Works with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or your own local model: paste this prompt and your AI will co-facilitate this exercise with you.

Help me prepare and run the exercise below. First ask for my participant count, time, setting, access needs and intended result. Check these against the stated limits. Use the supplied rules and materials. Explain any proposed changes before using them, and label them as adaptations. Do not invent source claims or require personal disclosure. Give me one step at a time when I say start. I manage the people, physical activity and clock; do not claim to observe the room. Ask me what happened before choosing a next step.

Reference revision: 247fbf95ee28678de0558664df0f860c10cf42071b9cc13c4758d383d55f2516

# Stakeholder Analysis

Participants identify the people affected by or influential to a project and plot them onto a two-by-two grid of power versus interest. The group then determines specific communication and engagement tactics for each quadrant.

**Time:** 45 minutes. Gamestorming suggests 30 to 60 minutes. 45 minutes allows structured brainstorm, grid mapping, and initial action planning.
**People:** 4 to 24. Small working groups of 3 to 5 people working on shared or distinct project areas, followed by whole-room alignment.

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Map individuals and groups by their relative influence and interest in a project to set clear communication priorities.
**Use it when:** Use at the kickoff of a new project or initiative when a team needs shared clarity on who must be consulted, informed, or partnered with.
**Skip it when:** Skip when key project goals, scope, and deliverables are entirely undefined, or when the team lacks direct knowledge of the external environment.

## Materials and tools

- Sticky notes (1 pad per table)
- Broad-tip markers (1 per person)
- Large flipchart paper or wall space with a pre-drawn 2x2 grid (1 per table or group)
- Painter tape

## Before participants arrive

1. Draw a large 2x2 matrix on flipchart paper or a whiteboard for each group.
2. Label the vertical axis 'Power / Influence (Low to High)' and the horizontal axis 'Interest / Impact (Low to High)'.
3. Distribute sticky notes and markers to each table.

## Say this to open

We are going to identify the groups and people connected to this project and map them by their power and interest. Power means their ability to direct, approve, or obstruct the work. Interest means how much the outcome directly affects them. First, we will generate the names individually, then map them on the grid and agree on our next steps.

## How to run it

### 1. Brainstorm roles and groups (8 minutes)

Working silently, each person writes key roles, departments, or external partners on sticky notes. Put one entity per note. Prompts: Who funds or sponsors the work? Who does the daily work? Who uses or receives the end result? Who can block or approve decisions? Stopping condition: Stop when sticky note production slows or the timer hits 8 minutes.

### 2. Consolidate and place on grid (15 minutes)

In table groups of 3 to 5, members take turns reading a note and placing it onto the 2x2 matrix according to its relative power and interest. Combine exact duplicates. If two people disagree on placement, discuss relative impact for no more than one minute and place the note between the disputed positions. For example, write 'IT Security Lead' rather than just 'IT'.

### 3. Define engagement actions (12 minutes)

Review the four quadrants on the matrix: High Power/High Interest (Manage Closely/Partner), High Power/Low Interest (Keep Satisfied), Low Power/High Interest (Keep Informed), Low Power/Low Interest (Monitor). On the matrix or a separate pad, each group writes 1 specific communication action and an assigned owner for their top 3 priority groups.

### 4. Room walk and debrief (10 minutes)

Groups spend 4 minutes viewing other tables' matrices. Reconvene as a whole room. Take up to 3 observations on overlooked groups and high-risk relationships.


## Debrief questions

- Which quadrant holds the most critical blind spot for this project?
- Where did we have the most disagreement on power versus interest, and why?
- What is one concrete communication action we need to take within the next week?

**Finished output:** A completed 2x2 grid mapping project entities by power and interest, accompanied by a list of initial engagement owners and actions.

## Remote

Set up a digital whiteboard with a 2x2 matrix labeled Power on the vertical axis and Interest on the horizontal axis. In breakout rooms of 3 to 5, participants add digital sticky notes. Use breakout timers for the brainstorm and placement phases. Return to the main room for screen sharing and review.

## Hybrid

In-person groups use physical wall grids while remote participants collaborate on a mirrored digital board. Assign a designated in-person scribe to duplicate digital notes onto the physical board, or have all participants use individual laptops to edit the single digital canvas.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may suggest broader organizational groups instead of naming specific individuals if interpersonal dynamics are sensitive.
- Participants can contribute ideas via written notes silently without presenting out loud.
- Any participant may opt out of speaking during the final debrief.

## If the session gets stuck

**Participants write broad categories like 'Customers' or 'Management' that are too generic to assign actions.**

Prompt them to break the category down into specific roles, such as 'Regional Sales Directors' or 'Daily App Users'.

**The group spends too long arguing over the exact coordinates of a single sticky note.**

Remind them that position is relative, not mathematical. Place the note on the border line between quadrants and move forward.


## Terms used here

- Power: The level of authority or influence an entity has to direct, approve, or obstruct project decisions.
- Interest: The degree to which an entity is directly affected by or cares about the project's progress and outcome.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in Gamestorming (Dave Gray et al.), which notes historical roots in political forecasting tools such as the Prince Chart developed by Coplin and O'Leary.

The core mechanic of mapping entities on a Power versus Interest 2x2 grid is drawn from Gamestorming. UWT added explicit step timing, silent writing to balance introverted contributions, neutral examples, and a standard quadrant engagement framework (Manage Closely, Keep Satisfied, Keep Informed, Monitor).

[Gamestorming](https://gamestorming.com/stakeholder-analysis)

[Gamestorming](https://gamestorming.com/stakeholder-analysis/)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/stakeholder-analysis/