Views: 20
Summary – Any IT project operates in an ecosystem of stakeholders with varied powers, where informal resistance and unanticipated decisions threaten schedules, budgets, and adoption. The interest/influence matrix maps sponsors, key users, and informal levers to tailor communication, committees, and engagement levels at each phase—from scoping to deployment—while regularly updating emerging profiles.
Solution: deploy a dynamic matrix and a segmented engagement roadmap from ideation to steer influence, prevent roadblocks, and secure collective buy-in.
Any IT or digital transformation project unfolds within a complex network of stakeholders whose motivations vary and sometimes conflict. Using a stakeholder matrix from the outset reveals the formal and informal levers that influence success or failure.
Beyond mere classification, this tool becomes a strategic map for deciding whom to involve, inform, or monitor at each stage. By offering a consolidated view of the decision-making ecosystem, the matrix prevents unforeseen resistance and optimises governance. It proves essential for allocating communication and engagement resources where they generate the most value and ensure collective buy-in.
Understanding the Decision-Making Ecosystem through the Interest/Influence Matrix
The interest/influence matrix exposes hidden dynamics among sponsors, implementers, and end users. It structures the understanding of formal and informal power from the project’s earliest phases.
Identifying Sponsors and Their Influence
Sponsors often hold the financial power and political legitimacy to launch and secure a project. Their budget commitment translates into support during strategic trade-offs. Understanding their expectations helps frame objectives and anticipate choices when priorities conflict.
Analysing the primary sponsor includes assessing their ability to reallocate resources quickly or publicly champion the project. A highly influential sponsor can accelerate decision-making but may also impose scope changes without fully gauging technical impact. Documenting these behaviours then guides communication and deliverables.
In a Swiss company’s customer-portal overhaul, the IT department had identified a sponsor whose support seemed assured. Yet his informal influence with top management explained why he repeatedly secured budget increases. The matrix formalised this lever and adjusted governance, preventing costly mid-project scope expansions.
Mapping Key Users
End users are often the primary judges of a project’s operational value. Their interest may be high even if they lack significant hierarchical authority. Identifying those with strong needs ensures functional relevance and avoids mass rejection upon rollout.
The matrix distinguishes pilot users—who will test core features—from secondary users, whose feedback is useful but less critical. This segmentation guides prototype development, training plans, and the selection of satisfaction metrics.
For example, a Swiss industrial SME included two field supervisors identified as influential within their teams during the scoping phase. Their involvement uncovered undocumented business constraints, leading to functional adjustments that smoothed adoption and reduced training incidents.
Detecting Informal Levers
Beyond organisational charts, some individuals wield specialised expertise or maintain influential personal networks. Their opinions can block or facilitate decisions and generate hidden resistance. The matrix unearths these profiles and indicates the attention they require.
Spotting informal influencers involves observing cross-functional meetings, internal discussions, and informal team feedback. These weak signals often serve as early warnings of underestimated human or organisational risks.
During an ERP transformation in a Swiss public institution, a support technician with low hierarchical visibility delayed go-live due to fear of losing control over incident management. The matrix isolated his role as an informal lever, enabling a dedicated dialogue channel that quickly addressed his concerns.
Crafting an Engagement Strategy Tailored to Each Profile
The matrix doesn’t just classify; it defines a precise engagement roadmap. It guides the choice of communication methods and involvement level for each stakeholder.
Closely Involving High-Influence Stakeholders
High-influence, high-interest stakeholders should be integrated into steering committees and scoping workshops. They actively contribute to technical decisions and validation milestones. Their engagement prevents bottlenecks and enables swift trade-offs.
For these profiles, schedule dedicated meetings and provide regular project performance indicators. Document key points and approved compromises to reinforce their sense of control and reduce out-of-governance change requests.
By tailoring deliverables to their expectations—such as concise dashboards or targeted demos—you build a lasting partnership that secures buy-in during critical phases.
Informing Medium-Interest Stakeholders without Overload
Medium-interest stakeholders, often busy with daily operations, need regular updates without being inundated with technical details. Their support helps validate assumptions and anticipate process impacts.
A concise monthly bulletin or a dedicated collaborative channel suffices. It should recap progress, key decisions, and upcoming milestones, while inviting them to targeted workshops when their input is needed.
