SCARF Augmented Stakeholder Analysis
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

SCARF Augmented Stakeholder Analysis

  • 503 views
Uploaded on

In this presentation we explore ideas related to improving the usefulness of project Stakeholder Analysis by augmenting it with the neuroscience based SCARF model. http://www.proficiencysystems.com/

In this presentation we explore ideas related to improving the usefulness of project Stakeholder Analysis by augmenting it with the neuroscience based SCARF model. http://www.proficiencysystems.com/

More in: Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
503
On Slideshare
503
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
30
Comments
0
Likes
3

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • Tips on reducing status related threats and increasing corresponding rewards:When considering a workplace change, seek to understand the, often subtle, factors impacting individual employees’ perceived status. Items like workplace type (office or cubicle), location (window or no window), type of furniture, etc. can often be perceived as status symbols, with their change potentially triggering threat or reward responses. For instance, in the movie Office Space, the taking of Milton’s Red Swingline Stapler was enough to trigger his burning down of the office. Allow people to give themselves performance feedback, instead of you giving them feedback. Giving people feedback, advice, or instructions can often be viewed as a critical judgment from you, triggering a threat response.Provide opportunities for people to learn and improve – and recognize it when it happens. It appears that people use the same brain networks when thinking about themselves as when thinking about others; therefore beating one’s own ‘best’ may be viewed as having increased personal status over the prior-self. Leaders can also explicitly recognize the individual’s improvements, which can further increasing the individual’s perceived increase in status. A key learning is that there are many other opportunities to increase perceived status beyond tangible monetary rewards and promotions.
  • Tips on reducing certainty related threats and increasing corresponding rewards:Build and communicate business plans, strategies, and maps. Even though they may differ from the actual future reality, these mechanisms help provide clarity and increase the certainty of the organization’s future.Make more things explicit. This includes communicating meeting times, stating objectives up front, telling people where they are in the process, etc. “Tell them what you’re going to tell them, tell them, then tell them what you told them”.Work to provide pockets of certainty in uncertain times. Even when an organization is going through turbulent times, with very uncertain outcomes, leaders can help ensure a level of perceived certainty by providing dates when specific information will be known and shared, helping employees focus on the elements of their jobs they can control (e.g. work quality), etc.
  • Tips on reducing fairness related threats and increasing corresponding rewards:Provide increased transparency, by increasing the amount of communication and involvement.Establish clear expectations and ground rules. Allowing the team to set their own ground rules is also recommended (Links to other SCARF components).Provide a perception of fairness by sharing the burden. For example, an executive taking a slight pay-cut during down-turns can significantly help improve perceived fairness.

