Strategy in transformation
Stakeholder analysis for strategy: bring the expectations of owners, customers, employees and other relevant stakeholders into your strategic decisions.
Owners, customers, employees and other stakeholders can expect very different things from the same organisation. A stakeholder analysis clarifies which perspectives matter for the specific question about your future, and where interests can be reconciled or need a deliberate decision.
Identify the relevant groups and their influence on the task.
Compare internal hypotheses with stakeholders’ own views.
Make shared interests, differences and conflicting goals visible.
Discuss the consequences for positioning, participation and communication.
Starting from the brief, we identify which groups influence the development or are affected by it. Internal assessments serve as hypotheses; interviews or surveys add what those involved actually expect.
The analysis tests whether the assumed groups really share similar expectations. Groups can be merged or broken down further. This brings to light shared interests as well as conflicting goals and unmet conditions for working together.
Formally belonging to a group says little about what people expect from the organisation.
The strategy team assesses which expectations should shape positioning and next steps. The analysis helps prepare decisions and communication; it does not relieve the managers responsible of weighing conflicting interests.
Book an initial callA stakeholder list is not yet an analysis. The Innovative Stakeholder Analysis begins with the question of which stakeholder groups influence the specific strategic task and what expectations they have of the organisation. Internal classifications are initially hypotheses. They are tested from the perspective of those affected through conversations or a suitable survey. This may reveal that people within a supposedly uniform group have very different concerns, or that groups considered separately think similarly on the relevant question.
We therefore distinguish the formal role from actual interest. Relationships between the groups are particularly important: Who needs a contribution from whom, where do conflicting goals arise, and which expectations have so far remained unspoken? The result is a structured external perspective on the strategic task, not a vote on whom management must follow.
The perspectives gathered are evaluated with the responsible decision-makers. There, it is discussed which interests are particularly relevant for positioning and further development and which cannot be met at the same time. For organisations oriented towards the common good, we link stakeholder needs and organisational core competencies: capabilities are drawn out from past successes and failures; building on this, value propositions are developed for different groups. This logic can only be applied with reference to the specific mandate.
We disclose where the data is robust and where further research would be needed. Management receives a basis for priorities, communication and further participation. It decides for itself how to deal with contradictory expectations.
Die Gruppierung anhand der Ergebnisse überprüfen: Die ursprüngliche Einteilung der Stakeholder ist eine Arbeitshypothese. Zeigen die erhobenen Erwartungen Unterschiede innerhalb einer Gruppe, kann sie weiter differenziert werden. Stimmen die für den Auftrag relevanten Erwartungen überein, können Gruppen zusammen betrachtet werden. Diese Prüfung verhindert, dass ein vorab gewähltes Etikett die tatsächlichen Bedürfnisse verdeckt.
Anspruchsgruppen und Kernkompetenzen in NPO verbinden: Bei gemeinwohlorientierten Organisationen beginnt die Segmentierung mit der Klärung, wer als Kunde beziehungsweise Stakeholder betrachtet wird. Bedürfnisse und Verhaltensweisen bilden die Kriterien für unterschiedliche Gruppen. Aus der Reflexion vergangener Erfolge, ihrer Ursachen und auch von Fehlschlägen werden organisationale Kernkompetenzen herausgearbeitet. Darauf aufbauend werden Wertversprechen für die Gruppen und der dafür erforderliche Entwicklungsbedarf konkretisiert.
Arbeitsergebnisse: Überprüfte Sicht auf relevante Anspruchsgruppen; Gemeinsame und widersprüchliche Erwartungen; Entscheidungsfragen für Strategie und Kommunikation.
Taking part does not mean every expectation can be met. The mandate and how results will be handled are settled when the brief is agreed.
The method gains its value by separating formal affiliation from actual expectation. An owner, a customer group or an authority can have very different perspectives on the same strategic question; conversely, actors from different groups may expect a common benefit. That is why an initial map of those affected and key players is reviewed.
We ask which contribution matters to whom, what dependency arises from it and where contradictory expectations call for a deliberate decision. The process may include interviews, conversations or a suitable survey. The evaluation does not condense everything into a single majority picture. It shows differences, commonalities and uncertainties that are relevant to the mandate. Especially in organisations oriented towards the common good, the question of who is regarded as a customer or stakeholder group at all is also important.
The organisation’s capabilities can be drawn out from successes and failures; only then does a value proposition for the groups make sense. Clients gain a comprehensible basis for planning participation and communication. Which interests take priority remains a leadership decision, which the analysis makes visible but does not replace.
A stakeholder list alone does not change any decision. The analysis distinguishes interests, influence, degree of impact and the existing relationships with the groups involved. The project team records which assumptions about these groups need to be tested through conversations. From this, suitable forms of participation and communication can be derived: who needs information, whose knowledge is necessary for the solution and who must support a decision? The analysis is reviewed again with the client before important decisions are made, because influence and attitudes can change over time.
The result is a comprehensible basis for decisions on how to deal with different expectations. It is neither a division into allies and opponents nor a substitute for direct conversation with the people concerned.
Any group whose expectations or influence matter for the specific strategic question; the circle is defined in the brief. It can include owners, customers, employees, partners, public authorities or the media. We distinguish formal roles from actual interests: people within what looks like a single group can have very different concerns.
No. A list of stakeholders is a working hypothesis, not yet an analysis. It is tested through interviews or a suitable survey from the point of view of those affected. If the expectations gathered differ within a group, the group is broken down further; if the relevant expectations match, groups can be considered together. That way, no label chosen in advance hides real needs.
Conflicts are made visible and weighed by the decision-makers responsible. The strategy team discusses which interests matter most for positioning and which cannot all be met at once. The analysis prepares decisions and communication; it does not relieve management of weighing conflicting interests.
No. The mandate, the limits of decision-making and how results will be handled are agreed at the outset. Taking part does not mean every expectation can be met. In the E/D/E Group’s EVOLUTION programme, the ISA gathered more than 350,000 individual data points from around 1,500 decision-makers in 19 countries, according to Markus Peterhänsel (PVH-Magazin 2018). The results informed the picture of the future; they were not a vote.
Case study
How separate initiatives became a jointly managed cross-functional task.
What decision are you facing? Together, we clarify your situation, the people involved and the right next step.
Director | Chief Operating Officer (COO) and Head of corporate strategy competence team
Let’s talk about your situation and what you want to develop in your organisation.