This presentation was given by Donnie MacNicol and Guy Giffin at the joint APM / RICS conference on project leadership held in London on 25th February 2014.

1. 18/02/2014
RICS & APM Project
Leadership
Conference
Stakeholder
Engagement
Guidance Note
Guy Giffin and Donnie MacNicol
25 February 2014
Parliament Square, London
Authors
Guy Giffin
guy.giffin@prendo.com
Donnie MacNicol
donnie@teamanimation.co.uk
Paul Mansell
paulrmansell@gmail.com
1

2. 18/02/2014
Structure of our session
1. Introduction and overview of the Guidance Note
2. The 10 Principles, the heart of the Guidance Note
3. Appendices
1. A4
2. A2
3. A5
How to develop the capability
Framework of good practice: CASE Model
Results of the Survey
4. What did we learn on our ‘Journey’?
5. Consultation – your opportunity to engage
6. Questions
‘Manager’ to ‘Leader’
•
•
Is this trend true in your experience?
What impact is this having?
– What you do
– How you do it
– Who you do it with
•
Expectations changing?
What are the challenges:
– Does more “leadership” mean less “management”?
– Who does the “management” that the “leader” is no longer doing?
•
What is required to transition from management to
leadership?
– Skills – what are they?
– Need for improved stakeholder engagement skills (…is that a
leading question)?
Sarah Coleman
Donnie MacNicol
3rd Edition
2

3. 18/02/2014
Stakeholder
Management
Stakeholder Engagement
(aka more Leadership focus)
Stakeholder management is the systematic identification, analysis
and planning of actions to communicate with, negotiate with and
influence key stakeholders. Stakeholders are all those who have
an interest or role in the project or are impacted by the project.
APM BoK 5th Edition
•
•
•
•
•
So what is Stakeholder Engagement?…….
…. relationships
…. engagement
…. leadership
…. success…….
Stakeholder Engagement Guidance Note
• Guidance to anyone who encounters
“human”, as well as technical,
challenges in their working lives
• Increasingly recognised as a key
success factor on projects
–
numerous project reviews indicating these “human factors” as the most
likely causes of project problems or failure.
• Principles and corresponding examples
are based on real life situations
–
drawn from practitioner experience of what happens in the real world.
• Aim to “de-mystify” this topic
–
a description of good practice, rather than a prescription for best practice.
• More art than science.
3

4. 18/02/2014
The 10 Principles, the heart of the Guidance Note
“ Principles, if applied, will have a
positive impact on the engagement
of your stakeholders ”
•
•
Not attempting to describe the
mechanisms (“tools and techniques”)
Each Principle has a relationship with
the others - reflects the complex
nature of stakeholder engagement:
–
–
–
•
There is no single answer or approach
You often cannot consider or influence one without
impacting the other
… complex given the potential uncertainty and ambiguity
of how each stakeholder views and reacts to a project.
Consider as independent nuggets of
advice offered by a trusted colleague
or mentor.
Reproduced with kind permission from Gatehouse
10 Principles
1. COMMUNICATE
2. CONSULT, EARLY & OFTEN
3. REMEMBER: THEY’RE ONLY HUMAN
4. PLAN IT!
5. RELATIONSHIPS ARE KEY
6. SIMPLE, BUT NOT EASY
7. JUST PART OF MANAGING RISK
8. COMPROMISE
9. UNDERSTAND WHAT SUCCESS IS
10. TAKE RESPONSIBILITY
4

5. 18/02/2014
Appendices
3 Appendices from the Guidance Note
• A4 How to develop the capability
• A2 Framework of good practice: CASE Model
• A5 Results of the Survey
Appendix 4 How to develop the capability
developing expertise depends essentially on
quality and speed of feedback, as well as on
sufficient opportunity to practise
“
“
Daniel Kahneman
5

