The purpose of this assignment is to identify key stakeholders within your organization who are affected by, have influence over, or have an interest in solving the problem you are attempting to address with your action research project.Stakeholder analysis requires you to examine a number of variables in relation to each individual or group you have identified. Use the “Stakeholder Brainstorming” resource provided as a tool to assist you in completing the “Stakeholder Analysis” Excel spreadsheet.In the analysis, list titles and groups of stakeholders. Do not list names of specific individuals. It is important to note the role each stakeholder has in the problem and in solving the problem. Determine whether or not the individual or group has a negative, indifferent, positive, or very positive predisposition about the problem.Within the “Stakeholder Analysis” spreadsheet, there is a tab labeled “Current-State Matrix.” Study the terminology related to influence and support and think about how each block describes the feelings a stakeholder may have about the problem and proposed solution. For example, there may be a group or individual that has a high degree of support with regard to solving the problem. If you know such person or group also has a high level of influence in how the problem is solved, it is important to think about how you will approach this person or group in terms of seeking information and presenting potential solutions. Taking time to rank the level of influence and support for each stakeholder is critical as you proceed, because it may have a large role in determining whether or not specific problem solutions can be implemented.Take the time necessary to conduct research that will help you determine possible stakeholder reactions and issues related to potential solutions. Think about the motivation, drivers, and expectations of exchange for each stakeholder, the problem, and the proposed solutions. Finally, consider the role of the stakeholder, including when the stakeholder needs to be involved in the change effort, any stakeholder management activities, and stakeholder deliverables and timelines. If a stakeholder will ultimately end up having a designated role in implementing the solution, the ability to articulate the role, scope, and timeframe will be of utmost importance.Complete the “Stakeholder Analysis” spreadsheet and submit it to the instructor along with a 500-word summary of your findings. In the summary, discuss the following:Summarize stakeholder attitudes about the identified problem and support your summary with specific data from your collection tool.Summarize stakeholder attitudes or experiences related to previously implemented problem solutions and support your summary with specific data from your collection tool.Summarize stakeholder ideas for potential solutions and support your summary with specific data from your collection tool.Who are the stakeholders you will seek to act as sponsors to support you in the implementation of a problem solution? Provide specific reasons why these stakeholders are key to implementing a solution.Who are the stakeholders that will likely be directly affected by solving the problem? Provide specific ways these stakeholders could be directly affected by solving the problem.Who are the stakeholders who could pose potential roadblocks to solving the problem? Provide specific reasons why these stakeholders could pose potential roadblocks and what those roadblocks could be.This summary will be used as part of the Business Proposal Presentation in Topic 7, and within the Final Business Proposal in Topic 8. Evidence of revision from instructor feedback will be assessed on the final business proposal.
Negative Support/High Influence
(Commit)
I
N
F
L
U
E
N
C
E
Negative Support/Moderate Influence
(Invest)
N
C
E
Negative Support/Low Influence
(Marginalize)
SUPPORT
Positive Support/High Influence
(Leverage)
Positive Support/Moderate Influence
(Plan)
Positive Support/Low Influence
(Maintain)
SUPPORT
Name of Stakeholder
Description of Stakeholder
Role of Stakholder
Example: Call Center Manager Leader of the Call Center in Phoenix Project Sponsor
Level of Knowledge in
Program
High level of knowledge
Available Resources, Information, Influence, Money,
Staff, Technology, etc.
Funding of project and internal resources from call center
Level of Interest
High
Level of Support
Positive
Level of Influence
High
Action Plan for Stakeholder
Engagement
Maintain regular communication with
stakeholder on progress and updates.
Understanding Stakeholders
What is a stakeholder? According to Cambridge Dictionary “A stakeholder can be an
employee, customer, or citizen who is involved with an organization, society, etc. and
therefore has responsibilities towards it and an interest in its success.”
While this definition appears generally broad, the stakeholders involved with an
implementation can be numerous. This section reviews different types of stakeholders,
introduces tools for both stakeholder identification and analysis towards both priorities
and stakeholder support.
