Peer Review

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 1

Stakeholder Management and Engagement Process on the Learning Innovations Team

Melissa Waite

Applied Project Report

Dr. Kevin Ellsworth

ASU College of Integrative Sciences and Arts

School of Applied Professional Studies

November 8, 2025

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 2

Abstract

Stakeholders are an unavoidable and critical part of the project environment. These individuals or groups have varying levels of involvement and engagement within projects, and can significantly influence the outcome, tipping the balance towards success or failure in meeting the project objectives. The Learning Innovations team within the Learning Enterprise at Arizona State University is responsible for exploring new ideas and prototypes in educational programs across four focus areas. The focus area leads and their team members must manage a variety of projects and a diverse web of internal and external stakeholders in an ambiguous working environment. Uncoordinated application of stakeholder management within Learning Innovation projects has led to product delays, among other detrimental impacts. A literature review and interviews with eight Learning Innovations team members were conducted to explore uncoordinated stakeholder management practices and recommendations for improving coordination in the stakeholder management process. Findings indicate that stakeholder roles should be clearly identified and analyzed; the project leader should possess strong interpersonal skills and lead by example. Additionally, well-coordinated communication from project leaders plays a central role in relationship management with stakeholders. Overarching all of this is the understanding of the ever-evolving project environment, which necessitates continual attention to stakeholder management as well as tailoring the stakeholder management approach to meet the project's specific needs. The findings will support the creation of a customized stakeholder management process for the learning Innovations team to use in their projects.

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 3

Applied Project Prospectus

Stakeholder Management and Engagement Process on the Learning Innovations Team

Introduction

Stakeholders and project outcomes are synonymous. Satisfied stakeholders can see a

project through to successful and, occasionally, better-than-expected outcomes. Alternatively, if

stakeholders in a project are misaligned or resistant to the project's goals, they can quickly derail

the entire project. Negative impacts can vary from damaged relationships and increased project

spend to delayed timelines, or, at worst, the cancellation of an entire project. Given the risk

posed by stakeholders, a project leader must lead a coordinated stakeholder management and

engagement process for all stakeholders at all levels of a project.

Project leaders within the Learning Innovations team at Arizona State University's

Learning Enterprise must manage education development projects that are largely ambiguous in

nature in a department hierarchy that has shifted around multiple times in the past year.

Additionally, these project leaders must navigate towards successful project outcomes with

limited access to organizational resources. Stakeholder engagement is critical to maintaining

project progress and getting the support needed to ask for project resources. The interconnected

web of stakeholders associated with Learning Innovations projects can become jumbled within

its own team. This can lead to stakeholders, for example, subject matter experts, being unclear

about their roles in the project, which may hinder progress. Conversely, if stakeholders receive

excessive information and updates, they might feel pressured to provide input even when it isn't

required, which can slow down decision-making in the project. Approaching stakeholder

management with a coordinated plan and appropriately applied leadership methods can resolve

this problem. This paper will explore the topics of stakeholder management, project leadership

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 4

methods applicable to project leaders, and developing a process for stakeholder management.

This knowledge will be used to develop a research-backed stakeholder management process that

the Learning Innovations team can apply directly to their projects.

Purpose Statement and Scope

Purpose

The purpose of this project is to create a stakeholder management process in order to

address the problem of uncoordinated stakeholder management that causes project delays,

contributing to project success.

Scope

Inclusions

The scope of this project includes:

● Developing a stakeholder management framework that outlines project phases (e.g.,

initiation, planning, execution, review).

● Creating tools such as decision flow charts and scaffolding templates to guide project

leaders in navigating stakeholder involvement, especially in high-pressure or tense

situations.

● Establishing expectation-setting practices at the start of projects to clarify stakeholder

roles, responsibilities, and communication channels.

● Providing recommendations for ongoing communication and stakeholder engagement to

maintain alignment throughout the project lifecycle.

Exclusions

The project will not include:

● Redesigning or altering existing ASU enterprise-wide governance structures.

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 5

● Comprehensive training programs beyond the scope of the created process (though the

process may inform future training).

● Direct implementation of the process across all Learning Enterprise units; this deliverable

is a proposed framework and toolkit for piloting within Learning Innovations.

Stakeholders

Key stakeholders for this project include:

● Internal stakeholders

● Learning Innovations team members, area leads, and the Director of Learning

Innovations.

● Institutional stakeholders

● Academic units and faculty collaborators.

● External stakeholders

● Corporate partners, community collaborators, project sponsors, and vendors who

support content development and delivery.

Literature Review

Introduction

Stakeholders can be defined as individuals, groups, or organizations internal or external

to an organization that have an impact, may have an impact, or are perceived to be impacted by

project decisions, activities, or outcomes in projects. They compose an interconnected web of

relationships, involvement, and influence that a project leader must navigate to minimize

negative impacts and outcomes for stakeholders and maximize positive impacts. A coordinated

approach to stakeholder management and the application of leadership methods throughout the

entire life of a project is critical to maintaining stakeholder needs and expectations. Failure to do

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 6

this can have detrimental effects such as stakeholder resistance, cancellation of a project, and

financial losses (Olander & Landin, 2008; Sutterfield et al., 2006).

This review of literature will develop an understanding of stakeholder management

within projects, leadership skills that complement stakeholder management activities, and the

development of processes for implementing a stakeholder management plan within an

organization.

Stakeholder management and engagement

Stakeholders, being a key element in the successful outcomes within projects, must be

managed and engaged from initiation to closure of a project. A stakeholder who is not aligned

with their role in a project can quickly derail progress. For example, a manager who perceives

they have a higher decision-making power than they truly have can result in confusion and

conflict within a project (Olander & Landin, 2008). A commonly seen process flow for

stakeholder management follows identification and analysis, development of an engagement

plan, execution of the engagement plan, and continued monitoring of the stakeholder to keep

them satisfied during the project (Project Management Institute, 2021; Colford, 2006; Ramazani

& Jergeas, 2015).

Stakeholder management and engagement cannot happen if the stakeholders are not

identified; it is the river's headwater, the source of the flow. Beyond just having a list of names,

important data must be captured for each stakeholder, such as their relationship to the project

organization, perceived level of support for the project, responsibilities during the project, and

value they wish to gain from the project (Landin & Landin, 2018; Griffin & Otter, 2014; Project

Management Institute, 2021). This is not an exhaustive list, but it is a solid starting point for

analyzing and prioritizing stakeholder groups. Various tools and techniques are available in a

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 7

project leader’s toolbox for analysis and prioritization. A commonly known tool in stakeholder

analysis is the power/interest grid, which sorts stakeholders from high to low impact levels and

levels of power and interest in a project (Project Management Institute, 2023). Alternatively, a

project leader can map each stakeholder's engagement levels to determine where they currently

are and should be for project engagement. Other mapping methods include an approach that

follows the politically based lines of the relationships rather than organizational, starting with the

most junior stakeholder and working up to higher influential ones, and focusing on the dyadic

relationship between a stakeholder and project with the systemic constellation method (Miller &

Oliver, 2015; Eskerod & Huemann, 2014). Regardless of how the analysis is conducted, it assists

in determining the appropriate involvement of a stakeholder in a project, which contributes to a

coordinated approach when engaging with them.

