Practical Guide for Stakeholder Analysis
Draft 17 January 2011
This document is a practical guide to staff or consultants involved in stakeholder
mapping exercises as part of their elaboration of the program development and
Theory of Change analyses.1
The document is part of a much wider process and assumes that consultants and
staff have been fully briefed, in particular in terms of understanding CARE’s
values and Theory of Change Approach.
This document uses the Pastoralist Girls and the Urban Female Youth’s program
to illustrate the approach, however, CARE Ethiopia’s third program and other
country programs could adopt the same approach once it has been piloted and
refined. It is offered as guidelines to be built on and enriched not as a blue-print.
Stakeholder mapping
There is a large literature on stakeholder mapping, partnership analysis, etc
which staff and consultants could refer, some of which is provided in the
bibliography. The following document is an attempt to synthesis this literature for
best use in CARE’s current long-term programming approach.
The starting point to the mapping should be the impact group and the goal – i.e.
given our impact group and goal who is there that is important rather than an
approach which starts with who is there, what do they do and is this at all
relevant to us. Although more detailed work about the fit with the Theory of
Change follows latter, even at the initial mapping point it would be useful to ask
questions such as: Who is likely to contribute (positively) to the theory of
change? Who is likely to be resisting or opposing to the change process as
expressed in the TOC? How should we collaborate with these two different
groups?
Though the focus should be on the impact group, it would be useful to consider
the sub-impact groups as well. These are:
Within the pastoralist girls impact group:
 Those about to be married
 Young mothers
 The more mobile pastoralists
Within the resources poor
urban female youth impact
group
 Commercial sex workers
1
See Annex for glossary of key terms used by CARE in its development of a theory of change and in
program design
Stakeholder mapping
1
December 2010




The comparatively poor
Those without access to education and
other facilities
The disabled
Orphans (due to conflict)



Daily labourers
Older orphans and
Vulnerable Children
Domestic workers
The value of the exercise is also increased significantly if it focuses on the nonobvious traditional partners. There are often easily available lists of local and
international NGOs for example. In this study most time should be given to move
beyond these to look at other partnerships and cast the net wide to include
micro-finance institutions, customary institutions, social movements, multilaterals,
the private sector, elements of the state such as the judiciary and the police, etc.
In the stakeholder analysis it will also be critically important to identify those that
may have a negative influence on our project/program, not just the allies.
The table below can be used to help initial thinking, i.e. given our goal who is
there in terms of the different levels from local to international and in terms of
type of stakeholder.
1. Overall listing of key stakeholders and counterparts brainstorming:
(Divided into A. governmental and B. other)
for initial
A. Governmental
Type of counterpart
Local
(kebele
to
Woreda)
I
Regional
II
Multiregional and
National III
Other
V
Local
(kebele
to
Woreda)
I
Regional
II
Multiregional and
National III
Intern
ational
IV
B. Non- governmental
Type
Other
V
1. CBOs/ traditional
structures (formal
and informal),
Stakeholder mapping
2
December 2010
interest groups, etc
2. Social movements
3. Local NGOs
4. Ethiopian Resident
NGOs
5. International NGOs
6. Research institutions
7. Private Sector (e.g.
contributing to
education, health,
livelihoods, financial
institutions)
8. UN bodies/
multilaterals
9. Other
Funders/Donors
10. Consortia/Networks
11. Other
(note use numbering as this could be useful in the synthesis, maps, etc)
2. Identify development/emergency continuum for initial brainstorming
During the initial brainstorming it would be useful to consider different
programming considerations, e.g. phases of programming, and where different
stakeholders operate within the emergency/development continuum. This could
be summarized in the same table using colour coding or some other symbolic
classification.
3. Level of engagement with Impact group for detailed analysis
Once the main stakeholders have been identified, further details need to be
captured. The following tables provides guidelines of what and how key issues
can be synthesized. The full information captured per stakeholder should be
submitted as a supporting separate document rather than in the main document.
Once again the tables are broken down into A. governmental and B. Other
institutions/structures
Stakeholder mapping
3
December 2010
A. Governmental
Counterpar
t
Degree of
overlap re
impact group
Describe then
summarize
e.g. full
overlap (FO),
partial (PO),
no overlap
with impact
group but
important to a
target group
(NO)
Specific
focus on
subimpact
group
Specify
which if
any
What kind of
relationship
expected with
program2
Degree of
similarity of
vision/missio
n, etc
Current and potential
influence/contribution
to scale on ToC
As:
1)stakeholder
2) target
group
3) impact
group
Summarize
vision/missio
n and visually
summarize
e.. √ for some
similarity
√√ for a lot
X for not
Summarize and use
symbol e.g.
√ for some
√√ for a lot
X for not
Specific
focus on
subimpact
group
What kind of
relationship
expected with
program3
Degree of
similarity of
vision/missio
n, etc
Current and potential
influence/contribution
to scale on ToC
Degree of
interest in
partnership
and the
ToC
Summarize
and use
symbol e.g.
