stakeholder-map

Installable Ships in discovery-synthesizer — or copy the raw skill below.

Paste into Claude Code, Claude.ai, the desktop app, or the browser extension — ⌘/Ctrl+V.

ExperimentalNo security review

Stakeholder Map

Build a structured stakeholder register, influence/interest grid, and engagement plan from whatever stakeholder data the user provides — a name list, interview notes, org chart, or project brief.

When this skill applies

User asks to "map stakeholders," "build a RACI," or "figure out who needs to be involved"
User provides a list of names and roles and wants a structured engagement view
Discovery interviews have surfaced political dynamics the team needs to navigate
Project is entering a new phase and stakeholder alignment is a prerequisite

Workflow

Step 1 — Extract stakeholder data

From the provided material, extract for each identified stakeholder:

Name (if provided — preserve for internal use; redact in client-facing versions)
Role / title
Organization or department
Engagement signal: how did this person come up? (mentioned by others / direct interview participant / named in brief)
Any stated interests, concerns, or influence signals from the material

If the user has not provided material, ask: "Please share the project brief, interview notes, or a list of names and roles so I can build the map from your actual data."

Step 2 — Classify each stakeholder

For each stakeholder, assign:

Influence level (their ability to shape or block the project):

High — can approve, fund, veto, or significantly redirect the work
Medium — can influence scope, timeline, or team access
Low — affected by outcomes but cannot redirect the project

Interest level (their stake in the outcome):

High — directly impacted by the digital experience being built
Medium — periodic touchpoints; cares about outcomes but not day-to-day
Low — minimal direct impact; kept informed only

Engagement posture (from signals in the data):

Champion — actively supportive; likely to sponsor or accelerate
Neutral — no strong position; engagement may move them
Skeptic — doubts the approach, timeline, or team; needs targeted engagement
Blocker — actively resistant; engagement plan must address their concerns explicitly
Unknown — insufficient data; flag for follow-up

DACI role (for decisions):

Driver — accountable for moving the decision forward
Approver — has final say
Contributor — provides input; does not have final say
Informed — receives updates; not consulted on decisions

Step 3 — Build the influence/interest grid

Place each stakeholder in the 2×2 grid:

           Low Interest     High Interest
High      ┌──────────────┬──────────────┐
Influence │  KEEP        │  MANAGE      │
          │  SATISFIED   │  CLOSELY     │
          ├──────────────┼──────────────┤
Low       │  MONITOR     │  KEEP        │
Influence │              │  INFORMED    │
          └──────────────┴──────────────┘

For each quadrant, note what engagement that quadrant warrants:

Manage closely — regular 1:1s, early access to drafts, involvement in key decisions
Keep satisfied — milestone updates, awareness of decisions that touch their domain
Keep informed — distribution list, summary communications, no active engagement required
Monitor — watch for influence changes; re-evaluate each phase

Step 4 — Flag political dynamics

From the source material, identify:

Competing interests — two or more stakeholders who want different things from the project
Dependency risks — a decision or approval is owned by someone who is disengaged or skeptical
Sponsorship gaps — no champion in a quadrant that needs one (e.g., no executive champion for the technology platform choice)
Proxy relationships — someone who "speaks for" an unavailable or unnamed stakeholder

Document these in a separate "Political dynamics" section. These are internal-only; not for the client register.

Step 5 — Draft the engagement plan

For each "Manage closely" and "Keep satisfied" stakeholder, draft an engagement plan entry:

Engagement frequency (weekly / biweekly / milestone-based)
Communication channel preference (if known)
Key messages this person needs to hear
What RBA needs from this person (approvals, access, data)
Risk if this person disengages

For skeptics and blockers, add a tailored mitigation approach:

Root concern (if known from the data)
Recommended tactic (early demo, direct involvement in a workshop, executive sponsor alignment)
Owner on the RBA side

Step 6 — Produce the deliverable(s)

Stakeholder register (default):

Name	Role	Dept	Influence	Interest	Posture	DACI	Notes
[Name]	[Title]	[Dept]	High/Med/Low	High/Med/Low	Champion/Neutral/Skeptic/Blocker	D/A/C/I	[Key note]

Influence/interest grid — ASCII or markdown table version (see Step 3).

Engagement plan — table or list by stakeholder, with frequency, channel, key messages, needs, and risk.

Political dynamics summary — internal-only paragraph; flag it as such.

Step 7 — Self-check before returning

Every stakeholder from the source material appears in the register
No stakeholder has been assigned "High influence" without a specific reason in the data
Blockers have explicit engagement tactics, not just flags
Political dynamics section is marked internal-only
The register is suitable for use in a project kick-off deck with minor reformatting

Reference file

See reference.md for DACI and RACI comparison, engagement frequency guidance by phase, and notes on virtual stakeholder mapping for distributed teams.

Technical details

Plugin

discovery-synthesizer

Author

Dakota Smith

Skill name

stakeholder-map

Maturity

experimental

Security review

No security review

Owners

strategy

Argument hint

[paste stakeholder list, org chart, or interview notes] [--engagement-type platform-selection|implementation|strategy|workshop] [--deliverable register|raci|engagement-plan|all]

Allowed tools

Read
Write
Glob

Source

plugins/discovery-synthesizer/skills/stakeholder-map/SKILL.md

Edit this skill on GitHub — opens GitHub's web editor. No git knowledge needed.