There are two different types of stakeholders, internal and external. Internal
stakeholders are those involved day to day in the program. These are individuals
associated with the actual project or specific problem. External stakeholders are those
outside of the organization who are influenced or impacted by the project or issue.
There may also be external stakeholders that may be part of the project depending on
the issue.
There are many different stakeholders and it is important to understand the interest and
influence of each. The first step is to brainstorm and identify all the potential
stakeholders. Figure 1 is an example of a stakeholder diagram depicting the target
audience call center quality issue. The second ring of circles represents the individuals
or organizations that have a direct connection with the interests of the primary
stakeholder impacted by the initiative. The other rings around the secondary group are
tertiary stakeholders who have a direct connection with the interest of the secondary
stakeholders in support of the primary stakeholders.
The key purpose of this brainstorming tool is to ensure that you have not missed a stakeholder
group. First you must revisit the problem statement to ensure that you have the focus of the
issue. Below the example problem statement is an example of brainstorming for internal and
external stakeholders.
Problem: Many call center representatives are not achieving quality standards, thereby
contributing to the overall low-quality rating (92%) for the call center. Through data and process
evaluation, it was determined that the training time for call center representatives is 30% less
than other similar call centers, which may contribute to lack of skills training. In addition, the
online tools available to the call center representatives are not updated frequently with
procedural changes and do not contain all required information necessary for representatives to
perform their job. The low quality over the past 6 months has resulted in a 2% decrease in
customers and a $550,000 loss in annual revenue. Decreased employee satisfaction in the call
center due to the issue has contributed to a 5% increase in voluntary attrition, which costs the
business $80,000 annually. There is an opportunity to improve quality and reduce both customer
and employee attrition by addressing the skills training and resource issue in the call center.
© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Figure 1
Employee
tertiary family
Local
Businesses
Customer
Organizations
Employee
Immediate Family
Customers
Customer
Families
Other internal
organizations
Call Center
Employees
Curriculum
Team
Stakeholders
Call Center
Leadership
Organization
Leaders
Training
Group
Human
Resources
Training
Team
Recruitment
Staff
HR Leadership
Once the stakeholder individuals or organizations are identified, they require analysis
for interest and support. The other critical aspects of this analysis are to understand what
the stakeholder is contributing and identification of an action plan. Reference the
“Stakeholder Analysis Template” in the course materials for an example.
2
Collapse All
Stakeholder Analysis – Rubric
Stakeholder Template
5.25 points
Criteria Description
Stakeholder Template
5. 5: Excellent
5.25 points
Stakeholder Template tab of the stakeholder analysis is complete and correct.
4. 4: Good
4.46 points
Stakeholder Template tab of the stakeholder analysis is mostly complete and
correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory
3.94 points
Stakeholder Template tab of the stakeholder analysis is partially complete and
correct.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
3.41 points
Stakeholder Template tab of the stakeholder analysis is incomplete or incorrect.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Stakeholder Template tab of the stakeholder analysis is not included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Stakeholder Attitudes
5.25 points
Criteria Description
Stakeholder Attitudes
5. 5: Excellent
5.25 points
Discussion of stakeholder attitudes about the identified problem and previously
implemented problem solutions, including specific data from the collection tool, is
complete.
4. 4: Good
4.46 points
Discussion of stakeholder attitudes about the identified problem and previously
implemented problem solutions, including specific data from the collection tool, is
mostly complete.
3. 3: Satisfactory
3.94 points
Discussion of stakeholder attitudes about the identified problem and previously
implemented problem solutions, including specific data from the collection tool, is
partially complete.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
3.41 points
Discussion of stakeholder attitudes about the identified problem and previously
implemented problem solutions, including specific data from the collection tool, is
incomplete or incorrect.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Discussion of stakeholder attitudes about the identified problem and previously
implemented problem solutions, including specific data from the collection tool, is
not included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Potential Solutions
5.25 points
Criteria Description
Potential Solutions
5. 5: Excellent
5.25 points
Discussion of stakeholder ideas for potential solutions, including specific data from
the collection tool, is complete and correct.
