Filled example: stakeholder list
A fictional learning team moves course bookings to an online system. Roles and groups only. The map area follows from the two ratings: 2 or 3 counts as high.
| # | Stakeholder (role or group) | What they need or care about | How the work affects them | Effect (1–3) | Influence (1–3) | Map area | Known or assumption | Evidence, or how we will check |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | Course participants (about 400 staff) | To book in a few steps, on a phone or a laptop | Bookings move from email to the new system | 3 | 1 | Hear and support | Assumption | Not asked yet. Check: test with six volunteers |
| S2 | Line managers (18) | To approve quickly and see who is booked | They approve in the system, not by email | 3 | 2 | Work together | Known | Three interviews, 6 and 7 October |
| S3 | Head of people (sponsor) | Go-live before January; no extra admin hours | Reads a monthly report from the system | 1 | 3 | Ask first | Known | Project brief, 1 October |
| S4 | IT service desk | Single sign-on and a named supplier contact | Takes support questions after go-live | 2 | 3 | Work together | Known | Meeting notes, 8 October |
| S5 | Data protection officer | Only necessary personal data; a retention period | Reviews the system once, then once a year | 1 | 3 | Ask first | Assumption | From an earlier review. Check: ask for conditions |
| S6 | Finance team | A cost centre on every booking; a monthly export | An export replaces a manual spreadsheet | 2 | 2 | Work together | Assumption | Process not seen. Check: walk through an export |
| S7 | External trainers (9) | The attendance list two working days ahead | Lists come from the system | 2 | 1 | Hear and support | Assumption | One said so. Check: ask three trainers |
| S8 | Facilities team | To know room needs a week ahead | Room requests may move into the system | 2 | 1 | Hear and support | Assumption | Not asked. Check: how rooms are booked |
| S9 | Warehouse shift staff (about 60) | A way to book without a laptop, in paid time | The standard route does not reach them | 3 | 1 | Hear and support | Assumption | No work laptops (staff list). Check: ask two shift leads |
| S10 | Staff representatives | Fair access to training for all staff groups | Little change to their own work | 1 | 1 | Tell briefly | Known | Email from the chair, 9 October |
Stakeholder list
Blank version. Copy it into a document, or use the Excel list, which names the map area from the two ratings.
| # | Stakeholder (role or group) | What they need or care about | How the work affects them | Effect (1–3) | Influence (1–3) | Map area | Known or assumption | Evidence, or how we will check |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | ||||||||
| S2 | ||||||||
| S3 |
What each map area changes
A rating of 2 or 3 counts as high. The area names and the advice are written for this kit; the two-axis grid itself is commonly credited to Aubrey Mendelow (1991).
| Map area | Ratings | Before a decision | After a decision | What goes wrong if we skip it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Work together | Influence 2–3, effect 2–3 | Draft the decision with them. Agree it before it is final. | Confirm in writing what was agreed. | They block or undo a decision they hear about late. |
| Ask first | Influence 2–3, effect 1 | Ask for their conditions early. Keep the contact short. | Say how their conditions were met. | A late “no” on a point they could have named early. |
| Hear and support | Influence 1, effect 2–3 | Ask what they need. Test the change with a few of them. | Tell them early and say where to get help. | The work suits the team, not the people it changes. |
| Tell briefly | Influence 1, effect 1 | No input needed, unless they ask. | Send a short summary. Invite questions. | Silence that looks like secrecy. |
Rating scale
A shared scale for discussion, not a measurement. When two people disagree, write the higher number.
| Rating | Effect of the work on them | Their influence on the work |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Their day changes little or not at all. | They cannot change the work or its timing. |
| 2 | Part of their work changes. | The work needs their time or advice. |
| 3 | A core part of their work changes. | They can approve, stop or delay the work. |
Filled example: stakeholder map
The ten fictional stakeholders in their four areas.
| Effect on them: 1 (low) | Effect on them: 2 or 3 (high) | |
|---|---|---|
| Influence on the work: 2 or 3 (high) | Ask first: S3 Head of people; S5 Data protection officer | Work together: S2 Line managers; S4 IT service desk; S6 Finance team |
| Influence on the work: 1 (low) | Tell briefly: S10 Staff representatives | Hear and support: S1 Course participants; S7 External trainers; S8 Facilities team; S9 Warehouse shift staff |
Filled example: what the map changes
The decision-use table: what the team does differently because of the map.
