Stakeholder Management Report

Food-waste is a major problem upon which individuals and companies throughout the

world continue to contribute. The consequences of food waste are far-reaching, encompassing

everything - the global environment, society and economy. The ACS 800 social infrastructure

project class unanimously voted to address the issue of food waste. The goal of the project was to

work within Ryerson’s community to develop awareness of the causes and effects of wasting

food and to encourage active change. The creation of the Toronto Social Impact Film Forum was

meant to provide an inclusive space for open dialogue through the captivating art of film. This

paper will discuss the stakeholder team’s journey during the formulation of Tdot SIFF 2015. The

report will include what a stake is, who the stakeholders are and their importance in relation to a

business, institution and social infrastructure. Furthermore, the report will analyze and include

the common fundamental stakeholder management methods in conducting engagement practices,

appropriate framing and mapping. Our role in procuring and managing stakeholder involvement

with our event assured that the right people and organizations were involved in promoting the

issue at hand - food waste. More importantly, such relationships helped legitimize TdotSIFF

2015 as well as secure interest in potential future endeavors.  

Aims and Goals

As the ‘Stakeholder Management’ team, our objectives consisted of successfully

identifying and inviting stakeholders that would have an interest, right, and/or claim in the event,

as well as those who could benefit from our film forum or be affected in some way. They can

also contribute to the project by spreading awareness of the event and the message being

conveyed. Stakeholders can aid our film forum in expressing our values, carrying out our

mission, and essentially contributing to sustainability and the success of the event. Essentially,

stakeholders provide a form of support for projects.  It is the Stakeholder Management team’s

duty to ensure all stakeholders’ individual and distinct objectives are met, as well to guarantee

that they have a critical role in the project.  The mission of the film forum is to spread awareness,

persuade people to change certain behaviours and to ensure either a good continuity or a good

flow, being the middleman between the class and stakeholders of the forum.   

1

What is a Stake and Stakeholder/Categorizations?

In order to manage our stakeholders, we had to first gain knowledge about what

constitutes as a stake and stakeholder. This allowed us to know whom to approach and why. A

stake can take on multiple forms, depending on a person or group’s relation to a project. It can

come in the form of an interest, in which the stakeholder might have no legal or direct

connection that is obligatory, but rather may simply desire to be included. It can come in the

form of a right to be informed and or involved, whether legal or direct, or even morally. It can

also come in the form of a claim, which refers to the power or position of a stakeholder,

something that is due, or believed to be due to them (Karakowsky, Carroll & Bucholtz 2005).

Thus, we see there are multiple kinds of stakes. Furthermore, a stakeholder can have several

interests and therefore various stakes in a project (Karakowsky et al. 2005). There is a central

theme of responsibility involved when defining a stake and stakeholder because it is about who

is most likely capable of being affected or not, and who can in turn influence the actions or

policies.

Certain people will have more legitimacy or rightfulness than others, depending on the

outlook a business or project has because their objectives can differ (Karakowsky et al. 2005).

Their objectives or meanings can differ depending on time and context. In the basic, traditional

business outlook, prioritized stakeholders are shareholders, employees, and customers. However,

taking into consideration a pluralist society, everyone else must also be considered, such as

competitors, suppliers, the media, special-interest groups, the public, and even the environment

(Karakowsky et al. 2005).

There are different kinds of stakes and certain stakeholders will have more legitimacy, It

is justifiable then, to mention that there must be different kinds of stakeholders, and that

understanding each of them is necessary in order to identify our most immediate or urgent

stakeholders. Luckily, business enterprises have spent much time and research on categorizing

stakeholders to determine such urgency. There are various ways to categorize stakeholders, such

as primary, those who can directly affect or be affected, versus secondary, those who are not

directly affiliated but can have influence in the public eye. Another method of categorization is

2

distinguishing between core: those necessary for survival of the project, strategic: those

necessary for the success, and environmental: those in the community. However, the simpler and

more straightforward the method is, the better.

A primary stakeholder in regards to our event is Stephanie Walsh. One reason that

Stephanie would be considered as a primary stakeholder is that she is a head authority figure of

our Arts and Contemporary Studies program. Stephanie has a claim to the film forum because

her reputation and the rest of the Arts and Contemporary Studies faculty can be affected by it.

