Why a stakeholder map, not a RACI.

RACIs describe what people are accountable for doing. Stakeholder maps describe what people care about, what they can do if they're unhappy, and what channel you can reach them through when things go sideways.

In a federal agency context, that second document is the one that tells you whether a program is really going to land. The RACI is just the operating manual.

The two axes that matter.

I use a simple two-axis map: ability to influence outcome on the vertical axis, current disposition toward the program on the horizontal. Four quadrants, each requiring a different engagement strategy:

  • High influence, supportive — your active champions. Meet them privately every fortnight. Give them the real status, before the committee sees it.
  • High influence, sceptical — your most important relationships. Meet them privately more often, and ask what would move them. Sometimes the answer is a single artefact you hadn't thought to write.
  • Low influence, supportive — useful allies for execution detail. Don't over-consume their time, but don't neglect them; they often know the real story.
  • Low influence, sceptical — monitor, don't cultivate. These are often former sponsors or displaced experts. Brief them politely. Don't try to win them over.
Most stakeholder maps fail because they're drawn at kickoff and never updated. A good one is a live artefact — revised after every reshuffle, every ministerial letter, every SES-level movement.

Four roles you must name.

On every federal engagement, four specific roles need to be identified by name, not by job title:

  1. The program owner. The person whose career visibly does better if the program succeeds and visibly worse if it doesn't. This is often not the sponsor on paper.
  2. The political interface. The person whose job it is to carry bad news upward. You don't write to ministers; they do. Brief them well.
  3. The quiet veto. The person whose disagreement, expressed privately, will derail a steering committee decision. Often an SES Band 1 in a peripheral division.
  4. The operational truth-teller. The person at EL1 or EL2 level who knows what the service actually does today. Usually underestimated in the initial plan.

Identify these four people in your first two weeks. Meet each of them one-on-one. Write down what you heard.

How to fill it in without causing a diplomatic incident.

Stakeholder maps are sensitive documents. Label someone "sceptical and high-influence" in a shared drive and you will eventually regret it. A few practical rules:

  • The map is a personal working artefact. It lives in your own drive, shared only with your direct client sponsor.
  • Use neutral language — "currently unconvinced", "needs more visibility", "appropriate engagement: fortnightly 1:1s" — not "enemy" or "roadblock".
  • Never put direct quotes on the map. Summaries, always.
  • If challenged, be honest: yes, you maintain a stakeholder map; yes, it helps you engage people appropriately; no, you won't share it without their permission.

When to refresh it.

Five triggers I apply automatically:

  • A Machinery of Government change announcement
  • An SES-level movement in the agency
  • Any steering committee that didn't go to plan
  • The arrival of a new vendor delivery partner
  • A ministerial letter on the program topic

Outside those triggers, I refresh it monthly. It takes an hour. That hour reliably saves five hours of recovery later.