholder thinks, feels and believes to be true.
Ethos, Pathos and Logos

Ethos
Logos Pathos
Figure 4: Going beyond logic Revision

on the go
Using people’s skills to best advantage

Excellent stakeholder management requires all members of the project team to work together to
play their role in the stakeholder communication plan. Each team member will need to build their
own stakeholder networks and take any opportunity offered to influence stakeholders. Depending
on the skill set of the team, there are wide range of ways that team members can get involved:
• informal communication with stakeholders, for example, emails, conversations etc.;
• formal meetings and stakeholder presentations;
• hosting stakeholder consultations meetings;
• acting as a facilitator at stakeholder events;
• writing content for newsletters or social media.
© ABE 67
Whatever methods of persuasion are used, what the project team needs to do is play to the strengths
of the individual team members to persuade the stakeholders. For example, if a team member has
strong emotional intelligence, they will be able to contribute to the pathos of the stakeholder.
Gentle persuasion
Nye (1990) introduced the concept of soft power, referring to the ability to attract, co-opt and
persuade. Originally linked to foreign policy, the concept focuses on the power that the influencer has
in regards to attributes and achievements that provide an advantage in power games. Soft power is:
The ability to achieve goals through attraction rather than coercion.

Nye (1990)
Nye (1990) argued that soft power is just as important hard power, enabling changes in behaviour
in others using persuasion and attraction to avoid conflict and competition. In many ways, gentle
persuasion seduces the stakeholder into co-operation.
Behavioural economics and hidden influence

Stakeholder management has links to behavioural economics, which is a theory of decision
making that starts with the premise that human behaviour is irrational, but if we can gather
sufficient data, it is largely predictable. This is relevant to stakeholder management because the
behaviour of stakeholders affects an organisation’s ability to achieve its goals. Therefore, if your
feedback relating to the study guide is positive, and you and your fellow students pass this module
successfully, we can predict that it is likely that your tutor will encourage you to continue with your
studies and use study guides in the future.
Packard (2007) researched how the advertising industry manipulated consumer hopes, needs
and fears in order to sell goods and services. This goes beyond soft power, suggesting that it is
possible to manipulate stakeholders into impulsive and self-destructive behaviours. The hidden
influence that Packard (2007) refers to is a sinister power, which means that consumers knowingly
commit irrational acts and exhorts advertisers to moderate their behaviour and focus on fact-
based presentations. The same exhortation can be made to those engaging in stakeholder
communication. There is a fine line between persuasion and manipulation, and it is important to
keep this in mind when devising your stakeholder engagement plan.
Over to you
Activity 5: Is it persuasion or manipulation?
Critically review a selection of literature from organisations that you would consider
yourself to be a stakeholder of. For example, a sport club, your organisation or the college.
• Can you identify any areas where the communication from the organisation uses
“soft” rather than “hard” power?
• What, in your opinion, makes a message manipulative rather than persuasive? Give
reasons for your answer.
68 © ABE
Stakeholder engagement as part of corporate culture

In an ideal world, stakeholder engagement would be part of the way things are done in the
organisation. Commitment to its stakeholders enables the business to build trust with its various
stakeholder groups. If engagement becomes the cultural norm for the organisation, it is possible
for the organisation to manage risk and shield the organisation from threats to its financial health.
A positive stakeholder engagement culture prioritises stakeholders in the decision-making process,
leading to higher levels of commitment and satisfaction.
Customer and client Relegating the “customer is always right” ethos, a corporate
service culture focused on staff engagement brings balance to the
competing stakeholder needs.
Product and service There is a wider range of stakeholders involved in the early
development stages of product and service development.
Management and Leaders are consciously involved in stakeholder engagement

leadership and prioritise time spent with stakeholders.
Policies and procedures Consistency of stakeholder engagement processes is

maintained through the development of policies and
procedures.
Competencies and Staff are trained in stakeholder engagement tools and

capabilities techniques.
Incentives and Reward and punishment are used to build culture.

