What to do when stakeholders matter: stakeholder ...

1 Bryson, John to do when stakeholders matter: stakeholder identification and analysistechniquesBryson, John M., (2004) "What to do when stakeholders matter: stakeholder identification and analysistechniques" from Public Management Review 6 (1) , London: Routledge Staff and students of Anglia Ruskin University are reminded that copyright subsists in this extract and thework from which it was taken. This Digital Copy has been made under the terms of a CLA licence whichallows you to: * access and download a copy; * print out a copy; Please note that this material is for use ONLY by students registered on the course of study asstated in the section below. All other staff and students are only entitled to browse the material andshould not download and/or print out a copy.

2 This Digital Copy and any digital or printed copy supplied to or made by you under the terms of thisLicence are for use in connection with this Course of study . You may retain such copies after the end ofthe course, but strictly for your own personal use. All copies (including electronic copies) shall include this Copyright Notice and shall be destroyed and/ordeleted if and when required by Anglia Ruskin University. Except as provided for by copyright law, no further copying, storage or distribution (including by e-mail)is permitted without the consent of the copyright holder. The author (which term includes artists and other visual creators) has moral rights in the work and neitherstaff nor students may cause, or permit, the distortion, mutilation or other modification of the work, or anyother derogatory treatment of it, which would be prejudicial to the honour or reputation of the author.

3 This is a digital version of copyright material made under licence from the rightsholder, and its accuracycannot be guaranteed. Please refer to the original published edition. Licensed for use for the course: "Strategic Management Analysis". Digitisation authorised by Sarah Packard ISSN: 1471-9037 WHAT TO DO WHENSTAKEHOLDERSMATTERS takeholder Identification andAnalysis TechniquesJohn M. BrysonJohn M. BrysonHubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs245 Humphrey CenterUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolis, MN 55455, USATel: + 1 612 625 5888E-mail: article focuses specifically on how andwhy managers might go about using stake-holder identification and analysis techniquesin order to help their organizations meet theirmandates, fulfill their missions and createpublic value.

4 A range of stakeholder identi-fication and analysis techniques is techniques cover: organizing participa-tion; creating ideas for strategic interven-tions, including problem formulation andsolution search; building a winning coalitionaround proposal development, review andadoption; and implementing, monitoring andevaluating strategic interventions. The articleargues that wise use of stakeholder analysescan help frame issues that are solvable inways that are technically feasible andpolitically acceptable and that advance thecommon good. The article concludes with anumber of recommendations for manage-ment research, education and wordsStakeholders, strategic management, strate-gic planning, coalition, common good, smartpracticeVol.

5 6 Issue 1 2004 21 53 Public Management Review ISSN 1471 9037 print/ISSN 1471 9045 online 2004 Taylor & Francis : word stakeholder has assumed a prominent place in public and nonprofitmanagement theory and practice in the last 20 years, and especially in the last term refers to persons, groups or organizations that must somehow be taken intoaccount by leaders, managers and front-line staff. Research and writing on the subjecthas both contributed to the rise in the use of the term and to knowledge about what itmight mean in practice. Ironically, while the term has passed the tipping point intocommon use (Gladwell 2000), and the notion that key stakeholders must be attendedto is an idea in good currency (Schon 1971), there is relatively little in the public andnonprofit literatures on exactly how to systematically identify and article is a beginning response to that Edward Freeman, in the now classic textStrategic Management: A StakeholderApproach(1984), defined a stakeholder as any group or individual who can affect or isaffected by the achievement of the organization s objectives (1984: 46).

6 Typicaldefinitions of stakeholder from the public and nonprofit sector literatures include thefollowing variants:. All parties who will be affected by or will affect [the organization s] strategy (Nutt and Backoff 1992: 439).. Any person group or organization that can place a claim on the organization sattention, resources, or output, or is affected by that output (Bryson 1995: 27).. People or small groups with the power to respond to, negotiate with, andchange the strategic future of the organization (Eden and Ackermann 1998:117).. Those individuals or groups who depend on the organization to fulfill their owngoals and on whom, in turn, the organization depends (Johnson and Scholes2002: 206).The sample definitions from the public and nonprofit management literatures differ inhow inclusive they are.

7 To Eden and Ackermann stakeholders can only be people orgroups who have the power to directly affect the organization s future; absent thatpower, they are not stakeholders . Their definition is similar to many in the businessmanagement literature (Mitchellet al. 1997; Jones and Wicks 1999), and makes sensefor their purposes, as they are writing for both business management and public andnonprofit management audiences. In contrast, Nutt and Backoff, Johnson and Scholes(who also address a primarily business audience) and I urge consideration of a broaderarray of people, groups or organizations as stakeholders , including the nominallypowerless. While there is no explicit ethical content in any of the four definitions, Nuttand Backoff s, Johnson and Scholes s and my definitions would seem to be morecompatible with typical approaches to democracy and social justice, in which theinterests of the nominally powerless must be given weight (Lebacqz 1986; Lewis 1991;22 Public Management ReviewBoyte and Kari 1996; Stone 1997).

8 The decision about how to define stakeholderstherefore is consequential, as it affectswhoandwhatcounts (Mitchellet al. 1997). Inthe case of public and nonprofit management, it therefore would appear to be wise tobegin any stakeholder identification and analysis procedures with a more inclusivedefinition (Lewis 1991).2 While specific stakeholder definitions vary, this literature concurs in the need forstakeholder support to create and sustain winning coalitions3(Riker 1962, 1986;Baumgartner and Jones 1993), and to ensure long-term viability of organizations (Edenand Ackermann 1998; Abramson and Kamensky 2001; Brysonet al. 2001), as well aspolicies, plans and programs (Bryson and Crosby 1992; Baumgartner and Jones 1993;Roberts and King 1996; Jacobs and Shapiro 2000; van Schendelen 2002).

9 Keystakeholders must be satisfied, at least minimally, or public policies, organizations,communities or even countries and civilizations will fail (Huntington 1996; Friedman2000).WHY stakeholder ANALYSES HAVE BECOME SO IMPORTANTS takeholder analyses no doubt have always been important. For example, BarbaraTuchman (1984) in her sobering historyThe March of Folly: From Troy to Vietnamrecounts a series of disastrous misadventures that followed in the footsteps of ignoringthe interests of, and information held by, key stakeholders . She concludes Threeoutstanding attitudes obliviousness to the growing disaffection of constituents,primacy of self-aggrandizement, and the illusion of invulnerable status are persistentaspects of folly .The story continues with paul Nutt sWhy Decisions Fail(2002), a careful analysis of400 strategic decisions.

10 Nutt finds that half of the decisions failed that is they werenot implemented, only partially implemented or otherwise produced poor results inlarge part because decision makers failed to attend to interests and information held bykey stakeholders . Other quantitative and qualitative studies report broadly similarfindings with respect to the importance of paying attention to stakeholders ( Brysonet al. 1990; Bryson and Bromiley 1993; Burby 2003; Margerum 2002). Failure toattend to the information and concerns of stakeholders clearly is a kind of flaw inthinking or action that too often and too predictably leads to poor performance,outright failure or even analyses are now arguably more important than ever because of theincreasingly interconnected nature of the world.