Managing, engaging, and monitoring stakeholders requires active effort during a project.

In addition to meeting base-level stakeholder needs and expectations, stakeholders must be

continually nurtured, and issues negatively impacting their well-being must be addressed to

maintain their satisfaction (Project Management Institute, 2021; Griffin & Otter, 2014). A lack of

coordination with communication and a common understanding of project goals can quickly

result in misunderstandings between stakeholder groups. While monitoring stakeholders, project

leaders may need to tailor the stakeholder engagement plan or other project plans to keep

stakeholders satisfied and projects on track. Tailoring the stakeholder management plan during a

project to meet the evolving needs of stakeholders and projects has become common practice

within the project management industry (Project Management Institute, 2023). This approach

allows for a more flexible, collaborative environment where project leaders can apply

stakeholder engagement practices and leadership methods as needed throughout a project.

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 8

Leadership Styles and Skills

A stakeholder management plan helps a project leader determine how and when to apply

leadership methods in projects. Several leadership styles are recommended to project leaders,

including laissez-faire, transactional, servant, transformational, charismatic, and interactional

(Project Management Institute, 2023). A common thread between the leadership styles is the

high focus on collaboration and people-oriented leadership. A project leader must have the

appropriate attitude, talent, and character to influence internal and external stakeholders.

Richardson (2015) refers to being influential in this way as a process. A project leader must be a

value provider for stakeholders, understanding their needs, values, building up the team around

them, and remaining objective in the business setting (Nauman et al., 2022; Colford, 2006;

Project Management Institute, 2021).

When considering leadership skills that apply to the stakeholder management process, a

case study on resiliency megaprojects for coastal cities demonstrates the complexities and

contextual challenges project leaders can face when managing stakeholders. Governmental

agencies were vital stakeholders in these coastal resiliency projects, but collaboration and

engagement with these groups were often mired in bureaucracy and slowed project progress

(Nilsson, 2020). Project teams had to adapt to the restrictions imposed by the agencies and use

influential leadership skills to convince governmental leaders that a long-term investment in

flood prevention was in the public interest, even if it did not look like a favorable move at first.

To win trust over the communities impacted by the megaprojects, the project team had to

collaborate with local governmental agencies and tailor their stakeholder plan specifically for the

impacted communities. This involved developing relationships directly with the community

members, having transparent processes, and communicating about the project at a level the

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 9

community stakeholders could understand (Nilsson, 2020).

As demonstrated in the example above, a project leader must have sound communication

skills, strategic direction and visionary skills, interpersonal skills, and other soft skills to

distinguish themselves as a reliable and trustworthy leader to stakeholders (Project Management

Institute, 2021; Project Management Institute, 2023; Müller & Turner, 2010). The role of project

leader is one of the most complex in the organization because it requires solid interpersonal skills

and a strong understanding of the interworkings of project complexity and context (Colford,

2006; Ramazani & Jergeas, 2015). However, those capabilities are only part of the equation.

Leadership skills should be infused into a coordinated stakeholder process standardized enough

to align teams and tailored to fit the project’s context.

Stakeholder Management Process Development

When considering the development of a stakeholder management process for a team, it

must be standardized but adaptable and align with other project processes, such as procurement

management. Standardization creates consistent, cross-team execution and clearer handoffs

across project domains such as the procurement process. At the same time, overly rigid structures

can miss contextual needs or be misinterpreted in practice, which misses the opportunity for

early risk detection and enhances the potential for delays (Project Management Institute, 2021).

Designing assessment and evaluation methods into the project process, such as the entropy index

for measuring process quality or periodic stakeholder satisfaction checks, can assist teams in

identifying issues before they escalate into significant risks in a project (Obronova, 2022).

Process mapping, workflow mapping, or flowcharting, as seen in Figure 1, is a visually

forward method of designing a project process that simultaneously follows many of the same

practices seen in stakeholder management (Canva, 2025). Using principles of transparency, these

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 10

maps or charts show the project’s flow of activity and points of decision within a value chain

(Project Management Institute, 2023). It is possible to see where stakeholders are involved in

project processes and assess where leadership interventions are needed along the project lifecycle

to maintain stakeholder satisfaction. Additionally, process maps can serve as a communication

tool with stakeholders to help them understand the flow of project activities and garner their

support for the work. Involving stakeholders in the collaborative creation and day-to-day use of a

process map demonstrates that having an established, standardized system within an organization

can improve performance metrics and reduce errors in work activities (Reijers & van der Aalst,

2005).

Though stakeholder engagement principles and practices have become the focus of

project management operations in recent years, process mapping is a tool project leaders can use

to effectively manage and engage stakeholders throughout a project (Project Management

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 11

Institute, 2021). Rather than prescribing a single toolkit for stakeholder management, the

literature converges on the idea that tools are selected to fit context and timing. Standardized

core steps such as identification, analysis, management, and monitoring are standard, but the

techniques used in each step vary by need. For example, power–interest mapping offers a rapid

screening process in prioritization, while other models take a more calculated, risk-based

approach (Miller & Oliver, 2015; Verzuh, 2005). Engagement processes need to be flexible to

promote coordination among internal stakeholders, such as the project team, and tailored to meet

the communication needs of external stakeholders (Project Management Institute, 2021). Paying

careful attention as a project leader to align expectations between all stakeholders can reduce the

likelihood of unanticipated negative impacts to stakeholders and other project processes (Olander

& Landin, 2008). A properly prepared and tactically sound project leader can gain a reputation

amongst stakeholders as a trusted navigator through unpredictable project environments.

Summary

A significant implication of this research is that no projects are purely consistent and

repeatable. Every project has its own unique circumstances. Project leaders can try their best to

be prepared for any situation within a project, but that is unrealistic. This point is further

emphasized by the project management industry trends, which go from prescribed process

management guidance to a more flexible practices-based approach (Project Management

Institute, 2021). Additionally, the body of knowledge and peer-reviewed research regarding the

intersections of stakeholder management and leadership was small and in great need of

additional, up-to-date content to support the latest trends briefly highlighted in other sources.

