Every project manager can tell a story about a program equipped with the best talent, solid processes and the sponsoring organization’s commitment, only to never get off the ground and fail to deliver on intended benefits. And on the other hand, despite having the odds stack up against success, some programs do deliver results. Such anecdotes reinforce the fact that success needs something more beyond a talented team and mature processes. Stakeholder commitment and support is the sine qua non of program success. A “stakeholder” is commonly defined as anyone who is positively or negatively impacted by the outcome of a project. So, why would a stakeholder want you to fail? We explore a few scenarios and discuss strategies program managers should consider to help them succeed in such an environment in the discussion. What strategies should a program manager apply when a stakeholder (a powerful executive, an organization or an individual) whose intent is to see the program fail? We have researched several Project management publications (PMI.org), external blogs, and strategies in managing human capital (e.g, dealing with difficult, unreasonable people, and how to influence behaviors and intent). The ideas in the article are drawn from our personal experiences gained from managing several large scale programs for IBM’s clients.

1. Strategies to succeed – When one of your project stakeholders wants you to fail
Authors:
Srinivas Attili – Mr Attili is a client partner with IBM Global Business Services
responsible for both the delivery of complex technical services to IBM clients and the
development of new business opportunities.
Srinivas Jujjuru – Mr Jujjuru is a Project Executive with IBM Global Business Services
responsible for delivery large systems integration programs within the Federal practice.
Every project manager can tell a story about a program equipped with the best talent,
solid processes and the sponsoring organization’s commitment, only to never get off the
ground and fail to deliver on intended benefits. And on the other hand, despite having the
odds stack up against success, some programs do deliver results. Such anecdotes
reinforce the fact that success needs something more beyond a talented team and mature
processes.
Stakeholder commitment and support is the sine qua non of program success. A
“stakeholder” is commonly defined as anyone who is positively or negatively impacted
by the outcome of a project. So, why would a stakeholder want you to fail? We explore a
few scenarios and discuss strategies program managers should consider to help them
succeed in such an environment in the discussion to follow.
Beyond Stakeholder Management
Program managers understand the criticality of stakeholder management for the success
of a program. It is a common practice to map stakeholders on a 4x4 Power - Interest Map
(Figure 1) and apply an appropriate strategy based on the quadrant the stakeholders fall in.
Although this may provide a brief overview of how to make an action plan based on
stakeholders power & interest, this approach falls short of managing the actual behaviors
and intent of the stakeholders.
Figure -1 – Stakeholder Power – Interest Map
High Power Persuade Involve
Low Power Monitor Inform
Low Interest High interest
Consider an example of a fortune 100 company. A strategic program, which was key to
firm’s future success, was signed off by company’s investment committee and C level
executives. The internal IT organization fails to deliver results a year into the program
due to a variety of reasons – primarily the lack of industry best practices and in house
talent to develop and deploy a large scale strategic program. The business sponsor hires a
vendor – a leading technology services company to implement the program with the CIO
involvement in structuring the services contract. The services vendor and the business
sponsor are heavily reliant on the internal IT organization’s support to make the program
successful. Many key managers in the IT organization have an incentive to see the vendor
fail – to drive a point that it’s not their incompetency but the program is too complex to

2. fail even if the best services company is working on it. This is a recipe for failure as a key
stakeholder, the IT organization, wants the project to fail.
This type of scenario is not uncommon. What strategies should you apply when you have
a stakeholder (a powerful executive, an organization or an individual) whose intent is to
see the program fail?
Interest – Intent Model
We propose managing stakeholders by expanding the low interest quadrants from the
Power - Interest Map in Figure 1 by adding a new dimension - ‘Intent’. We group
stakeholders into four categories based on Interest and Intent – High Interest Positive
Intent (HIPI), High Interest Negative Intent (HINI), Low Interest Positive Intent (LIPI),
and Low Interest Negative Intent (LINI). Intent in this context is defined as what the
stakeholder wants to achieve – success or failure and behaviors are their actions and
attitude on the program. Figure 2 below depicts the framework to categorize stake
holders based on interest and intent and the arrows signify the recommended order of
movement between categories. The goal of the program manager is to land majority of
their stakeholders in the HIPI quadrant. Interest – Intent Model Management strategies
(Figure 3) provides a summary view of the different actions the program manager can
take to effectively manage stakeholders within these categories.
High
HINI HIPI
Interest
LINI LIPI
Low
Negative Intent Positive
High Interest - Positive Intent (HIPI) –
This is the best group of stakeholders any program manager can have on the program. We
call them HIPI’s. These are the group of stakeholders with the best combination of
attributes - a high interest and a positive intent towards the program. The program
manager should effectively leverage HIPI’s to effectively convert naysayers and other
stakeholders with negative intent or low interest. HIPI’s with high power in the

