Stakeholder dedication approval and participation

Question A
Stakeholder dedication, approval and participation in the overall change process proves crucial to change management initiative success. To this end, stakeholders ought to be adequately informed about change goals and intent, in addition to being accorded a chance to share individual ideas during change initiative implementation. Studies reveal that an open, consultative approach to change implementation leads to better overall outcomes (Chirenje, Giliba & Musamba, 2013).
Studies reveal that without having an effective communication strategy in place, the whole process of change can end up being a disaster. Both a total lack of communication and over-communicating are detrimental, potentially derailing the entire change endeavor. Without ample organization-wide communication or reciprocal conversation, the change attempt might end up not fulfilling its aims. A communication strategy that is straightforwardly and efficiently devised helps build awareness as well as acquire personnel support all through the course of the initiative. The continuum of communication delineated in the following paragraphs demonstrates the impact of effective communication on stakeholders when fostering commitment to change (Chirenje, Giliba & Musamba, 2013).
Stakeholder Analysis may be defined as the basic activities prior to communication strategy preparation and adoption during change. The more complicated the change, the more vital is stakeholder analysis, since change implementation may be faced with the obstacle of stakeholder opposition owing to various reasons. Stakeholder analysis facilitates minimization of potential change process participant opposition through understanding the expectations and needs of important stakeholders indirectly or directly impacted by change (Chirenje, Giliba & Musamba, 2013).
The unindustrialized world’s social structures continue to focus on small groups of communities based on cultural, geo-political, and economic relationships, particularly in rural places. To these communities, top-down decisions appear most ineffective when it comes to attaining sustainable development. The majority of unindustrialized nations, particularly African nations, often vigorously adopt non-participatory decision-making strategies. Here, policy is governed by people in positions of power, with rural communities being mere implementers and recipients. Consequently, rural societies are separated from the resources they rightfully ought to operate and derive benefits from. It is essential to engage African communities in participatory budgeting and decisions (Chirenje, Giliba & Musamba, 2013).
Local communities provide raw materials and human resources for ventures, and their knowledge is highly valuable, at times, when it comes to natural resource management. Hence, active participation of communities in decision-making is crucial, right from formulating policy to adoption and assessment. Further, relying on donor resources and finance proves problematic. Therefore, participatory community role during the stages of budgeting and planning will facilitate stakeholder identification of community resources that may be utilized in initiatives, ventures and tasks, thereby decreasing reliance on donors. Local community empowerment via sustainable resource allotment, use, and management form major components of alleviating poverty (Chirenje, Giliba & Musamba, 2013).
Studies reveal that marginalized populations typically suffer the most from negative effects whilst having narrow opportunities when it comes to participating or benefiting from the program/project. Stakeholders potentially adversely affected by corporate tasks and decisions ought to be made a priority, even in the event of low organizational influence. It is imperative that special efforts be made to comprehend the concerns/interests of stakeholders incapable of expressing themselves (on subjects like the ecosystem, future generations, etc.) and consider vulnerable stakeholder populations (like marginalized and disadvantaged communities, females, minors, immigrants, and indigenous communities). Situations change, as do stakeholders and stakeholder interests, with time. Moreover, stakeholder populations not influential at first may grow to be of significance, with time. Stakeholder involvement plans and mapping ought to be revised as required (Fleming & Koppelman, 2016).
Question B
Several program planning-related participation tasks will likely occur within group settings. Group meeting facilitation deals with how individuals without decision-making power aid more effective and efficient group planning, implementation, monitoring and assessment. This role is challenging, yet critical, if the society has to be accorded actual decision-making authority. Professionals might require relevant capability development or gender training in participatory study and planning methods for successful facilitation (Fleming & Koppelman, 2016).
Project success relies on coordination and administration quality. These activities may prove to be a key task for community volunteers and groups. In the majority of instances, coordination or facilitation prove central to project progress. The first stop must be gauging whether the service to be provided falls within stakeholders’ scope. The best facilitator would regularly be on site and highly familiar with the area. Problems will crop up if group members don’t have easy access to the coordinator (Fleming & Koppelman, 2016).
Stakeholder participation in the planning phase helps build local ownership, bolsters initiative design and integrity, and helps develop foundational relationships potentially contributing to constructive issue resolution in the event of challenges or problems. Timely, repetitive stakeholder participation facilitates establishment of reciprocal trust and good faith, playing a role in sustainable development results which go beyond the venture. Timely stakeholder participation can build on prior stakeholder involvement processes (like country program creation, similar projects, etc.). But individual projects will potentially give rise to their own distinct stakeholder configuration (Eskerod & Jepsen, 2016).
