stakeholder-comms

# Stakeholder Communications (Deep Workflow) Good stakeholder comms **reduce surprise**, **align decisions**, and **protect credibility**. The goal is not optimism—it is **clarity**, **appropriate detail**, and **explicit asks**. ## When to Offer This Workflow **Trigger conditions:** - Weekly exec update, steering committee, roadmap review - Incident or delay disclosure - Cross-functional dependency negotiation - “Explain why we’re not building X” **Initial offer:** Use **five stages**: (1) audience & outcome, (2) facts & narrative, (3) risks & trade-offs, (4) ask & decision, (5) cadence & follow-up. Confirm **sensitivity** (can this be forwarded?) and **medium** (email, doc, live meeting). --- ## Stage 1: Audience & Outcome **Goal:** Know **who reads**, **what they decide**, and **what success looks like**. ### Questions 1. Primary reader’s **role**: exec (time-poor), IC manager (detail-mixed), legal (risk), customer (trust)? 2. Desired **action**: approve, prioritize, unblock, stay informed? 3. **Political** context: past broken promises, skepticism, competing initiatives? ### Output One sentence **purpose**: “After reading this, X should Y.” **Exit condition:** **Level of detail** matches audience—no 10-page appendix for a 2-minute exec read unless requested. --- ## Stage 2: Facts & Narrative **Goal:** **Truth first**, then a **coherent story**—not the reverse. ### Structure (flexible) - **TL;DR** / **BLUF** (bottom line up front): status in one short block - **What changed** since last update (delta-first) - **Evidence**: metrics, dates, links—**bounded**; avoid data dumps in email body ### Tone - **Neutral and specific**: “slipped 1 week due to dependency X” beats “we’re working hard” - **No passive voice hiding ownership**: who does what by when **Exit condition:** Reader can answer **where we are**, **why**, **what’s next** without a meeting. --- ## Stage 3: Risks & Trade-offs **Goal:** Surface **bad news early** with **mitigation**, not panic. ### Framework - **Risk**: description, **likelihood/impact** (even qualitative), **mitigation**, **trigger** to escalate - **Trade-offs**: Option A vs B with **criteria** (time, cost, quality, security) ### Trust - Admitting uncertainty: “We don’t know yet; we will know by DATE via METHOD” **Exit condition:** No **hidden** dependency or date slip—if unknown, **date the unknown**. --- ## Stage 4: Ask & Decision **Goal:** If a decision is needed, make it **easy to make**. ### Practices - **Single explicit ask**: “Please approve budget for…” / “Choose path A or B by Friday” - **Options** with recommendation and **reversibility** - **Deadline** and **default** if no response (when appropriate and ethical) **Exit condition:** Stakeholder knows **exactly** what to say yes/no to. --- ## Stage 5: Cadence & Follow-Up **Goal:** Comms **compound**—track commitments and close loops. ### Practices - **Action table**: owner, deliverable, date—carry forward until done - **Next update** date; **what will change** by then - After meetings: **notes** with decisions distributed within 24h when stakes high ### Escalation - Clear **path** when blocked: who to ping, what info they need --- ## Final Review Checklist - [ ] Audience and desired outcome explicit - [ ] BLUF + delta + evidence (proportionate) - [ ] Risks and trade-offs visible; ownership clear - [ ] Ask/decision unambiguous - [ ] Follow-up mechanism exists ## Tips for Effective Guidance - **Executives**: lead with **business impact** and **decision**; appendix for nerds. - **Peers**: more **technical** detail and **interface contracts**. - Never **surprise** your own manager in a larger forum—pre-brief. ## Handling Deviations - **Highly political**: focus on **facts**, **options**, **documented** agreements; avoid chat-room venting in writing. - **Cultural**: adapt directness; clarity stays, **bluntness** may soften.