Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
Identify and Categorise All Stakeholders
1–2 weeks (2 hrs/day)
Identify all stakeholders for a real project or initiative — internal and external — and categorise them on a power/interest or influence/impact grid. For each stakeholder, document their current stance (supporter, neutral, opponent, unknown), their primary concern about the initiative, and what they stand to gain or lose.
Proof required
Submit a stakeholder map covering all identified stakeholders positioned on a power/interest grid, with a one-paragraph profile for each key stakeholder (high power or high interest) documenting their current stance, primary concern, and what they stand to gain or lose from the initiative.
What gets checked
- At least eight stakeholders are identified across internal and external categories — not just the obvious direct participants
- Every high-power stakeholder has a documented current stance based on observation or direct conversation — not assumed
- At least one stakeholder is identified as a potential opponent with their concern documented specifically
Common mistakes
- Identifying only obvious stakeholders and missing the ones who can block the initiative from outside the immediate team
- Assigning stance as 'supportive' for everyone without evidence — the map then provides no strategic information
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
Masteryfor the dedicated
What a verifier looks for
- Ask: 'who did you almost miss and how did you find them?' — gaps in the stakeholder list are a common failure mode
- Pick an opponent and ask how their concern was documented — direct conversation, observation, or assumption?
- Challenge the grid positioning: ask why a specific stakeholder is placed in the high-power/low-interest quadrant
- Ask whether any stakeholder categorisation changed after initial mapping and what updated it
Build the Influence and Engagement Plan
2 weeks (2 hrs/day)
Design a tailored engagement plan for each stakeholder quadrant, with specific engagement actions for every high-power or high-interest stakeholder. For each engagement action, specify the objective, the channel, the frequency, the owner, and how success will be measured. Address how to manage opponents and convert neutrals.
Proof required
Submit: an engagement plan with quadrant-level strategies and individual-level actions for every high-power or high-interest stakeholder; for each action, document the objective, channel, frequency, owner, and success measure; and a specific influence strategy for at least two opponents or high-risk neutrals.
What gets checked
- Every high-power stakeholder has at least one specific engagement action — not 'keep informed' as a generic default
- Opponent strategy addresses the documented concern specifically, not generic change-management reassurance
- Success measures are observable — 'verbal confirmation of support at steering committee' passes; 'feels better about the project' fails
Common mistakes
- Planning the same engagement approach for all stakeholders regardless of quadrant position
- Opponent strategy that ignores the root concern and focuses only on communication volume
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
Masteryfor the dedicated
What a verifier looks for
- Pick the most difficult opponent and ask: 'what specifically will you say or do to address their concern?'
- Check success measures: are they observable and time-bound, or vague?
- Ask who owns each engagement action — are responsibilities allocated to specific people or left generic?
- Challenge the neutral conversion strategy: 'what is the most likely reason this person stays neutral and how does your plan address that?'
Present Plan to a Practitioner and Respond to Challenge
1 week (2 hrs/day)
Present the stakeholder map and engagement plan to a senior project manager, change manager, or OD practitioner with real experience managing complex stakeholder environments. The practitioner challenges your stakeholder categorisation, engagement strategies, and how you would handle a scenario where a key engagement fails.
Proof required
Submit: the final stakeholder map and engagement plan; a written review session record with the reviewer's credentials, at least three specific challenges raised, and your written responses; and a revised plan section showing at least one change made based on the review.
What gets checked
- Reviewer has direct experience managing stakeholders in large or politically complex projects — not a theoretical background only
- At least one scenario challenge ('what if this stakeholder blocks you at the steering committee?') was posed and addressed
- The revised section shows a substantive change to engagement strategy, not wording polish
Common mistakes
- Presenting only the clean plan without explaining the stakeholder political context the reviewer needs to assess whether it is realistic
- Choosing a reviewer who has not managed stakeholder resistance personally
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
Masteryfor the dedicated
What a verifier looks for
- Pose a blocking scenario: 'your highest-power opponent has just escalated to the CEO — what do you do now?'
- Ask how the candidate would know their engagement plan was working at the three-month mark
- Check reviewer credentials: they should have managed a project where stakeholder resistance was a genuine threat, not just a minor inconvenience
- Ask: 'what would you do differently if you were starting this stakeholder analysis again?'