Discussion Forum: Stakeholder Analysis And Communication ✓ Solved

Discussion Forum: Stakeholder Analysis and Communication. In

Discussion Forum: Stakeholder Analysis and Communication. Initial Post (20 points): Minimum 300 words. Choose one of the discussion questions located at the end of Chapter 6, CPM 4e, and write a discussion post that includes at least one citation and a reference list in support of your discussion. Choose from Discussion Questions 5, 9, or 10.

Response Post (10 points): Minimum 150 words. In the response post, provide a counter opinion or alternative point of view, not simply a reaffirmation of the initial post. The response may rely on your experience or be supplemented with course readings. Guidance: See the Purdue OWL for citations and references. Use materials from CPM 4e and PMBOK 6e. Online blogs are not acceptable references. Include in-text citations and references.

References: Kloppenborg, T. J., Anantatmula, V. S., & Wells, K. N. (2019). Contemporary Project Management: Organize, Lead, Plan, Perform. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Paper For Above Instructions

Stakeholder analysis and effective communication are foundational to successful project outcomes, and this is especially true in disaster response contexts where time is critical and the range of stakeholders is broad. In project management literature, stakeholders include individuals, groups, and organizations that can affect or be affected by the project (PMBOK Guide Sixth Edition, PMI, 2017). A rigorous stakeholder approach helps ensure that resources are allocated to priorities that reflect community needs, that expectations are managed, and that legitimacy is maintained across agencies, NGOs, volunteers, survivors, and donors (Kloppenborg, Anantatmula, & Wells, 2019). The connection between stakeholder engagement and project success is well documented in both practitioner and academic sources, and it provides a practical framework for analyzing and communicating with diverse actors in time-sensitive disaster settings (Freeman, 2010; Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997).

First, identify and classify stakeholders using a salience framework. Mitchell, Agle, and Wood (1997) propose identifying stakeholders by power, legitimacy, and urgency to determine who truly matters to project success. In disaster response, this means recognizing federal and state emergency authorities, local governments, operating NGOs, faith-based groups, community leaders, volunteers, and affected populations as stakeholders whose needs and influence must be understood early in the planning phase. A disciplined identification step mitigates the risk of overlooking essential partners or misjudging the relative importance of different actors (Olander & Landin, 2005). Freely, a stakeholder approach that weighs legitimacy and urgency among groups helps avoid ad hoc engagement that can delay critical interventions (Freeman, 2010).

Second, connect identification to engagement through a formal stakeholder management plan and a tailored communications strategy. The PMBOK Guide Sixth Edition frames stakeholder management as a knowledge area comprising planning, managing, and monitoring stakeholder engagement, with communications planning serving as a core component. The plan should specify who needs what information, when, through which channels, and in what level of detail. In disaster contexts, a one-size-fits-all communication approach tends to fail; instead, messages must be adapted for diverse audiences—policy makers requiring concise situation briefs, on-site volunteers needing operational guidance, and community members seeking timely, empathetic updates. Kloppenborg et al. (2019) reinforce that leadership across stakeholder groups requires clear expectations, roles, and accountability, supported by credible, timely information (PMI, 2017; Kloppenborg et al., 2019).

Third, apply stakeholder engagement tools and models to operationalize engagement. A widely used tool is the power/interest (or influence/impact) grid, which helps determine where to allocate effort and resources. The Salience Model also guides attention to those who possess power, legitimacy, and urgency in a dynamic situation. In practice, this translates to routine updates for agencies with policy authority, formal briefings for major donors, and two-way channels with frontline volunteers and affected communities. Ethical considerations—such as transparency, cultural sensitivity, and respect for local authority structures—are essential to maintain trust and legitimacy (Coombs, 2007; Freeman, 2010). Proactive stakeholder engagement has been shown to improve risk communication and reduce perception gaps during crises (Olander & Landin, 2005; Coombs, 2007).

Fourth, reflect on a disaster volunteer resources scenario to illustrate application. Imagine a coordinated relief operation where federal emergency management, state agencies, multiple NGOs, faith-based groups, community leaders, volunteers, and survivors are stakeholders. A structured approach would begin with a stakeholder register, append contact preferences, information needs, and decision-making roles, and then feed into a communications plan that specifies cadence (daily briefs for key agencies, shift-based field updates for volunteers, and culturally appropriate messages for affected communities). Engagement would require two-way feedback loops, not merely top-down information dissemination. Integrating stakeholder engagement with risk and ethical considerations aligns with best practices in project management and crisis communication (PMBOK, 2017; Coombs, 2007; Bourne, 2009).

Finally, consider the assignment requirements for the discussion response. The initial post should present an evidence-based perspective that relies on published literature, including at least one in-text citation and a reference list (Kloppenborg et al., 2019; PMI, 2017). The response post should offer a counter opinion or alternative viewpoint, drawing on experience and course readings where appropriate, and should include additional references. The overall analysis should demonstrate an understanding of stakeholder theory, engagement planning, and effective communications as they apply to disaster response contexts (Mitchell et al., 1997; Freeman, 2010; Olander & Landin, 2005).

References

  • Project Management Institute. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide) Sixth Edition. Newtown Square, PA: PMI.
  • Kloppenborg, T. J., Anantatmula, V. S., & Wells, K. N. (2019). Contemporary Project Management: Organize, Lead, Plan, Perform. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
  • Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Cambridge University Press.
  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886.
  • Bourne, L. (2009). Stakeholder Relationship Management: A Maturity Model for Organizational Implementation. Burlington, MA: Gower.
  • Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B., & De Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art. Cambridge University Press.
  • Coombs, W. T. (2007). Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, Managing, and Responding. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Olander, S., & Landin, A. (2005). Evaluation of Stakeholder Analysis in the Early Stages of Construction Projects. International Journal of Project Management, 23(4), 281-294.
  • Bryson, J. M. (2004). Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Related Assignments