Our respective activities have a reciprocal relationship, mutually benefitting one another. A

secondary stakeholder in relation to our event would be Cecilia Rocha, who is the director of the

school of nutrition at Ryerson University. Cecilia Rocha is a secondary stakeholder because she

doesn't have a direct affect on film forum, nor do we have a direct influence on her. However,

Cecilia Rocha does deal with the same subject matter that our film forum will represent.

Therefore, Cecilia might influence public opinion about our event. For instance, Cecilia

networked or sent emails to her faculty members and since they deal with the subject matter,

then we eventually become in contact with additional individuals who have an interest in

spreading the awareness of food waste and the possibilities it has in deteriorating our

environment, wasting food that can be used to distribute to those who are suffering from

malnourishment. It is important to mention that categories can shift according to time and place.

The development of stakeholder management not only coincides with the growth of

business initiatives to improve efficiency, but also demonstrates how definitions of stakeholders

can be determined by time and context. Initially, focused on the production process, owners

thought of stakeholders as only those who either contributed in resources or purchased the

product or service. Ownership and management separated over time, as they recognized the need

to interact with people dealing in the various aspects that constitute the business or project

(Karakowsky et al. 2005). Changes, internally and externally, created a new approach, the type

we are using, in which not only those that management considers to be, but also those groups or

individuals that would have a reason to believe they themselves have a stake must be considered.

(Karakowsky et al. 2005) Stakeholder management when done correctly can thus improve

efficiency. It seems that improving efficiency goes back to responsibility, and ensuring that

everyone is accounted for. We can also note in the development of stakeholder management that

3

as time goes on the concept of stakeholder becomes less broad and identifies specific

individual/groups that could have a stake. Furthermore, the less broad it becomes, the more

differences in objectives we will encounter.

Framing and Sustainability

The ultimate goal of discussing food waste is to engage people to partake in more

sustainable food practices, but what does this mean? The term sustainability was first used by

Hans Carl von Carlowitz in 1712 and was used in relation to the management of forestry. In the

1980’s the notion of sustainability gained global attention and in 1987 the United Nations came

up with a formal definition of sustainable development (Scoones 2007).  The United Nations

defined sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of the present without

compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Gorp & Goot, 2012,

p.127 & Scoones, p.590).  This definition is still used on the international stage as a baseline for

measuring sustainability.

The United Nations’ definition of sustainable development is very vague on how to

achieve sustainable development in concrete terms, leaving this part up to individual

interpretation. People have differing ideas on how to maintain enough resources for future

generations to survive and how to implement sustainable solutions (Gorp & Goot 2012).  This is

because the notion of sustainability is intertwined with other aspects of society, making it a

multifaceted issue. For example, sustainability can be tied to environmental degradation,

individual/corporate financial loss, and/or scarcity of food in the third world.  One’s perspective

shapes the way they approach sustainability.

Understanding how stakeholders are connected to the issue of food sustainability was

necessary in convincing stakeholders to support our event. Almost every stakeholder had a

different stake in participating (or not participating) in our event and therefore may have

provided support (or chosen not to provide support) for different reasons. After researching our

stakeholders, we were able to link food sustainability and our event to our stakeholders’ interests.

In other words, we were able to “frame” (Gorp & Goot, 2012, p.130) our position, or select

aspects of food sustainability and our initiatives that related to individual stakeholders’ interests

and desires and were able to express this to them through ongoing conversation.

4

One frame, for example, we used was how food sustainability could contribute to the

reduction of global hunger when speaking with Global Citizen. Global Citizen is a non-profit

organization whose ultimate goal is to eradicate poverty by the year 2030. The organization

supports a couple of initiatives dedicated to ending global poverty, including an initiative called

“Live Below the Line”. ‘Live Below the Line’ is intended to highlight that many people around

the globe cannot afford to feed themselves and their families. So in order to gain support from

Global Citizen, we targeted the Live Below the Line campaign, and spoke about how our event

can shed light on the systemic issues of food distribution.  We tied food distribution to the lack

of access many people have to food and that by increasing awareness of this we can contribute to

their attempts at eradicating global hunger.   