performance reviews
Stakeholder The culture is supported by a foundation of principles and

engagement processes tools.
and tools
Table 4: The effect of stakeholder engagement Revision

on the go
© ABE 69
3.2 Justifying recommendations for

communications that will engage the key
strategic stakeholders
The basic approach to selecting which communication method to employ is based upon the
stakeholder pyramid (see Section 3.1) and the principle that you should communicate with
stakeholders in the way in which they would like to communicate.
There are a wide range of communication mechanisms which can be used to engage with your
stakeholders. Clayton (2014) offers a comprehensive list of formal and informal communication
methods; a few examples are given in Table 4, which he segments into modes of delivery:
Mode Examples
Face-to-face Conversation, seminars, training, surveys interviews.
Distance Tele-conferencing, webinars, video or messaging.
Written Press releases, memos, display boards, articles, case studies, reports.
Online Blogs, websites, podcasts, social media.
Broadcast TV, radio, in-house magazines.
Table 4: Formal and informal communications methods (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Over to you
Activity 6: Methods of communication
Working in a group, if possible, write down all the different methods of communication
you can think of under the following headings:
Formal Informal
Face-to-face
Distance
70 © ABE
Formal Informal
Written
Online
Broadcast
Due to a cacophony of information that modern stakeholders are subjected to, the chosen
communication method will need to engage the key strategic stakeholders for a particular project
in line with its objectives, and with its ability to make a pathway through other communication that
is competing for the stakeholder’s attention.
The method chosen will be based upon the engagement approach:
Partner Communication methods need to be two-way and enable stakeholders to

participate in joint learning, decision making and action planning. Informal
face-to-face communication and online tools that enable sharing of
information are appropriate for this stakeholder group.
Collaborate Two-way communication is still appropriate for this stakeholder group, but
the engagement will need to limit responsibility and be focused on the
delivery of particular tasks. Face-to-face communication methods may still
be used but they will be more formal.
© ABE 71
Involve This communication method means that there is a limited two-way

engagement, with the responsibility for the project sitting with you and the
organisation. The communication methods are aimed at asking questions of
the stakeholders and providing a channel for stakeholders to answer those
questions. This communication method limits stakeholder influence to data
in decision-making processes.
Engage At this level, communication methods are a one-way channel aimed at

broadcasting information to all stakeholders or stakeholder groups who are
part of a targeted and segmented engagement campaign. The focus is on
communicating a tailored message for the particular target audience, but
uses a variety of channels such as email, webinar, and newsletters to reach a
larger audience.
Inform Broad one-way communication with information that is available in the

public domain and relies on the stakeholder choosing to pay attention to
the engagement message. In many ways, the communication methods
chosen at this level add to the communication noise that you are trying to
cut through to engage with key stakeholders at the partner and collaborate
level. Stakeholder messages at this level rely on the stakeholder choosing
to engage with the information provided.
Table 5: Partner engagement approaches Revision

on the go
Critique of different communication methods

Different communication methods for distinctive stakeholder segments can cause problems, both
for the stakeholder and for your ability to devise a stakeholder communication plan. Despite the
exhortation to engage in two-way communication to partner, collaborate and involve, the majority
of stakeholders are subject to an overreliance on one-way communication methods. It could be
argued that the behaviour of individuals devising stakeholder communication is related to the
behavioural economics (see Chapter 3.1) notion of irrationality, whereby, although you know that
face-to-face two-way communication is the correct strategic choice, time and financial resource
constraints result in the use of communication methods being chosen because they are the simplest
to execute. The end result is that less time is spent on face-to-face consultations with stakeholders
who are less influential. Making use of stakeholders with low influence/power could engage their
levels of interest, subsequently increasing the potential to positively impact upon stakeholder
goodwill.
If stakeholder analysis is inaccurate or based on a static snapshot in time, the communication

methods chosen may be inadequate to positively influence stakeholder adoption of your project or
organisation strategy. As discussed in the diffusion of innovation section (see Chapter 1.2), Rogers
(2003) highlighted the importance of communication channels, especially the use of interpersonal
communication and relationship channels in achieving mutual understanding and successfully
navigating the decision-making process to persuade individuals to adopt an innovation.
Resource considerations also need to balance the design and content advantages of printed
materials with cost constraints and the speed at which it becomes redundant. Although traditional
print material has been replaced by email, online surveys or online content, print is perceived as
more credible than information on the internet.
72 © ABE
Achieving an integrated approach

