Simplified Stakeholder Analysis A Demonstration Nisha Narayanan PRMPS

Simplified Stakeholder Analysis A Demonstration Nisha Narayanan, PRMPS Stephen Ndegwa, PRMPS

Goals • • • Demonstration, preliminary use Simple, user-friendly and portable model Transparent calculations and assumptions Scenario building over prediction Accessible charts and grids as guides for potential options/targets for policy dialogue

Data Collection • As with other models, extensive and reliant on field interviews • Depending on government or policy area openness, data can be collected by two methods: • Interviews with specialists or experts and/or • Interviews with actual stakeholders

Data Attributes *Annex 1: New Effective Power equation

Sample Data

Policy Continuum A

New Policy Continuum B (#) = Effective Power

Effective Power/Position Matrix Identifies stakeholder position and their relative power -- how hard reform will be With simple rule -- movement within quadrant/subset -- allows setting goals to influence

Scenarios: Governing Assumptions • Stakeholders can only move within their policy preference sector, or minimally into next one • Strategy may then be to: – Move stakeholders with low policy reform preferences to the right or diagonally upwards by increasing information – Empower stakeholders with higher policy reform preferences to move up and to the right by increasing effective power

Influence-Salience Matrix Identifies the stakeholders by their level of salience and influence (color-coded on policy reform preference) Information on stakeholder attributes allows setting intervention strategy and coalition building

Specific Examples in response to influence-salience profile of opponents • • Promoters - counter or compromise Defenders - suppress potential action Latents – Increase salience Apathetics - Ignore

Specific Examples in response to influence-salience profile of proponents • Promoters - Build coalitions with low preference stakeholders-common interests • Defenders - Provide resources to promote position • Latents - Provide information and incentives to increase saliency and preference for reform • Apathetics – Ignore

New Policy Continuum B (#) = Effective Power

Improvements/Simplifications • Adds detailed stakeholder “reservation price” to policy continuum • Clarifies “effective power” equation • Focuses on creating scenarios in lieu of predictions to promote policy • Uses maps to identify and assess stakeholder positions and potential movement for dialogue and goal-setting

Conclusion • Simpler model – Portable, cost effective – Excel-based – WB team executed (data/scenarios/dialogue) • Transparent assumptions – Informed by Task team – country/issue knowledge – Theoretically valid, methodologically reliable • Organic scenarios over precise/debatable predictions

Annex 1: Effective Power Equation (. 70)*I + (. 30)*S = Effective Power • Effective Power is the weighted sum of 70% Influence and 30% Salience • Influence is weighted more than Salience because those with higher influence have a higher ability to block reform • Eg. A stakeholder with 80 (I) and 20 (S) has more power to veto a policy than a stakeholder with 20 (I) and 80 (S)

More Information • On Sentia’s Model, Other Models used elsewhere, Bank Pilots, and Simplified Model, please contact: – Stephen Ndegwa/Nisha Narayanan Ed Campos/Shilpa Pradhan (PRMPS) – Barbara Nunberg/Amanda Green (EASPR) – Jennie Litvack/Nabil Chaherli (MNSED)