Skip to main content

Stakeholder Influence Clinic

Disagree-and-commit simulations and stakeholder mapping exercises. The goal is to rehearse moves you rarely get to practice in a safe setting.

Budget: 2 hours.

Retrieval Prompts​

  1. State the four RACI roles. What does each one mean?
  2. Name the two axes of stakeholder mapping and what the four quadrants imply.
  3. State the disagree-and-commit move in one paragraph.
  4. Why should the strongest version of the opposing argument come before your own in an escalation?
  5. What is the difference between consulted and informed?

Exercise 1: Stakeholder Map​

Pick one real cross-team decision you are involved in (or have been in the last 6 months). Produce a stakeholder map in a simple two-part form.

Part A: RACI table​

StakeholderRoleR / A / C / IWhy
............

Rules:

  • Exactly one Accountable.
  • Responsible is often 1-3 people.
  • Consulted should include anyone whose veto you respect - including operations, security, and finance if applicable.
  • Informed should include downstream teams who will feel the change even if they do not approve it.

Part B: Power / Interest plot​

Plot each stakeholder on power (how much their veto matters) vs interest (how much they care). Label each quadrant with your approach:

  • High power, high interest -> work closely, walk the map first
  • High power, low interest -> brief with a 1-page summary; do not burden
  • Low power, high interest -> keep informed so they hear it from you
  • Low power, low interest -> monitor

Exercise 2: The Alignment Walk​

Using the map from Exercise 1, write a short walk plan:

  1. Order of conversations. Who first, who second, who third. Start with the Accountable, then Consulted stakeholders with veto power, then others.
  2. Expected objection per person. Write the specific objection you expect. Be precise; "concerns about performance" is not specific. "Concerns that the migration will push Payments past its p99 SLA" is.
  3. Carryover plan. When you enter the second conversation, state the first stakeholder's objection before your own position. Note what that looks like in each case.

Then have at least one of the conversations in real life. Record what surprised you. The surprises are the data.

Exercise 3: Disagree-and-Commit Simulation​

Pick three scenarios. For each, write a disagree-and-commit memo.

Scenario A (tech choice)​

Your VP has decided the team will rewrite a service in Go. You believe Rust is the better fit.

Scenario B (process)​

Your manager has decided the team will adopt mandatory code reviews by a central architecture team. You believe this will create a bottleneck and prefer peer review.

Scenario C (priority)​

Product leadership has decided the next quarter will focus on a major customer-facing feature. You believe the team is one quarter away from reliability collapse and should spend the quarter on reliability work.

For each scenario, write a 250-word memo with this structure:

  1. My disagreement. The strongest version of your own argument (80 words).
  2. The strongest version of the opposing argument. In their words, not as a strawman (80 words). This is the hardest part. Do not skip.
  3. Observable trigger for reopening. What would make me flag that the decision should be revisited? Specific, measurable, time-bound (40 words).
  4. Commit statement. One sentence. "I commit to executing [decision] at full strength, flagging if [trigger] occurs by [date]." (30 words).

Exercise 4: Managing Up​

Write one short message for each of these situations:

  1. Early escalation. You are 30% through a project and the original plan will not work. Write the 5-sentence Slack message to your manager, proposing a specific revised plan, not just flagging the problem.
  2. Difficult news. A key dependency has slipped and your launch will miss its date. Write the 4-sentence message to the VP, including the slip, the revised date, the blast radius, and the ask (decision requested or just FYI).
  3. Pre-read before a 1:1. Three bullets for next Tuesday's 1:1 with your manager: one thing going well, one thing going badly, one decision you need from them.

Compare and Distinguish​

  • Consulted vs informed. Consulted is asked for input before the decision; informed is told after.
  • Disagree-and-commit vs silent dissent. The first is loud during, silent after. The second is silent during, loud later.
  • Escalating a problem vs escalating a proposal. A problem is a wish for the manager to solve it; a proposal is a decision for them to approve or decline.
  • Veto vs influence. A veto stops the decision. Influence shapes it. Most stakeholders have influence; few have veto.

Common Mistake Check​

Identify the error:

  1. "My stakeholder list has 25 people on it." (too many; scope will be dragged)
  2. "Two people are Accountable - my manager and their peer." (ambiguous accountability; nothing ships)
  3. "I told them about the decision after I made it." (informed-as-consultation error)
  4. "I disagree with the decision and I'll do the minimum required." (silent sabotage; not commit)
  5. "My escalation says 'we have a problem, please help.'" (no proposed decision; manager has to do the thinking)

Evidence Check​

This clinic is complete when you can:

  • produce a stakeholder map with RACI and power/interest in under 30 minutes
  • walk that map for a real decision and adjust the proposal based on what you learn
  • write a disagree-and-commit memo in which the opposing argument is at least as strong as your own
  • escalate with a proposed decision, not a naked problem