Stakeholder Engagement (not management) is one of the factors considered to be critical for project success, yet it is under-represented in the bodies of knowledge and other “best practice” standards and methodologies. As one of the “soft skills” it is often left to be implemented at the discretion of the Project Manager and their team, and therefore is under-resourced. It is often responsive, rather than pro-active. Based upon current research and recent case studies, this webinar will provide an overview of the International Association for Public Participation spectrum (IAP2) and discuss when each element of the spectrum could and should be applied.

2. Project Stakeholder Management
The processes required to identify people, groups and organisations
that could be impacted by the project, to analyse the needs and
expectations of these stakeholders and to develop and implement
plans and strategies to enable the team to engage with the
stakeholders and ensure that their expectations are met.
2

3. The Fourth Constraint
3

4. Stakeholder Definition(s)
4

5. Types of Stakeholders
5

6. Involuntary Stakeholders
6

7. Power-Interest Grid
7

8. Mitchell et al
• Power
• Coercive Power - is based on the physical resources of force, violence or restraint.
• Utilitarian Power - which is based on material or financial resources
• Normative Power - which is based upon symbolic resources.
• Urgency
• Time sensitivity
• Criticality
• Legitimacy
• “…generalised perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable,
proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system…: (Suchman, 1995)
8

9. Salience Model
9

10. Communication Plan
10

11. Benefits
• Common language – speak in terms which are relevant to
stakeholders
• What is important to the stakeholders?
• Provides an explanation of why the project is important
20 MARCH 2020 Presentation Title 11

12. IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation
12

13. Inform and Consult
13
INFORM CONSULT
Public
Participation Goal
To provide the public with balanced and
objective information to assist them in
understanding the problems, alternatives
and solutions.
To obtain public feedback on analysis,
alternatives and/or decision.
Promise to the
Public
We will keep you informed We will keep you informed, listen to and
acknowledge concerns and provide feedback
on how public input influenced the decision
Tools • Fact sheets
• Websites
• Open Houses
• Public comment
• Focus Groups
• Surveys
• Public Meetings

15. Involve
15
INVOLVE
Public
Participation Goal
To work directly with the public throughout
the process to ensure that public issues and
concerns are consistently understood and
considered.
Promise to the
Public
We will work with you to ensure that your
concerns and issues are directly reflected in
the alternatives developed and provide
feedback on how public input influenced the
decision.
Tools • Workshops
• Deliberate polling

16. Collaborate
16
COLLABORATE
Public
Participation Goal
To partner with the public in each aspect of
the decision including the development of
alternatives and the identification of the
preferred solution.
Promise to the
Public
We will look to you for direct advice and
innovation in formulating solutions and
incorporate your advice and
recommendations into the decisions to the
maximum extent possible.
Tools • Citizen Advisory Committees
• Consensus Building
• Participatory Decision-Making

17. Prioritisation – Who Decides?
• Are all Must Haves non-negotiable?
• A Must Have = “Deliver this or we cancel the project”
• Project Manager or Business Analyst may challenge less obvious Must Haves
• Can this requirement be broken down further?
• A high level Must Have may contain mix of Musts, Shoulds, Coulds, Won’ts at a lower level
• Business Visionary / Business Ambassador have final say
• The Business Sponsor perspective
• Sponsor expects delivery of all Must Haves
• Typically expects delivery of most / all Should Haves
• The recommended split of Musts / Shoulds / Coulds gives 20% contingency for Could Haves
• N.B 10% contingency is the normal working level on a traditional project
17

18. Empower
18
EMPOWER
Public
Participation Goal
To place final decision-making in the hands
of the public.
Promise to the
Public
We will implement what you decide.
Tools • Citizen Juries
• Ballots
• Delegated Decisions

19. Risk ≠ Risk
• Risk
• The “real” value of the
risks involved in a
project
• Hazard
• The “technical” value
of the risk defined
through the risk
assessment
• Outrage
• The perspective and
response of the
stakeholders
19
Hazard
Outrage
Risk

20. Barendrecht
• Power to the people
• Carbon Capture and Storage
• Shell and Netherlands government
• Local politicians
• Local communities
• Forced solution
• Changed permitting process
20

21. THANK YOU
• KENN DOLAN
• CONSULTANT
Email kenndolan@outlook.com
0737 8344 535