     Stakeholder Mapping and Prioritizing

Stakeholder mapping is a significant step to comprehending who the stakeholders are,

where each stakeholder comes from, what stakeholders are looking for in relationship to an

organization, and how to approach them. Stakeholder mapping takes into consideration the

forming of relationships and engagement with stakeholders, which is beneficial to the company

because it strengthens efficiency and the chances of prediction of impact are greater (Morris,

Baddache, Nelson, Barenblat & Kannabhiran, 2012). Ultimately, stakeholder mapping is an aid

to not only understanding who are our stakeholders are but also which stakeholders are

prioritized.

Stakeholder mapping essentially consists of four steps in order to prioritize every

stakeholder into specific categories. It consists of doing a thorough amount of research, debating

as well as graphing and laying out key stakeholders. The first step in the mapping process is to

clearly identify each stakeholder. This involves categorizing different types of stakeholders, as

well as identifying the type of stakes each stakeholder possess on the specific project. Basically,

“legitimate and valid” stakeholders need to be recognized and their influence mapped so that

their ultimate effect on projects can be more understood (Bourne & Walker 2005). Thus these

people preferably are influential and have a strong interest in occupying a rising development

(Newcombe, 2010). In this case, our group was able to identify stakeholders within the Ryerson

community, who for the most part were primary stakeholders such as Sheldon Levy, Nicole

Florecki, Stephanie Walsh, etc. Secondary stakeholders who held an interest in the film forum

5

that featured “Just Eat It” was organizations like Live Below the Line, Second Harvest, Provision

Coalition, Evergreen and so forth.

After identifying stakeholders, it is necessary to analyze and understand their

perspectives. Fundamentally, observing stakeholder’s contribution, legitimacy, willingness to

engage, as well as influence would be considered as analyzing his or her interests and

perspectives (Newcombe 2010). Clarifying what they could do for the project and how the

project will benefit with their participation.

Then, the actual process of mapping is a visual tool that can categorize and determine

which stakeholders are most useful and beneficial, as well as what category they fall into.

Producing a map or a chart completes this (Appendix A). Creating a visual helps compare the

importance and relevance of every stakeholder in relation to the organization and or cause. The

method is merely to list stakeholders alongside one axis of a chart, list the significant stakeholder

interest along another axis of the table and to then specify the professed degree of their interest

(Bourne et al. 2005). From the stakeholder perspective they have a vested interest in the project’s

accomplishment that varies in intensity from very low to very high (Bourne et al. 2005).

Focusing on stipulating the nature of the stakeholder’s interest, assessing the stakeholder’s

interest, expecting what the stakeholder’s future actions will be to gratify their stake (Bourne et

al. 2005) would all be examples of what to look at in the visual chart. Also, within the chart, their

forms of power can be looked at such as what types of networking connections they have that

can benefit with the project, how knowledgeable they are in the specific field that the project is

related to, as well as their referent power based on their characteristics and whether they are

likeable, admired or successful individuals (Bourne et al. 2005) and this information can all be

attained obviously through interviewing the stakeholders and getting a better sense of knowing

their initiatives.

The Stakeholder Management group of TdotSIFF conducted a chart to specify what kind

of stake each stakeholder has. Their type of stake was an indication as to what kind of level of

interest, willingness, legitimacy, and contribution they would fall under. So for stakeholders such

as Stephanie Walsh, Nicole Florecki and Sheldon Levy, who fall under primary and core

stakeholders, with not only an interest but a claim, on the chart they would score a ‘high’ in

every category, because they would be directly involved with the film forum and it can directly

affect them as well, representing the Ryerson community. However there still are stakeholders

6

within the Ryerson faculty who fall under environmental stakeholders, but might not have a high

contribution or necessity of involvement, thus are not principally prioritized. As for those

secondary stakeholders who purely have an interest in the film forum, there were a few that we

contacted that seemed to want to be more involved with the film forum, rather than merely

attending and watching the film, they wanted to somehow contribute to the project; sending out

our social media links to the community, sending out flyers, handing out flyers at the event, etc.