3. organization also have the clout and credibility to make an impact on the success of the
program and other stakeholders involved in the program.
The project manager should explore ways to get direct communication from these senior
executives on the importance of collaboration and the reasons why the client organization
needs the program to be successful and the impacts of failure (e.g, left behind compared
to competition, cannot effectively compete in the evolving marketplace, etc). The project
manager should help develop the communications and channel these same
communications through the HIPI’s to better influence other stakeholders. However, one
must be cautious in their approach on the content and tone of the message. For example,
the program manager from the Fortune 100 company example discussed earlier
convinced a HIPI C level executive to send a tough message to the uncooperative IT
organization to cooperate and collaborate. The executive in this case directed his
organization in strong words to get out of the vendors way – in effect telling them to
remove any roadblocks. The message got trickled down and interpreted as “don’t talk to
the vendor unless approached and only answer the specific question the vendor asks”.
This led to further mistrust and degraded relationships between the vendor and the client
organization.
Another example is a program which effectively leveraged a HIPI stakeholder to turn
around the behaviors of a Negative Intent (HINI/LINI groups discussed later) stakeholder
organization. The team recruited an executive from the HINI organization to be a full-
time liaison for the project team and the HINI organization. The executive was carefully
vetted and selected with the criteria that the individual should believe in the program’s
cause and is someone who has a tremendous amount of respect, credibility and trust
within his organization. With the new executive in the liaison role, the relationship with
the organization displaying negative behavior and adding roadblocks in the past
converted into a collaborative and positive relationship.
HIPI’s with negative behaviors
Consider a scenario where, a HIPI with a positive intent towards the program exhibits
negative behaviors towards the program. Consider an example where a HIPI is actively
engaged in the development of a key deliverable but constantly suggests enhancements
delaying sign off or starting the next phase – a classic example of perfection being the
enemy of good. In this case the stakeholders have the right interest and intent but their
behaviors don’t match the interest and intent. The project manager needs an insatiable
curiosity for inquiry and dialogue to work with HIPI’s demonstrating negative behaviors.
One of our favorite quotes that comes to mind when dealing with this group is from
George Bernard Shaw -- “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the
unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress
depends on the unreasonable man.” In essence, if you are not working with unreasonable
people, you are not making progress. Do not question their intent or interest, but question
their actions. The team should take off the table any sense of personal attack and instead
focus on facts and outcomes. These stakeholders are unreasonable for a reason --- there is
always a story behind the story, and the program manager needs to develop a strong
working relationship with the HIPI to get to the underlying rationale for their actions..

4. Virginia Satir, an American author and psychotherapist, originated a slightly different
meaning of the phrase positive intention. She believed that digging deeply into a client's
dysfunctional or damaging behavior should reveal that the client is trying to achieve a
positive intent through undesirable behavior, unconsciously ineptly and harmfully, and
that the dysfunction could often be helped by finding other ways to honor that positive
intention. The project manager should find deeper reasons for the client’s frustration, get
to know the person at a deeper level, understand what’s really driving them to behave the
way they are behaving and turn their anger into constructive actions for the program.
High Interest - Negative Intent (HINI)
The HINI group – they can be as dangerous as the H1N1 swine flu to the program if not
managed proactively. These are individuals in the organization with a high interest in the
program and intent to derail the program. The program manager must engage actively
with a significant focus to manage HINI’s.
Consider an example of a small business that won a contract as a prime vendor on a very
large Federal government program. Since the small business doesn’t have the required
expertise to manage the program, it hires the incumbent contractor as a sub-contractor.
The incumbent is a leading services company vying to be the prime vendor. There is an
inherent incentive for the services company to derail the program by not helping the
small business be successful. As it turned out, the project became a troubled program
within a few months – missing deadlines and did not deliver on committed results to the
client. In this example there is a high interest and negative intent for the incumbent
contractor to introduce roadblocks.
As a Project Manager, acknowledge this and proactively design ways to create a win-win
situation instead of treating it as a zero sum game. This will enable HINI’s to be
committed and involved. The small business should collaborate with the incumbent
contractor to remove the perception of a zero sum game and make them part of the
success of the program.
Another example is a stakeholder who is one of the key points of contact from the client
organization. Given his role, the stakeholder has a high interest in the program but has a
negative intent due to perceptions on the hired vendor. After several failed attempts to
influence intent, it is obvious that there are deeper motives and none of the options to
influence the intent worked. As a last resort, the program manager worked with the
stakeholder’s chain of command to identify a replacement.
It is always important to identify the HINI stakeholders and take appropriate steps to
move them into HIPI quadrant, or if necessary, drive to change out the stakeholders to
improve overall chances of program success.
Low Interest – Positive Intent (LIPI)
Don't let behavior fool you. Sub-optimal stakeholder behaviors can be misleading,
because they don't necessarily represent underlying intentions. The program manager
should target this group to close the intent-behavior gap and activate their positive intent
for driving optimal behaviors and generate high interest. Steps should be taken to

5. activate stakeholder’s positive intents and drive them into HIPI’s with positive behaviors.
It is essential to explore ways to leverage the positive intent of these stakeholders for the
program’s advantage, and to actively engage them to influence their interest in the
program. One tactic is to devise ways to demonstrate quick wins/outcomes to invigorate
interest of the LIPI stakeholders.
Consider an example where a quality assurance director within the CIO organization has
a positive intent while the CIO organization itself is a HINI stakeholder. The program
manager made a conscious effort to activate the director’s positive intent by building trust