Clayton (2014: pp. 188–189) offers a number of campaign planning tools to help you to achieve an
integrated approach across inter-related stakeholder groups.
The basic stakeholder communication plan helps you to plot each element of your communication
against each stakeholder:
Stakeholder 1 Stakeholder 2 Stakeholder 3
Objectives
Message: what to
communicate
Tone
Medium: method of
communication
Feedback: how
will we test
understanding?
Timing or frequency
Person responsible
Table 6: Basic stakeholder communication plan Revision

on the go
© ABE 73
An alternative approach allows you to focus on the communication that you wish to make:
Communication A Communication B Communication C
Circulation:
Stakeholders who will
receive it
Nature: Medium
and style of
communication
Message: Information
or persuasive
argument
Owner: Who will
design and publish
the communication
Feedback: how
will we test for
understanding?
Timing or frequency
Table 7: Alternative stakeholder communication plan Revision

on the go
A communication approach grid (Clayton, 2014: p. 191) integrates the messages you need to get
across all inter-related stakeholders and all media available to you to help you develop a combined
message/medium communication approach:
Newsletter Formal Report Briefing meeting Conference
Progress Staff and line Senior

updates management management
Process design Senior Line management

briefings management
New product Customers

schedule
Pre-launch Senior Staff and line Customers

briefing management management
Table 8: Communication approach grid Revision

on the go
74 © ABE
Over to you
Activity 7: Develop a communication approach grid
Revisit your stakeholder list from Chapter 2, Activity 3 and develop a communication
approach grid to create an integrated communication campaign across inter-related
stakeholder groups.
Communication Medium
Progress
updates
Process design
briefings
New product
schedule
Pre-launch
briefing
Lobbying and the use of public affairs

Lobbying covers a wide variety of techniques and practices used by lobbyists to influence,
persuade and obtain support in areas that relate to activities involving vertical relationships
between organisations. These affect and are affected by government policy and also horizontal
relationships between different groups, and are involved and concerned with policy development in
a particular area of interest.
Public affairs practitioners can include people from a diverse range of organisations, predominately
in the private sector. These include professional lobbyists, trade associations, interest groups, non-
governmental organisations (NGOs) and charities. More recently, there has been an increase in
citizen participation in lobbying due to the advent of technology, allowing the quick dissemination
of information and a cheap communication channel to receive responses from interested parties.
The purpose of lobbying in public affairs is to ensure that issues relating to specific policy areas are
present on the agendas of decision makers and other key stakeholders.
CASE STUDY: The climate change lobby

The road to the Paris accord
Climate change is not a new phenomenon. From a scientific
perspective, scientists have been arguing that human activity
has had a negative impact on climate since the late 19th
Century. Shortly after the end of the Second World War,
compelling evidence began to develop relating to the effect
of carbon dioxide on global temperatures. However, climate
change remained on the fringes of public consciousness until
the beginning of the 1990s, where there was a consensus that
greenhouse gases impacted upon climate change.
© ABE 75
1950s and 1960s

The climate change lobby began in the laboratories of climatologists around the world, who
used scientific research methods to give advice to governments on the warming effect of
human emissions. At the end of the 1960s, NATO developed environmental initiatives relating
to tackling acid rain and the greenhouse effect. The World Wide Fund for nature was founded
in 1961.
1970s and 1980s

The mainstream media picked up on several scientific research studies and the evidence
regarding global warming was presented at the first World Climate Conference in 1979. By
the early 1980s, a changing consensus around climate change was beginning to develop. The
campaigning organisation Greenpeace, which acts to change attitudes and behaviour in order
to protect and conserve the environment, was founded in 1971.
1980s
More conferences followed and the growing consensus began to impact government policy,
specifically in the Vienna Convention (1985), which addressed the issues of CFCs and ozone
depletion, and the Montreal Protocol (1987), which introduced regulations relating to acid rain.
Modern climate change