| Decision or step | Ask before we decide | Tell, and when | Check first | What we will do differently |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Does every booking need a manager’s approval? | Line managers; head of people | Course participants, in the launch message | That managers can approve within two working days | Decide after the manager demos on 20 October |
| The go-live date | IT service desk; head of people | All staff and external trainers, two weeks before | That single sign-on is ready | Announce the date only after IT confirms it in writing |
| Which personal data the system stores | Data protection officer | Staff representatives, in the one-page summary | The officer’s conditions (assumption S5) | Configure nothing until the written conditions arrive |
| How staff without a laptop book a course | Two shift leads, for the warehouse shift staff | Warehouse shift staff, in the shift briefing | That a shared device works (assumption S9) | Test the route with shift staff before the general test |
| Who books training rooms | Facilities team | External trainers, with the first attendance list | How rooms are booked today (assumption S8) | Keep rooms out of scope until facilities has answered |
Filled example: engagement plan
Status on Friday 23 October 2026: four contacts done, two overdue (E3 and E5).
| # | Stakeholder | Map area | What we will do | Contact owner | By when | How we will know it worked | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | Line managers | Work together | Run two 30-minute demos of the approval step and collect objections | Learning coordinator | 20 Oct | The approval rule is agreed in writing with managers | Done |
| E2 | IT service desk | Work together | Agree single sign-on, the support route and the go-live date | Project lead | 16 Oct | IT confirms the date and a named contact in writing | Done |
| E3 | Finance team | Work together | Walk through the monthly export with a sample file | Learning coordinator | 22 Oct | Finance confirms the export has the fields they need | Planned |
| E4 | Head of people | Ask first | Hold a 20-minute meeting on the approval rule and the go-live date | Project lead | 15 Oct | Both decisions are in the decision log | Done |
| E5 | Data protection officer | Ask first | Send the list of personal data and ask for conditions | Project lead | 16 Oct | Written conditions arrive before configuration | Planned |
| E6 | Course participants | Hear and support | Test the booking steps with six volunteers from three departments | Trainer | 27 Oct | At least five of six book a course without help | Planned |
| E7 | Warehouse shift staff | Hear and support | Ask two shift leads how staff without a laptop can book | Trainer | 21 Oct | A booking route for shift staff is written and tested | Done |
| E8 | External trainers | Hear and support | Ask three trainers what they need on the attendance list | Learning coordinator | 28 Oct | The three trainers confirm a sample list | Planned |
| E9 | Facilities team | Hear and support | Ask how rooms are booked today and who should book them | Learning coordinator | 23 Oct | One written rule for who books rooms | Planned |
| E10 | Staff representatives | Tell briefly | Send a one-page summary and offer a conversation | Project lead | 30 Oct | Summary sent; questions answered in five working days | Planned |
What you'll leave with
In 60 minutes the team has a list of 8 to 12 stakeholders with their needs and the evidence for each, a map in four areas, three to five decisions that now name who to ask and who to tell, and a contact plan in which each contact has an owner, a date and a sign that it worked.
Before the session
- For facilitators, trainers and project leads who help a project or change team of 3–10 people look outside the team, at the start of a project or before a decision that affects other people.
- Ask the project lead for the project in one sentence and for two or three decisions due in the next month. Bring any evidence that exists, such as meeting notes or a project brief.
- Prepare the four sheets in a shared document or print one set. Agree who keeps the list afterwards, and store it where the team would be comfortable for a stakeholder to read it.
- Send the sheets a day early as plain text for screen readers. Plan silent writing before each discussion, accept written contributions, let people pass and keep cameras optional. The map uses text labels, not colour.
How to fill it in with your team
Name the decision and the ground rules
Read the project or decision in one sentence. Say: “We will map the people and groups outside this team that our work touches. The map describes roles and needs. It is not a judgement of anyone, and most of what we write today will be an assumption until we ask.” Agree two rules: write roles and groups, not names, and write nothing you would not show to the stakeholder.
List the stakeholders
Give four minutes of silent writing: each person lists roles and groups, one per line. Prompt with four questions: “Who uses the result? Who must approve or pay? Who does extra work because of it? Who is easy to forget?” Take six minutes to merge the lists and remove duplicates. Aim for 8 to 12 rows. Split a group when one part of it is affected differently.
Record needs, effects and evidence
Spend eight minutes on two columns for each row: what the stakeholder needs or cares about, and how the work affects them. Work in pairs when the list is long. Then spend four minutes on the last two columns. Ask for each row: “How do we know?” Write Known with the source, or Assumption with a way to check. Nobody has to defend a row.
