All Courses
Upcoming Course Dates
Professional Courses
Academy & Short Courses
IPM Courses
PMI Courses
IPMA Courses
PRINCE2 Courses
Corporate Training
Corporate Partnership
University Partnership
Strategic Partnership
IPM Competency Pathway
Growth Partner
View More Academy Course
IPMA Certification
PMI Certification
IPM CPM Level 1
IPM CPM Level 2
IPM CPM Level 3
IPM-AI
IPM-Sustainable
IPM-SCRUM
IPM-PMO
IPM-AGILE
IPM-ASSOCIATE
About IPM Hub
IPM Membership
EMEA Monthly Events
Mentorship
All Resources
Expert Insights
Ebooks & Toolkits
Publish Your Writing
IPM Jobs Portal
The Institute
Faculty
Global Advisory Board
Apply to Lecture or Volunteer
Apply to Intern or Campus Ambassador
Speak to an Advisor
hamburger__close
A stakeholder matrix is a project management tool that categorises stakeholders based on two variables, most commonly power and interest, so that project managers can prioritise engagement, allocate communication effort appropriately, and reduce project risk. It typically produces four distinct groups, each requiring a different management strategy. Understanding who your stakeholders are and how to engage them is not optional for a professional project manager; it is foundational. Before building your first matrix, it helps to understand what stakeholders are and why they matter to every project from initiation through to close.
A stakeholder matrix is a visual framework used in project management to classify individuals, groups, or organisations who have an interest in or influence over a project. By plotting stakeholders according to measurable attributes, most often their level of power (or influence) and their level of interest, the matrix helps project managers determine how much attention, communication, and engagement each stakeholder group warrants throughout the project lifecycle.
Master Stakeholder Management with our course, designed to improve communication and resolve conflicts of interest between project stakeholders.
The most widely used version is the Power-Interest Grid, sometimes called Mendelow’s Matrix after its originator, Aubrey Mendelow. It divides stakeholders into four quadrants, each associated with a recommended engagement strategy. The table below summarises these quadrants directly.
| Quadrant | Power Level | Interest Level | Recommended Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manage Closely | High | High | Engage actively, be involved in decisions, and communicate frequently |
| Keep Satisfied | High | Low | Meet their needs, avoid overloading with information, and monitor for shifts in interest |
| Keep Informed | Low | High | Provide regular updates, listen to concerns, and involve where appropriate |
| Monitor | Low | Low | Track passively, revisit periodically, do not over-invest engagement resources |
While the Power-Interest Grid is the most prevalent form, the stakeholder matrix concept extends to other frameworks that add dimensions such as urgency, legitimacy, or attitude. Each variation serves the same fundamental purpose: helping practitioners make informed, evidence-based decisions about stakeholder engagement rather than relying on intuition alone.
Projects do not fail in isolation. When a project goes wrong, it is rarely a purely technical failure. Missed deadlines, scope creep, budget overruns, and outright cancellations are frequently traced back to poor stakeholder management , to misaligned expectations, unengaged sponsors, or unidentified opponents who quietly undermine progress. The stakeholder matrix exists precisely to prevent this class of project failure.
For a project manager who is new to formal methods, the matrix offers something invaluable: a structured, repeatable process for making sense of the human complexity surrounding any project. Rather than maintaining a rough mental model of who matters and why, the matrix externalises that thinking, makes it shareable with the team, and creates a living reference document that evolves as the project does.
From a competency perspective, stakeholder management is one of the most consistently assessed domains in professional project management frameworks, including those aligned with the IPMA Individual Competence Baseline (ICB). Practitioners who approach stakeholder engagement systematically, using tools like the matrix, consistently outperform those who improvise. The difference shows up in stakeholder satisfaction scores, change resistance levels, and ultimately, project outcomes. Understanding the full stakeholder analysis process is the logical next step once you understand what the matrix does and why it matters.
