Stakeholder Analysis

PGI Liao, Wilfred Patrick R.

Divine Word Hospital
Objectives
To define Stakeholder Analysis and Stakeholders
To discuss the benefits in doing Stakeholder Analysis
To discuss the different steps in doing Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder Analysis
Process of systematically gathering and analyzing qualitative information
to determine whose interests should be taken into account when
developing and/or implementing a policy or program
Who Is a Stakeholder?
These are actors (persons or organizations) with a vested interest in the policy being
promoted.
These stakeholders, or “interested parties,” can usually be grouped into the following
categories:
international/donors
national political (legislators, governors)
public (ministry of health [MOH], social security agency, ministry of finance)
labor (unions, medical associations)
commercial/private for-profit, nonprofit (nongovernmental organizations [NGOs],
foundations)
civil society
users/consumers.
Which Stakeholder Characteristics Are Analyzed?
knowledge of the policy
interests related to the policy
position for or against the policy
potential alliances with other stakeholders
ability to affect the policy process (through power and/or leadership).
Why Is Analysis Useful?
Policymakers and managers can use a stakeholder analysis to identity the
key actors and to assess their knowledge, interests, positions, alliances,
and importance related to the policy.
This allows policymakers and managers to interact more effectively with
key stakeholders and to increase support for a given policy or program.
When this analysis is conducted before a policy or program is
implemented, policymakers and managers can detect and act to prevent
potential misunderstandings about and/or opposition to the policy or
program.
Steps in Stakeholder Analysis
1. Planning the process
2. Selecting and defining a policy
3. Identifying key stakeholders
4. Adapting the tools
5. Collecting and recording the information
6. Filling in the stakeholder table
7. Analyzing the stakeholder table
8. Using the information
Step 1: Planning the Process
Define the purpose of the analysis, and identify uses for the results.
Identify and train a working group
Develop a plan and timeline.
Step 2: Selecting and Defining a Policy
Basic criteria for evaluating the appropriateness of health reform policies as
subjects of a stakeholder analysis:
The policy should be specific and “definable
The policy should be socially and politically controversial so that it merits
the investment of resources required to determine what aspects are
controversial and to whom.
The policy should be key to current reform efforts and important enough
to justify the resources that will be needed to implement recommended
actions that emerge from the analysis
Step 3: Identifying Key Stakeholders
Compile and review existing information
Develop a list of all possible stakeholders
Develop a list of priority stakeholders with input from experts.
Step 4: Adapting the Tools
Definitions of stakeholder characteristics
Stakeholder table
Interview questionnaire and protocol
Reference chart
I.D. number (given to the stakeholder on the questionnaire)
Position and organization
Internal/external: internal stakeholders work within the organization
that is promoting or implementing the policy; all other stakeholders are
external.
Knowledge of policy: the level of accurate knowledge the stakeholder
has regarding the policy under analysis, and how each stakeholder defines
the policy in question. This is important for identifying stakeholders who
oppose the policy due to misunderstandings or lack of information.
Position: whether the stakeholder supports, opposes, or is neutral about the
policy, which is key to establishing whether or not he or she will block the
policy implementation
Interest: the stakeholder’s interest in the policy, or the advantages and
disadvantages that implementation of the policy may bring to the stakeholder
or his or her organization. Determining the stakeholder’s vested interests
helps policymakers and managers better understand his or her position and
address his or her concerns.
Alliances: organizations that collaborate to support or oppose the policy.
Alliances can make a weak stakeholder stronger, or provide a way to influence
several stakeholders by dealing with one key stakeholder
Resources: the quantity of resources—human, financial, technological, political,
and other—available to the stakeholder and his or her ability to mobilize them. This
is an important characteristic that is summarized by a power index and will
determine the level of force with which the stakeholder might support or oppose the
policy
Power: the ability of the stakeholder to affect the implementation of the health
reform policy.
Leadership: the willingness to initiate, convoke, or lead an action for or against the
health reform policy. Establishing whether or not the stakeholder has leadership will
help policymakers and managers target those stakeholders who will be more likely
to take active steps to support or oppose the policy (and convince others to do so).
Suggested Interview Protocol
Two-person interview teams should be used, with the interviewers representing
different organizations whenever possible.
Both interviewers should take notes, but only one should lead the interview.
Questions should be asked no more than twice; if the stakeholder still does not
provide an answer, the interviewer should move on.