Research on climate change continues to expand and grow with stakeholders in the fields of
atmospheric sciences, numeric modelling, behavioural sciences, geology and economics working
to influence government policy and action in the area of environment protection. The culmination
of nearly seventy years of climate change lobbying in public affairs resulted in 195 signatories
signing the Paris Agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) in April 2016. This is the world’s first comprehensive climate agreement aimed
at reducing global warming.
Over to you
Activity 8: Identifying lobbyists
Revisit your research into the political campaign from Chapter 2, Activity 8. Can you
identify the lobbyists who were trying to influence, persuade and obtain support for
their cause during that campaign?
List the lobbyists and the methods that were used to influence the campaign below.
76 © ABE
READING LIST
• Sybille Sachs, Edwin Rühli, (2005) “Changing managers’ values towards a broader
stakeholder orientation”, Corporate Governance: The international journal of business
in society, Vol. 5 Issue: 2, pp. 89–98. (This article will be available in your online student
resources.)
• Christopher Hendrik Ruehl, Diana Ingenhoff, (2015) “Communication management on social
networking sites: Stakeholder motives and usage types of corporate Facebook, Twitter and
YouTube pages”, Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 19 Issue: 3, pp. 288–302.
(This article will be available in your online student resources.)
Summary
The development of relevant communication approaches and messages used at each stage of the
stakeholder engagement plan requires you to know who your stakeholders are, identifying the key
players and developing a communication plan for engaging with them. Crafting the messages that
you wish to communicate and customising them to influence and persuade different stakeholder
groups to engage with your project requires you to develop a clear, consistent and targeted
strategic intent and communications which are compelling, persuasive and powerful. By taking
these steps you enable your project to have a greater chance of success. However, you need to
implement your strategy in order to successfully communicate with your stakeholders and this is
where some plans fall down.
© ABE 77
Chapter 4
Managing Stakeholder
Resistance
Introduction
Stakeholder management exists because stakeholders can affect and are affected by your project
or organisation strategy. Individual stakeholder reactions are not the whole story; these reactions
will impact upon the reactions of others. Therefore, your project’s objectives are not independent of
context and our dependent on each other. Resistance occurs when stakeholders are uncomfortable or
feel their security is under threat. If stakeholder fear and uncertainty is not managed through proper
planning then stakeholders will become an opposing force and threaten the success of your project.
Learning outcome
4 Recommend how to deal with the stakeholder resistance that might be encountered with a
project’s objectives and the way a project is planned to be implemented.
Assessment criteria
4 Recommend how to deal with the stakeholder resistance that might be encountered with a
project’s objectives and the way a project is planned to be implemented.
4.1 Assess the response to your engagement campaign in order to identify early indications
of resistance so that prompt action can be taken.
4.2 Recommend practical ways of managing and resolving conflict so that stakeholder
engagement can be achieved in line with the project’s objectives.
© ABE
Level 6 Strategic
Background
Stakeholder resistance is probably one of the biggest fears of those involved in stakeholder
engagement activities. At its very worst, resistance can lead to catastrophic conflict, such as
organisations that have battled with trade unions, leading to loss of business and profit over a
period of time. At its best, resistance may be something as simple as procrastination over providing
information that you need for a project, which can result in minor delays and missed project
deadlines. Acknowledging that resistance is a possibility in stakeholder management will enable
you to develop a process to counter any resistance you may come up against.
Over to you
Activity 1: Stakeholder resistance
Research an act of stakeholder resistance. Examples of resistance that you might research
include: shareholders holding a company board of directors to account; trade unions
balloting for employees to strike after a breakdown in communication with company
management; project overruns; or customers boycotting a company’s products.
• Critically evaluate the reasons why the stakeholders adopted a resistance mentally.
• What recommendations would you make to prevent such a situation occurring in
the future?
© ABE 79
Chapter 4 Managing Stakeholder Resistance
4.1 Assessing the response to your

engagement campaign
Assessing the stakeholder response to your stakeholder engagement campaign enables you to
identify early indications of resistance so that you take prompt action to manage resistance.
The response cycle offers an iterative process of monitoring to enable you to regain control if the
stakeholder response is negative or you are already facing a significant level of resistance from
your stakeholders.
NEED TO KNOW: The response cycle
Step 1: Step 2:
Identify Analyse
Step 5: Step 4: Step 3:

Review Act Plan
Figure 1: The response cycle (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
The response cycle demonstrates that as the engagement plan progresses, if the response of
the stakeholder is significantly different to that which you were anticipating (Step 1: Identify),
it is possible to revisit you analysis (Step 2: Analyse), and if necessary restart the stakeholder
engagement process (Step 3: Plan and Step 4: Act). A critical review of your initial stakeholder
analysis (Step 5: Review) may reveal the identification of new stakeholders that need to be
included in the engagement plan.
Identifying and managing resistance

