How can you analyze stakeholders before starting a change project?

Never underestimate the ‘political landscape’ of stakeholders within the change environment. Understanding the ambitions and pain points (ie key drivers) of stakeholders is often not as obvious as it may first appear - lift the covers and search for the truth!

This is an interesting question. Given the complex network of relationships across IT and business ecosystems, there is very little change that is limited to a single stakeholder. What is a stakeholder? Well, in today’s language a stakeholder should be someone who is a) impacted and b) has a vested interest in ensuring a successful outcome. Someone who will guide you on how to make it happen rather than ask you to prove it can happen. With lots of projects running at any given time, all driving for speed and quality… does it really make sense for each project to be undertaking silo’d stakeholder analysis? Would it not make more sense for domain stakeholders to proactively publish and communicate their interests / hot spots regularly? ??

Often not all stakeholders are identified at the start of a change project. One of the ways thats worked best for me is in every discussion, probe the stakeholders on who else may be impacted or involved in the change. Make a list - invite everyone, communicate with everyone either by cascading a status update or inviting to specific meetings. Over time, some of the "stakeholders" will drop off while others will get added.

When I'm creating a change communication plan for my clients, the stakeholder analysis is where the magic happens. We have a detailed discussion about each stakeholder group. We discuss their Characteristics (what they do in relation to the change, current attitudes, how they like to receive info, etc.), Desired Behaviors (what do we need them to do for change to be successful) and how important they are to the success of the change. During these discussions, we always uncover something that could have been a problem if it hadn't been discovered until late into the change process.

What is useful is too look for the "invisible" stakeholder.... You may be wondering, what the heck does he mean? Identifying key stakeholders is an obvious first step. Assessing their level of influence and risk is a second. But have you ever thought about the invisible ones? For example... Executive Assistants! They are gold. Treasures. Invaluable. They have their fingers on the pulse, understand the dynamics and subtly influence. #just saying

Stakeholder analysis can be a game changer in many healthcare settings. Having a first hand experience of it, it promotes informed decision-making, helps with resource allocation, improve communicatio, build trusts and help with overall success and longevity for the organisation. But it is essential that the analysis involves across the board representing all the sections and there is a countinous feedback loop.

Understanding why we do this is simple: you want to avoid surprises. By knowing who's who in your project, you can figure out the best way to keep everyone informed and happy. It's about having fewer bumps along the road.

The why of stakeholder analysis is simply to help put guiderails around the change you are making. If the change has high impact to a stakeholder group, or there are stakeholders with high influence in your organization, then they can make our break the outcome. Additionally, understanding if it will be high or low effort to bring a stakeholder through a change will be key to how you plan your change roll out and stakeholder management strategy. In short, the why is so you can make thoughtful and intentional decisions how you drive a change.

Figuring out who your stakeholders are can be as straightforward as asking around and making a list. Think about who's going to be affected, who can help you out, and who might need a bit more convincing.

A couple ways I like to go about identifying stakeholders is to first understand if there is a formal program or project structure in place. (Don't forget that the people driving the project or change are some of the most needed stakeholders to align to the mission). I use a couple tools to help me: SIPOC - who might be supplying, processing or consuming something today that will likely be impacted by the change? Fishbone - people associated with manpower (roles), mechanics/methods (processes), materials (data), machines (IT). Org charts - authority, owners, relationships. Existing governance models - consultative partners Lastly, it is imperative to lean into a small group of confidants to close gaps you may not have awareness of.

I like to do ”Sponsor interviews” to find out the individual views of a change. This allows me to hear sponsors/stakeholders expressing and explaining the impact of a change with their own words. A way to discover gaps in knowledge and understanding but also a way to assess their personal committment. On the less implicit side sponsor interviews allow for developing relations and trust. You, the CM, allow the sponsor to be in focus, be listened to and not argued with or challenged. By using the same set of questions in all the interviews I gather input that is comparable. Next step: 1:1 coaching sessions to ”foster” the sponsorship qualities needed. I use the interview input to analyze each sponsor, setting actions.

Sorting your list is next. You could think of it as deciding who gets VIP passes and who's in the regular crowd. Some folks have more say or need more attention, so you plan how to talk to each group accordingly.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on the matrix. I use this 2x2 described. I also do a second 2x2, plotting high/low effort and high/low readiness to make the change. This helps with roll out planning and stakeholder management strategies.

Assessing how your much involvement your stakeholders want and can contribute at the time it is needed is key to aligning engagement plans. It may come down to what priority can be given while still meeting critical timelines - but at least having a mutual understanding of the trade-off is highly beneficial.

Getting everyone involved is key. Share your plans, ask for their thoughts, and keep them in the loop. It's like keeping friends updated about party plans – ensuring they show up and have a good time.

One thing I have found helpful with managing senior stakeholders is engaging with them "how" they want to be engaged. Their time is precious, so be very clear about their role on the project, what you or the project needs from them and what they will in turn get from you. In addition to providing clarity, ask them how best and how often they wish to be engaged; this will allow you to establish the right channel and frequency of engagement. By doing this, you make them feel valued, show you care about them and increase the level of satisfaction.

There is a very heavy emphasis in this article on plans, spreadsheets, maps, categorisation and so on and very little about actually taking any meaningful action as a result of those things. Another way to approach this is: 1. Find the people that have an influence on whether or not you achieve the benefits 2. Go and listen to what they have to say, properly listen...empathise and ask questions. 3. Take action based on what they've said. It isn't about the artifacts being produced to tick a box on a deliverable. It's about human connection and action through meaningful engagement, dialogue, communication etc.

Change is like a surprise party – inevitable, but not always easy. To make it a hit, analyze and engage stakeholders. They're your party guests; some dance in right away, others need convincing. Remember, even reluctant dancers might have the coolest moves!

Through identifying their interests, influence, and potential impact on the project. Use tools like stakeholder maps or matrices to categorize stakeholders based on their level of support or resistance to the change. For example, in implementing a new software system, stakeholders may include end-users, IT department, managers, and external vendors. Engage with each stakeholder group to understand their needs, concerns, and expectations regarding the change. By conducting thorough stakeholder analysis, project teams can tailor communication strategies, anticipate potential challenges, and garner support from key stakeholders, increasing the likelihood of project success.

I agree with all text here. Besides to identify and listen our key stakeholders we need to talk with who will be most impacted by change, end users. As the same we need sponsor speech and money, we need people to use and reinforce the change around the company.

How about reframing the question? Instead of trying to analyse stakeholders, try to understand them instead. I interpret analyse as examining something in the same way as you would an inanimate object - methodically and pretty hands off - in order to explain and interpret it. People aren’t inanimate objects! Seeking to fully understand might be more work up front but it sets everyone up with a better foundation for success.