Literature on project process development was even more elusive. The inconsistent nature of

projects may be a cause of this gap. A process implemented in one project may have no

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 12

applicability to others due to many contextual factors, such as the type of project, the size of the

project, the stakes the project has to the organization, and much more. Often, project research is

confined to a specific project context and situations to stay within scope. In place of universal

recommendations for all projects, literature has provided generalized methods strongly

emphasizing tailoring to project needs (Cserhati, 2023; Project Management Institute, 2021).

This project aims to supply a project leader with a semi-tailored, but comprehensive,

research-backed stakeholder management process. It will be up to the project leader within the

Learning Innovations team to further tailor the process to best suit the contextual needs and

complexity of their specific projects and stakeholders.

Project Context

Organizational Overview

The Learning Enterprise at ASU is focused on expanding access to education and

promoting lifelong learning for individuals at all stages of life. This initiative supports ASU's

mission to serve the public good through various educational programs, including K–12

education, professional development, and open online learning. Key offerings include ASU Prep

Digital, Universal Learner Courses, and Accelerate ASU (Arizona State University, 2024). The

Learning Enterprise aims to enhance social and economic opportunities for students and the

community through these programs.

Within the Learning Enterprise, the Learning Innovations (LI) team operates as an

entrepreneurial hub within the department. This team is responsible for exploring new product

ideas and rapidly prototyping solutions in learner health, Ask-A Solutions, Innovations, and

planetary health. These focus areas and associated objectives and key results (OKRs) were newly

established for the team as of Q1 2025. Additionally, direction and structure within LI have been

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 13

in flux within the past year due to changes in senior leadership and team structures. The direction

moving forward as of August 2025, as seen in Figure 2, is the following hierarchical

arrangement: LI Senior Director, LI solution team lead, LI cross-functional lead, and central

support areas such as learning design, project coordination, and operational support (Arizona

State University, Learning Innovations, 2025c). This structure allows area leads to have full

project ownership over their portfolio and accountability towards their key results. Some area

leads may have additional staff within their own portfolio, but must rely on cross-functional

support for critical project needs, such as marketing support.

Industry and Sectors

The ASU Learning Enterprise and the LI team fall under the sector of

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 14

non-traditional/non-degree-based education, where participants interacting with course materials

are not called students but learners. Instead of following degree programs and certificates

through the various schools and colleges in the University, learners come to the Learning

Enterprise for a variety of reasons. This includes learners seeking pathways to degree programs,

career and professional development, free online learning opportunities, or those prompted by

employers looking to train their workforce (Arizona State University, 2024).

To create opportunities for learners, many stakeholders are involved in the process. At the

base level, there are the learners themselves. Product launches may be of interest to corporate

sponsors, governmental agencies, or other sponsors of the learning content. The Learning

Enterprise (LE) works closely with academic units and their faculty to provide the expertise

needed for its learning products. Additionally, external experts such as corporate partners or

contracted vendors support the creation of educational courses. These stakeholders have varying

interests and impacts on Learning Enterprise projects and activities. Another factor to consider is

the modality of stakeholders. They can be localized, as in the case of Arizona-based developed

and funded projects, or completely remote, where stakeholders are interacting around the world.

Lastly, the Learning Enterprise must continually respond to changes in the education

sector and manage stakeholder engagement and expectations around those changes. For example,

on its website page targeted towards potential employer stakeholders, LE promotes its newly

developed AI trainings to stay ahead in the digital landscape (Arizona State University, Learning

Enterprise, 2025).

Project Trends

Project management, along with stakeholder management, has evolved over the years.

Beginning with the first edition of the Project Management Institute’s PMBOK in 1987, the

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 15

fundamentals of project management were put on paper. Earlier in its history, project

management practice was considered procedural and standardized, rather than tailored to each

instance. Project management was defined as the application of knowledge, tools, and skills to

project activities that met or exceeded stakeholders’ needs and expectations.

As time passed and the PMBOK gained further content and analysis from experts, the

definition of project management evolved from meeting stakeholder expectations to more

generally “meeting project requirements”. In more recent years, project management knowledge

has become synonymous with agile. With the shift toward more flexible agile approaches, a

systems view of value delivery was adopted. Value for the organization is now kept in mind as

project deliverables are produced.

Project management practices have shifted from a process-based to a values-based

approach. These new practices encompass “Ways of Working,” “Power Skills,” and “Business

Acumen”. Looking forward, project management practices and knowledge will continue to

evolve. As projects continue to be recognized as complex systems, project leaders must be

equipped to manage all of the stakeholders, activities, and surprises awaiting them (Project

Management Institute, 2021).

External Factors

As a department of an academic institution, ASU Learning Enterprise (LE) has a

strength as a highly credible educational provider. Other strengths include a skilled and

motivated workforce and backing from the university president.

Weaknesses show within LE as it is vulnerable to market trends and is subject to the

broader constraints of university processes, which slow down the rapid innovation of work.

Internal academic politics can also affect decision-making; powerful stakeholders within the

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 16

university may exert influence over Learning Enterprise initiatives.

Opportunities exist in streamlining learning products across the organization, as seen in

Figure 3, leveraging the recent organizational transition to the same hierarchy as academic units

(Arizona State University, Learning Enterprise, 2025). This will create opportunities for LE to

collaborate closely and engage closely with these vital stakeholders.

At the same time, constant threats persist from external competition with other learning

providers, shifts in market or political conditions, and reliance on funding from government or

donor sources that may be temporary or heavily monitored. These external dynamics highlight

both the opportunities and risks in creating and sustaining coordinated stakeholder engagement

processes (Arizona State University, Learning Enterprise, 2025a).

Internal Factors

The Learning Innovations team was formed toward the end of 2023 with five

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 17

members. By August 2025, the team size had expanded to approximately 20 members (Arizona

State University, Learning Innovations, 2025b). The team operates in a hybrid environment, with

some members fully remote and others working in a hybrid schedule of remote and in-office

each day, each week. Digital tools such as Slack, Zoom, and Outlook are used to facilitate and

coordinate work (Arizona State University, Learning Innovations, 2025a).

The team’s culture is positive and lighthearted, with strong interpersonal relationships

and a collaborative spirit. Persistent high workloads for multiple members within Learning

Innovations sometimes result in periods of disengagement from the team. Learning Innovations’

focus area leads are responsible for projects and coordination within their domains, which can

mean managing highly ambiguous projects while balancing the interests and needs of

stakeholders. They have been assigned this position due to their expertise in the area's subject

matter, but have limited formal project management training and experience, which can

contribute to uncoordinated project management process activities.