Clayton (2014) introduced the onion model to provide an overview of how stakeholders resist
change. As you deal with each layer of resistance, there will appear another layer, and another, and
another, with each layer getting progressively more uncomfortable to deal with.
Before you can handle resistance, you need to be able to

recognise what is happening and understand the nature of the
resistance you are receiving.
Clayton (2014)
80 © ABE
Managing Stakeholder Resistance Chapter 4
Clayton (2014) identified six levels of resistance and offered a practical response for each level:
I do not Although change is a constant, Using evidence that resonates with

understand stakeholders may be unaware of what the stakeholder thinks, feels
why we need to the need to change. and believes demonstrates that
change failing to change is not an option.
I do not Although the stakeholder might If the failure is a simple lack of

understand why accept that change is necessary, understanding, moderate your
this changed they are not convinced that the message so that the stakeholder
approach you are taking is the can understand. However, if the
correct one to fix the problem. message has been misunderstood
and the stakeholder has got the
wrong impression, you need to
detect the misunderstanding and
correct it.
I do not like this Resistance can come in the In the case of loss aversion,
change form of the stakeholder wanting constructively engage with the
to maintain the status quo, stakeholder to diminish the
protecting their self-interest security of the status quo. Where
because they will be worse the stakeholder will genuinely be
off because of the change, worse off, be honest and act with
or because they believe the integrity in your dealings. Where
organisation will suffer as a the concern is related to whether
result of the change. what you are doing is genuinely
the right thing to do, listen to the
concerns of your stakeholder and
be respectful.
I do not like Resistance may stem from This type of resistance is linked
change a discomfort with changing to fear and has its origins in
routine, stress related to the emotional reaction of the
change, the speed at which stakeholder regarding the
change is occurring or cognitive implications of change. Address
rigidity where people have stakeholder fears on a personal
made up their mind they do not level, guiding the stakeholder
like the change. through the transition.
I do not like you A form of resistance that is In this instance, get to the
hard not to take personally root cause of the resistance.
but is rarely about you. The Understand what went wrong
stakeholder is reflecting an previously, find a way to deal with
historical experience and it (which requires ethical behaviour)
they wish to avoid a painful and consistently demonstrate that
repetition. it will be different this time.
I like to resist The rotten core of the onion Hopefully these people will be
model, sometimes people will removed during a recruitment
resist because that is part of who process, but if they are an
they are, based on a combination identified stakeholder then you
of nature and nurture. need to get them removed.
Table 1: Six levels of resistance to change Revision

on the go
© ABE 81
Whatever resistance you encounter during the implementation of your stakeholder plan, ensure
that you listen carefully to understand where on the onion model the stakeholder’s resistance is
coming from. Address the concern in order to negate the resistance.
Over to you
Activity 2: A personal onion model
Think about a recent situation where you have found yourself resisting change. Critically
reflect on what layers of the onion model your resistance was stemming from and
consider how your resistance could have been managed differently.
CASE STUDY: A manager who likes to resist

Lorenzo’s project falls at the first hurdle
Lorenzo was an external training provider who had agreed a
leadership development programme with the chief executive
of a large multi-site organisation. The project was a significant
piece of work; he had been instructed to liaise with the learning
and development manager to get the names of participants
and begin the process of scheduling in the dates for the
workshop and coaching.
I do not understand why we need to change

Lorenzo emailed the learning and development manager with the details he had agreed with
the chief executive, but rather than providing the information requested, Lorenzo received a
phone call demanding why the leadership programme was happening. A little taken aback,
Lorenzo explained that the contract had been agreed and he was following the direction of the
chief executive.
I do not understand why this changed

Before agreeing to provide participant names, the learning and development manager wanted
to revisit the leadership development programme outline. The exercise became a renegotiation
of the programme, both in regards to its structure and budget.
I do not like this change

Even after concessions were made to get the programme up and running, the learning and
development manager continued to resist efforts to get a list of participants and book dates for
the programme to go ahead. Her communication with Lorenzo and his staff was overwhelmingly
negative, rude and on many occasions unprofessional.
82 © ABE
I do not like change

The learning and development manager’s behaviour began to get more and more erratic. The
chief executive met with the learning and development manager to try and understand what
the issue was. The response given was in relation to other organisational changes that were
going on and the issues that the learning and development manager had with her line manager,
the HR director who had introduced a new strategy that changed the projects that the learning
and development manager was working on.
I do not like you

Eventually, Lorenzo met with the learning and development manager and asked her directly
whether she had a problem with him. The learning and development manager highlighted that
she did not like to work with external training providers and did not understand why the chief
executive had signed off the programme in the first place.
I like to resist
After almost three months of resistance, the HR director asked Lorenzo for copies of some of
the more destructive communications he had received from the learning and development
manager. Lorenzo began dealing with the HR director directly, and within two days had
received the participant list and dates were scheduled. A few months later, the learning and
development manager had left the organisation.
The onion model
I do not understand why we need to change
I do not understand why this changed
I do not like this change
I do not like change
I do not like you
I like to resist
Figure 2: The onion model (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
© ABE 83
Delivering tough messages