This is the default stakeholder matrix for most project environments. It plots stakeholders on a two-axis grid where the vertical axis represents power (the ability to influence the project or its outcomes) and the horizontal axis represents interest (the degree to which the stakeholder is affected by or concerned with the project). The four resulting quadrants, Manage Closely, Keep Satisfied, Keep Informed, and Monitor, provide clear, actionable engagement strategies. It is the most practical matrix for day-to-day project management and is widely taught in formal project management curricula.
A variation on the Power-Interest Grid, this version replaces interest with active influence, the stakeholder’s capacity to affect project decisions, resources, or direction. It is particularly useful in organisational environments where a stakeholder might have high formal authority but choose not to exercise it, or conversely, where an individual has low formal power but significant informal influence. Senior project managers working at the programme level often find this variation more reflective of complex stakeholder dynamics.
Developed by Mitchell, Agle, and Wood, the Salience Model assesses stakeholders across three dimensions: power, legitimacy, and urgency. Stakeholders are classified into categories such as definitive, dominant, dependent, or dormant based on how many of these attributes they possess. While more complex to apply, the Salience Model is valuable on large or politically sensitive projects where stakeholder relationships are layered and difficult to reduce to two dimensions.
This lesser-known but highly practical matrix plots stakeholders by their attitude towards the project (positive, neutral, or negative) against their level of influence. It is particularly useful in change management contexts, where understanding who your opponents and champions are and how powerful each group is directly shapes your communication and change strategy. It complements the Power-Interest Grid rather than replacing it.
Stakeholder management is a discipline that rewards structured learning. If you want to go beyond the matrix and develop a complete toolkit for engaging stakeholders effectively across project phases, IPM’s Stakeholder Management and Communications course covers everything from identification and analysis through to advanced engagement planning and communication strategy, taught by practitioners with real project experience, not textbook theory.
These two terms are sometimes used interchangeably, which creates unnecessary confusion. A stakeholder matrix and a stakeholder map are related tools, but they serve different purposes and present information in different ways.
A stakeholder matrix is an analytical tool. It classifies stakeholders into categories based on measurable attributes, power, interest, influence, or attitude, and assigns engagement strategies to each category. It is most often represented as a grid or table and is primarily used by the project manager and core team as a planning and management instrument.
A stakeholder map, by contrast, is a visual representation of stakeholder relationships. It shows how stakeholders connect to the project and to one another, often using diagrams with nodes and lines to illustrate proximity, hierarchy, or interdependence. It answers the question of who is connected to whom, rather than the matrix’s question of how much attention each stakeholder deserves.
In practice, the two tools work best when used together. The stakeholder map helps you identify and understand the landscape; the matrix helps you decide what to do about it. Both belong in the toolkit of a well-prepared project manager, and both are taught as complementary instruments within professional project management education.
Begin by generating a comprehensive list of everyone who could affect or be affected by the project. Cast the net wide at this stage. Include internal stakeholders such as sponsors, team members, and department heads, as well as external stakeholders such as clients, suppliers, regulators, and community groups. Use workshops, document reviews, and interviews to ensure the list is thorough. It is far better to include a stakeholder who turns out to be peripheral than to overlook someone who becomes critical later in the project.
For each identified stakeholder, evaluate their level of power over the project and their level of interest in its outcomes. This assessment does not need to be mathematically precise; a simple High, Medium, or Low rating is sufficient for most projects. The important thing is that the assessment is discussed and agreed upon by the project team rather than assigned unilaterally, since collective judgment is more reliable than individual perception. Document your reasoning so that the ratings can be revisited as the project evolves.
Transfer each stakeholder to the appropriate quadrant of the Power-Interest Grid based on their ratings. For stakeholders who sit close to the boundary between two quadrants, err on the side of more engagement rather than less. A stakeholder who sits at the edge of the Manage Closely quadrant should be treated as belonging there, not moved to a lower-effort zone for convenience.
