stakeholder-mapping

Place each stakeholder on a Power × Interest grid to assign engagement strategies: manage closely, keep satisfied, keep informed, or monitor. Then run an Impact × Power grid independently and compare placements to find stakeholders you are under-engaging relative to how much the product affects them.

Power × Interest answers how to engage each stakeholder based on influence and attention. Impact × Power answers who bears the consequences but lacks organizational voice. Running both and comparing them reveals blind spots that either grid alone misses.

Run it after stakeholder identification has produced the full named list, and before per-stakeholder engagement planning. Re-run it at quarterly review cycles or after reorgs, since authority and influence shift between quadrants over time.

Elevate them with concrete actions rather than passive access: recruit them into discovery research and usability testing, give them a named role in requirements review, and include them in launch readiness criteria. Naming them on a map without changing engagement is the most common failure mode.

Common pitfalls include running only one grid, conflating org-chart seniority with actual power, treating placements as permanent, quantifying rankings within quadrants, and stopping at placement without defining migration actions and owners.