For instance, Live Below the Line, whereby they would have a high score on each category, and

perhaps prioritizing them would be essential. Their contribution, legitimacy, willingness to

engage, influence as well as necessity of involvement fell under high scores, and by attending or

incorporating their logo both the film forum as well as their corporation are mutually benefitted.

Nevertheless we still have excellent secondary stakeholders such as Second Harvest, Evergreen,

Provision Coalition, etc., who may not score high under every category within the mapping

process and thus may not be prioritized stakeholders, are still playing a crucial role by attending

our film forum.

Lastly, prioritizing every stakeholder through referencing the mapping techniques, we are

able to determine which stakeholders may hold a more central role to the project, which would

generally be primary stakeholders who have a claim over the project such as specific faculty

members of Ryerson or secondary stakeholders who hold very similar interests with the projects

aims and would like to sponsor or perhaps collaborate with the project.  By prioritizing you can

also analyze the issues that could be potentially raised when determining which stakeholders

should be prioritized and which should not.  

Content Information on TDOT SIFF Stakeholders

Hot Docs & Regent Park Film Festival

Environmental Stakeholders

7

Push Communication

Hot Docs’ Green Initiative

RFPP Year-round community involvement

Pathways to Education

Evergreen

“Mission: Inspiring action to green cities

Vision: Green Cities, Healthy Planet”

Secondary Stakeholder with Potential

Push Communication and Attendance

Networking with Farmers’ Markets

Junction Farmers’ Market

Second Harvest

Non-profit organization founded in 1985.

Ina Andrew and Johan Clayton, who saw fresh food was being thrown away, while many

were still going hungry.

Started as an initiative to rescue and deliver fresh wasted food to those experiencing

hunger;

They share our concern and offer their support; could provide us with networks or advice

as they have a deep interest in the matter

The Global Poverty Project

Goal: eradicate poverty worldwide by 2030

Mission: “ Growing the number and effectiveness of global citizens to achieve the public,

business & political commitment and action to end extreme poverty.”

Behind an initiative called “Live Below the Line”

Provision Coalition

Works with  various food and beverage associations

Provide tools and solutions for creating more sustainable food and beverage practices

8

Industry Program Manager: Meena Hassalini

Sheldon Levy (President)

Figurehead representing the interests of Ryerson University; primary & core stakeholder

His stake is a claim and a right.

Open to anything that involves building social infrastructure that is for the betterment of

the city

Stake in the University’s reputation; the benefits of establishing prolific partnerships with

other stakeholders. It is in his interest to ensure the event’s success.

Not attending, but agreed to funding and giving a brief video of thanks. May attend post

screening reception.

Stephanie Walsh & Nicole Florecki

ACS director and ACS program administrator

both have a claim, right as well as an interest

interested in how the ACS program’s student work together

Both are attending and are offering their support

Cecilia Rocha / School of Nutrition

Research  on assessing the social efficiency of food security initiatives and programs, the

role of market failures in food insecurity, and the effectiveness of markets as policy tools

Conducted research on food security conditions among immigrant populations in

Toronto, and the manifestation of food sovereignty in an indigenous settlement in Brazil

An interest, and could have a right as the program could influence us

Patrick Dingle / Event Manager

In charge of Ryerson Campus Events, so could have had reservations about our event

Support what we are doing; offered to help us with searching for a venue

Attending

We have his interest, and perhaps a claim

Joshna Marahaj / Food Services

Executive Chef and good-food advocate; reinventing the Food Services at Ryerson

9

Known as one of the leading experts and proponents of high-quality food, especially in

large institutional settings

Joshna is the adviser of new Food Services management operator, developing new

performance indicators for Food Services:

Focusing on sustainability, variety and competitive pricing and engaging with students,

faculty and staff on food strategy.

Urban Planning & sustainability Department

They have understanding about creating and implementing plans to develop and enhance

communities, whether urban, suburban, or rural.

They can advise on planning decisions related to social, economic, cultural, or resource

development

Includes environmental, heritage and other issues.

Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholders hold a vital position in ensuring efficiency in the overall business

performance of an organization, institution and or company.  One of the key roles of the

stakeholder is to invest in their stake in a business, whether it is monetary or through corporate

social responsibility. The strategies of stakeholders may not be for their own interest for financial

gain and can be the commitment of strengthening relationships inside and outside of a business

(Marquis, N/A). How to incorporate stakeholders in a company’s business practices is through

essential communication.   Over the years, the shift of responsibility has grown, in the sense that

stakeholder engagement may enhance the sustainability and profitability of an organization (B-

Analytics, N/A). Stakeholder engagement is the process which an organization, company and or

institution involves people who may be affected by certain policies or can encourage the

development of its decisions (Morris et al., 2012). Organization’s policies or a stakeholder’s

influence may be within the organization or throughout the community or even be affected in the

long term. For example, corporations such as Starbucks use the media as one of its tactics to

10

reach out to its stakeholders, i.e. customers. Starbucks utilizes the Internet to gather information

from its customers, which is also a type of stakeholder (Morris et al., 2012). “My Starbucks

Idea” is a networking strategy that engages customers, by encouraging them to submit their

opinions for better, innovative product ideas.

Stakeholder engagement has been identified as key to the overall function and efficiency

for business success (Australian government Document, 2008). The goal of engaging

stakeholders in business communications is to have relationships that create sustainable- high

performance organizations, not solely economically and financially, but socially and

environmentally as well.  Organizations communicate with their stakeholders to discover what

social and environmental issues are significant in relation to their performance, to improve

business strategies (Morris et al., 2012). The process of engagement within stakeholder’s

management is likely to increase accountability, strengthening trust and corporate credibility.

That is why it is vital not to limit the participation or engagement of stakeholders in any decision

(Sloan, 2009). However, different organizations give different reasons why stakeholder

engagement is important.  There is no common understanding of what stakeholder engagement

means or of the characteristics of effective engagement (State Government of Victoria, 2011).

This is usually due to the organizations purpose, or stakeholder’s interest in achieving high ends.

When implementing engagement practices one must remember it requires time, resources

and knowledge (B-analytics, N/A). The engagement between a stakeholder and a company is

designed according to the knowledge and interest of its participants within the structure of the

organizations goals and ambitions.  It is also important that there is a focus on short and long

term goals, to determine logistics for the engagement and set specific rules (Morris et al., 2012).

There are several methods and practices that organizations implement when engaging with

stakeholders.  Essentially, there is no ‘one size fits all’ model for stakeholder engagement (State

Government of Victoria, 2011).  There may be a positive outcome or negative outcome within

the process of engagement. To ensure that the engagement process flows well, one must have a

thoughtful action plan. Basic principles of appropriate engagement requires asking the ‘what’,

‘who’ and ‘how’ questions to determine productive ways to engage their stakeholders (State

Government of Victoria, 2011). To reach negative results of engaging is usually because of

poorly thought through engagement practices. Basically, a non-thought out plan constructs

11

mistrust, wastes stakeholder’s time and leads to reluctance to participate in future consultations

in the long-term process of any organization or event (State Government of Victoria, 2011).

A basic, broad outline of designing an action plan with stakeholder engagement is by

firstly prioritizing stakeholders, ensuring to target the key stakeholders in relation to the interest.

Secondly to seek out third party organizations with additional resources that can serve as an

intermediary stakeholder and enhance capacity (B-analytics, N/A). A more direct approach in

implementing an engagement plan is through implementing the following four steps that have

been illustrated by State Government of Victoria. Step one focus’s on what the purpose is. One

should identify why engagement is important for the organization’s policy, project or service.

Step two pertains to who should be engaged.  A list should be created of relevant stakeholders,

categorizing each stakeholder under their important significance to the project.  Step three relates

to how to engage these stakeholders; choosing a suitable method of engagement by planning

engagement logistics (timing, resourcing and responsibilities) Step four is evaluating the

engagement process whereby one were to develop performance measures to assess each stage of

the engagement process  (State Government of Victoria, 2011).

In relation to defining, explaining the benefits and importance of the engagement process

relates to step three on how to engage.  The ‘framing’ source mentioned earlier in the report

illustrated that there are many ways to engage with stakeholders. Moreover, there is a basic

outline of five engagement levels (inform, consult, involve, collaborate and empower) (State

Government of Victoria, 2011). ‘Inform’ involves performing a balanced objective as well as

understanding and obtaining accurate information to assist stakeholders to understand the

problems, alternatives and or opportunities. Distributing material can impact stakeholders, build

trust, and demonstrate a willingness to engage (B-Analytics, N/A). By material, this usually

means through websites, newsletters and fact sheets (State Government of Victoria, 2011).