For each quadrant, define specific engagement actions. This goes beyond the generic quadrant descriptions. For a Manage Closely stakeholder, you might specify weekly briefings, inclusion in steering committee reviews, and early consultation on scope changes. For a Monitor stakeholder, a quarterly update email may be entirely sufficient. The matrix is only useful if it generates real, scheduled actions rather than vague intentions.
A stakeholder matrix is a living document, not a one-time deliverable. Stakeholder positions shift throughout the project. A previously passive stakeholder may become highly engaged when a project phase affects their department. A powerful sponsor may lose interest after initial approval. Build a regular review cadence , typically aligned to project phase gates or major milestones , and update the matrix accordingly. This habit distinguishes practised project managers from those who treat stakeholder planning as a box-ticking exercise.
This question appears frequently among practitioners new to formal project management tools, and it deserves a direct answer: No, a RACI chart is not a stakeholder matrix, though both deal with people and projects. Understanding the distinction prevents you from misapplying either tool.
A RACI chart (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed) is a roles and responsibilities matrix. It clarifies who does what on a project by assigning one of four role types to each person for each task or deliverable. It answers the question: for this specific piece of work, who is doing it, who owns it, who needs to be consulted, and who needs to be kept informed?
A stakeholder matrix, by contrast, is a prioritisation and engagement tool. It does not address task ownership at all. It answers a different and broader question: given everything I know about my stakeholders’ power and interest, how should I manage my relationships with them across the entire project?
The two tools complement one another effectively. The stakeholder matrix informs the Consulted and Informed columns of a RACI chart. Once you know which stakeholders are high-interest, you know who should feature in those columns. But they operate at different levels of granularity and serve distinct purposes. Using a RACI chart as a substitute for stakeholder analysis is a common shortcut that leaves significant relationship risk unaddressed.
The 4 Cs of stakeholder management provide a useful framework for thinking about what good stakeholder engagement actually involves. While different practitioners and educators describe these in slightly different terms, the most commonly referenced version identifies the four Cs as: Communicate, Consult, Collaborate, and Control (or in some formulations, Co-create). The stakeholder matrix does not replace this framework; it informs and structures it.
A project manager leading a building infrastructure upgrade in a local government organisation used the Power-Interest Grid to identify that elected councillors held high power but variable interest depending on whether the project affected their ward. The facilities director held high power and high interest and was therefore classified as Manage Closely, receiving weekly briefings and involvement in key supplier decisions. Residents in affected streets were classified as Keep Informed , high interest, but limited power to change the project scope. A structured community newsletter was issued at each milestone to manage their expectations and reduce complaints to elected representatives.
During a large enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation across a manufacturing business, the project manager identified the Chief Financial Officer as a Manage Closely stakeholder whose financial reporting requirements were non-negotiable constraints on system configuration. The HR department was classified as Keep Informed, since the system would affect payroll processing, but HR had no authority to change the technical specifications. Front-line production supervisors, initially classified as Monitor, were reclassified as Keep Informed mid-project when it became clear that their informal influence over workforce adoption was significantly higher than anticipated, a reminder of why regular matrix reviews matter.
For a new product launch, the marketing director and retail sales team were classified as Manage Closely, given their joint authority over launch timing and distribution channels. The legal team sat in the Keep Satisfied quadrant , highly powerful in terms of their ability to delay or block the launch, but with relatively low interest in the day-to-day project activities. The project manager scheduled two formal legal review checkpoints and avoided routine communications that would burden the legal team unnecessarily. This approach kept the legal stakeholders satisfied without drawing excessive attention to minor project developments that might prompt unnecessary scrutiny.
It is tempting to treat the stakeholder matrix as a downloadable template, fill it in once at project initiation, and file it away. In practice, the practitioners who derive the most value from the matrix are those who understand it as a competency rather than a form. A competency involves not just knowing what the tool is, but knowing when to apply which variation, how to facilitate the assessment process with a team, how to handle politically sensitive stakeholder positions, and how to translate the matrix into daily engagement habits.
