Stakeholder map: who influences and who decides

A stakeholder map places the people affected by a project by their influence and interest. How to build one, which strategy fits each quadrant, when to skip it.

info Quick Definition
A stakeholder map is a two-axis matrix that classifies the people affected by a piece of work according to their influence (how much they can affect the outcome) and their interest (how much they care). It helps decide whom to inform, whom to consult and whom to persuade before a decision is made.

What is it and where does it come from?

The tool is associated with the power-interest grid, also known as Mendelow’s matrix. Its origin is the paper “Environmental Scanning: The Impact of the Stakeholder Concept” by A. L. Mendelow, published in 1981 in the proceedings of the second International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS). Some guides date it to 1991; the ICIS record says 1981. Design guides such as IxDF’s use a 2x2 influence-interest matrix with the same logic.

IxDF presents it as a tool for analysing and categorizing the people involved in your work or affected by it. Its structure is a 2x2 matrix with two axes: influence, meaning the power to affect outcomes, and interest, the degree of involvement in the project’s success.

Why does it matter to a designer?

Because design decisions are rarely made by one person. A redesign may depend on product, legal, a commercial director or a support team that will receive the complaints. If the designer does not know who decides and who merely comments, they spend time persuading someone who had no power to change anything, or ignore the person who does.

The map also helps plan communication. A director with high influence and low interest needs a short summary on time. A support agent with high interest and low influence needs to know what changes and when, because they can become allies or detractors.

How do you build one, step by step?

IxDF proposes five steps:

  1. Gather information. Brainstorming, interviews and consultation with sponsors to identify everyone relevant.
  2. Prioritize by influence and interest.
  3. Visualize on a quadrant, a mind map or a network diagram, whichever is most useful to the team.
  4. Plan the interaction with each person: what they need to know, when and through which channel.
  5. Review and update as roles and priorities change.

Rework defines power as the ability to shape decisions, release resources or block progress, and interest as how much the person cares about what the project delivers. ResumeLens reminds us that power is not purely hierarchical rank: a legal counsel with veto authority can have high power regardless of title. So when assigning values, look at how decisions are actually made and not only at the org chart.

Which strategy fits each quadrant?

IxDF proposes one strategy per quadrant:

  • High influence and high interest: manage closely. Involve them regularly and ask for their opinion before deciding. These are the people you co-create the solution with.
  • High influence and low interest: keep satisfied. Inform them at a high level, with short summaries that do not waste their time.
  • Low influence and high interest: keep informed. Keep them up to date. They can be allies if they are listened to, and detractors if they feel ignored.
  • Low influence and low interest: monitor. Minimal effort, with periodic reviews in case their position changes.

Rework identifies the high-influence, low-interest quadrant as the most dangerous: their interest can spike late, for example when a security director nobody consulted halts a rollout just before launch. ResumeLens recommends timely, concise executive updates for that person, so they are not ambushed. That is why it is worth reviewing that quadrant often.

When is it not worth it?

  • When the team is very small and everyone knows their role. The map adds no decisions.
  • When the project does not involve several areas or several people who decide.
  • When it replaces the conversation. Classifying someone does not substitute for talking to them.
  • When it is treated as fixed. A map from three months ago may be wrong today.

Matrices also simplify. Rework notes that binary axes can oversimplify real political dynamics, and ResumeLens warns that power is not purely formal hierarchy.

Example

Illustrative example: a team wants to change the approval flow for requests in an internal tool. Its map includes the operations director (high influence, low interest for now), two department heads who use the tool daily (high interest, little formal influence) and a support team that receives the complaints (high interest, low influence). The director gets a one-page summary before each decision. The department heads take part in two co-design sessions. The support team receives weekly updates and, in the first test, spots a problem nobody had seen. The map did not decide the design, but it stopped the director from learning about a change by surprise.

For your next project: write five people on a sheet, place them in the grid and ask which of them would change course if they heard about the project tomorrow.

Common mistakes

  • Making the map once and never reviewing it.
  • Confusing job title with influence, without looking at how decisions are actually made.
  • Ignoring people with little formal influence but a lot of interest.
  • Treating the low-interest quadrant as irrelevant.
  • Using the map to evaluate people instead of planning communication.
  • Not defining what the team will do with each quadrant.

To understand who you design for, personas describe users, while the map describes who decides about the product. To present decisions to those stakeholders, executive presentations are the natural format. To talk with the people the map identifies, use stakeholder interviews. And if the map is part of a broader process, review the UX design process.

Sources

Frequently asked questions

What is a stakeholder map?
It is a two-axis matrix that classifies the people involved in or affected by a piece of work by their influence over outcomes and their interest in the project’s success. IxDF describes it as a tool to analyse and categorize those people. It derives from Mendelow’s power-interest matrix (1981).
What are the four strategies of a stakeholder map?
High influence and high interest: manage closely. High influence and low interest: keep satisfied. Low influence and high interest: keep informed. Low influence and low interest: monitor.
Is a stakeholder map made only once?
No. IxDF warns that stakeholder mapping is not a one-off activity and suggests reviewing it at milestones, such as after user research, during prototyping and before launch.
When is a stakeholder map not worth it?
When the team is so small that everyone knows their role, or when the project involves few areas and few people who decide. In those cases the map adds work without new decisions.