A recent reorganization shifted the team to a centralized support system intended to

provide stronger coordination for area leads. However, the benefits of this restructuring have not

yet been fully realized due to the newness of its implementation.

Participants & Positionality

The participants for this study will be members of the Learning Innovations (LI) team.

Based on the organizational structure referenced in the Organizational Overview section, the

Senior Director, four focus area leads, the Learning Experience Design Lead, and selected

supporting team members will be interviewed. Due to time constraints, the interview sample

group will be limited to eight individuals.

This sample was chosen using a purposive sampling method because the individuals in

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 18

the sample group hold key responsibilities in project leadership and stakeholder engagement

within the Learning Innovations team (Brewerton & Millward, 2011). Their perspectives are

imperative to identifying uncoordinated practices and informing the development of an improved

stakeholder management process.

The researcher is a member of the Learning Innovations team and currently serves as

Project Coordinator. This role provides a unique position for the researcher to design and

implement project processes that can benefit the team. That said, due to the pre-established

involvement and working relationships with the participants, it will be imperative for the

researcher to remain impartial, professional, and objective throughout the research process

(Brewerton & Millward, 2011).

Project Rationale

Problem Identification

The problem of uncoordinated stakeholder management practices has led to confused,

misaligned, and resistant stakeholders in projects (Project Management Institute, 2021). If not

addressed, this problem can result in reduced stakeholder engagement and project delays. A

comparative study conducted by Orlander and Landin (2018) provides clear evidence of the

impact that uncoordinated stakeholder management can have on project outcomes. The

comparative study analyzing stakeholder influences was conducted on two construction projects.

Project One identified and managed community stakeholders from the start of the project, while

Project Two had no strategy or management for community stakeholders. Outcomes with the

community stakeholders varied between the two projects. Because of the early-established and

maintained relationship Project One built with its stakeholders, they grew to accept and even

support the impacts the construction project had on their community. Project Two, not having

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 19

engaged with community stakeholders in the process, dealt with a growing resistance to the

project. The less influential stakeholders had rallied enough to eventually influence much more

powerful stakeholders, such as politicians. Even with growing opposition, Project Two did not

change its nonactive stance on stakeholder management. This resulted in Project Two’s project

being delayed by six years (Orlander & Landin, 2008). Within the Learning Innovations team,

there are no formalized stakeholder management processes between the project area leads, and

discussions around stakeholder management are had on a conversational, ad-hoc basis (Arizona

State University, Learning Innovations, 2025c). This does not allow for adequate documentation

of problems and impacts resulting from uncoordinated stakeholder management processes within

LI projects.

Problem Statement

The problem addressed in this project is that the Learning Innovations focus area leads

and team members practice uncoordinated stakeholder management, leading to stakeholder

misalignment, confusion, and project delays. Stakeholders are a vital part of the project process

and successful outcomes. To coordinate efforts with stakeholders, it is generally recommended

practice to build cohesion, motivation, and trust among stakeholders. This includes clearly

communicating who the decision makers are in the project and understanding the skills and

knowledge stakeholders bring to the project. Building a solid foundation of trust with the project

will allow a project leader to lead and influence project direction (Project Management Institute,

2025; Nilsson, 2020; Richardson, 2015). Though members of the Learning Innovations team

may have good intentions to achieve successful outcomes with stakeholders on projects,

coordinated efforts can be thwarted if different members of the team interact with the same

stakeholder in different ways (Project Management Institute, 2021). For example, when

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 20

considering the Learning Innovations (LI) team organizational hierarchy, the Senior Director of

Learning Innovations, a solution area lead, and the Learning Experience Design team member

may interact with the same stakeholder, such as an Academic Unit liaison (Arizona State

University, Learning Innovations, 2025c). If the three LI team members are not coordinated in

their approach with the liaison, they could end up creating a situation of confusion, conflict, and

project delays. This can have a lasting impact on the relationship with the stakeholder; they could

lose trust in the LI team and the larger Learning Enterprise organization.

Rationale of the Project

If the Learning Innovations team continues to engage in uncoordinated stakeholder

management practices, it heightens the risk of detrimental project outcomes, such as stakeholder

resistance and forced adjustments to project scope, which can lead to financial losses,

compressed project deliverable timelines, and conflict within the stakeholder groups (Olander &

Landin, 2008; Sutterfield et al., 2006). With the Learning Enterprise's recent organizational

repositioning within Arizona State University (ASU) to work closer with Academic Unit

stakeholders, it is a critical time to demonstrate alignment with the stakeholder management

process (Arizona State University, Learning Enterprise, 2025). This project aims to enhance

stakeholder management and engagement practices by creating a tailor-made stakeholder

management process. This process will incorporate project leadership tools, techniques, and

methods to assist a Learning Innovations team leader and team members in effectively applying

stakeholder management and engagement to achieve successful project outcomes. This project

promotes the larger Learning Enterprise organizational goal of creating positive impacts in the

community and collaboration within ASU’s affiliate units (Arizona State University, 2024).

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 21

Research Questions

1. What should go into a stakeholder management process?

2. What are key things that leaders should understand for engagement of stakeholders?

3. How can uncoordinated stakeholder engagement cause project delays?

4. What are the barriers to stakeholder engagement?

Analytical Methods

The primary methodology for this project will be a qualitative, narrative-based case study

design conducted via semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of eight members of

the Learning Innovations team. This approach will allow for the collection of rich,

narrative-based data that reflects how team members perceive and practice stakeholder

management in their projects (Brewerton & Millward, 2011). Additionally, a content analysis

with literature from reputable sources such as the ASU library research databases, course

materials provided throughout the Master of Science in Organizational Leadership (MSOGL)

program, and the Project Management Institute's knowledge base will supplement the primary

methodology.

Data will be documented via written notes and transcripts collected from session

recordings during interviews. The data will be analyzed manually to identify recurring words,

patterns, and themes. Conclusions drawn from the data can be shared with the interviewees to

ensure interpretations are accurate (Brewerton & Millward, 2011, p. 8).

Ethical considerations include ensuring participant confidentiality, obtaining informed

consent, and emphasizing the ability to opt out. Due to the risk of bias from the researcher's

pre-established relationship with participants, a structured interview guide and review of

interview questions with the Applied Project course (OGL593) professor and organization will

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 22

be conducted prior to proceeding with any data collection with participants.

Assumptions and Limitations

The project assumes that introducing a stakeholder management process will improve the

project outcomes on the LI team.