This distinction matters particularly as project managers progress into senior roles. At the programme and portfolio level, stakeholder complexity increases dramatically. The number of stakeholders grows, their interdependencies multiply, and the consequences of poor engagement extend beyond a single project to affect organisational strategy. Senior practitioners working at this level benefit from understanding more advanced frameworks, including the Salience Model and Attitude-Influence Matrix described earlier, and from integrating stakeholder management into governance structures rather than treating it as an individual task.
| Key Aspect | What to Know | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Purpose | Classify stakeholders by power, interest, or influence | Ensures engagement effort is directed where it matters most |
| Core Tool | Power-Interest Grid (Mendelow’s Matrix) | Produces four actionable engagement quadrants |
| Key Distinction | Different from RACI and stakeholder maps | Prevents misuse and ensures the right tool is applied to each challenge |
| Application Frequency | Should be reviewed at each project phase gate | Keeps engagement strategies aligned with evolving stakeholder dynamics |
| Professional Relevance | Assessed competency domain in IPMA-aligned frameworks | Builds a measurable, certifiable skill that improves project outcomes |
Professional project management bodies consistently identify stakeholder management as one of the highest-weighted competency domains in certification and assessment frameworks. This reflects the reality that relationship management, communication strategy, and political awareness are skills that cannot be automated or delegated, and that experienced practitioners who have built these capabilities hold a genuine competitive advantage in the job market and in project outcomes.
For practitioners looking to build this competency in a structured way, IPM’s Stakeholder Management and Communications course offers practitioner-led instruction grounded in 35 years of applied project management education, covering the full range of tools, frameworks, and engagement strategies discussed in this guide.
Master Stakeholder Management with our course, designed to improve communication and resolve conflicts of interest between project stakeholders.
For those ready to formalise their project management skills, IPM CPM Level 1 validates core project management competence , including stakeholder management , through real training performance and assignments rather than a single high-stakes exam. Practitioners working at the programme and portfolio level can progress to IPM CPM Level 2, which addresses the more complex stakeholder environments that characterise senior project roles. For those operating at the director or project leadership level, IPM CPM Level 3 validates the strategic and leadership competencies that define the profession’s highest tier. You can also explore IPM Specialised Certifications for in-demand skill areas, including agile, PMO, and sustainable project management.
Earn your Project Management Diploma & IPMA® Certification with expert-led training at IPM to confidently manage any project.
In the context of the Power-Interest Grid, the four types of stakeholders are those with high power and high interest (Manage Closely), high power and low interest (Keep Satisfied), low power and high interest (Keep Informed), and low power and low interest (Monitor). More broadly, stakeholders are often classified as internal or external, primary or secondary, or defined by their level of influence and legitimacy, depending on the framework used.
No. A RACI chart is a roles and responsibilities matrix that clarifies who is Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed for specific tasks or deliverables. A stakeholder matrix is an engagement prioritisation tool based on attributes like power and interest. They serve different purposes and operate at different levels of project management. Both are useful, but one cannot substitute for the other.
The 4 Cs of stakeholder management are Communicate, Consult, Collaborate, and Control (sometimes described as Co-create in certain frameworks). They represent a spectrum of engagement intensity, from one-way information sharing through to joint decision-making and active collaboration. The stakeholder matrix supports all four by identifying which stakeholders require which level of engagement based on their power, interest, and influence.
A stakeholder matrix classifies stakeholders using measurable attributes such as power and interest, producing engagement categories and strategies. A stakeholder map is a visual diagram that shows relationships between stakeholders and the project. The matrix answers how to prioritise engagement; the map answers who is connected to whom. Used together, they give a project manager both analytical and relational insight into the stakeholder environment.
The stakeholder matrix is one of the most practical and transferable tools in the project manager’s repertoire. Used consistently and reviewed regularly, it moves stakeholder engagement from a reactive, relationship-by-relationship effort to a strategic, evidence-based discipline. Whether you are managing your first project or leading a complex programme, the competencies behind the matrix, analysis, communication strategy, and relationship management are career-defining skills worth developing with the same rigour as any technical project management capabilit