According to Clayton (2014), there are six steps to delivering tough messages. These are:
Step 1: Preparation Research the situation thoroughly and make a plan of what it is
you want to say to your stakeholder.
Step 2: Create safety Do not deliver tough messages in public spaces. Create a safe
environment in which to talk through the issues.
Step 3: Deliver your Provide clarity in your explanation when delivering a concise
message message. Most importantly, be respectful of the situation and
the stakeholder.
Step 4: Pause Give the stakeholder time to absorb what has been said and give
room for them to respond. Listen to their response and when you
do talk avoid being defensive.
Step 5: Invite a You might be delivering a tough message, but it does not mean
dialogue that there is no space for dialogue. Allow the conversation to flow,
sharing what you and the stakeholder think, feel and believe, for
as long as needed.
Step 6: Next steps As the conversation draws to a natural close, review the agreed next
steps. Understand that the parting may lack exuberant cheerfulness
as the stakeholder may need time to process the discussion.
Table 2: Six steps to delivering tough messages (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Over to you
Activity 3: Delivering a tough message
Consider someone with whom you need to have a difficult conversation. Develop a plan
for your conversation with them:
• Is confrontation the right approach?
• How will you best do this?
• What do you need to know about them to develop an understanding of your
position? Are you being overly judgemental?
• What are your main arguments/points? Avoid over-generalising and consider your
evidence.
• What are your fall-back positions? How does their behaviour/actions adversely
affect yours, other people or the situation?
• What is the issue for them? What reasons might there be for their actions and
behaviour that might alter how you approach the issue?
• What outcome are you looking for? What does success look like?
84 © ABE
4.2 Practical ways of managing and resolving

conflict
Although not an ideal situation, sometimes stakeholder resistance can lead to real conflict.
However, there are practical ways of managing and resolving conflict so that stakeholder
engagement can be achieved in line with the project’s objectives.
Dealing with conflict

When conflict happens, in many ways strategic stakeholder relationships have broken down and
stakeholder engagement has failed. However, when conflicting with a stakeholder or stakeholder
group, it is important that the wider stakeholder communication plan mitigates any fallout from
the conflict. You must also keep in mind that conflict can escalate beyond something as simple as
miscommunication, which can be resolved with a simple conversation to result in all-out hostility
and litigation.
© ABE 85
NEED TO KNOW: Escalation of conflict
All-out hostility
Litigation
Disciplinary action
Arbitration
Mediation
Facilitated conversation
Talking and listening
A quiet chat
Minimal intervention
Ignore the issue
Figure 3: Escalation of conflict (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
Over to you
Activity 4: Conflict escalated
Working with a group, discuss your experience of a conflict that has escalated. This may
be something that happened to you personally, or a situation you are aware of, either
within your own network or something you are aware of in the news.
Review the conflict in regards to what part each party played in escalating the conflict.
Develop a timeline for the conflict as it moved through the conflict escalation modes.
Critically review what actions could have been taken by either party in the conflict to stop
its escalation.
86 © ABE
Achieving mutual agreement

Use of negotiation to achieve mutual agreement.
Stakeholder engagement, especially on the partner and collaborate continuum (Chapter 3.2,
p. 70), can be characterised as a form of negotiation between the stakeholder and the organisation.
Negotiation is a process of exchange and bargaining aimed at reaching mutual agreement. It is
in some ways soft conflict, in that rather than pushing the two parties apart, the communication is
aimed at finding solutions to problems and finding an outcome which is of benefit to both parties.
This process aims to reach agreement between the different parties. In order to negotiate, it is
essential that you develop great interpersonal skills, including:
• effective communication skills • problem solving
• active listening • decision making and assertiveness
• rapport building • managing difficult situations
Clayton (2014) outlines four steps to the negotiation process:
Preparation Set out the outcome you wish to achieve and develop a good
understanding of the stakeholder.
Opening Build rapport and ensure you are negotiating with the decision maker. Ask
the stakeholder to outline their objective.
Bargaining This is where the negotiation happens, establishing trading positions and
ensuring that both you and your stakeholder trade concessions to satisfy
both your interests.
Close Bring the negotiation to a close when an agreement can be reached.
Table 3: Four steps to the negotiation process (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
The soft conflict of negotiation
Preparation Opening Bargaining Close
Figure 4: The soft conflict of negotiation (Clayton, 2014) Revision