Consulting strategy consists of obtaining criticism from stakeholders on analysis and or

outcomes. This is usually demonstrated through focus groups, surveys and public meetings (State

Government of Victoria, 2011).  Involvement approach to engagement contains working directly

amongst stakeholders, in which stakeholders play a more important role in evaluations (B-

Analytics, N/A).  Tools that are utilized for appropriate engagement in the involvement approach

entail interviews, research, leadership summit and workshops (State Government of Victoria,

2011) ensuring that their concerns and needs are understood to establish healthy relations.  The

12

collaborative approach, similar to the involvement strategy consists of partnering with the

stakeholders as well as identifying and developing alternatives (B-Analytics, N/A). Experimental

projects facilitate consensus-building forums for decision-making. Lastly, empowerment level of

engagement is when stakeholders are given a specific responsibility. There is a sense of final

decision-making solely based by the stakeholder (State Government of Victoria, 2011). Usually

facilitation of direct dialogue between stakeholders and the government is conducted, which

involves joint planning (State Government of Victoria, 2011).

When Companies, organizations and or institutions decide to incorporate engagement

practices it is because they seek to enhance the overall development and reputation of their

business. There are many benefits when engaging with stakeholders. The central, important

benefit in engaging with stakeholders includes building trust. Stakeholder engagement provides

the understanding to gain acceptance, lead to performance, securing current and future corporate

growth (Sloan, 2009).  Another benefit from engagement with stakeholders is risk management.

When working with stakeholders, they can help prevent risks, and provide solutions that may

entail within the operations in the environment of the organizations activities (B-Analytics, N/A).

Efficient communication with stakeholders can improve brand enhancements through its

reputation by involving customer’s input. Lastly, thought-out engagement practices will benefit

the organization by improving productivity, creating partnerships, creating innovative strategic

opportunities and overall an increase in investment (B-Analytics, N/A).  

Stakeholder Management

“Selling” ones project to stakeholders does not end after procuring their interest.

Maintaining their interest requires one to continue the sell, and is a part of managing

13

relationships with stakeholders. Proper management allows a mutually beneficial relationship to

flourish, where the needs of all parties, not just ones own, are met (Rasche & Esser, 2006).

Methods of stakeholder management is variably dependent on how one has chosen to frame and

prioritize their stakeholders.

If mapping identifies who stakeholders are and what do they what, stakeholder

management is the next step - what do we do about it. Because there are many ways in which a

person or organization may have a stake, we must adjust our management tactics accordingly.

We can end up with a spectrum of stakeholders: dominant, dormant, dependent, demanding,

dangerous (Fassin, 2012). As such, previous steps of Identifying, Mapping and Prioritizing is

crucial in allocating ones time and attention. Since it is inefficient, and at times simply

impossible, to give equal amounts attention to every stakeholder, managing one's time among

each stakeholders is a crucial skill in management. As seen in Mapping, those who have more

power, influence, and legitimacy will often require more urgent attention. Similarly, stakeholders

who have invested a higher stake in a project are managed differently from those with equal

influence but have lower interest. The latter will require just as much attention as the former to

maintain or strengthen their weak stake. And yet, it is important that the needs of all invested

stakeholders be met regardless of profile (Rasche & Esser, 2006). This sometimes can be

difficult especially between non-profit organizations where often one organization has multiple

objectives and can easily conflict with other organization objectives (Ahmed, 2012). Stakeholder

management strives to negotiate and to find compromise for this conflicts as much as is in our

capacity (Fassin, 2012).

