This
article is based on an initial submission to Walden University in partial
fulfillment of the requirement for completion of an assignment.
In the context of strategic planning for social development enterprises,
stakeholder analysis is paramount. But how does one conduct a stakeholder
analysis? Understanding the vision, mission, and goal or the organization
can be a useful first step. In other words, what your organization does or
espouses to do? It is equally useful to understand who a stakeholder is—in this
context, it would be that person or institution that will stand to loose or
gain from the actions of planning by your organization (Dewhurst &
FitzPatrick, 2005. p.6) and based on the description of what you do, the
organization could potentially have the following as their stakeholders: grass
root networks; women’s groups; lower local governments; protection committee
members at the village, parish and sub-county levels; employees; Area Local
Councilors (local politicians); donors, National Boards, board members of your organisation, in and
out of school young persons and your own peers (non-governmental organizations)
working around the same issues or geographical location.
For a strategic planning process, your organization may not need all of
them so you will have to think through who among these stakeholders would have
the desired resources for a successful strategic planning process as well as
the process of implementation or depending on your business; the span of
influence over the strategic planning process (Bryson, 2011; Dewhurst &
Fitz Patrick, 2005; Parent & Deephouse, 2007), which you will determine through
a stakeholders’ analysis. To help better understand this, a set of fundamental questions can be
used. Table 1 below summarizes a list of stakeholders constructed using
fundamental questions advanced by Parent & Deephouse (2007):-
- Among the
listed stakeholder, who should be on your side in order to operate
successfully?
- Who can
level the ground for you and make it easy?
- Who may
make it hard for you so that you may engage them ahead of time?
Table 1: Proposed Stakeholders
Interest
|
|||
Low
|
High
|
||
Power and
Influence
|
Low
|
Corner A:
Stakeholders in this corner require minimal
effort from you
1.
Your peers (non-governmental organizations)
|
Corner B:
Stakeholders in this corner must be kept in the know
1.
Grass-root networks
2.
Women’s groups
3.
In and out of school young persons
4.
etc
|
High
|
Corner C: Stakeholders in this corner must be kept
satisfied.
1.
Area Local Councilors (local politicians)
2.
National NGO Board
|
Corner D: These
stakeholders are the key players. Efforts
must be directed at them.
1.
Lower local governments
2.
Child protection committee members at village,
parish and sub-county levels
3.
Donors,
4.
Board members
5.
Employees
|
|
Adapted from Johnson & Scholes Model in Dewhurst
& FitzPatrick, 2005
Stakeholder groups in box “A”
even though may have less influence and interest in what is going on; are also
looking for funds from most likely the same donors for their own processes. You
need to consider ways of improving collaboration and cooperation with them to
avoid competition.
The stakeholder group in box “B”
can “smoothen” things up for you for they are interested and the project if
well considered would directly impact their lives and that of their families.
Stakeholders in box B will have greater support for your organization, provided
that they are informed. Given that majority would not read and write in the
context of Uganda, writing or sharing with them newsletters isn’t ideal.
Holding community dialogues would work. Their support of the process provides
legitimacy to your strategic planning exercise since they are the primary
beneficiaries.
Stakeholders of box “C” are
the ones your organization must keep satisfied; by characteristics, they hold a
lot of power and influence but may not be interested in the details of
programming at organisation. They may be kept satisfied by ensuring that they
comply with the laws, and regulations of the national board; and avoid what Bryson
(2011) termed “philanthropic particularism”, “philanthropic paternalism”, and
“philanthropic amateurism” (p.120); implying your organization must be able to
generate and invest adequate and reliable resources for the communities, avoid
selective non-equitable and discriminative targeting of beneficiaries, avoid
swindling the project funds and work through professionals.
The key players are those in box “D”;
they have the resources necessary for your organisation’s programming, and they can
break or make the strategic planning exercise for they have both the power and
or influence and interest in the exercise. Stakeholders in box D may not
automatically support the exercise in spite of having the greatest influence
and interest. You have to influence them and obtain their buy-in and commitment.
In order to solicit or maintain their support for the process, stakeholders
in box D must be informed in writing; meetings or prior discussions or
consultation to boost their awareness, understanding and support (Dewhurst
& FitzPatrick, 2005.p. 7). You may consider earlier “incorporation [into
the exercise and, sharing of] confidence, showing compromises” with them and so
on (ibid.). You require maintaining the buy-in and commitment of stakeholders
in box B by providing frequent feedback to the members on the different stages
of planning and implementation. The commitment of the group in C will be
maintained by following the requirements of the law and policies in place. For
the politicians, ensuring that the ACODEV isn’t involved in philanthropic
particularism”, “philanthropic paternalism and “philanthropic amateurism” would
be necessary. Your organization can choose to ignore group A stakeholders at
the risk of heightened competition and malice.
Reference
& Further Readings
Action for Community Development.
Who we are, how we work. (2013) Retrieved from: http://www.acodevuganda.org Bryson, J.
M. (2011). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: A guide
to Strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement (4th ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Dewhurst, S., & FitzPatrick, L.
(2005). Turning stakeholders into advocates. Strategic Communication
Management, 9(6), 6–7. Document ID: 925428051.
Parent, M. M., & Deephouse, D.
L. (2007). A case study of stakeholder identification and prioritization by
managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(1), 1–23. Document ID: 1328615741.
Yankey, A. J. (n.d.) Strategic
Planning. Retrieved:
Williams, B. (n.d). Strategy and
Strategy Development. Retrieved:
http://users.actrix.com/bobwill/strategy.doc
