mohitagw15856
f3b9d008fe
New skills added: - teaching-lesson-plan: structured lesson plans for any subject/audience/setting - seo-content-brief: complete SEO briefs with intent, competitor gaps, and outline - media-pitch: story-first journalist pitches with angle development framework - change-management-plan: stakeholder analysis, comms strategy, adoption metrics - workshop-facilitation-guide: activity instructions, decision protocols, facilitator moves - sales-forecasting-model: pipeline model, scenario analysis, assumption log - tax-planning-checklist: year-end tax planning across income, pension, CGT, reliefs Quality improvements across all 93 existing skills: - Standardised description format: "Verb the thing. Use when X. Produces Y." - Added Required Inputs section to all skills missing it (prompts for missing info) - Added Quality Checks section to all skills missing it (specific, not generic) - Fixed broken multiline YAML descriptions - Removed non-standard frontmatter keys (tool_integration, metadata blocks) README updated to v6.0.0 with 100-skill count, new skill tables, and article series Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
61 lines
3.0 KiB
Markdown
61 lines
3.0 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: stakeholder-influence-mapper
|
|
description: "Map stakeholders for a product decision and produce a tailored influence strategy with talking points. Use when asked to get alignment, build consensus, get buy-in from engineering or finance or legal, navigate organisational resistance, or plan stakeholder conversations for a major initiative. Produces a stakeholder map, recommended conversation sequence, and tailored talking points per stakeholder."
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Stakeholder Influence Mapper Skill
|
|
|
|
Turn a product initiative into a structured influence plan — who needs to be aligned, in what order, and exactly what to say to each person in their language.
|
|
|
|
## Required Inputs
|
|
|
|
Ask the user for these if not provided:
|
|
- **Initiative description** (what you want to do and why)
|
|
- **List of key stakeholders** (name, role, relationship to initiative)
|
|
- **Timeline pressure** (when do you need a decision?)
|
|
- **Any known objections or political context** (what you're already aware of)
|
|
|
|
## Process
|
|
1. Build stakeholder map with: role, primary concern, decision authority (blocker / influencer / informed), current stance (supportive / neutral / resistant / unknown)
|
|
2. Identify the critical path of conversations — who must be won before others
|
|
3. For each stakeholder, lead with their concern, not your ask
|
|
4. Prepare one likely objection per stakeholder and a prepared response
|
|
5. Flag any stakeholders who should NOT be approached until others are aligned
|
|
6. **Validate** — Confirm every "blocker" stakeholder has a specific tactic (not just "have a conversation"), and that the sequence accounts for political dependencies
|
|
|
|
## Output Structure
|
|
|
|
### Stakeholder Map: [Initiative Name]
|
|
|
|
| Stakeholder | Role | Primary Concern | Authority | Current Stance |
|
|
|-------------|------|-----------------|-----------|----------------|
|
|
| [name] | [role] | [concern] | [type] | [stance] |
|
|
|
|
### Recommended Conversation Sequence
|
|
1. **[Name first]** — because [reason they unlock others]
|
|
2. **[Name second]** — once [first] is aligned
|
|
[continue...]
|
|
|
|
### Talking Points by Stakeholder
|
|
|
|
#### [Stakeholder Name]
|
|
**Lead with:** [Their concern, not your feature]
|
|
**Your ask:** [One specific thing you need from them]
|
|
**Likely objection:** [What they'll push back on]
|
|
**Prepared response:** [How to address it without being defensive]
|
|
**What success looks like:** [What alignment from them looks like]
|
|
|
|
## Notes
|
|
- Never send the same message to all stakeholders — calibrate every time
|
|
- Engineering leads want technical feasibility acknowledged first
|
|
- Finance stakeholders want ROI framing before anything else
|
|
- Legal/compliance stakeholders want risk mitigation addressed upfront
|
|
|
|
## Quality Checks
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Every blocker has a specific tactic (not just "have a chat")
|
|
- [ ] Conversation sequence accounts for political dependencies
|
|
- [ ] Each stakeholder's talking points lead with their concern, not your agenda
|
|
- [ ] At least one "do not approach until X is aligned" flag is considered
|
|
- [ ] The ask from each stakeholder is a single, specific thing (not a vague "support")
|