The interview should be terminated at the stakeholder’s request, even if questions
remain.
Immediately following the interview, the interviewers should type their notes into
one electronic questionnaire per stakeholder. (Interviewers should enter each
answer under its corresponding question in the electronic questionnaire.)
The information should be entered in the same words the stakeholder used.
Why do we Pretest?
Interviewers are comfortable with the questionnaire
The interviewee understands the questions
Answers provide the information required for filling in the analysis table
(the table should be filled in for the pre-test interviews)
The interview does not take more than 2 hours
Interviewers successfully adhere to the established protocol
Reference Chart
Step 5: Collecting and Recording the Information
Review existing information.
Make interview appointments.
Conduct interviews and record notes.
Step 6: Filling in the Stakeholder Table
This step of the process involves taking detailed and often lengthy
answers from the interviews and arranging them into a more concise and
systematized format (for anonymity and to highlight the most significant
information).
By doing this, the working group can eventually develop clear
comparisons among the different stakeholders and concisely present this
information to the policymakers who will use it.
Determine the stakeholders’ position
The position of each stakeholder can be established by analyzing the
following:
Information directly reported by the stakeholder in the interviews
Indirect information gathered through other stakeholders and secondary
information (i.e., others’perceptions)
Interest information.
When determining the final position of each stakeholder (column E3), the working
group needs to reconcile any differences between the position that is self-reported
(E1) and the position that is perceived by others (E2). Differences can be resolved in
the following manner:
When the stakeholder states that he or she is against the policy, this is assumed to
be accurate, albeit subjective, information because there is little incentive for the
stakeholder to misrepresent his or her position. For moderate opponents (MO) or
opponents (O), self-reporting should determine the stakeholder’s final position.
In the case of the self-reported neutral or supportive stakeholder, it is important to
cross-reference the opinions of others because the stakeholder may have an
incentive to misrepresent his or her position.
Fill in the resources column and create a power index for
each stakeholder
Quantity of resources: 3 = many, 2 = some, 1 = few
Ability to mobilize:
3 = the stakeholder can make decisions regarding the use of the resources in
his or her organization or area
2 = the stakeholder is one of several persons that can make decisions
regarding the use of resources
1 = the stakeholder cannot make decisions regarding the use of the resources.
The two resource scores for each stakeholder should be averaged,
resulting in a power index between 3 and 1: 3 = high power, 2 = medium
power, and 1 = little power
Step 7: Analyzing the Stakeholder Table
From the information in the stakeholder table, the working group should be
able to conclude the following:
Who are the most important stakeholders (from a power and leadership
analysis)?
What is the stakeholders' knowledge of the policy?
What are the stakeholders' positions on the specific policy?
What do the stakeholders see as possible advantages or disadvantages of
the policy (interest analysis)?
Which stakeholders might form alliances?
Carry out a power and leadership analysis
For this analysis, the working group should divide the stakeholders into
three groups:
Group 1: those who have leadership and high power (level 3)
Group 2: those who have leadership and medium power (level 2)
Group 3: those who do not have leadership but have high to medium
power (level 2 or 3).
Analyze knowledge data
The information found in the knowledge data can be crossed with the
power/leadership analysis to highlight the importance level of the
stakeholders with a low knowledge level.
The knowledge data also can be cross-referenced with the position of the
stakeholders to determine if those opposed to the policy have a
consistently low level of knowledge. This would indicate to the
policymaker or manager promoting this policy that communicating or
advocating the objectives and basic tenets of the policy could reduce the
opposition.
Analyze stakeholders' positions
Total number of supporters Importance of opponents (cross-reference with
Importance of supporters (cross-reference with power/leadership analysis)
power/leadership analysis) Knowledge of opponents (cross-reference with
Knowledge of supporters (cross-reference with knowledge data)
knowledge data) Advantages and disadvantages of policy
Advantages and disadvantages of policy implementation to the opponents (cross-reference
implementation to the supporters (cross-reference with interest data)
with interest data) Knowledge of whether these opponents are internal or
Knowledge of whether these supporters are internal or external to the organization developing the policy
external to the organization developing the policy (cross-reference with the internal/external
(cross-reference with the internal/external classification)
classification) Opposition "clusters": stakeholders in the same sector
Support "clusters": stakeholders in the same sector who who oppose the policy (cross-reference with
support the policy (cross-reference with organization organization information)
information)  Neutral stakeholders, their importance, knowledge,
Total number of opponents and interests
Analyze interest data
In cross-referencing the interest data with other data, the policy
implementation advantages and disadvantages identified by the
stakeholders can be used to explain their positions or to emphasize their
knowledge of the policy (i.e., irrelevant advantages and disadvantages
may represent a misunderstanding of the policy).