Transcript

  • 1. Augmenting Stakeholder Analysis with SCARF Jeff Stankiewicz www.ProficiencySystems.com
  • 2. 2 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  A method to identify all parties – persons, departments, or organizations – who may have influence upon a project and take the necessary steps to manage their interests and expectations so that the project runs as smoothly as possible What is Stakeholder Analysis? An important project management tool to proactively and effectively manage risk, potentially impacting the delivery of desired results on time, within budget, that last
  • 3. 3 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  Lack of stakeholder buy-in is one of the most common project failure modes  Proactively analyzing stakeholder buy-in allows issues to be addressed early on, helping to ensure they don‟t hinder project success Why Stakeholder Analysis?
  • 4. 4 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc. Stakeholder Analysis Process  Should be conducted early on, and updated throughout the project as understanding of stakeholders' influence and attitude evolves When to Do Stakeholder Analysis? Stakeholder Analysis Process Stakeholder Analysis Process Stakeholder Analysis Process Stakeholder Analysis Process Project Life
  • 5. 5 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc. 1. Identify stakeholders 2. Assess their attitudes and degree of influence 3. Develop the Plan to address buy-in issues of high-influence stakeholders 4. Execute the plan 5. Monitor for evolving attitudes and influence Stakeholder Analysis Process Stakeholder Analysis Process
  • 6. 6 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc. Stakeholder Analysis – Assessment Grid High-Influence Resisters Low-Influence Resisters Low-Influence Advocates High-Influence Advocates Degree of Influence AttitudeTowardProject Arik S. NW Mfg Ande S. Nigel M. R&D Jane D. Jay Z. John M. Phil F. Sales Leverage these stakeholders to help influence buy- in of High-Influence Resistors Develop a plan to improve the attitude (buy-in) of these stakeholders
  • 7. 7 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  A stakeholder‟s attitude toward the project is determined based on a consensus best guess of their emotional position relative to the change – There is no defined criteria to assess why they may or may not be bought-in; it‟s just “yes” or “no” – Without more defined criteria to consider when assessing degree of buy-in, there is increased risk in a misdiagnosis and unexpected (potentially damaging) stakeholder behavior later in the project Issues with Traditional Stakeholder Analysis  When High-Influence Resister stakeholders are identified, there is no guidance on how to effectively manage them
  • 8. 8 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  Augment the traditional Stakeholder Analysis tool with the SCARF model Our Suggestion for Improvement… Stakeholder Analysis Process Augment with SCARF
  • 9. 9 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  SCARF is a brain-based model for collaborating with and influencing others  Developed from hundreds of neuroscience studies  Enabled by the advent of functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) in 1992, which made it possible to study the mental processes of subjects by looking at brain activity What is SCARF? Status Certainty Autonomy Relatedness Fairness
  • 10. 10 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  The SCARF model was developed by David Rock What is SCARF? (Cont.) http://www.your-brain-at-work.com/files/NLJ_SCARFUS.pdf http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isiSOeMVJQk&feature=youtu.be
  • 11. 11 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  The “minimize danger and maximize reward” overarching, organizing principle of the brain – If a SCARF element increases, the brain‟s approach response increases – Likewise, if a SCARF element decreases, avoidance responses are triggered Foundation of the SCARF Model Adapted from various lectures, presentations, and papers discussed in the NeuroLeadership Institute’s Certificate in the Foundations of NeuroLeadership course
  • 12. 12 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  Status is about perceived relative importance compared to others  The brain‟s reward circuitry is activated when someone feels „better than‟ another person, leading to a flood of dopamine. A reduction in status appears to trigger the same brain regions that correspond to physical pain Status Tips:  When considering a workplace change, seek to understand the, often subtle, factors impacting individual employees‟ perceived status  Allow people to give themselves performance feedback, instead of you giving them feedback  Provide opportunities for people to learn and improve – and recognize it when it happens Adapted from various lectures, presentations, and papers discussed in the NeuroLeadership Institute’s Certificate in the Foundations of NeuroLeadership course
  • 13. 13 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  Certainty helps meet the brain‟s need for identifying recognizable patterns, to be used in the prediction of the near future  Any uncertainty triggers an alert to the Orbital Frontal Cortex, diverting attention to the abnormality Certainty Tips:  Build and communicate business plans, strategies, and maps  Make more things explicit  Work to provide pockets of certainty in uncertain times Adapted from various lectures, presentations, and papers discussed in the NeuroLeadership Institute’s Certificate in the Foundations of NeuroLeadership course
  • 14. 14 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  Autonomy is the perception of one having control over their environment  Having perceived control feels rewarding, however a perceived reduction can result in an intense threat response linked to the perceived inability to influence outcomes Autonomy Tips:  Don‟t micromanage employees  Be aware that working in a team naturally results in a reduction of autonomy. This perceived threat can be counteracted with increases in status, certainty, and relatedness  When necessary, seek out ways to provide “structured” autonomy. For example, instead of stating “this is the solution”, provide two options and ask “which would you prefer” Adapted from various lectures, presentations, and papers discussed in the NeuroLeadership Institute’s Certificate in the Foundations of NeuroLeadership course
  • 15. 15 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  Relatedness involves the perception of others being „in‟ or „out‟ of a social group  People appear to a have a pre-disposition – probably driven by millions of years of tribal living – for forming and seeking to belong to groups, where they achieve a sense of belonging and protection. Correspondingly, „outsiders‟ were viewed as being a threat  When someone does not feel an adequate amount of relatedness a threat response, in the form of feeling lonely, is generated – Interestingly, countering this loneliness by seeking relatedness to a new individual often triggers an additional automatic threat response Relatedness Adapted from various lectures, presentations, and papers discussed in the NeuroLeadership Institute’s Certificate in the Foundations of NeuroLeadership course
  • 16. 16 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc. Relatedness (Cont.) Tips:  When meeting someone new, offer a handshake, swap names, discuss something in common, etc. to generate some feeling of closeness, triggered by the release of oxytocin  Provide team members opportunities to share personal aspects of themselves  Utilize formal buddy, mentor, and/or coaching programs to help foster safe connections Adapted from various lectures, presentations, and papers discussed in the NeuroLeadership Institute’s Certificate in the Foundations of NeuroLeadership course
  • 17. 17 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  Fairness, as exhibited by a number of studies on fair exchanges, has been shown to be intrinsically rewarding  Unfair exchanges can generate a strong threat response, sometimes linked to the same brain region involved with triggering the emotion of disgust Fairness Tips:  Provide increased transparency  Establish clear expectations and ground rules  Provide a perception of fairness by sharing the burden Adapted from various lectures, presentations, and papers discussed in the NeuroLeadership Institute’s Certificate in the Foundations of NeuroLeadership course
  • 18. 18 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc. 2. Assess:  For each influential stakeholder, instead of simply rating his or her level of buy-in, explore how the changes resulting from the project will likely impact the stakeholder‟s SCARF dimensions; either positively (approach) or negatively (avoid) How to Integrate SCARF into the Stakeholder Analysis Process Stakeholder Analysis Process
  • 19. 19 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc. 3. Plan:  For each High-Influence Resister stakeholder, instead of simply brainstorming for ways to improve buy-in, use the SCARF model to develop a more scientific based action plan  Develop a plan that maximizes each of the SCARF dimensions (in the positive direction) for the stakeholder How to Integrate SCARF into the Stakeholder Analysis Process (Cont.) Stakeholder Analysis Process
  • 20. 20 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  Let‟s assume that a team is conducting an analysis on an influential stakeholder  This stakeholder's office will need to be moved as part of a larger improvement. The team comes up with the following: SCARF Augmented Stakeholder Analysis Example
  • 21. 21 © 2014 by Proficiency Systems, Inc.  For stakeholder with a moderate to high degree of negative SCARF impacts the team should explore ways to eliminate or offset the negatives and to maximize the positives: SCARF Augmented Stakeholder Analysis Example (Cont.)
  • 22. info@proficiencysystems.com www.ProficiencySystems.com