This measured approach prevents information fatigue and keeps trust high without overconsuming governance resources.
Managing Low-Influence Profiles as Needed
Some stakeholders, although low in influence, can cause friction if they feel excluded or uninformed. Keeping them in a light loop—with quarterly reporting or an automated FAQ—reduces ad hoc inquiries.
A simple asynchronous sync, via an internal newsletter or a project-tracking module, meets their information needs without diverting the project manager’s attention.
By adopting this selective approach, you focus communication efforts where they add the most value and minimise organisational noise.
Edana: strategic digital partner in Switzerland
We support companies and organizations in their digital transformation
Keeping the Matrix Live Throughout the Project
The stakeholder matrix evolves through ideation, execution, and deployment. Regular monitoring prevents steering with an outdated map and underestimating new human risks.
Updating the Matrix during Ideation and Scoping
At launch, focus on initially identifying stakeholders and validating assumptions. A first version of the matrix structures scoping workshops and defines governance committees.
At this stage, a few iterations suffice: prioritise major levers and lay the foundations for clear governance. Share each update with sponsors to validate the engagement logic.
This first iteration secures funding and sets unanimously accepted milestones, providing a common trajectory and a basis of trust.
Reassessing During Execution
Once the project moves into execution, new actors may emerge: technical team leads, external consultants, business liaisons. Their interest and influence should be periodically re-evaluated based on progress and field feedback.
A matrix review aligned with sprints or key phases identifies shifts in interest and influence. Communicate changes to the relevant stakeholders to adjust the engagement strategy.
This agile approach avoids surprises and enables rapid responses to unanticipated needs or latent conflicts.
For example, a public organisation in Switzerland discovered that a technical liaison, initially deemed secondary, became crucial during testing. Revising the matrix led to inviting him to technical committees and adjusting the test schedule.
Anticipating Deployment and Change Management
As deployment approaches, adoption stakes peak. Previously marginal profiles—such as training managers, support teams, or key users—can become decisive.
The matrix then guides change-management activities: training sessions, how-to guides, targeted communication materials. Stakeholders identified as critical receive personalised support.
By planning these actions in advance, you reduce resistance and secure operational ramp-up.
Reducing Risks by Managing Influence and Communication
Managing influence lets you anticipate resistance and minimise organisational risks. Tailored communication channels ensure each profile receives the right information at the right time.
Adapting the Message to Influence Levels
Strategic messages vary depending on whether you address executives, managers, or frontline operators. For decision-makers, emphasise business benefits and performance gains. For delivery teams, highlight ease of use and operational support.
A calibrated message bolsters credibility and avoids perceived gaps between strategic vision and day-to-day reality.
By modulating tone and detail, you reduce frustration and maintain buy-in at every stage.
Establishing Targeted Communication Channels
Choose synchronous channels (meetings, workshops) and asynchronous channels (newsletters, collaboration platforms) based on stakeholder profile and message urgency. Too many meetings cause overload; too few leave people out of the loop.
A project communication charter—defining frequency, format, and recipients—provides a clear framework. It can include dashboards, sample deliverables, and escalation paths for urgent issues.
This structured approach avoids parallel tracks and ensures transparency around decisions and ongoing actions.
Optimising Steering Committees and Ad Hoc Groups
Steering committees bring together strategic stakeholders to validate milestones and trade-offs. Their efficiency depends on a clear agenda, common prework, and structured minutes.
Simultaneously, ad hoc groups can be formed to address specific topics (security, training, integration). They include only those profiles whose influence and interest are relevant to the subject.
This modular setup reduces cognitive load and focuses decision-making energy where it’s needed.
Steer Influence to Secure Your Strategic Projects
From ideation onward, structure your governance around a stakeholder matrix to avoid human and political blind spots. By segmenting stakeholders according to their interest and influence, you define precise engagement modes, optimise communication, and anticipate resistance.
An evolving matrix, revisited at each phase, ensures you always have an up-to-date map of forces and risks. It becomes the central tool of your strategic steering, reducing unnecessary meetings and securing collective buy-in.
Our Edana experts support your journey—from initial matrix construction to its integration into your project lifecycle. We tailor every recommendation to your context, favouring modular, open-source, and scalable solutions for agile, secure governance.