Rate and read the map
Spend six minutes rating each row from 1 to 3 twice: the effect of the work on them, and their influence on the work. Read the rating scale aloud first. When two people disagree, write the higher number and mark the row as an assumption. Spend four minutes placing each row in its area on the map and reading the map aloud. Ask: “Who is in Hear and support, and have we spoken to any of them?”
Decide what the map changes
Write three to five coming decisions on the sheet “What the map changes”. For each one, take two minutes: who we ask before we decide, who we tell and when, and which assumption we check first. Finish each row with one sentence that starts with “So we will…”. If the map changes nothing about a decision, say so and move on.
Plan the contacts
Fill the engagement plan. Start with the areas Work together and Hear and support, then Ask first, then Tell briefly. Each row needs one action, one contact owner who says yes, a date and a sign that it worked. Every assumption that a decision depends on gets a contact that checks it. Several stakeholders can share one contact.
Read back and close
Read back the number of stakeholders, the number of rows still marked Assumption and the first three contacts with their owners and dates. Agree the date of the first review and who keeps the list. Ask each person for one stakeholder they now see differently, in one line aloud or in the chat, or a pass.
Participant worksheet
Copy this table into a document, or print the worksheet from the bundle. Share only what you choose.
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Stakeholder list | Role or group, what they need, how the work affects them, and how we know |
| Two ratings | Effect of the work on them and their influence on the work, each from 1 to 3 |
| Stakeholder map | Four areas: work together, ask first, hear and support, tell briefly |
| What the map changes | For each coming decision: who to ask, who to tell and what to check |
| Engagement plan | One action per contact, with an owner, a date and a sign that it worked |
Debrief questions
- Which stakeholder did we add late, and what would have happened if we had missed them?
- Which rows are still assumptions, and which decision depends on them?
- Who is strongly affected by our work and has little influence on it, and how will we hear them?
- What will we do differently in the next two weeks because of this map?
Adapt it for your group
- For three or four people, skip the pairs and fill the list together. Keep the silent writing, so that the first voice does not set the list.
- For a 30-minute version, collect five stakeholders from each person in advance. In the session, merge, rate and fill “What the map changes” for one decision. Plan the contacts by message.
- Online, keep one shared document on screen and collect the silent lists in the chat or in the document. Read each row aloud before the group rates it. Make cameras optional and turn on captions.
- For quiet participants and people working in a second language, collect ratings in writing first and read them out without names. Anyone can pass, and nobody has to explain a rating.
- When a stakeholder is a member of the team, or a single named person, write the role and keep the row factual. If the row would embarrass the team in front of that person, rewrite it as a need.
After the session
Send the list, the map and the plan on the same day. After each contact, change the row from Assumption to Known or correct it. Review the plan every two weeks: look only at overdue contacts, new stakeholders and open assumptions. When a decision from the table is made, record who was asked and who was told.
Questions people ask
What should a stakeholder mapping template include?
A list of the people and groups the work affects, what each one needs, how the work affects them and how much they can affect the work. It also marks what is known and what is assumed, and has a simple map and a contact plan. This kit adds a table of what the map changes.
How do you map stakeholders in a workshop?
List roles and groups in silence, merge the lists, and record the need, the effect and the evidence for each. Rate effect and influence from 1 to 3, place each row in one of four areas and plan a contact.
Is this the power and interest grid?
It is related. The two-axis stakeholder grid is commonly credited to Aubrey Mendelow (1991). This kit uses two axes of its own, the effect of the work on the stakeholder and their influence on the work, with its own area names and advice.
How is this different from the project kickoff meeting agenda?
The project kickoff meeting agenda settles roles, decisions and risks inside the team. This template looks outside the team, at the people the work affects. Use the kickoff agenda first for a new project.
Is it fair to rate people by influence?
The ratings describe a role’s relation to this piece of work, not a person’s worth or character. Write roles and groups, keep each row factual, and write nothing you would not show to the stakeholder. The template is a planning aid, not an assessment of people.
What is included in the free and editable files?
The open PDF has the blank stakeholder list, map, table of what the map changes and engagement plan, a filled example of each and the 60-minute agenda. Subscribers also receive the editable Word file, an Excel workbook that names map areas and flags overdue contacts, and a CSV of the example list.
How to use the files
Print the PDF, edit the Word file in Word or Google Docs, or open the CSV or XLSX in a spreadsheet. Open files need no email.
Can I use this with paying clients?
Yes. Use and adapt this original Superglue kit in your own training, including paid client sessions. Please share this page rather than redistributing the unmodified kit. Read the full usage terms.