4. 4: Good
4.46 points
Discussion of stakeholder ideas for potential solutions, including specific data from
the collection tool, is mostly complete and correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory
3.94 points
Discussion of stakeholder ideas for potential solutions, including specific data from
the collection tool, is partially complete and correct.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
3.41 points
Discussion of stakeholder ideas for potential solutions, including specific data from
the collection tool, is incomplete or incorrect.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Discussion of stakeholder ideas for potential solutions, including specific data from
the collection tool, is not included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Stakeholder Sponsors
5.25 points
Criteria Description
Stakeholder Sponsors
5. 5: Excellent
5.25 points
Discussion of stakeholder sponsor and specific reasons why each could play a key
role in implementing a problem solution is thorough and includes substantial
explanation and support.
4. 4: Good
4.46 points
Discussion of stakeholder sponsor and specific reasons why each could play a key
role in implementing a problem solution is complete and includes explanation and
support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
3.94 points
Discussion of stakeholder sponsor and specific reasons why each could play a key
role in implementing a problem solution is included but lacks explanation and
support.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
3.41 points
Discussion of stakeholder sponsor and specific reasons why each could play a key
role in implementing a problem solution is incomplete or incorrect.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Discussion of stakeholder sponsor and specific reasons why each could play a key
role in implementing a problem solution is not included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Directly Affected Stakeholders
5.25 points
Criteria Description
Directly Affected Stakeholders
5. 5: Excellent
5.25 points
Discussion of stakeholders directly affected by solving the problem, including
specific ways the stakeholders will be affected, is extremely thorough and includes
substantial explanation and support.
4. 4: Good
4.46 points
Discussion of stakeholders directly affected by solving the problem, including
specific ways the stakeholders will be affected, is complete and includes
explanation and support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
3.94 points
Discussion of stakeholders directly affected by solving the problem, including
specific ways the stakeholders will be affected, is included but lacks explanation and
support.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
3.41 points
Discussion of stakeholders directly affected by solving the problem, including
specific ways the stakeholders will be affected, is incomplete or incorrect.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Discussion of stakeholders directly affected by solving the problem, including
specific ways the stakeholders will be affected, is not included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Stakeholder Roadblocks
5.25 points
Criteria Description
Stakeholder Roadblocks
5. 5: Excellent
5.25 points
Discussion of stakeholders who could pose potential roadblocks to solving the
problem, including discussion of the stakeholders who could pose potential
roadblocks and specific reasons why they could pose potential roadblocks, is
thorough and includes substantial explanation and support.
4. 4: Good
4.46 points
Discussion of stakeholders who could pose potential roadblocks to solving the
problem, including discussion of the stakeholders who could pose potential
roadblocks and specific reasons why they could pose potential roadblocks, is
complete and includes explanation and support.
3. 3: Satisfactory
3.94 points
Discussion of stakeholders who could pose potential roadblocks to solving the
problem, including discussion of the stakeholders who could pose potential
roadblocks and specific reasons why they could pose potential roadblocks, is
included but lacks explanation and support.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
3.41 points
Discussion of stakeholders who could pose potential roadblocks to solving the
problem, including discussion of the stakeholders who could pose potential
roadblocks and specific reasons why they could pose potential roadblocks, is
incomplete or incorrect.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Discussion of stakeholders who could pose potential roadblocks to solving the
problem, including discussion of the stakeholders who could pose potential
roadblocks and specific reasons why they could pose potential roadblocks, is not
included.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar,
language use)
1.75 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. 5: Excellent
1.75 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. 4: Good
1.49 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The
writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. 3: Satisfactory
1.31 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to
the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate
language are employed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
1.14 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in
language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct
but not varied.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Documentation of Sources
1.75 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as
appropriate to assignment and style)
5. 5: Excellent
1.75 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment
and style, and format is free of error.
4. 4: Good
1.49 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is
mostly correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory
1.31 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some
formatting errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
1.14 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 35 points
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment