Powering Change
Stakeholder and Network Engagement (in Change Projects)
by Anneke Bergsma, Günter Kradischnig, Marit Ubachs
Embracing a Holistic Approach
Change initiatives require a conscious approach to be taken with internal and external stakeholders, as it becomes increasingly important to move beyond the narrow confines of one's own organizational unit. Especially in today's world, organizations are more frequently working together in close collaborations or even networks to achieve goals that they could not achieve alone. As a result, stakeholders in change projects are becoming more diverse and are not limited to participants in the organization's direct value chain. Stakeholders from business, government, education, and research sectors, as well as from civil society, are being more frequently included.
Establishing an explicit role for your network or stakeholders in a change process increases the rate of acceptance and the application of the results, as well as increases the quality of the solutions. Unstructured and overburdened stakeholder involvement, however, can lead to disappointed expectations and/or a lack of goal orientation, as well as being time-consuming for all participants. Simply asking for individual opinions and wishes would therefore be insufficient or even counterproductive. Good relationships may even be jeopardized.
For this reason, we address the role of networks and stakeholders in this paper when describing when and at what stage of the change (project) stakeholders should be involved. We first look at the issue from a network perspective and then present steps that can be considered to be standard for a stakeholder process. We also provide information about the additional options available, depending on the amount of effort to be invested.
Stakeholders in networks
As the world becomes more complex, a shift in thinking is taking place. In recent decades, we have moved from a shareholder focus to a stakeholder focus. These multidimensional problems are constantly evolving and can have multiple solutions; thus, they cannot be solved by one stakeholder alone, but require a network approach to be taken. Therefore, the outcomes and success of organizations are being more heavily influenced by the networks in which they operate. Consequently, any major change project within the organization requires a definition of the role and acceptance of the network, which consists of a variety of stakeholders from different organizations and institutions.
Stakeholder analysis: Three tools
We have outlined three different tools that can be used to help define the stakeholder landscape. When used correctly, these tools provide a solid starting point for understanding what the landscape looks like, which stakeholders there are, how they perceive the change project, and what their existing relationships and power are. This helps the organization define how and when to engage with them.
1. Stakeholder portfolio
Comprehensively identifying the stakeholders and transparently describing their interests and potential influence on the project form the basis for communication within the project. The ideal result of taking this first step in the project would be a stakeholder matrix, like the one shown below. But the longer a project lasts, the more likely it is that stakeholders will shift from one area to another over time. This is especially true in the early stages of the network formation process, when it is not yet clear which stakeholders will be involved, and as participants join and leave the network.
2. System environment analysis
Once the stakeholders have been identified, conducting a system environment analysis can help understand better how the stakeholders view the change project, how they relate to the project, and how they communicate with the project. This analysis provides a systemic view of their relationships to the project.
3. Force field analysis
The force field analysis can help to understand the relations of the systems involved, so that these can be used to increase project acceptance. This analysis shows connections and relationships among the stakeholders within the network or on the playing field in relation to the change project.
Engaging stakeholders and networks
Complex stakeholder landscapes, and especially landscapes that involve networks or cross-organizational initiatives, can include 50 or more stakeholder groups. Nevertheless, it is important to give all stakeholders a voice; at the least, the opinion leaders, networks, and key groups should be given voices. This does not always have to take the form of individual interviews but can also take the form of group discussions or stakeholder dialogues in a workshop setting.
This phase is carried out not only to gain information about how stakeholders see the project, but, above all, to give everyone the opportunity to express their ideas. This ultimately leads to the formation of a comprehensive picture of the whole system. The focus is placed on listening and, in group settings, on initiating an (outcome-) open dialogue between stakeholder groups.
One way of achieving this initiation is to use a dialogue map. This is an open, semi-structured dialogue, printed on DIN A0 paper or digitally hosted, in which a structured approach is applied that allows groups of four to eight people to engage in a dialogue on a specific topic. In this way, up to 1000 people can be reached at the same time.
Typical questions that can be used to initiate such a stakeholder conversation include:
- How important do you think this issue is? What leads you to this conclusion?
- What is the status quo in your organization regarding this issue? How did you deal with this issue so far?
- What do you expect or hope to gain by carrying out this project?
- Dare to dream: What is the target state/ideal picture of the organization in 5-10 years?
- What contribution could/would your organization make to the change project (under what conditions)?
Coordination of analyses and outcome approaches
A widely supported outcome can only emerge once a common understanding of the initial situation has been achieved. Therefore, it will be necessary not only to ask questions and think about the desired vision at the beginning (which is already the best case in practice), but also to involve the stakeholders or the network in the development process. This is also possible in large groups, either in person or virtually, but requires a great deal of organization and/or facilitation. The advantage of holding such large group events is that they enable joint exchange and transparency across all stakeholder groups. If they are designed correctly, these events encourage a common spirit of optimism and increase the chance that the concepts or concept variants will be accepted. If the work and communication performed in previous phases have been done well, there is no reason to fear that the results presented will not meet an appropriate level of acceptance.
Sharing results
Above all, it is important to reflect honestly and openly on the results. This can again take place in the large group or through accompanying communication structures (e.g., sounding boards, reflection groups).
Even at this stage, the organization must be willing to accept feedback and incorporate changes. Presenting an unchangeable result at this stage would be counterproductive and would undermine many of the previous steps taken to encourage stakeholder involvement.
In networks or other cross organizational initiatives, stakeholders should be strongly encouraged to express their views regarding how the outcome will affect their collaboration or what they would require from the other parties to make the project work.
Depending on the size of the network or other cross organizational initiative and the impact of the change project, one or more meetings may be needed to discuss the concept thoroughly. The fact that most of the people attending these meetings are board members often delays the process. This problem can be overcome by planning ahead or it can simply be accepted. Or it may even make sense to slow down high-impact projects in order to properly assess the (side) consequences.
The impact of increasing stakeholder diversity
The range of stakeholders has become more diverse over time. Stakeholders come from different backgrounds and, as mentioned earlier, come from diverse sectors (e.g., business, education, public). These parties move at different paces and have different interpretations of the term long term, what the priorities are, and what interests need to be considered. This means that change projects must take into account the views and approaches of multiple stakeholders. No one-size-fits-all approach can be taken; therefore, the project team needs to invest more time and commitment.
In conclusion, we can only reiterate that, while this comprehensive form of stakeholder engagement is costly, it is certainly effective. And while it may seem like a rational approach, it is not possible to plan for all aspects of the human factor. In social systems things can always turn out differently from what is expected.