Strategy Survival Guide

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Engaging with stakeholders Having identified those stakeholders that will be most closely involved with the project, it is necessary to identify how best to engage with them throughout the various stages of the project. The key elements of a positive stakeholder relationship include: • Early agreement of the need to work together to deliver results • Meetings to establish project parameters, success criteria and potential constraints or barriers • Review and agreement of key issues • Early flagging of problems • Constant updates on progress. The table below identifies some of the steps to stakeholder engagement throughout 4 phases of the strategy process. Phase Key Stakeholder Management Tasks Justification & Set Up • Agree objectives and questions to be answered • Determine process for consultation • Discussion of broad issues Research & Analysis • Identify key concerns/issues and collect knowledge • Communicate emerging conclusions Strategic Direction Setting • Seek views as to emerging strategic options • Communicate chosen option Policy and Delivery Design • Consult on policy design, especially those responsible for implementation • Secure collective agreement if required There are a number of approaches to engaging with stakeholders, including: • One to one meetings (usually required on regular basis with influential stakeholders) • Inviting stakeholders to sit on Steering, Advisory or Working Groups • Presentations to staff/senior management teams/boards • Recruiting team members from stakeholder organisations • Joint working with stakeholder organisations on key issues • Conducting a public consultation exercise and preparing an interim report for publication • Seminars for broader debate of particular issues or topics • Written communications, for example in the form of newsletters, updates or drafts of papers • E-mails • Web sites posting up key papers • Focus groups and seminars - for example, these might be a useful way of involving members of a sector, representative organisations and users. Different approaches are likely to be appropriate for different stakeholders. A combination of approaches is likely to be most effective, especially for key stakeholders. Strategy Survival Guide – Strategy Skills Page 80
Effectively engaging with stakeholders In Practice 1: SU GM Crops Project The GM crops project learned some tough lessons in stakeholder engagement. Despite the team having drawn up a stakeholder management plan, the initial scoping document - heavily reliant on internal work and comments from other government departments - was widely and severely criticised by many external stakeholder groups. In response to the criticism, the GM crops team opted for a much more extensive level of stakeholder engagement. All interim papers (including the criticisms of the scoping note) were published, and the team arranged stakeholder seminars to design the scenarios for the project and to draw up some illustrative "shocks and surprises". Repeat meetings with key stakeholders were organised, and many key stakeholders were involved in “Expert Groups” which had the opportunity to provide input to work in progress. A long list of contacts was kept informed of key developments in the project, and at the end of the project, a post-publication event provided stakeholders with an opportunity to comment on the report and the methodology. Whilst most stakeholders were interested mainly in the content of the report, the degree of engagement in the process was widely welcomed. NGOs in particular appreciated the feeling of being used as a source of valuable information, rather than just another group to tick off a list. The ability of the team to respond and re-plan in the light of criticisms was also seen as positive. Overall, the project achieved a surprising degree of consensus, with most groups feeling that their viewpoint had been listened to and reflected in the report. Effectively engaging with stakeholders In Practice 2: SU Fisheries Project The Fisheries Project set up two bodies to mediate formal contact with external stakeholders. The team invited a ‘Red Team’ of fishing industry experts to act as critical friends of the project. They provided constructive criticism of the team’s thinking at key stages of the project. In addition, the Stakeholder Advisory Group brought together representatives from all sectors of the fishing industry along with environmentalists and other stakeholders. Two meetings were held during the course of the project. These were structured to allow the team to communicate key findings and for the Stakeholder Advisory Group to input to the team’s work. The consultation paper, launched after the first couple of months of analysis, had several purposes. It provided an opportunity for gathering data that could not be found by other means. It gave individual stakeholders and organisations the opportunity to feed into the team’s work through a formal process. It also provided the team with the opportunity to present some of the initial analysis in a form that challenged preconceived notions and asked some searching questions. This was useful in preparing the ground for consideration of reform of the fisheries sector. The team also held a Stakeholder Event after the bulk of the analysis had been done. The team invited over sixty stakeholders; people met during the course of the project and a number of respondents to the consultation exercise. The Stakeholder Event allowed the team to ‘truth test’ its findings with a crosssection of stakeholders, continue the process of challenging received wisdom and provide stakeholders with ‘early warning’ of the likely terrain of the final report. The Stakeholder Event used outside facilitation and innovative technology to allow structured participation from attendees. This meant that all participants were able to comment on the team’s work. The use of a mixture of conventional and innovative tools for stakeholder engagement, combined with a commitment to transparency, encouraged constructive engagement and allowed the team to access resources and knowledge that were invaluable to gaining an understanding of a highly complex field. Strategy Survival Guide – Strategy Skills Page 81
Page 1:
Strategy Strategy Survival Survival
Page 4 and 5:
Strategy Survival Guide Version 2.1
Page 6 and 7:
Building an Evidence Base 113 Data
Page 8 and 9:
A Framework for Strategic Direction
Page 10 and 11:
These four components need to be co
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33: Strategy Survival Guide Version 2.1
Page 50 and 51: Recruiting a team In Practice: SU G
Page 52 and 53: • Commitment to a common purpose
Page 54 and 55: Away-days A project away-day is ano
Page 56 and 57: WHY ...are you telling me this? SO
Page 60 and 61: Try to put into practice the princi
Page 62 and 63: Encouraging creativity In Practice:
Page 64 and 65: There are clear differences between
Page 80 and 81: Identifying key stakeholders and th
Page 86 and 87: • What channels do we know don’
Page 90 and 91: Preparing the Story Once you have a
Page 94 and 95: development process include brainst
Page 100 and 101: Reinforcing Loops A + Balancing Loo
Page 102 and 103: Structuring the thinking - Systems
Page 104 and 105: Opportunities • Where are the goo
Page 108 and 109: Structuring the thinking - PESTLE I
Page 110 and 111: Revolution This is creativity at it
Page 112 and 113: For example, Sub-problem: My collea
Page 114 and 115: Structuring the thinking - Creativi
Page 118 and 119: in The Magenta Book) are rigorous m
Page 122 and 123: • Avoid asking the same question
Page 124 and 125: Expectations can be shaped by a num
Page 126 and 127: Collecting data - Surveys In Practi
Page 130 and 131: Collecting data - Interviews & focu
Page 132 and 133:
Step One: Define the problem explic
Page 134 and 135:
• Are the units correct? Step Sev
Page 136 and 137:
Analysing data - Modelling In Pract
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
The Five Forces Framework can be us
Page 142 and 143:
References Structure, Conduct, Perf
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Symbols • What language and jargo
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
• Put a contact name, telephone n
Page 152 and 153:
Learning from others - Internationa
Page 154 and 155:
4. Functional Benchmarking or Gener
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Strengths • Quantitative forecast
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
3. Bring drivers together into a vi
Page 164 and 165:
Scenario development In Practice 1:
Page 166 and 167:
Scenarios used in the Strategy Unit
Page 168 and 169:
groups at random. In other words, t
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
events. There are a number of diffe
Page 174 and 175:
Multi-criteria analysis In Practice
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Cost-benefit & cost-effectiveness a
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
For further material, see the Ratio
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Compelling vision for action - the
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Designing an implementation plan In
Page 194 and 195:
Creating Public Value http://www.nu
Page 196 and 197:
National Statistics http://www.stat
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Driver trees 97 Econometric modelli
Page 206 and 207:
management 17, 20, 27, 34, 45 outpu
Page 208:
Strategy Unit, Admiralty Arch, The
show all

Strategy Survival Guide

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?