The interest data also can be cross-referenced with the power/leadership
data to indicate what the most important stakeholders may have to lose or
gain from policy implementation
Analyze alliances
The alliances can be identified in two ways:
by referring to the analysis table to see if stakeholders mentioned
organizations that they would work with to demonstrate for or against the
policy
by referring to the position "clusters" (the stakeholders with similar
positions and within the same organization or subsector).
Analyze alliances
The alliance information should be cross-referenced with the position
data to identify those alliances that may be potential sources of support,
as well as those that may work together to oppose the policy.
The working group can suggest or encourage policymakers to develop
specific strategies based on these key alliances, either to reinforce a
potentially supportive alliance or to separate a potentially threatening
alliance.
The alliance data can also be cross-referenced with the power/leadership
analysis results to highlight those alliances that are potentially the most
supportive or threatening to the policy implementation.
Step 8: Using the Information
The use of the information generated by the stakeholder analysis should be
discussed during Step 1, Planning the Process, and should be reviewed again
once the results have been analyzed.
If the policymakers and managers plan to use the results obtained through
the stakeholder analysis to take concrete, and possibly "behind the scenes,"
actions to increase stakeholder support, only those persons involved in
implementing the follow-up actions should be included in the presentation
and discussion of the results.
If the purpose of the presentation is to share the results to build consensus
among the stakeholders, then all stakeholders should be invited to attend.
Presentation of Power/Leadership Analysis Results
Presentation of Stakeholders' Positions
Presentation of Knowledge Data
Presentation of Key Alliances
Presentation of Other Results/Conclusions
Presentation of Recommended Strategies
Presentation of Other Results/Conclusions
Presentation of Recommended Strategies
The working group presenters should always place the results within the context
of recommended actions and next steps so that the sponsor and other
policymakers or managers know how to use the results.
To guide these follow-up actions, the working group should develop strategies to
achieve the following five basic goals:
Maintain the support of those stakeholders who are currently supporters
Increase power and leadership of the supporters
Convert the opponents to supporters
Weaken the power and leadership of the opponents
Convert the neutral stakeholders into active supporters (i.e., convince them to
support the policy and increase their power and leadership where necessary).
Two types of strategies can then be identified to meet those goals:
General strategies: the working group should analyze the interests,
concerns, and misunderstandings common to most stakeholders.
Strategies for specific stakeholder groups: the working group should
consider the position of each stakeholder, his or her interests, and the five
basic strategy goals. The working group should develop specific ways of
addressing the concerns of the individual stakeholders and securing their
active support (i.e., increasing their power and leadership so they can
demonstrate this support).
The working group should present these strategies to the sponsor and other
policymakers or managers present, with the following caveats:
To be most effective, certain strategies may need to remain confidential, known
only by a select group of policymakers implementing the policy.
The strategies should be developed in further detail through concrete action
plans, communication plans, and negotiation packages.
The implementation of the strategies will require the commitment of additional
time and resources from the sponsor.
The implementation of the strategies will require the development of a select
group of professionals trained in communication, facilitation and mediation,
and negotiation techniques.
It is not always necessary or feasible to implement all of the strategies
immediately. In presenting the strategies, the working group should
identify a few, select priorities for immediate action (i.e., next steps) by
the sponsor or other policymakers or managers.
Depending on the results, the working group may recommend
implementation of one key strategy for all stakeholders, or
implementation of several strategies to address the needs of several
stakeholders. In the latter case, the working group should recommend
which stakeholders should be targeted for strategy implementation, given
the limited resources generally available for implementation.
Stakeholders To Be Targeted by Strategies
Supporters with little power and leadership: focus on ways of increasing
the power and leadership of these stakeholders.
Neutral stakeholders with medium to high power and leadership: focus
on convincing the stakeholders to support the policy and increasing their
power and leadership where necessary.
Opponents with high power and leadership: focus on negotiating for the
opponents' support and decreasing their power and leadership if they
remain opposed.
Reference