Stakeholder Engagement in Systems Engineering

𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭: 𝐌𝐞𝐞𝐭 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐀𝐫𝐞 Enterprise Architecture abhors a vacuum—it thrives on stakeholder engagement. Often, architects jump into collaboration without first assessing one critical factor: • 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐝𝐨 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞, 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐄𝐀? Before strategy, frameworks, or roadmaps, 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬, 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 and 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬. This will shape how you approach, gain buy-in, and drive outcomes. Here are 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐬 for aligning EA with stakeholders: 𝟏 | 𝐆𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐞 𝐄𝐀 𝐀𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐁𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 EA means different things to people, how can you align? Approach: * 𝐀𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐥𝐞𝐝𝐠𝐞. What do leaders think EA does? What experiences shape their view? * 𝐏𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐄𝐀 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞. If a product saw EA as 'overhead,’ shift the conversation to ‘rapid decision-making.’ * 𝐓𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐨𝐫 𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐚𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞. Finance, operations, and IT leaders have different concerns. Meet them on their terms. 👉 𝐎𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞: When you shape EA’s role based on their reality, it becomes relevant, not theoretical. 𝟐 | 𝐀𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐄𝐀 𝐭𝐨 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 EA isn’t all architecture, it’s solving business problems. Approach: * 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐊𝐏𝐈𝐬. Growth? Efficiency? Risk? Align EA contributions to what leadership interests. * 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐭. Show architecture driving go-to-market, savings, or agility—over compliance. * 𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐞/𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐝𝐛𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐤𝐬. If EA was a bottleneck, demonstrate accelerated decision-making instead. 👉 𝐎𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞: EA is a strategic enabler, not afterthought. 𝟑 | 𝐁𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐄𝐀 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 EA works best in collaboration, not isolation. Approach: * 𝐄𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬. Decision-making improves when EA is a proactive presence. * 𝐒𝐡𝐢𝐟𝐭 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 ‘𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐄𝐀’ 𝐭𝐨 ‘𝐜𝐨-𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬.’ Stakeholders engage when architecture is a tool for their success. * 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐨𝐧𝐞-𝐨𝐟𝐟. EA isn’t a pitch—it’s a dialog evolving with business. 👉 𝐎𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞: EA shaping decisions early rather than reacting later. 𝐓𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠. Before pushing frameworks or models, assess 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐄𝐀 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐚𝐲—and how to reshape that narrative to unlock its full potential. How do align EA stakeholders? Let’s discuss.👇 --- ➕ 𝐅𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰 Kevin Donovan 🔔    👍 Like | ♻️ Repost | 💬 Comment    🚀 𝐉𝐨𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬’ 𝐇𝐮𝐛 👉 https://lnkd.in/dgmQqfu2

🎄 Day 14 of the #AdventOfOR 2025! The single biggest mistake in optimization projects? Engaging stakeholders once. Most teams nail the "Early" part (kickoff, problem framing, initial requirements). But then they disappear into complex code. Weeks later, they return with the perfect solution... but trust has eroded. Engagement isn't a single event. It's a continuous cadence: Early AND Often. Why is this continuous interaction essential? 🤝 Maintains trust: Consistent updates prevent the project from becoming a black box. 🎯 Ensures relevance: Requirements shift; regular check-ins keep your model aligned with business reality (just like we got new requirements on Day 12!). 🪡 Drives adoption: Stakeholders own the solution when they help build it. The secret to making it work is lowering the cost of understanding the model's progress. But you don't need to do heavy presentations; do easy, frequent demos with tools that help: 🔹 GAMS MIRO for interactive apps stakeholders can explore 🔹 Streamlit or Taipy for quick Python dashboards 🔹 Nextmv for comparing runs and sharing scenarios When showing progress becomes easy, you'll do it more often. When you do it more often, trust compounds. 🫵 Your turn: What's the single biggest piece of friction that currently stops you from sharing model progress (work-in-progress, not final results) with your stakeholders more often? (e.g., "It takes too long to clean the output," "We lack visualization tools," "I only share final numbers.")

