Abstract

Stakeholder analysis is one of the important elements of the management of every project. Particularly, it is a significant aspect in high-risk projects, e.g. reorganization. The concerns of different groups of workers, the impact of the project on suppliers or clients – these are not only potential sources of risk but opportunity as well. The success of the reorganization project is therefore likely determined by the quality of the stakeholder analysis. It is determined by many factors. One of them is the use of appropriate techniques of stakeholder analysis. In the literature, there are some proposals based on the general approaches to project management (e.g. IPMA ICB 4.0). Mostly they use a simple procedure of assessment of stakeholder’s significance. Meanwhile, in many risky, a deeper reflection is needed. In these cases, a procedure of stakeholder analysis could be based on some decision-making methods. For this reason, the main aim of this article was chosen. That is, to identify the basic methodological assumptions of the process of stakeholder analysis which contains stages characteristic of a complex decision process. The proposed method was created and used in a study to provide a stakeholder analysis in one of the local governments in Poland on the occasion of the preparation of the reorganization project. Realizing the stated goal, a short literature review was provided in terms of the stakeholder activity and steps of stakeholders analysis. Then a new methodology of stakeholders analysis was proposed. For stakeholder identification and structuration, a procedure of the AHP method (Analytic Hierarchy Process) was used. This method was a basis for the analysis of stakeholder significance as well (using a Saaty’s scale). There were proposed new scales for assessing the consistency of stakeholder’s expectations with the project goals as well as the influence of the stakeholder on the project. This, the new methodology was verified during a real reorganization project in one of the Polish local governments. It is characterized by a higher workload – all the process of stakeholder analysis needs a group decision-making process. Moreover, members of the project team should have competences in the AHP method. The analysis is much more accurate. It allows for more accurate identification of stakeholders and understanding of their role in the project.

Keywords: reorganization project, stakeholder analysis, task-oriented organization, local government, public management.

JEL Classification: M1.

Cite as: Strojny, J. & Jedrusik, A. (2018). Stakeholder analysis during a reorganization project in local government institutions – key methodological aspects. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 4, 372-381. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2018.4-32

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. G. Gereffi, “The global economy: organization, governance, and development,” The handbook of economic sociology, 2, pp.160-182, 2005.
2. J. Urry, “The complexity turn,” Theory Culture and Society22, no. 5, pp. 1-14, 2005.
3. J. P Walsh, A.D. Meyer, and C. B. Schoonhoven. “A future for organization theory: Living in and living with changing organizations,” Organization Science17, no. 5, pp. 657-671, 2006.
4. R. Huggins, H. Izushi, and P. Thompson. “Regional competitiveness: Theories and methodologies for empirical analysis,” The Business and Economics Research Journal, 6, no. 2, pp. 155-172, 2013.
5. R.K. Smollan, “The multi-dimensional nature of resistance to change,” Journal of Management & Organization, 17, no. 6: pp. 828-849, 2011.
6. B.S. Kuipers, M. Higgs, W. Kickert, L. Tummers, J. Grandia, and J. Van der Voet. “The management of change in public organizations: A literature review,” Public Administration, 92, no. 1, pp. 1-20, 2014.
7. Organizational Competence Baseline – The standard for moving organizations forward, Zurich: IPMA, 2013, p. 16.
8. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, 5th Edition. Pennsylvania: PMI, 2013, p. 3.
9. F. C. Lunenburg, “Approaches to managing organizational change,” International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity, 12, no. 1, pp. 1-10, 2010.
10. B. Zarei, M. Ehsan and A. Ghapanchi, “Project process reengineering (PPR): a BPR method for projects,” International Journal of Information Systems and Change Management4, no. 4, pp. 299-313, 2010.
11. M. M. Crossan and M. Apaydin, “A multi‐dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature,”Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), pp. 1154-1191, 2010.
12. Oslo manual. Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data, 3d Edition, Paris: OECD Publications, 2005, p. 17.
13. T. Robyn, and C. Hardy, “Reframing resistance to organizational change,” Scandinavian Journal of Management, 27 no. 3, pp. 322-331, 2011.
14. D. G. Erwin, and A. N. Garman. “Resistance to organizational change: linking research and practice,”Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31, no. 1, pp. 39-56, 2010.
15. K. Kozioł, „Analiza strategiczna przedsiębiorstwa na poziomie makrootoczenia,” Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego. Studia i Prace Wydziału Nauk Ekonomicznych i Zarządzania, 17, pp. 77-88, 2010.
16. S. M. Sanderson, and G. A. Luffman. “Strategic planning and environmental analysis,” European Journal of Marketing, 22, no. 2, pp. 14-27, 1988.
17. H. Weihrich, “The TOWS matrix – a tool for situational analysis,” Long range planning, 15(2), pp. 54-66, 1982.
18. G. Gierszewska and M. Romanowska, Analiza strategiczna przedsiębiorstwa, Warsaw: PWE, 1998, pp. 35-55.
19. T. Donaldson, and L. E. Preston, “The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications,” Academy of Management Review, 20 no. 1, pp. 65-91, 1995.
20. R.E. Freeman, Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
21. M. Morsing, and M. Schultz, “Corporate social responsibility communication: stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies,” Business Ethics: A European Review, 15 no. 4, pp. 323-338, 2006.
22. A. A. Elias, R. Y. Cavana, and L. S. Jackson, “Stakeholder analysis for R&D project management,” R&D Management, 32 vol. 4, pp. 301-310, 2002.
23. J. Frooman, “Stakeholder influence strategies,”, Academy of Management Review, 24 no. 2, 191-205, 1999.
24. T.L. Saaty The Analytic Hierarchy Process, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980.
25. T. L. Saaty, “Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process,” International Journal of Services Sciences, 1, pp. 83-98, 2008.
26. A. Prusak and P. Stefanów, Analityczny proces hierarchiczny, Warsaw: C.H. Beck, 2014.
27. A. Prusak, A., J. Strojny, and P. Stefanow, “Analityczny proces hierarchiczny (AHP) na skróty-kluczowe pojęcia i literatura”, Humanities and Social Sciences, 19/21, vol. 4, pp. 179-192, 2014.