on the go
© ABE 87
Ensuring sustainability of outcome

Using an ethical approach to messaging and behaviour to ensure sustainability of outcome is not
easy to achieve. Carroll and Buchholtz (2014) suggest that there is a mutual dependency between
all stakeholders. It is recommended that organisations follow “the Clarkson principles” to guide the
ethical treatment of key stakeholders to move from transactional stakeholder management to that
of stakeholder symbiosis.
In the future, development of loyal relationships with customers, employees,

shareholders, and other stakeholders will become one of the most important
determinants of commercial viability and business success.
Carroll and Buchholtz (2014)
Principle 1 Acknowledge and monitor concerns of legitimate stakeholders.

Principle 2 Listen and communicate with stakeholders.
Principle 3 Adopt processes and behaviour that is aligned to stakeholder concerns.
Principle 4 Recognise interdependence between stakeholders and the organisation.
Principle 5 Work co-operatively to reduce risk.
Principle 6 Avoid activities that risk human rights.
Principle 7 Acknowledge potential conflicts.
Table 4: The Clarkson principles Revision

on the go
Crisis management
Textbook stakeholder engagement planning does not capture the reality of having to manage a
crisis management in case of disaster or emergency. Developing a disaster or crisis plan requires
deep thought to be given to what you would do in a crisis, and preparing and planning to be able
to respond quickly when a crisis does occur.
Clayton (2014) outlines the first three steps of crisis management as:
1 information gathering;
2 brief the spokesperson;
3 identify the questions that stakeholders and the media may ask. Prepare answers to these
questions.
Contingency planning will allow you to identify important stakeholder “what if” situations. However,
where a situation arises that is not pre-planned, then you must quickly identify the important
stakeholders and reassure them that the situation is under control. Staff who are not part of the
official media response team must stick to the script. Ensure only those who have had media
training are authorised to speak to the media.
If the crisis is big, for example, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, it would be advisable to
appoint advisors to help navigate the crisis and minimise reputational damage.
88 © ABE
Over to you
Activity 5: Crisis management
Working in pairs, if possible, critically review a crisis that you are familiar with.
What controls were in place and what was the plan for managing the crisis? Give evidence
for your response.
In your opinion, what went well with the organisation’s response to the crisis? What
recommendations would you make to develop a crisis plan?
Reading list
• Mario Minoja, Maurizio Zollo, Vittorio Coda, (2010) “Stakeholder cohesion, innovation, and
competitive advantage”, Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in
society, Vol. 10 Issue: 4, pp. 395–405. (This article will be available in your online student
resources.)
• Kirsi Aaltonen Jaakko Kujala, Päivi Lehtonen, Inkeri Ruuska, (2010) “A stakeholder network
perspective on unexpected events and their management in international projects”,
International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 3 Issue: 4, pp. 564–588. (This
article will be available in your online student resources.)
Summary
Stakeholder management enables you to manage stakeholders who affect and are affected by
your project or organisation strategy. How individual stakeholders react to change is not the whole
story. When resistance occurs, stakeholders may feel uncomfortable or feel their security is under
threat. Managing stakeholder fear and uncertainty through proper planning protects your project
or organisation from stakeholders becoming an opposing force and threatening the success of your
project.
© ABE 89
Glossary
Glossary
Apex stakeholders Stakeholders who can Negotiation An active dialogue which seeks
influence many other stakeholders but are to end in an agreement between all parties.
little influenced by others. They are hard to
influence, but if you can do so you can then Neutral stakeholder A stakeholder who is
influence many others. undecided about an issue.
Attitude The emotional state that Power The ability to impose your will over
accompanies a stakeholder’s interest or people or events.
concern.
Primary stakeholder One who is readily
Balanced Scorecard Creates measures influenced by others, but they are also good
across a range of different parameters to ensure at influencing others and can therefore have
that work is not effective in one area at the significant impact on perceptions.
expense of effectiveness in other areas.
Secondary stakeholder One who is readily
Basal stakeholders Those who have influenced by apex and primary stakeholders.
changeable views and are easily influenced by They have an important role to play in the
others. project and may have limited influence over
others.
Behavioural economics A theory of
decision making that starts with the premise Sociogram Sometimes called a ‘‘social
that human behaviour is irrational, but if we can network diagram’’ – a simple way to map
gather sufficient data, is largely predictable. relationships between stakeholders.
Benefits register A tool that records Soft power The ability to attract, co-opt and
all the positive outcomes associated with a persuade.
programme, usually in relation to a particular
Stakeholder Anyone who has an interest in
stakeholders.
what you are doing.
Contractogram A form of sociogram that
Stakeholder engagement The process of
captures the relationships of those who are
actively contacting, communicating with and
contracted to one another.
influencing a stakeholder.
Collaborative relationships Two or more
Stakeholder map A visual tool that
people or organisations working together to
represents a stakeholder’s characteristics.
achieve a common goal.
Stakeholder triage A quick way of
Impact The ability to affect the realities of the
grouping stakeholders by evaluating them
world through power and influence.
against a limited but salient range of criteria.
Influence The ability to affect other people’s
Strategic Identifying aims/interests and
attitudes and behaviours.
establishing how to achieve them.
Interest The level of concern with a project.
Transformer A high-impact stakeholder
Lobbying Activity which seeks to influence a who can potentially act as a game changer and
person or decision. transform the project you are working on.
Milestone A significant event or stage in