6. 18/02/2014
Appendix 2
Framework of good practice:
Complexity Alignment Stakeholder Engagement Tool
•
High level overview provided to practitioner around which they can base their
stakeholder engagement effort
It is NOT a ‘one size fits all’ approach – every project is different?
Process is based on an underlying model that provides the practitioner with a
usable tool to guide them through the identification, categorisation and planning
of Stakeholder Engagement, cognisant of the inherent complexities of the
project environment.
•
•
There are a suite of
tools you can deploy
ONLY if the project
demands it
Project Complexity - Rating for CA SE Tool Step 3
Consideration of Env ironmental Complexity
Source: adapted from Shenhar & Dv ir
Step 3A: Def ining the Dimensions of Complexity
Environment
W hat are the external political
af fects on the project from
national of local political
stak eholders?
Is there an above norm
deliberate influence on the
project from ex ternal
stak eholders?
Dimension
Step 3B: Assessing Impact of Complexity on Stakeholders
Dimension Environment
Total
Total
What is the impa ct of Politics on
your progra mme?
How polit ical is t he external
env ironment?
Score
Weighting
1 to 5
Political
Description
%
1
60%
5
40%
2
3
30%
0.9
2
70%
RA G
1.4
compound
sum of
is it of
of A*W
dimensions concern?
0.6
Technolog y
The project's level of
technological uncertainty.
Is the project's level of
technological uncert ainty
compounded by new technology,
systems a nd processes t hat aff ect
the likely project success?
4
100%
2
Is the current funding in pla ce?
Is future f unding in place?
Is there suf ficient contingency?
4
2
1
25%
50%
25%
Novelty
The uncertainty of the project's
goal, the uncertainty in the
market, or both.
How new is the projects' product to
users?
How new is the projects' product to
the market in g eneral?
1
50%
0.5
The capability and capacity of the Is there suf ficient support f rom t he
business/organisation to support leadership?
the project's success
Is there suf ficient support f rom t he
business (process, systems, tools)
to support success?
Are there t rhe ca pabilit ies ( and
capacity) of competencies and
skills to deliver project success?
Partial
5.5
No
Partial
12
Yes
2.7
Yes
3
2
No
3.75
Yes
7.6
Yes
1
2
20%
0.4
2
0.8
1
30%
0.3
3
0.9
1
20%
0.2
2
20%
0.4
2
60%
1.2
Yes
1.8
The urgency of the project Is there a rea sonable t ime planned
namely, how much time there is for the delivery of the project?
to complete the job
Is there contingency f or schedule
slippage?
How t horoug hly hav e risk s and
issues been modelled f or their
posisble impact on t he project?
Business
Environment
1
2
0.75
5.8
Partial
1.2
Pace
12
1
2
3
1
1
0.25
How new is the projects' product to
cust omers?
2.8
3
4
The current and future funding
2.7
2
2.25
F unding
4
3
Partial
4
is it of
concern?
1.8
Partial
2.3
Are the social network s external Are the socia l networks mapped,
to the project conducive to
stable, believa ble and able to
success?
support success?
Are the social network s internal Are the socia l networks mapped,
to the project conducive to
stable, believa ble and able to
success?
support success?
RAG
H (1) / M (2) / L ( 3)
3
2.6
S ocial
Eff ect of Complexity Dimension
Compound eff ect of
on Stakeholkders' perception of dimension on our ability to
success & positive engagement
influence the
with the project?
stakeholders?
Yes
1
0.2
1
0.4
2
2.4
4
40%
1.6
3
4.8
2
20%
0.4
1
0.4
3
40%
1.2
2
2.4
3.2
Yes
© Paul Mansell, ImpaQt Consulting
6

7. 18/02/2014
1. SE was a “discipline
worthy of further study and
development” and will be of
“increasing importance for
the profession in the future”.
Appendix 5
Results of
the Survey
4. 70% of people do not
believe there is a consistent
understanding of what
effective stakeholder
engagement is within their
organisation.
1. Less impressive - 80% of
people felt that there were
“insufficient resources
being committed to
developing SE”.
2. <50% plan and analyse
stakeholders with the same
rigour as the technical and
financial aspects of their
projects.
4. 85% said they did not
believe there is sufficient
and accessible knowledge
on stakeholder engagement
across their industry.
Conducted by the RICS and APM, designed by the authors, between
May and July 2013. Completed by 90 people, mainly practitioners.
3. 80% of people reported
that they “understood and
were able to clearly articulate
the motivation and interests
of the stakeholders”.
2. On only 50% of projects
was there typically a formal
stakeholder identification
workshop run at the start of
new projects with a crosssection of interested parties.
4. 80% did not believe that
their organisation had a
tailored stakeholder
engagement training and
development programme.
1. Value of Stakeholder Engagement
2. Practice of Stakeholder Engagement
3. Level of understanding of stakeholders
4. Need for training and development
What did we learn on our ‘Journey’?
Using the analogy of NYC2SFB
1.Engaging your stakeholders is good … but
you need to be ready to accept the
implications
2.Relationship building is key – its amazing
what people will do to help!
3.You should walk away smiling or what's
the point!
7

8. 18/02/2014
Consultation – your opportunity to engage!
•
iConsult - RICS online consultation
platform
– https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/stakehold
erengagement/consultationHome
•
Download a pdf version
•
Comment on the note section by section
via a structured document
8