DPGE1002 Chap.3 Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder analysis explains who is affected, who can influence the outcome and what each actor needs from others. The chapter keeps concern, priority, expectation, power and impact in separate columns so a simple ranking does not erase important differences. It then converts the matrix into an engagement plan by identifying dependencies, conflicts, possible coalitions and suitable forms of participation.
Start with the decision or change being analysed. A category such as students, staff or community may be too broad when members experience different effects or possess different authority. Split a category only when the distinction changes a concern, priority, influence pathway or engagement need. A concern names a risk or consequence, while a priority states what the stakeholder wants to protect or achieve.
Expectations describe what the actor believes another party should provide. Keeping these elements separate prevents a vague label from standing in for analysis. Influence concerns the ability to shape rules, resources, information or implementation. Impact concerns what the issue does to the stakeholder.
A low-influence group can face the greatest harm, so a power ranking alone can silence the evidence most important to fairness and feasibility. Add dependencies to show what each actor needs from another: authority, funding, operational knowledge, participation, trust or data. Conflicts often become manageable when the dependency is visible.
Two stakeholders may disagree about the proposal while sharing a need for reliable information or a safe process. Map possible coalitions carefully; common ground on one action does not erase different motives. The final purpose is engagement design. Decide who must approve, who can implement, who supplies evidence, who should be consulted and whose experience requires protection.
Update the map when new evidence, public attention, alliances or authority changes, because stakeholder positions are current judgements rather than permanent traits.
What this chapter covers
- 01
Internal and external stakeholders
- 02
Concerns versus priorities
- 03
Expectations and dependencies
- 04
Influence versus impact
- 05
Engagement strategy and change over time
Worked example · free
Compare three actors in a late shuttle proposal
- +1Separate each stakeholder's concern, priority and influence.
- +1Identify what each actor depends on another actor to provide.
- +1Name the central conflict and the groups most affected by it.
- +1Design a pilot with shared responsibilities and a review condition.
Key terms
- Internal stakeholder
- An actor within a system who has a direct role or vested interest.
- External stakeholder
- An actor outside the system who is affected by or interested in its outcomes.
- Stakeholder influence
- The power to shape decisions, resources, rules or implementation.
- Stakeholder impact
- The positive, negative or mixed effect the issue has on an actor.
Stakeholder Analysis FAQ
Is the most powerful stakeholder always the most important?
No. High power may determine implementation, while a low-power group may experience the greatest harm. Keep influence and impact separate, then design engagement that protects both decision quality and affected voices. Engagement must therefore reflect both formal authority and lived consequence, especially when the affected group cannot control implementation.
How do priorities differ from concerns?
A priority identifies what the stakeholder most wants to protect or achieve. A concern identifies a risk or consequence that threatens that priority. Connecting the two explains why the position exists. Evidence about the threatened priority helps distinguish a genuine stakeholder concern from a generic topic attached to every actor.
When should a stakeholder map be updated?
Revisit it when evidence, authority, public attention or alliances change. Wicked problems evolve, so influence and interest are current judgements rather than permanent labels fixed for the whole project. Redraw dependencies and engagement needs as well as changing a rating, because new alliances can alter who supplies evidence or authority.
Exam move
Choose an unfamiliar campus issue and build a matrix without ranking first. Fill concerns, priorities, expectations, influence and impact with concise evidence-based notes. Draw arrows for dependencies and conflicts. Only then choose an engagement approach for each stakeholder and explain what information or decision you need from that actor. Test the map with two questions.
First, could the stakeholder recognise the stated concern and priority as fair? Second, does the evidence justify the assigned level of influence and impact? Replace unsupported assumptions with a research question. Read across the rows to identify conflicts and down the columns to find actors who share a concern for different reasons.
Draft one engagement sentence per stakeholder that names the purpose, method and information required. Revisit the map after introducing a new incident detail and record which cells change. That exercise trains you to treat the matrix as a working model rather than a decorative table completed once.