More Related Content Similar to SCARF Augmented Stakeholder Analysis (20) SCARF Augmented Stakeholder Analysis 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.)
Editor's Notes 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.