It should be noted that the investment one puts into a stakeholder ultimately goes back to

one's aims and goals. Knowing how to allocate our attention towards certain stakeholders that

best reflect our mission ensures that our project is effectively producing the impact and change

we set out to do. This means that the larger 'powerful' organizations don't necessarily take

precedent by default. For example, our project is student based and student focused, so it was

important for us first and foremost, to foster a good working relationship with Ryerson

University itself. Of those involved were the Arts & Contemporary Studies Department &

President Sheldon Levy. In our particular situation, todotSIFF required two tiers of stakeholders;

long term and short term stakeholders. Short term stakeholders were those involved with this

year's theme of food waste. While it was important to cultivate these relationships, long term

14

stakeholders are of notable importance, particularly because our ultimate goal is to have this

event as returning event with longevity. This requires us to focus special attention to those

relationships that will allow this event to succeed in the future.

A large portion of Stakeholder management is Risk Management. By identifying our

stakeholders we can project how they will respond and therefore how we should react. More

importantly, by effectively planning and projecting we can identify risks before they happen and

avoid errors. Fundamentally, it is important to cultivate a relationship of awareness and

understanding with one's stakeholder before commitment (Rasche & Esser, 2006). What is

critical while fostering relationships is defining a stakeholders' expectations; what do they expect

from us and what do they expect from their involvement? This ensures that both parties are clear

on what one expects from another and have mutual goals that are feasibly gained out of the

project. Can both parties ensure executing their deliverables to guarantee success? Starting off on

a strong foot makes for easier management down the road and ensures healthy long term

investment in the project. Misunderstandings and/or lack of cohesive goals can sometimes be

inevitable. If not properly addressed it can become very time consuming and harmful to your

relationship with your stakeholder. In such cases a carefully planned risk response must be

adapted and carefully followed through if one is to maintain a positive working relationship. A

large part of stakeholder management in a new venture is to establish and 'prove' credibility and

legitimacy (Ahmed, 2012). This means retaining responsibility for all of our accounts and

actions, and demonstrating consistency and effectiveness in execution.

The following are important tasks and skills that are deemed necessary in maintaining positive

stakeholder relationships and effective in avoiding mismanagement:

I. Communication & Transparency

It is important among all stakeholders to have feedback and flow of information.

Consistent communication will help stakeholders feel engaged in the project. It is important to

keep in mind that different levels of communication vary by stakeholder engagement (Fassin,

2012). Push communication stakeholders would not need weekly telephone or in-person

meetings. Alternatively, participation and partnership engagement would require a more frequent

contact than just a monthly email update, it is recommended to pursue more than one method of

15

communication for stakeholders of importance. Good communication means the flow of

information both ways. Not only do we need to be available and accessible for stakeholder

questions and concerns, but stakeholders can provide critical and constructive input that should

not be easily dismissed. In all stakeholder management practices, transparency is the best policy.

By doing so you show to your stakeholders that you are a dependable partner with whom a

trusting relationship can be built (Rasche & Esser, 2006). Furthermore transparency helps avoid

confusion and diversion from addressing real issues that may prevent real progress.

II. Planning

As stated before, planning allows management to identify and anticipate issues before they arise.

Moreover, proper planning allows effective coordination and clearer delegation within one's

team as well as among stakeholders. Often in the non-profit sector, the product or end goal is

usually intangible (Ahmed, 2012). Planning provides a tangible product that not only keeps the

progress of the project timely but ensures that developments and growth remain goal oriented.

Planning also necessarily entails that all parties of interests have ethically agreed to fulfill their

respective responsibilities, tasks and deliverables (Rasche & Esser, 2006). There are times where

things do not go according to the original plan - contingency planning allows to the project and

its components - stakeholders - to adapt cohesively to the changes.

III. Organized Referable Data

Information of importance should be reserved on records and receive regular updates. In other

words, information such as plans, documents and agreements that are related to the

stakeholder(s) in question should be accessible for later reference by all parties. The function of

these reference points is to ensure accountability by all parties. The impact of stakeholder

contribution can heavily effect the outcome of a project, it is important to emphasize the

“reciprocal nature of responsibility” of such working relationships (Fassin, 2012). This is

particularly important for long term stakeholders where some projects may have lengthy time

spans and higher risk of stakeholder conflicts and confusion as projects and tasks evolve. In this

way information management can be just as important as time management.

