Strategy and analysis

Stakeholder Prioritisation

Compare the importance, influence, and engagement needs of different stakeholder groups. Useful for strategy, governance, sustainability, partnerships, and change management. The criteria can be changed, added to and weighted.

Start

What the framework is

Stakeholder prioritisation ranks the people and groups a project affects by how much influence they have and how much they are affected. That way, engagement effort goes where it counts. It's usually drawn as a power-interest grid:

  • High influence, high interest: manage closely.
  • High influence, low interest: keep satisfied.
  • Low influence, high interest: keep informed.
  • Low influence, low interest: monitor.

What the result looks like

EXAMPLE
Which stakeholders should we engage first?
Top ranked
Regional managers
Influence 92% · 1st
Dependency 63% · 1st
Risk Exposure 38% · 3rd
Collaboration Potential 75% · 1st
Strategic Importance 50% · 2nd
63%
Weighted win rate

Overall

Options Weighted win rate
01
Regional managers
Influence 1st · Dependency 1st · Risk Exposure 3rd · Collaboration Potential 1st · Strategic Importance 2nd
63%
02
Trade union
Influence 2nd · Dependency 2nd · Risk Exposure 1st · Collaboration Potential 3rd · Strategic Importance 1st
52%
03
Largest customer
Influence 3rd · Dependency 3rd · Risk Exposure 2nd · Collaboration Potential 2nd · Strategic Importance 3rd
35%

Overall with the criteria

Rank
Options
 Influence
20%
 Dependency
20%
 Risk Exposure
20%
 Collaboration Potential
20%
 Strategic Importance
20%
 Overall
Weighted win rate
01 Regional managers
92%
1st
63%
1st
38%
3rd
75%
1st
50%
2nd
63%
02 Trade union
42%
2nd
58%
2nd
71%
1st
33%
3rd
54%
1st
52%
03 Largest customer
17%
3rd
29%
3rd
42%
2nd
42%
2nd
46%
3rd
35%

By the options

01 · Regional managers 63% weighted win rate
–
Influence
92%
1st of 3 · 22 Wins · 2 Losses
–
Dependency
63%
1st of 3 · 15 Wins · 9 Losses
–
Risk Exposure
38%
3rd of 3 · 9 Wins · 15 Losses
–
Collaboration Potential
75%
1st of 3 · 18 Wins · 6 Losses
–
Strategic Importance
50%
2nd of 3 · 12 Wins · 12 Losses
02 · Trade union 52% weighted win rate
–
Influence
42%
2nd of 3 · 10 Wins · 14 Losses
–
Dependency
58%
2nd of 3 · 14 Wins · 10 Losses
–
Risk Exposure
71%
1st of 3 · 17 Wins · 7 Losses
–
Collaboration Potential
33%
3rd of 3 · 8 Wins · 16 Losses
–
Strategic Importance
54%
1st of 3 · 13 Wins · 11 Losses
03 · Largest customer 35% weighted win rate
–
Influence
17%
3rd of 3 · 4 Wins · 20 Losses
–
Dependency
29%
3rd of 3 · 7 Wins · 17 Losses
–
Risk Exposure
42%
2nd of 3 · 10 Wins · 14 Losses
–
Collaboration Potential
42%
2nd of 3 · 10 Wins · 14 Losses
–
Strategic Importance
46%
3rd of 3 · 11 Wins · 13 Losses
Scoring Explanations
CRITERIA WEIGHTINGS — The % weighting for each criterion is shown in the table header. Unless this was entered in the setup, the weighting is equal across criteria.
WEIGHTED WIN RATE — Each criterion's result, in the measure they share, averaged using the assigned weightings.

When it earns its place

Use it at the start of a project, a change programme, a policy consultation or a campaign. The trap is that the map shows only the project team's view, and groups the team rarely meets get underrated.

How to run it with a group

  1. List six to ten stakeholders as specific groups or people, not "the public".
  2. Participants compare them two at a time on influence, dependency, risk exposure, collaboration potential and strategic importance. Participants do not need an account to respond.
  3. Include people from outside the project team.
  4. The results rank the stakeholders once on each criterion. Read the grid from the influence ranking and what you know of each group's interest, and give each stakeholder in the high-influence, high-interest group an owner.

Get started

Start