Talk:Stakeholder analysis/Archives/2019
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Stakeholder analysis. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Methods of stakeholder mapping
Speaking both as a Wikipedia editor and someone with nearly 10 years of experience as a business analyst, the entire section is not very helpful.
The intro: "The following list identifies some of the best known and most commonly used methods for stakeholder mapping:"
But what follows is not in fact a list of "the most commonly used methods for stakeholder mapping" it is a list of names of people who developed methods. Different thing entirely.
Within this section, the following text is problematic:
Mitchell et al. proposed a classification of stakeholders based on power to influence, the legitimacy of each stakeholder’s relationship with the organization, and the urgency of the stakeholder’s claim on the organization. The results of this classification may assess the fundamental question of "which groups are stakeholders deserving or requiring manager's attention, and which are not?" This is salience - "the degree to which managers give priority to competing stakeholder claims."
Makes little sense. Why is "salience" being introduced? Honestly, I had never heard of the Salience Method of stakeholder analysis until looking up the source to understand what this section was talking about.
This section should be rewritten to highlight the methods first, and then mention the people who developed the methods.
I'll bookmark this article and see if I can get back to do it myself. Curdigirl (talk) 19:56, 19 April 2019 (UTC) -