Site Loader

Theme
4 community design
Stakeholders
part 2
Introduction
This
fourth theme is about gaining a more in-depth overview of all
stakeholders in comparison to each other. On that account it’s an
addition on the third theme which was about a rough start of mapping
the stakeholders. In this theme, I will specifically dive in to the
different stakeholder concepts and models, including the ‘Venn
diagram’, ‘power-interest matrix’, ‘network analysis’ and
‘value mapping’.
Summary
The
stakeholder typology power, legitimacy and urgency (see theme 3)
leads to the theory of stakeholder salience.
Salience is defined as ‘the
degree to which managers give priority to competing stakeholder
claims’. This means that if a stakeholder fulfills the three factors,
it has much priority. Power and legitimacy declare that the
stakeholders do have something at risk or they have a legal,
contractual, moral or financial claim. Power can be interpreted as
having physical means (coercive), material means (utilitarian) or
normative means (prestige, esteem, social). Legitimacy is about
desirable, proper and appropriate actions within some socially
constructed system. Urgency requires immediate action, so it contains
time, importance and being critical. From this typology, a Venn
diagram can be made:
Priority
of the stakeholders is represented by the colors in which the
stakeholders are mapped.
Green means a latent stakeholder, orange an expectant and red a
definitive one. However, this diagram is dynamic, which means
stakeholders can move to other areas. Therefore, it’s good to map
out which factors are missed and which factors a stakeholder already
fulfills.

An
(additional) matrix can be made to gain a better understanding of the
factor ‘power’ of the typology and interest as an extra factor: a
power-interest matrix.
This matrix details power (or influence) in hierarchy, financial
power, relation or network, knowhow or expertise and political power.
The level of interest is about how much the stakeholder want to be
involved in a certain organization or issue. Similar to power, the
specific parts of interest are: content, finance, economic, social,
politics and aesthetics. Having it determined for each stakeholder,
they can be mapped in the following matrix:

As
network is an indicator of power, understanding of the importance of
a network has risen and therefore, a network analysis can be of use.
The reason to create a network analysis is to appropriately and
effectively deal with the stakeholders of the organization (see theme
3). Indicators are hierarchy, context of cooperation, intensity, size
& representation, type of relation (formal or informal) or
relationship structures. Having figured out these indicators, a
schedule with corresponding symbols can be created.
To
examine the relationships within a network even more, archetypes can
be of use.
Archetypes can identify characteristic roles and behaviors, labeled
as archetypes when viewing organizations as programmatic actors
within an ecosystem. http://realeconomylab.org/#archetypes

When
the stakeholders are mapped out with the help of a Venn diagram,
power-interest matrix or a network analysis, it’s good to share
them with your stakeholders.
Pay attention to the used style and language, as stakeholders may
have different cultural backgrounds. A cultural orientation model
will be a helpful tool to avoid misunderstandings by becoming aware
of different ways to share.
When
stakeholders disagree with the shared map of stakeholders, value
mapping can be of use.
Working with this tool improves the alignment of stakeholders with
the organization by shared values. It starts by generating the values
of an individual, to afterwards agree with each other on the
(re)creation of the most important values. Such a foundation and
starting point is of importance when effectively dealing with each
other.

The
essence of the subject based on my opinion and examples

I
think this theme is very relevant, as it gives clear models which can
be used directly for my own project for Nexus (see theme 1).
We (my project group and I) already had mapped all their stakeholders
in the rainbow diagram (see theme 3), but wanted to dive into the
different aspects of the established relations. Therefore, we created
a network analysis together with Nexus. After figuring out the
indicators (hierarchy, context of cooperation etcetera), a clear
insight was generated into how to deal with the stakeholders
determined in the rainbow diagram. To check the validity, we showed
this network analysis in the stakeholder meeting. Everybody agreed
upon this one:

IMAGE
NETWORK ANALYSIS

In
the network analysis can be seen, among other things, that there are
many different relationship structures.
One of the shown relationship structures is facilitating workshops,
such as ‘dfdfd’
is connected to Nexus. To give a completely different example, a PPP
(see theme 2) is also a relationship structure. Namely a relationship
between a private sector organization and a public sector
organization.

Furthermore,
I think that archetypes can really clarify the models of an
organization.
For example, when establishing a specific stakeholder as pioneer and
create a symbol including a flag, it’s directly clear that they
navigate new territory to discover and develop significant
opportunity. Similar, a connector can be characterized with a cable
and a facilitator by bricks. A condition is that the visuals are
drawn by a proper designer who is able to transform the purpose of
stakeholders in drawings.

A
visual designer need to make all little differences clear with only
small drawings.
For instance, the indicator power is used in several models, but
consists of different aspects. A political leader in North Corea has
power over his people on a coercive basis, while a mother has power
over her son based on esteem. The drawings of the two will be totally
different.

I
interpreted the essence of the theme
as the importance to know that every stakeholder has different
motives towards the societal issue of an organization. Sometimes,
there will be discovered that the intention of the motives of an
individual stakeholder differs from what the organization thought the
intentions were. It’s important to harmonize these intentions of
the motives to efficiently collaborate towards a solution. That’s
why agreement of the organization and each stakeholder on the results
of a combination of these models is very handy.

Post Author: admin