6. Figure -3: Interest – Intent Model Management strategies
Low Interest (LI) High Interest (HI)
Negative Intent Positive Intent Negative Intent Positive Intent
(LINI) (LIPI) (HINI) (HIPI)
Recommended
Action Transform Intent Galvanize Intent Engage Actively with Leverage Intent
Significant Focus
 Breaking the  Activate stakeholder’s  Needs significant focus from  Actively leverage them to
status quo by positive intent to drive the program manager convert others as believers
creating a win-win positive behaviors and  Create a win-win situation by  Keep them highly engaged,
Recommended situation high interest designing ways to move away involved and informed
Management  Focus on moving  Build a sense of from a zero-sum game  Actively work with them to
Strategies them to LIPI accomplishment,  Actively engage to change gain grass roots support from
quadrant first, and purpose and mutual intent – get story behind the their LIPI colleagues
apply LIPI trust story  Proactively look for HIPI’s
management  Recruit them as project  Devise replacement strategies with negative behaviors and
strategies ambassadors if none of the other options have an open, honest
 Design incentives  Recognize work conversation about influencing
that change intent contributions and  Understand and validate their those behaviors. Do not
 Devise examples of feelings and perspectives, but question their intent or interest,
stakeholder collaboration openly point out the positive side of but question their actions
replacement within the organization the situation  Exercise inquiry and dialogue to
strategies if none  Recognize reasons for work with HIPI’s demonstrating
of the other low interest and take negative behaviors.
options work actions to transform
them into positive
interest

7. and mutual respect. The QA director became an ambassador of the program, suggested
many creative ways to deliver incremental successes and helped diffuse many tense
situations with the broader program team.
Another tactic is to recognize LIPI stakeholders who are collaborative and have been
openly helpful to the project team through their organizational command, especially if
they are in the mid to low level ranks in the organization. This builds a sense of
accomplishment, purpose and mutual trust.
A primary goal in managing LIPI’s is to recognize the reasons for the low interest,
leverage positive intent and create positive interest moving them into the HIPI quadrant.
A similar approach to managing HIPI’s with negative behaviors should be taken for
LIPI’s exhibiting negative behaviors.
Low Interest – Negative Intent (LINI)
This group of stakeholders, if not managed effectively, can have a slow poison effect to
the program. They can be categorized as stakeholders with a “glass half empty” view.
The program manager should be cautious about the spread of this view within the
organization. In pure mathematical terms, ½ empty + ½ empty = 1 empty. LINI
stakeholders can potentially convert a ½ full person in the organization to be ½ empty
having a multiplier effect in the organization. As shown in figure 2 the program manager
should focus on moving LINI’s to the LIPI quadrant first and follow the strategies
outlined to manage LIPI’s.
Take an example where a large scale project was awarded to a leading technology
services company. Work under the contract is expected to be performed at a remote
geographic location. Since the company didn’t have a significant presence in the area, it
hired several contractors as staff augmentation to perform the work. Within a few months,
the contractor personnel assumed key responsibilities and roles. They didn’t have either
the interest or incentive in completing the project on schedule. Aware of the fact that it is
not prudent for the technology services firm to replace them, they worked at their own
pace and convenience, negatively impacting productivity and resulting in schedule delays.
In this example, the project manager should work actively with the contractors to change
the intent and move them to the LIPI quadrant. Breaking the status quo by creating a win-
win situation – by designing incentives to meet timelines and creating an environment
where meeting project deadlines is incentivized vs just billing hours can change the intent
of LINI’s for the better.
It is extremely challenging to move LINI’s into the HIPI quadrant. After a careful
analysis, if the program manager concludes that neither interest nor intent of LINI
stakeholders can be influenced, we recommend devising action plans to replace LINI
stakeholders. In the example above, if it wasn’t possible to change interest or intent of
LINI’s, the program manager should identify strong resources outside of the program to
replace the contractors. This option isn’t easy by any means, but small steps pass a strong
message and help influence intent and interest.

8. It is easy to believe there is less impact on the program from LINI’s compared to other
groups as LINI’s have less interest in the program. However, if not managed, they can
have a slow and steady negative impact on the project – similar to a slow poison.
Conclusion
Having mature processes and a talented team doesn’t guarantee success. While we often
safely assume all stakeholders are committed to the success of the project; it may not be
always the case. Every program manager should aspire to have the program stakeholders
in the HIPI quadrant. This is not an easy task without a structured and concerted approach.
The Interest – Intent model described in this article helps program managers effectively
understand stakeholders, their intents and behaviors and manage them proactively to
deliver successful programs.
“Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm,” wrote Ralph Waldo Emerson. If
your goal is to effectively manage the intent, interest and behaviors of the stakeholders
you should go beyond stakeholder management and try different approaches with an
unwavering commitment and enthusiasm. We hope the discussion serves as a guiding
post for program managers to effectively manage stakeholders. The process is not easy.
Managing stakeholder interest and intent may be the most complex task of a program
manager. It takes time and commitment but the benefits are well worth it.
The next time you are leading a program, ask yourself – Do you have enough HIPI’s on
your side?