Given the limited timeframe for the project’s deliverables, there is the assumption that

participants will be willing and available to contribute during the data collection window. The

researcher benefits from having a pre-established rapport with participants and support from

management for collecting data (Brewerton & Millward, 2011). Due to the number of remote

participants in the research, all participant-facing data collection will occur virtually to ensure

consistency across participants.

A limitation of the methodology is the lack of generalized data that would be acquired

from focusing solely on a small number of qualitative inputs in a short period of time. For

example, a single case study or experimental design could have been conducted to analyze how

participants respond to a specific event. Venturing more into a mixed study, infusing quantitative

elements such as a leadership-focused psychometric survey would have allowed for a deeper

dive into analyzing an individual's specific leadership style and personality traits (Brewerton &

Millward, 2011).

Regarding limitations for the researcher, since they have an established relationship with

the participants and due to the nature of the work as a Project Coordinator, they must pay special

attention to remain impartial and objective throughout the research process (Brewerton &

Millward, 2011). Additionally, the researcher will be the sole data collector for the project,

risking misinterpretation of data, gaps in thematic analysis, or coding errors.

Lastly, there is a limitation in keeping the delivered stakeholder management process

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 23

relevant to participants due to the evolving changes and updates within leadership theory and the

project management body of knowledge (Wilson, 2017; Project Management Institute, 2021).

Primary Audience, Anticipated Deliverables, and Contribution

The primary audience for this project is the Learning Innovations team and its leadership,

as they will be the beneficiaries of the deliverable. A secondary audience includes the OGL593

professor, who will review the project for academic purposes.

The deliverable produced will contribute to the Learning Innovations project leads and

team members' ability to effectively manage and lead stakeholders using a structured process

throughout the entire life of a project. The project leads will better align with their fellow leads

and team members in interacting with stakeholders in a more coordinated and influential manner,

leading to better project outcomes. After completing the applied project work for the MSOGL

program, the researcher will converse with the Learning Innovations team leadership to formally

integrate the stakeholder management process into team operations.

Ethical Considerations

Content analysis does not involve human participants and poses no potential harm.

Building on the insights gained from the content analysis, the researcher will conduct interviews

to deepen the understanding of the specific experiences and needs of the Learning Innovations

team.

To ensure confidentiality, interview data will be accessible only to the researcher, the

interviewed participant, and the OGL593 professor. Interview results will not be published. The

data collected will be for classroom educational purposes and benefit the organization,

eliminating the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval requirement.

All participants will be treated with dignity and respect throughout the research process.

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 24

They will consent to participate in the research while scheduling their interview session and will

retain the right to opt out at any time. Participants will receive clear information regarding the

purpose and context of the study. They will be encouraged to ask any clarifying questions they

may have at any point during the process (Brewerton & Millward, 2011).

There will be no physical or emotional risk to participants involved in the data collection,

and they will not face any pressure or coercion to participate. The researcher's CITI certificate

and documentation confirming that the IRB wizard deems this activity does not constitute

research as defined under 45 CFR part 46 will be included in the appendix.

Results

Eight semi-structured interviews were conducted with a select group of Learning

Innovations team members. The subjects included all four solution area leads, the Senior

Director of Learning Innovations, the Learning Design Lead, a Learning Design team member,

and a Planetary Health team member. All interviews were approximately an hour in length, with

transcripts collected from Zoom and manually reviewed. The questions template can be found in

the appendix. Interview questions were formulated based on the research questions identified for

this project and were broken down to gain a foundational understanding of a subject's knowledge

of stakeholder management, specific impactful recountings surrounding stakeholders, and any

recommendations they may have.

Each subject was asked to provide their definition of a stakeholder, stakeholder

management, and stakeholder engagement. For defining who a stakeholder is, themes for

respondents centered on individuals who play an influential or impactful role in a project.

Additionally, more than half of the respondents indicated that a stakeholder is directly involved

in any project and invested in the outcomes of the work. The terminology used to describe the

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 25

positionality of stakeholders ranged from internal/external, working/invested, hybrid,

formal/informal, customers, and leaders. Moving on to the understanding of stakeholder

management, seven of the eight respondents directly mentioned communication or aspects of it

as a key component. Other processes mentioned included mapping stakeholders, although no

specific methods were described.

The following findings from the interviews and relevant literature will be presented in

relation to the research questions.

"What should go into a stakeholder management process?"

Themes from the interviews included stakeholder identification, clarification of project

roles, alignment of project goals among stakeholders, systems to track stakeholder relationships,

and collaborative communication tools. The literature supports the findings by outlining the

process flow for stakeholder management, which includes identification, analysis, development

of a plan, execution, and monitoring of stakeholders (Project Management Institute, 2021;

Colford, 2006; Ramazani & Jergeas, 2015). Additionally, the literature notes capturing data

important to the project for each stakeholder and using tools such as power/influence grids to

prioritize (Landin & Landin, 2018; Griffin & Otter, 2014; Project Management Institute, 2021).

Subjects in the interviews suggested the need for ongoing relationship management and

strategic tailoring in projects, particularly when working with stakeholder groups over the long

term. Two subjects noted the importance of truly getting to know project stakeholders to

encourage project support and collaborative ideation. The literature supports this theme by

emphasizing the importance of tailoring projects to meet stakeholder needs (Project Management

Institute, 2023).

"What are key things that leaders should understand for engagement of stakeholders?"

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 26

A strong theme emerged among the interviewed subjects, centered on the concept of

leading by example. Additionally, it was noted that leaders set the tone for the project and can be

a significant factor in a project's successful outcomes. Other key things leaders should

understand include being a culture leader, possessing strong interpersonal skills, awareness, and

understanding of project contexts, effectively managing relationships with stakeholders, and

having trust in their team's expertise. The literature indicates that project leaders must be

servants, collaborators, and influencers. Additionally, leaders must possess these skills in

interpersonal communication, strategic direction and vision, and other soft skills to distinguish

themselves as reliable and trustworthy leaders to stakeholders (Project Management Institute,

2021; Project Management Institute, 2023; Müller & Turner, 2010).

When asked specifically about building trust with stakeholders, themes centered on being

consistent, honest, and transparent. Two of the subjects specifically noted how a trusting

relationship coincides with high expectations from that stakeholder. This touches on the leading

by example concept referenced above, emphasizing that a leader should hold to their promises.

Subjects indicated that trust can take time to build and requires intentional effort on the part of

the project leader, but can result in highly motivated and supportive, long-term stakeholders. The

literature supports this notion that building trust is a key to project success. As stated by

Richardson, "A project leader cannot expect a stakeholder to comply just because they are the

project leader. Stakeholder trust must be earned through consistently being a value provider"

(2015, p. 4).

