There have always been ‘stakeholders’ in any venture but, according to The Oxford English Dictionary the word was first used in 1708.  The concept has now become a metaphor to describe people having a tangible interest or claim (a “stake”) in something of value.

Despite the term being around for over three hundred years it only became topical in business circles in 1963.  An internal memorandum by the Stanford Research Institute used it and, after the publication of “Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach” by Professor R. Edward Freeman in 1984 the ‘stakeholder concept’ arrived.  This concept, having evolved over a couple of decades was defined as “those groups without whose support the organization would cease to exist.’  Businesses ‘suddenly’ became aware of the importance of stakeholders.’

Some stakeholder or other will pay for the project, others will be the end-users, and some will physically work on, or contribute to it.  There are also those who can, and do, gain from the problems that may arise during a project’s lifecycle as well as benefit from yet another stakeholders’ misfortune.  Managing supportive stakeholders is essential but also relatively easy, but what about those who are either unsupportive or undecided?

Project Stakeholder Management

The 1996 edition of the PMI’s PMBoK included references to stakeholders, and it was advocated that project management was aimed at “meeting or exceeding stakeholder needs and expectations”.  In 2004 this was changed to become “meeting the project requirements” and in 2012 a separate knowledge area, ‘Project Stakeholder Management’, was introduced rather than being included under ‘communication’.

This knowledge area requires the identification of people or organizations affected by the project together with analysing their expectations and their impact on the project.  “Expectations” however can be dangerous!  Despite being subjective they are based upon anticipatory beliefs about some future outcome rather than objective “requirements’ that are SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant & Time-bound).

Stakeholders and requirements have both been the subject of evolution in the PMBoK over the past 25-odd years.

After identifying the stakeholders there comes the more perplexing task of analysing stakeholders to determine not only their interests and expectations but also their influence and position.

Stakeholder Analyses

The analysis of stakeholders typically uses a two-by-two matrix.  In the PMBoK it’s about ‘power and interest’ but for others it’s about ‘influence & supportiveness’:

Not every project has its supporters and not every stakeholder is necessarily interested or influential.  Some parties, or individuals, may vehemently object to a project despite a project sponsor or project team’s best efforts to convince them otherwise.

Interest is a two-way street – mutual interest begets more interest but if a stakeholder is not interested or supportive then the project team may also lose interest.  This is a big mistake.  Uninterested or ‘non-fussed’ stakeholders may actually be quite powerful and if they are ignored then this could be to a project’s peril.  Stakeholder analysis is not just about the other party, it is also about analysing a project team’s attitude and expectations.  And this is where the strategy for managing stakeholders is perhaps most important.

Fickle Friends

Most of us will have heard the phrase, ‘keep your friends close but your enemies closer.’  It’s commonly used but its sageness does not originate in some ancient text such as Sun Tzu’s The Art of War or a ruthless Machiavellian manuscript.  It’s from Francis Ford Coppola’s 1974 movie, The Godfather Part II.

Friends, real friends in a stakeholder sense, are those who genuinely support a project no matter what their power or interest.  But, as with personal friends, if ignored or forgotten or only contacted in times of need then that ‘friendship’ can easily become tenuous.  To preserve and nurture the relationship, ‘friends’ should be the subject of open and regular communication and keeping them abreast of matters, both good and bad; nobody like surprises.

Projects are inevitably about business and most relationships boil down to that bottom line, profit.  For those stakeholders with high interest and power, be it political or economic, then if monetary requirements or expectations are not being realized, or there’s an inkling of loss, then even a once avid supporter may quickly change their support and become fickle.  When it comes to profit and loss there’s sometimes no love lost between stakeholders who look at monetary loss rather than overall (and longer term) value…fickle is as fickle does.

Friendly Foes

So why keep foes close if friends too can be fickle?  Fickleness may be managed through interaction, communication, and explanation but out-and-out unsupportiveness by a stakeholder after a project commences means that there is a constant threat and possibly constant confrontation.

To combat such a situation and manage the ‘wayward’ stakeholder then we need to find out what the ‘enemy’ is doing.  Sun Tzu advocated that “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.”  To know an unsupportive party needs an understanding of why they are opposed to a project.  This requires dialogue and communication which, for a project team with a positive and optimistic view of their project, can be a difficult if not daunting task.  Rather than collaboration, confrontation can easily result as each party hunkers down and builds upon their own position rather than building the project.

Any negative view by a stakeholder cannot be ignored because, as soon as a project meets some hiccup, that negative view becomes a prophesy.  Other stakeholders can be easily swayed and adversely influenced by ‘bad press’ and the project may be put at risk.  This is why it’s important for a project team to also ‘know its own self.’  SWOT analyses are not only about identifying strengths and opportunities, and threats and weaknesses but knowing, understanding, and addressing weaknesses at a corporate and individual level.

Conclusions

There are stakeholders on every project, and all require various degrees of management, engagement, and involvement.  Stakeholder management can be difficult, particularly if some parties or individuals are unsupportive or even opposed to a project.  It’s also difficult if a project team does not engage positively, confidently, collaboratively, and uniformly with ‘one voice.’

It is said that “you can satisfy all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you cannot satisfy all of the people all of the time.”  The same is true of stakeholders.  Some stakeholders somewhere at some time will have a complaint.  People complain, even if things are going well or they merely have an axe to grind.  However, some complaints can be more far-reaching than others, especially from influential opponents.

Dealing with unsupportive stakeholders can be a painful experience.  Just as pain is weakness leaving the body, working with such stakeholders can build a stronger relationship and help convert opposition into support.  Such support may be through keeping unsupportive elements apart using a divide and conquer approach with one-to-one meetings.  Alternatively, a ‘hands-off’ approach of, ‘if you can’t beat them join them’ approach may be adopted.  By letting opposing elements argue their differences it can allow the opportunity for the project team to act as an intermediary for an optimal conclusion.

Stakeholders are, ultimately, people.  Some will be openly friendly and trusting while others will staunchly defend their opinion.  A project team may see such stanchness as stubbornness but will soon learn that escalated arguments only promotes more conflict and increased staunchness.  We also have those who are fickle, change their mind at the drop of a hat ,or at a perceived loss of profit, and are less than dependable supporters.

People make or break projects and so do stakeholders.  To manage the ‘stakeholders’ a project team needs to know ‘them,’ as well as themselves…on a project we are all stakeholders.