√ for some,
e.g.
information
exchange
√√ for a lot
e.g.
strategic
with or
without
financial
implications
X for not
Type of
relationship
expected in
the context of
the TOC
Summarize
and then use
symbols,i.e.P=
policy partner
I = implementation
R = research
F= co-funding
O= other
Degree of
interest in
partnership
and the
ToC
Type of
relationship
expected in
the context of
the TOC
Kind of
financing
relationship
expected
Other
Summarize,
e.g:
Cofunding;
funding of
counterpart
by CARE;
financing of
CARE by
counterpart:
no direct
financial
relationship
B – Other
Stakeholder
2
3
Degree of
overlap re
impact group
See p-shift definition of terminology in Annex and draft program design document for examples
See p-shift definition of terminology in Annex and draft program design document for examples
Stakeholder mapping
4
December 2010
Kind of
financing
relationship
to be
explored
Other
Describe then
summarize e.g.
full overlap
(FO), partial
(PO), no
overlap with
impact group
but important to
a target group
(NO)
Stakeholder mapping
Specify
which if
any
As:
1)stakeholder
2) target
group
3) impact
group
5
Summarize
vision/missio
n and visually
summarize
e.. √ for some
similarity
√√ for a lot
X for not
Summarize and use
symbol e.g.
√ for some
√√ for a lot
X for not
December 2010
Summarize
and use
symbol e.g.
√ for some,
e.g.
information
exchange
√√ for a lot
e.g.
strategic
with or
without
financial
implication
s
X for not
Summarize
and then use
symbols,i.e.P
= policy
partner
I = implementation
R = research
F= cofunding
O= other
Summarize,
e.g:
Cofunding;
funding of
counterpart
by CARE;
financing of
CARE by
counterpart:
no direct
financial
relationship
System mapping
Once the analysis has been done, the list of stakeholders should be ordered in
terms of how strategic they are to the program. In addition, the most strategic of
these partnerships could be summarized diagrammatically, e.g. with systems
maps. A stakeholder map for each domain could provide the first level of
synthesis and then an overall higher level synthesis drawn out for the program as
a whole.
Positive influence with
similar purpose,
culture and values
Positive influence but
different purpose,
culture and values.
CBOs
Private
L & INGOS
…..….
Domain or
Program
Gov structures
Funder
Research orgs
Consortium
Weak influence now
but potential.
Negative influence:
must
we quarantine or can
we
persuade on side?
Note that you can use shape, and distance from program to enrich the summary.
4. Fit with Theory of Change for detailed analysis
Stakeholder mapping
6
December 2010
The tables below are the next and the most detailed level of analysis required
only for those stakeholders and government counterparts identified as the most
important to the partnership going forward, i.e. to the strategically important for
the program.
The boxes in the tables in the first row look at the current and in the second row
at the potential contribution of partners to particular pathways. If possible in the
second row (potentially contribute) the narrative should identify a breakthrough
point opportunity that that stakeholder can be critical in achieving. As well as a
short narrative in the boxes, symbols would be useful e.g. √ or √√ where the
partner is/can contribute to the pathway.
Pastoralist Girls
Pastoral
communities
protect and
enhance their
livelihoods and
asset base (A)
Accountable and
influential pastoralist
customary
institutions, and
fora.
Strengthen land use
policy and practice
(A1)
Improved natural
resource and
livestock
management
through adaptation
to drought, and
preparedness and
resilience to
emergencies
through key,
strategic
interventions (A2)
Economic security
and mutual support
through women and
girl’s income and
savings groups and
through their
diversified
engagement in the
pastoral economy
and natural product
based activities (A3)
Availability and use
of quality, girl
friendly services:
- Education (B1)
Availability and use
of quality, girl
friendly services:
- Health (B2)
Availability and use
of quality, girl
friendly services:
- Water and
sanitation (B3)
Stakeholder1 …
currently
Potentially
Stakeholder2 …
currently
Potentially
Girls - including
the most mobile access services
(B)
Stakeholder mapping
7
December 2010
Women and girls
exercise their
rights (C)
Effective girl’s
empowerment
support structures
within communities
and schools
influencing
customary and
formal institutions
(C1)
Urban Female Youth
UFY are
Access and
economically
control to
empowered,
diversified
confident and
livelihood
self-reliant
mechanisms for
(A)
UFY
UFYs’ rights
are
protected
(B)
Improved
implementation
of existing laws
and policies
protecting UFY
Cultural and
social norms and
attitudes support
the aspirations
and improved
opportunities of
Stakeholder mapping
Harmful traditional
practices
abandoned (C2)
Harmonisation of
customary, religious
and formal
constitutional and
other laws to protect
and enforce girls’
and women’s rights
(C3)
Access to quality
youth friendly
basic services
(e.g. health and
education) for
UFY
Comprehensive
life skills attained
by UFY
Improved
knowledge
and
understanding
of laws and
policies by
UFY and the
community
Community,
parents ,
guardians and
immediate family
members
(including men
Law
enforcement
institutes
and justice
systems are
gender
sensitive
HTP and GBV
are addressed
8
Laws and
policies
formulated
and
implemented
to encompass
marginalized
sub-groups
Transformation of
socio-cultural
barriers (positive
values, beliefs and
practices towards
UFY)
December 2010
UFY (C)
and boys)
respect and
support UFY
5. Threats/risks to ToC in this relationship
Only for those stakeholders identified above as very important in achieving
breakthrough points, identify key threats in the partnership and steps to mitigate
these
Threats/risks in
partnership, i.e. how ToC
could be affected, power
dynamics, M&E
capabilities, etc
Suggested steps to
prevent this
Broad recommendations and conclusions
Conclusion to the Stakeholder Mapping in particular with recommendations about
how the TOC can be further refined and recommendations regarding
improvements to the program strategy.