"How can uncoordinated stakeholder engagement cause project delays?"

And

"What are the barriers to stakeholder engagement?"

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 27

Every subject was asked about the challenges they faced with stakeholders and the

impacts on their projects. All subjects indicated some type of impact on the project or product

delivery schedule. Additionally, there are impacts to stakeholder relationships that surfaced from

challenging situations. In one case, the reluctance of a stakeholder to engage with the project and

project team, and another with a number of confused stakeholders, was misaligned with the

project process and ultimate goals. Overall, the subjects indicated the ability to adapt to

challenges posed by stakeholders, but noted frustration within their teams and with other

stakeholders. Multiple subjects indicated that too many stakeholders of a certain type, for

example, subject matter experts, or unclear decision and communication pathways, led to

uncoordinated situations with stakeholders. In the literature, themes are aligned with the coastal

cities mega project case study. Restrictions on communication lines and the project team's lack of

authority led to bottlenecks and delays in the project. Project leaders had to adapt to the

challenges presented by stakeholders in order to advance in the project (Nilsson, 2020).

When considering barriers to stakeholder engagement, multiple subjects mentioned that

having a standardized process and tools could improve their ability to track and manage

stakeholder engagement. The article by Reijers & van der Aalst supports this by noting that

standardization in processes can lead to improved project metrics and fewer errors in work

(2005).

These findings, which highlight the Learning Innovations team's understanding of

stakeholders, stakeholder management, and stakeholder engagement and practice improvements

that align with the reviewed literature, support the need to develop a stakeholder management

process to address the problem of uncoordinated stakeholder management, which causes project

delays and ultimately contributes to project success.

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 28

Conclusions

The insights drawn from the literature analysis and semi-structured interviews support the

project's purpose statement. The information provided by the Learning Innovations (LI) team

members, along with analyses of recent structural changes within the team, aligns with

sentiments described in the literature regarding the need for a standardized process within the

team. It is essential to recognize the evolving nature of projects and the principles that should be

incorporated into the stakeholder management process deliverable for this project. It would be

beneficial for the LI team to have standardized tools, techniques, and a clear understanding of the

general stakeholder management flow, from identification to management. It will be up to the

individual project leads and team members to take the information provided, comprehend it, and

implement it into their projects. Depending on the individual's needs, they may start from the

foundational beginning of the process guide, while others may select and pull stakeholder-related

topics as needed.

With the tailoring theme in mind, this process guide does not follow a chronological

project process flow from start to end. Instead, the process guide starts with confidence-building

and foundational information about the structure of projects. Next, stakeholders are introduced as

a topic using the Project Management Institute’s formal definition. Jumping into stakeholder

identification and analysis, the process guide will outline methods for this process, including the

development of a RACI chart. The process guide then covers the topic of communication by

comparing different types of communication, and process mapping is introduced as a tool for

visual communication with stakeholders. The next topical area covered is leadership skills for

stakeholder management and engagement. Leadership styles relevant to project leaders are

lightly introduced. Several technical and people-focused skills are outlined for project leaders. To

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 29

address the themes of leading up and down mentioned in interviews, topics in the literature

discussing influences and critical decision-making will be covered. Lastly, the process guide will

include templates, tools, and other resources to provide the Learning Innovations team with a

head start when working with stakeholders. Available items include a RACI chart template and

links to additional articles and assessments for in-depth exploration of specific stakeholder

management and engagement topics.

In conclusion, this project and its deliverables will provide benefits in stakeholder

management and engagement for the Learning Innovations team. This is only a step towards

process improvement. Although much data was analyzed within the limited timeframe allocated

for the project, it is essential to recognize that organizations, teams, and projects will continue to

evolve. To maximize the impact of the process guide, this consideration was incorporated into

the design. It began with foundational elements of stakeholder management and engagement,

focusing on the critical skills of the domain. The stakeholder management process guide is not

intended to be a one-size-fits-all solution for the Learning Innovations team, but rather a part of

the team's continued process improvement.

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 30

Schedule

Week Activities

Week 1

S: 10/15/25

E: 10/22/25

● Align with OGL593 requirements

● Obtain approval for the prospectus

● Verify ethical considerations (informed consent, confidentiality, and

data-security plan)

● Seek organizational approval for research

● Finalize data collection documents (interview guide, consent form,

recruitment email)

● Conduct a brief pilot interview to test questions and recording process;

revise as needed

● Identify interviewees

● Schedule interviews

● Begin draft of stakeholder management process

Weeks 2-3

S: 10/23/25

E:11/5/25

● Conduct 8 semi-structured individual interviews

● Document and begin analysis of responses

● Write reflexive notes after each interview to capture context and early insights

Week 4

S:11/6/25

E: 11/12/25

● Continue analysis and synthesis of research findings; identify narratives

and themes

● Validate findings through member-checking with classroom peers and

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 31

professor review

● Start drafting the final report

Weeks 5-6 S: 11/13

E: 11/30

*Holiday period

● Continue work and refinement of the stakeholder management process

● Integrate supporting literature in the literature review and Learning

Innovations context

● Review the draft final report and stakeholder management process draft

with the professor

● Refine and iterate the research findings and stakeholder management plan

deliverable drafts

● Finalize the final report and stakeholder management process deliverable

Week 7

S: 12/1/25

E: 12/5/25

● Share findings and outcomes of the applied project research and the

stakeholder management process deliverable through a presentation to the

professor and class

● Submit the project deliverable and final project report to the course

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 32

Project Gantt View | November 7, 2025 | Link to Project Gantt Chart

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 33

References

Brewerton, P., & Millward, L. (2011). Organizational research methods: A guide for students

and researchers. SAGE.

Canva. (2025). Example of Organizational Process Map [Image]. Canva.

https://www.canva.com/design/DAG0UAXplGY/E6rSX-0qSynKxqCj4I3DFQ/view?utm

_content=DAG0UAXplGY&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_so

urce=uniquelinks&utlId=ha55b96425d

Colford, J. (2006). Attendance is mandatory: Leadership training facilitates today's project

managers and tomorrow's executives. Leadership in Project Management (PM Network),

2,

56–61.https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/attendance-is-mandatory-leadership-training-

11224

Cserháti, G. (2023). Highlighting Approaches to Leadership Style in Project Management: The

Need for a Broader Research Approach to the Context-Related Use of Leadership Styles.

Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, 12(1), 107–119.

https://doi.org/10.17708/DRMJ.2023.v12n01a07

Eskerod, P., & Huemann, M. (2014). Advancing project stakeholder analysis by standing on the

shoulders of giants [Conference presentation]. Project Management Institute Research

and Education Conference, Phoenix, AZ. Project Management Institute.

https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/advancing-project-stakeholder-success-1912

Griffin, J. A., & Otter, K. (2014). It takes a village: How stakeholder engagement is the key to

strategic success [Conference presentation]. PMI Global Congress 2014-North America,

Phoenix, AZ. Project Management Institute.

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 34

https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/stakeholder-engagement-key-strategic-success-9324

Miller, D., & Oliver, M. (2015). Engaging stakeholders for project success. PMI White Paper.

Müller, R., & Turner, R. (2010). Leadership competency profiles of successful project managers.

International Journal of Project Management, 28(5), 437–448.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.09.003

Nauman, S., Bhatti, S. H., Imam, H., & Khan, M. S. (2022). How servant leadership drives

project team performance through collaborative culture and knowledge sharing. Project

Management Journal, 53(1), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728211037777

Nilsson, R. (2020). Rising risks: With coastal cities under constant threat of flooding, urban

development leaders prioritize resiliency projects. PM Network, 34(4), 40–46.

https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/rising-risks-11984

Obronova, A. (2022). Development of a method for assessing the quality of project management

processes based on the entropy approach. Technology Audit and Production Reserves,

1(4), 6–11. https://doi.org/10.15587/2706-5448.2022.251952

Olander, S., & Landin, A. (2008). A comparative study of factors affecting the external

stakeholder management process. Construction Management and Economics, 26(6),

553–561. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190701821810

Ramazani, J., & Jergeas, G. (2015). Project managers and the journey from good to great: The

benefits of investment in project management training and education. International

Journal of Project Management, 33(1), 41-52.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.03.012

Richardson, B. (2015). Earning the right to influence [Conference presentation]. PMI Global

Congress 2015-EMEA, London, England. Project Management Institute.

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 35

https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/strategies-optimizing-stakeholder-engagement-9918

Sutterfield, J. S., Friday-Stroud, S. S., & Shivers-Blackwell, S. L. (2006). A case study of project

and stakeholder management failures: Lessons learned. Project Management Journal,

37(5), 26–35.

Thoha, N., & Wahyu Avandana, I. M. N. (2020). Project managers’ leadership styles and their

effects on project management performance. Pertanika Journal of Social Science &

Humanities, 28(2), 803–816.

Verzuh, E. (2005). Stakeholder management strategies: Applying risk management to people

[Conference presentation]. PMI Global Congress 2005-North America, Toronto, Ontario,

Canada. Project Management Institute.

https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/stakeholder-management-strategies-applying-risk-m

anagement-7479

Arizona State University. (2024). About ASU Learning Enterprise. ASU Learning Enterprise.

https://learning.asu.edu/about-us/

Arizona State University, Learning Enterprise. (2025). Workforce training to drive your

organization’s growth. ASU Learning Enterprise.

https://learning.asu.edu/partner-with-us/for-employers/

Arizona State University, Learning Enterprise. (2025a). Learning Summit 2025 slideshow

[Unpublished internal presentation]. ASU Learning Enterprise.

Arizona State University, Learning Innovations. (2025a). Learning Innovations onboarding

guide [Unpublished internal document]. ASU Learning Innovations.

Arizona State University, Learning Innovations. (2025b). LI team members [Unpublished

internal document]. ASU Learning Innovations.

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 36

Arizona State University, Learning Innovations. (2025c). LI weekly kickoff & strategic priorities

[Unpublished internal presentation]. ASU Learning Innovations.

Project Management Institute. (2025). Habits of Highly Effective Project Leaders: Enable Your

Team. Retrieved October 9, 2025, from

https://players.brightcove.net/5392214295001/default_default/index.html?videoId=63588

64255112.

Project Management Institute. (2023). Process groups : a practice guide. (1st ed.). Project

Management Institute.

Project Management Institute. (2021). A guide to the project management body of knowledge

(PMBOK guide) & the standard for project management (7th ed.). Project Management

Institute.

Wilson, S. (2016). Thinking Differently about Leadership: A Critical History of Leadership

Studies (Paperback edition). Edward Elgar Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784716790

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 37

Appendix

Consent Form

I am a graduate student under the direction of Professor Kevin Ellsworth in the Applied Project course (OGL593) in the College of Integrative Sciences and Arts at Arizona State University. I am conducting a research study to develop a stakeholder management process for the Learning Innovations team at Arizona State University.

You are invited to participate in a study interview lasting 60 minutes. This will be a recorded video interview conducted virtually via Zoom, and it will be transcribed. You will be asked questions related to your experience working on projects within the Learning Innovations portfolio. You have the right to decline any question and stop participating at any time.

Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate or to withdraw from the study at any time, there will be no penalty. Participants will contribute to discovering wins and pain points in the current stakeholder management practices within Learning Innovation projects. The findings will contribute to enhancing stakeholder management and engagement practices by creating a tailor-made stakeholder management process for Learning Innovations. This process will incorporate project leadership tools, techniques, and methods to assist Learning Innovations team leaders and team members in effectively applying stakeholder management and engagement to achieve successful project outcomes.

There are no foreseeable risks or discomforts to your participation. Your responses will be confidential. The results of this study may be used in reports and presentations to other classmates within the OGL593 course with the objective of providing students with training about and experience with research methods. The data will not be used, published or otherwise disseminated outside of the classroom. Results will be shared in an aggregate form. De-identified data collected as a part of the current study will not be shared with others (e.g., investigators or industry partners) for future research purposes or other uses.

Recording audio, video, and notes during the Zoom interview will significantly enrich the content available for the researcher. This approach enables a comprehensive understanding of the interview, facilitating better analysis and insights. The interview will not be recorded without your permission. Please let me know if you do not want the interview to be recorded. You can also change your mind after the interview starts. Just let me know.

If you have any questions concerning the research study, please contact the researcher at [email protected].

By signing below, you are agreeing to be part of the study.

Name:

Signature: Date:

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 38

Interview Questions Template

1. Foundation-setting questions

a. What is your role on the Learning Innovations team?

b. Tell me about the projects you work on in Learning Innovations.

c. What is your definition of a project stakeholder?

d. What is your understanding of stakeholder management within projects?

e. Can you define what stakeholder engagement is within projects?

2. Stakeholder-process specific

a. Explain a time when you had a challenge with a stakeholder or stakeholders in a

project?

i. What were the impacts on the project itself?

ii. Were there impacts on stakeholder relationships?

iii. Would you change anything, and what?

b. Do you feel that Learning Innovations has an established and coordinated

stakeholder management and engagement process? Explain your thoughts.

c. Give me an example of a time when you have experienced uncoordinated

application of stakeholder management and engagement within LI?

d. What is your current process for managing and engaging stakeholders within your

work?

e. What should project leaders know in the management of stakeholders in their

projects?

f. What would help improve your ability to conduct stakeholder management and

engagement in your projects?