IV Problem Solving & Flexibility

16

Not all stakeholders will be entirely cooperative and supportive. Problems will arise and we must

learn how to address them diplomatically as well as effectively. Furthermore we cannot expect a

lifetime of complacent dedication and loyalty - “Stakeholders have a right to defend they rights

and legitimate expectations” (Fassin, 2012). Listen to your stakeholders needs and review your

capacity to meet them. What can you do to ensure that the relationship remains reciprocal and

mutually beneficial?

Yves Fassin (2012) stresses the importance of cultivating a stakeholder relationship that

is consistent and reciprocal. This helps secure long term growth and success. We personally tried

reinforcing relations by maintaining contacting and consistant liaisons and working with

individuals or specific teams rather than a vague and general organization contacts. This which

helped streamline communication and also helped keep stakeholder relationships personable,

which engenders personal investment and active involvement in our project. It shows that we

value their involvement and their importance in helping make our project a success.

Goals to Ensure Continual Success in the Future

The research methods of approaching, engaging, and ensuring reciprocity and satisfaction

were successful.  However, the group did take note of different ways to potentially enhance the

Stakeholder Management aspect of the Social Impact Film Forum. One aspect that made

approaching stakeholders difficult was that there was no master list of who had previously been

contacted by other groups for any reason. This increased the chance of the same person being

contacted more than once for different reasons, which is not an efficient use of time and could

confuse the stakeholder. Another aspect of managing stakeholders that would benefit future

projects is to distinguish between short-term/relevant stakeholders and long-term stakeholders.

The Social Impact Film Forum is hopefully going to be an annual event, so it is important to

engage stakeholders who can help us in the future. However, considering the amount of time and

subject matter, the group had to focus more on our immediate and urgent stakeholders to our

theme. Future social impact events should take into consideration both the short-term and long-

term stakeholders. One more factor that will benefit future stakeholder management groups

17

would be to include certain stakeholders in the decision process of choice of the venue, funding

and structure, because stakeholders relevant to the forum have their own expertise in subjects

that could benefit the overall project. Given the amount of time, and the late choice of venue, we

could not do this to the extent we wished, but it is something to keep in mind for the future.

18

References

1. Ahmed, S. (2012). Effective non-profit management: Context, concepts, and competencies. Boca Raton, Fla: CRC.

2. B-Analytics. (N/A). GIIRS emerging market assessment resource guide: Stakeholder engagement. (). B-Lab.

3. Bourne, L.,Walker, D. (2005) Visualising and mapping stakeholder influence. Management. Decision, 43, pp.649 – 660. doi: 10.1108/00251740510597680

4. Fassin, Y. (2012). Stakeholder management, reciprocity and stakeholder responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(1), 83-96. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1381-8

5. Gorp, V. D., & Goot, J. M. (2012). Sustainable food and agriculture: Stakeholder’s frames. Communication, Culture & Critique, 5, 127-148. doi: 10.1111/j.1753- 9137.2012.01135.x

6. Karakowsky, L., Carroll, A. B., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2005). Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management.

7. Live below the line. (n/a). Retrieved from https://www.livebelowtheline.com/ca/the_cause

8. Morris, J., Baddache, F., Nelson, J., Barenblat A., & Kannabhiran, S. (2012). Back to basics: How to make stakeholder enagement meaningful for your. ().

9. Newcombe, R. (2010) From client to project stakeholders: a stakeholder mapping approach. Construction Management and Economics, 21, pp. 841-848. doi:10.1080/0144619032000072137

10. Rasche, A., & Esser, D. (2006). From Stakeholder Management To Stakeholder Accountability. Journal of Business Ethics, 65(3), 251-267. Retrieved March 29, 2015.

11. Scoones, I. (2007). Sustainability. Development in Practice, 17 (4/5), 589-596. doi: 101080/09614520701469609

12. Second Harvest. (n/a). Retrieved from https://www.secondharvest.ca/our-history

13. Sloan, P. (2009). Redefining stakeholder engagement: From control to collaboration.36, 25.

14. State Government of Victoria. (2011). Stakeholder Engagement framework. Australia, Melbourne:

15. The Business Meaning of Social Responsibility of Stakeholders. (n/a). Retrieved from:http://smallbusiness.chron.com/business-meaning-social-responsibility-stakeholders-25516.html

19