Suggested Structure of Main Report
Executive summary
(this executive summary is very important. It can be several pages long
and should be written in a way that elements can be incorporated more or
less directly either into the UCPVs analyses or into the programme
strategy documents for the two programs)
Table of contents
List of Acronyms
1. Methodology
2. Stakeholder mapping findings Pastoralist Girls
2.1. Overall listing of key stakeholders
2.2. Level of engagement with impact group
2.3. Fit with theory of change
Stakeholder mapping
9
December 2010
2.4. Threats/risks to theory of change
3. Stakeholder mapping findings Urban Female Youths
3.1. Overall listing of key stakeholders
3.2. Level of engagement with impact group
3.3. Fit with theory of change
3.4. Threats/risks to theory of change
4. Broad recommendations and conclusions
Suggested structure of supporting report
Table of contents
1. Detailed findings from stakeholder analysis – Pastoralist program
2. Detailed findings from stakeholder analysis – Urban Female Youth program
Stakeholder mapping
10
December 2010
Glossary of main terms related to program approach
Term
Definition
Breakthroughs
A change affecting the impact group on the pathway of change that signifies, with a high level of
confidence a point of no return. In its greatest magnitude, it is a structural or systemic change; on a smaller
scale, it manifests as a precedent (something that happens for the first), an opportunity that makes the
change possible for others in the impact group.
Breakthroughs should not be limited only to those changes that CARE can do. This is the time for
stakeholders to think big, without the limits of what any individual organization can do.
Domains of
Change
Areas in which change is essential to achieving an impact goal. Domains of change are identified based on
the underlying causes identified as part of the statement of the current situation (element 1 above).
Enabling
Environment
The structural environment and value systems that recognize and reinforce mutual rights and obligations. It
is made up of interrelated conditions necessary for fostering just societies.
Human
Conditions
Aspects of quality of life, well-being, and opportunities. These include the necessary material conditions for
a good and healthy life
Impact
Long-term and sustainable social change that occurs at systemic and structural levels and addresses
underlying causes of poverty for a specified group of marginalized and vulnerable people [Brief #4]
Impact Goal
A 10-15 year ambition, and specifies the kind of enduring impact we would like to see achieved in the lives
of the impact population group, at broad scale, which means as broad as the definition of the impact group
itself.
An impact goal should be framed in terms of the desired change, such as women’s improved access to and
control over assets, and their greater equality in various forms of decision forums, as well as the reshaping
of institutions so that women’s voice is represented equitably.
The specific population group upon which the program (CARE and its partners) aims to have a positive
impact with a long-term commitment to overcome their underlying causes of poverty and social injustice.
The scale of the impact on this group is at least at national level.
Impact Group
Sub-Impact Group: One of the disaggregated groups that shares the characteristics of the impact group but
also has other unique characteristics that differ from those of the impact group as a whole. (See examples in
Fig 3). Specific program initiatives that form part of an overarching programme may need to focus on a
subset population.
Pathways
A pathway of change is a map that illustrates the series of major breakthroughs and related incremental
changes that are needed within a domain of change in order to reach the desired long-term goal. Pathways
to change depict what needs to happen in society in order for the desired long-term change to come about.
Programme
A coherent set of initiatives by CARE and our allies that involves a long-term commitment to specific
marginalized and vulnerable groups to achieve lasting impact at broad scale on underlying causes of
poverty and social injustice. This goes beyond the scope of projects to achieve positive changes in human
conditions, in social positions and in enabling environment.
Peoples’ position in society and their ability to live in dignity. The dynamics and characteristics of
marginalization, exclusion, inequality, and powerlessness.
Those individuals or groups who may affect or be affected by a program. They are recognized for their
importance in collaborating or cooperating with the program but are not “targeted” by activities or
initiatives.
A group of people who are deliberately engaged in the program as a means for CARE and its partners to
achieve impact on the intended impact group. Resources or inputs are invested in the target group. While
some aspect of their lives may be favorably impacted, it is the “impact group” and its subgroups to whom
CARE’s commitment is long-term and focused.
Generically, a set of hypotheses (if-then statements) and critical assumptions and risks underpinning the
design for how the program goal will be achieved. In the context of a program, this generic definition is
represented by the pathways of change which (a) flow from domains of change and (b) are marked by
breakthroughs
The result of a combination of political, social, economic, and environmental factors that are related to the
systemic and structural underpinnings of underdevelopment, residing at the societal and often the global
level
Social Positions
Stakeholder
Group
Target Group
Theory of
Change
Underlying
Causes of
Poverty
Stakeholder mapping
11
December 2010