Transparency with regard to knowledge gaps and uncertainties in the course of early stakeholder involvement is pivotal. Collaborating with a wide array of stakeholders probably helps delineate project parameters, bridge major gaps in knowledge, and, if needed, give rise to alternative ideas pertaining to venture design and likely mitigation measures, risks, grievance, and monitoring procedures. Stakeholder identification and timely consultation at the planning stage may establish the foundation for collaborations with major stakeholder populations, in addition to identifying likely stakeholder representatives to include in the steering committees, Local Project Appraisal Committee, and Project Board (Eskerod & Jepsen, 2016).
More project stakeholders means more stress and project complexity. Stakeholders’ emotional investment or responsibility/role within the project as well as their capability of impacting project results or implementation strategy impacts project complexity as well. Besides stakeholder share and their extent of investment, how far they agree/disagree impacts project complexity. For instance, small commercial constructions often have numerous stakeholders, including building permitting organizations, safety and labor organizations, and environmental organizations, which can impact project implementation plan. Additionally, the neighbors will be concerned about the edifice’s architectural appeal, construction noise, and construction purpose (Eskerod & Jepsen, 2016).
For instance, an American chemical firm commissioned a project group for designing and constructing a plant for manufacturing raw materials that went into unpaved road-targeted truck tire production. This plant was meant to be constructed in India some years following an accident involving another American chemical firm, which claimed the lives of several Indians. When the firm announced this novel project and started preparations, it faced such severe community backlash that it had to be cancelled. Hence, a highly engaged stakeholder may have a significant impact on project success (Callahan, Olshfski & Schwella, 2005).
For successful project implementation, there is a need for identifying all stakeholders prior to commencement of the new project. All groups affected by, or capable of affecting, the initiative ought to be included. This must be followed by forging robust relationships with individual stakeholder groups. Furthermore, stakeholder analysis must be performed, which is an evaluation of major project participants, and the impact of the project on their requirements and issues. Individual stakeholder concerns and traits ought to be identified, in addition to their motivations and things that provoke them. Lastly, their degree of involvement and roles must be defined, besides determining conflicts of interest between stakeholder groups (Eskerod & Jepsen, 2016).
Project leadership must gauge the extent of influence of individual stakeholders on the project. A highly influential stakeholder means a greater need for the project manager to acquire the stakeholder’s support. Consider the question of “What’s at stake for them?” whilst considering individual stakeholders. Understanding individual stakeholder demands or requirements can help project managers judge their level of support. Finally, identifying distinct stakeholder expectations is a must. Soliciting clarification for completely understanding them is even more important. All stakeholders will have different ideas of what defines project success and to find this out during project completion will only result in failure. Hence, their definition of success must be garnered up front; further, they must be included in project objectives for ensuring all stakeholders support the end result (Eskerod & Jepsen, 2016).
It is also imperative to ensure stakeholder engagement rather than merely reporting plans and progress to them. Their input must be solicited. Short meetings or lunch/coffee meets must be used to better understand them. Individual stakeholders’ capacity of involvement must be gauged, and their time constraints honored. Importantly, ensure stakeholders are well-informed via ongoing status updates; the rule here is: daily updates are too much while updates once a month are too little. Weekly updates are just about right. Project meetings must be held as needed, though not too infrequently. Another point to bear in mind is to be prompt in replying to stakeholder emails and questions. Regular communication, even if the news is bad, is appreciated. The above points form the foundation of forging robust stakeholder relationships. However, as in all other relationships, subtleties exist, which must be grasped by an effective project manager (e.g., understanding stakeholder differences and effectively relating to various kinds of stakeholders) (Eskerod & Jepsen, 2016).
References
Callahan, K., Olshfski, D., & Schwella, E. (2005). Global public management: Cases and comments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Chirenje, L. I., Giliba, R. A., & Musamba, E. B. (2013). Local communities’ participation in decision-making processes through planning and budgeting in African countries. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment, 11(1), 10-16.
Eskerod, P., & Jepsen, A. L. (2016). Project stakeholder management. Routledge.
Fleming, Q. W., & Koppelman, J. M. (2016). Earned value project management. Project Management Institute.