the life, progress or development of a person,
nation, etc.
90 © ABE

Level 6 Strategic

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Level 6 Strategic

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Level 6 Strategic

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Yo u r road to success

Your road to success

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or

Copyright © ABE 2017

All facts are correct at time of publication.

Author: Caroline Foster

Editorial and project management by Haremi Ltd.

The publishers gratefully acknowledge permission to reproduce the following

Chapter 1 Strategic Influence of Stakeholders 2

1.1 The importance of stakeholder analysis4

Chapter 2 Engaging with stakeholders 32

Chapter 3 Communication with Stakeholders 60

3.1 Key components of the message that need to be communicated62

Chapter 4 Managing Stakeholder Resistance 78

4.1 Assessing the response to your engagement campaign 80

Element of Learning Key capabilities

Element 1: Strategic Influence of Ability to assess the strategic significance of an

Commercial acumen, stakeholder awareness

Element 2: Engaging with Stakeholders Ability to analyse a project’s stakeholders in

Stakeholder awareness, prioritisation, stakeholder

Element 3: Communication with Ability to develop relevant messaging and

Targeted communications, campaign planning and

Listening, negotiation, assertiveness, conflict

• has advanced practical, conceptual or • determine, refine, adapt and use

The stakeholder notion is indeed a deceptively simple one.

Stakeholder impact can either affect or be affected by the achievement of an organisation’s

1.1 The importance of stakeholder analysis

Methods of identifying stakeholders in relation to a project

Method Description Pros and Cons

Brainwriting A simultaneously individualistic and • simple

Method Description Pros and Cons

Stakeholder A formal record that captures the details • can be time-consuming to

Scenarios Scenarios are descriptions of a sequence • useful for facilitating

Task-by-Task Documents themed relationships • breaks down the stakeholder

• those who will evaluate the success of

Method Description Pros and Cons

Horizon A systematic analysis of information • long-term strategic approach

Methods of identifying stakeholders

Task-by-task Scenarios and

Figure 1: Methods of identifying stakeholders Revision

Managers Managers have a similar stake to that of employees but in exchange

Customers Customers provide resources to the organisation in the form of financial

Local An immediate beneficiary of the presence of an organisation receiving

Table 1: Six vital stakeholder categories (Freeman, 1984) Revision

A stakeholder model of the organisation

Figure 2: A stakeholder model of the organisation (Freeman, 1984) Revision

Wide definitions of stakeholders

Stakeholders are those who have a stake in an organisation’s

The communication model of change offers an overview of the strategic dimensions of

CASE STUDY: Engaging Opinion Leaders

Co-opting opinion leaders

Influencing others during the design process

Embedding the training

Specific stakeholder roles

Opinion leader Journalists

Figure 3: Specific stakeholder roles (Lewis, 2011) Revision

The “Big Six”

Interest This relates to activities of the organisation or subjects that concern a

Attitude Attitude is concerned with how stakeholders feel or think about a

Chapter 1 Strategic Influence of Stakeholders 2

1.1 The importance of stakeholder analysis4

Chapter 2 Engaging with stakeholders 32

Chapter 3 Communication with Stakeholders 60

3.1 Key components of the message that need to be communicated62

Chapter 4 Managing Stakeholder Resistance 78

4.1 Assessing the response to your engagement campaign 80

NEED TO KNOW: Mendelow Matrix

NEED TO KNOW: The power and interest matrix