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 39

g. What would hurt your ability to effectively conduct stakeholder management and

engagement in your projects?

3. Leadership

a. What role do a project leader’s leadership practices play in the management and

engagement of stakeholders?

b. What does trust building with stakeholders in projects mean to you?

i. How to build trust

ii. Impacts strong trusting relationships have on a project & beyond

c. Can you share an example of good and/or bad application of leadership within a

project?

4. Anything else you would like to mention?

Parking lot questions:

5. If you were to create a stakeholder management process for LI, what would you do?

6. What are your typical communication flows with stakeholders?

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 40

This is to certify that:

Melissa Waite

Has completed the following CITI Program course:

Human Research (Curriculum Group)

IRB – Social & Behavioral Research (Group 2) (Course Learner Group)

1 - Basic Course (Stage)

Under requirements set by:

Arizona State University Completion Date 18-Jan-2025 Expiration Date 18-Jan-2029 Record ID 67358747

Not valid for renewal of certification through CME.

101 NE 3rd Avenue, Suite 320 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 US

www.citiprogram.org

Generated on 18-Jan-2025. Verify at www.citiprogram.org/verify/?w87584439-fdbd-4d1f-94f0-fa82a74f8711-67358747

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 41

Response Summary:

Q1.1.

Welcome to the IRB Exempt Wizard

The ASU Institutional Review Board has implemented an IRB Wizard tool to streamline the IRB review process for studies that fall under one or more exempt categories. To determine if your study is eligible for a determination through the wizard, please review the criteria below.

Before you begin, please review our IRB Exempt Wizard -

FAQ to facilitate the process. Criteria:

1. Unfunded research (i.e., studies that are NOT externally funded by federal agencies, industries, foundations, or local partners) – internally (ASU) funded research is eligible.

2. NOT a clinical trial.

3. Single-site study (IRB procedures conducted at ASU only and

no external collaborators). 4. Study is only conducted in the U.S.

(i.e., no international research).

5. Participants are adults (18 years or older) and NOT from a vulnerable population (i.e., non-military, non- Native American, and/or non-prisoner population).

6. Data collection methods:

A. For single component of data collection: surveys or interviews are acceptable.

B. For multiple components of data collection: surveys and

interviews are acceptable. C. Focus groups and

interventions CANNOT go through the exempt wizard

process.

7. Researchers do not have a dual role (i.e., conduct

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 42

research on participants that they supervise/oversee).

8. Research does NOT involve sensitive topics related to drug/alcohol use, sexual behavior, mental health, criminal behavior, immigration status, or personal financial information.

9. Research does NOT involve other information that could put participants at risk of criminal/civil liability.

10. Research involves use of secondary human subjects data that are publicly available.

11. If you are unsure if your study meets the criteria above, you can reach out to [email protected] for clarification. However, if you feel that your study meets these criteria, please complete the Wizard

Once you have received a determination through the Wizard, please follow these steps:

1. Download a copy of Wizard's determination (e.g., This activity is not human subjects so 45 CFR part 46 does not apply") and the response ID (e.g., R_3ewUzgEYL7bzLty).

2. Log in to the Enterprise Research Administration site and click on the 'IRB' tab, and create a new study.

3. Fill out the basic study information and upload a copy of the IRB Wizard's determination and response ID in lieu of the IRB protocol application under the "Attach a protocol" question. Do NOT upload any other application materials (e.g., recruitment, consent,

or supporting documents). 4. Only a full-time faculty/staff can serve as the Principal Investigator (PI) on the IRB submission. Students/Postdocs CANNOT serve as PIs. Once the submission is ready for review, the PI can submit to the ASU IRB for an official approval letter.

I have reviewed the wizard Criteria above and confirm that my study meets these criteria.

IM_6fJ27IXjr9uFkh0

Version 2.5

Q1.3. Contact Information

First Name Melissa

Last Name Waite

Q1.4. Email address

[email protected]

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 43

Q1.16. Study title Enhancing Project Success Through Coordinated Stakeholder Engagement

Q1.17. What is the purpose of this study? The purpose of this project is to create an engagement stakeholder process in order to address the problem of uncoordinated stakeholder engagement that causes project delays, contributing to project success.

Q82. Principal Investigator (PI) name Kevin Ellsworth

Q2.1.

Does the research involve using children (under 18) OR does the research involve using prisoners?

IM_6XPKgT1iNgULsAR

Q2.2.

Is there more than one institution involved in the project (e.g., researchers from two universities)?

IM_6XPKgT1iNgULsAR

Q2.3. Does the researcher have a non-research relationship with the subject e.g. professor to student or clinician to patient/client?

IM_6XPKgT1iNgULsAR

Q2.4.

Is the study limited to following components - Surveys, interviews or both?

IM_3a3xje1GW6tD98V

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 44

Q2.5. Does your research fall into any of the following categories? None of the above.

Q2.6. Are any of the following statements true? (Choose all that apply.) None of the above

Q3.1. Is the research minimal risk? Minimal risk means that the probability and magnitude of harm or discomfort anticipated in the research are not greater in and of themselves than those ordinarily encountered in daily life or during the performance of routine physical or psychological examinations or tests.

IM_3a3xje1GW6tD98V

Q3.2. Will you be collecting information that may be used to identify the participants (e.g., name, contact information, job title and employer name)? Remember to consider the context of your study (e.g., demographic information for participants from one organization could be combined to identify individuals).

IM_6XPKgT1iNgULsAR

Q3.4.

Are you using any of the following populations?

None of the above Q4.1. Is the activity a systematic investigation, including research development, testing, and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge*? [45 CFR 46.102(l)]

* Generalizable knowledge: If the results of the proposed study will be shared outside of ASU with peers at other institutions and with the generpublic then ASU IRB would consider this as contributing to generalizable knowledge. Generalizability means including the findings in the thesis, dissertation, publication, or presentation to be shared outside ASU.

IM_6XPKgT1iNgULsAR

STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 45

Q4.2. Select all that apply, leave blank any that do not apply. Your project is limited to course-related activities designed specifically for educational or teaching purposes; where data are collected from and about human subjects as part of a class exercise or assignment and are not intended for use outside of the classroom

This activity is not research so 45 CFR part 46 does not apply. To see the regulation [45 CFR 46.102(l)] click here.

Other Federal, State, and local laws and/or regulations may apply to the activity.