How do we approach stakeholders - and how do we generate meaninful value for them? Over the last years, working across multiple Horizon Europe projects (e.g. Soil Health Benchmarks, LILAS4SOILS, Project CAFAMORE, TRAILS4SOIL), I’ve spent a lot of time reflecting on how we design and run stakeholder engagement. Across projects and organisations alike, I keep encountering a familiar pattern. We design engagement frameworks. We create checklists. We define participation moments. And still, something often doesn’t quite land. Not because stakeholders are unwilling to engage — but because we often misread or interpret from our perspective what we’re actually hearing. And foremost, projects engage motivated by checklists. Lately, I’ve been exploring this challenge through the lens of epistemic justice (very much as a learner) - not as a theory to apply, but as a practical question: How do we recognise, work with, and value or enable different ways of knowing in stakeholder (needs, expectations, wishes, etc.)? One of the risks, when we don’t, is what is often described as epistemic injustice. The image below captures this quite simply: someone shares experience A, but what gets heard - and acted upon - is B. Not out of bad intent, but because interpretation is guided by existing knowledge structures and decision-making power. For example: in a workshop on regenerative agriculture, a farmer is asked to reflect on “barriers to adoption” using predefined indicators. When he explains that the real challenge is yield volatility, financial risk, and the inability to absorb a bad season, this is translated into labels like “risk aversion” or “lack of incentives”. The farmer is heard - but his framing is reshaped to fit project categories, rather than allowing those categories to adapt. What I’m learning is that this isn’t about adding more empathy workshops or slowing projects down. It’s about epistemic fluency: integrating different kinds of knowledge, coordinating different ways of knowing, and designing engagement processes that adapt with stakeholders, not just to them. In my role advising the Mission Soil Cluster on Stakeholder Engagement and Communication, working with 55+ projects,  I want to explore this more deliberately over the coming year - and I’d genuinely welcome critique or pushback from those who’ve thought about this far longer than I have. Alexandra Robinson Dave Snowden Adrian Wagner Anne Caspari Joshua Stehr How do you see the balance between structured project delivery and epistemic justice e.g. in EU-funded projects that aim to engage stakeholders around diverse understandings of challenges and objectives (e.g. soil health across different regions)?

How I turned chaos into collaboration. All by asking the right questions. Stakeholder engagement isn’t easy. I once worked with a stakeholder who didn’t trust her team. She believed control was the only way to get results. Her working style caused chaos: → She would agree one day. → And, change her mind the next. The team was frustrated. → Deadlines were slipping. → Team morale was dropping. And I needed to fix this issue. Here’s how I shifted her mindset and got her to trust the process: 1. I asked, “What’s your biggest worry?” → I genuinely listened to her concerns. → I realized her constant changes came from fear of failure. 2. I asked, "How can we stick to a plan?" → I shared a roadmap with defined milestones and explained the impact of last-minute changes. → She agreed to revisit decisions only during weekly reviews. 3. I asked, " Can you take ownership here?". → I assigned her specific deliverables to oversee. → Sharing regular updates reduced her doubts. 4. I asked, "What type of data will build your trust?" → Every week, I showed progress with data. → She saw the team could deliver. The result? → No more frantic emails. → No last-minute changes. → She trusted the team and the plan. Takeaways: 1. Listen to your stakeholders’ concerns. 2. Set clear boundaries. 3. Give ownership so they can drive without control. 4. Build you trust by consistently supporting them. In just three weeks, I turned chaos into collaboration. This wasn’t just a win for the project it transformed how we worked together.   So, I always say, you don’t manage stakeholders; you engage them. Ask questions → Set boundaries → Build trust. PS: What’s your story of turning a difficult stakeholders around?

Why 73% of Projects Fail and How I Stopped Losing Stakeholder Support Let me tell you a quick story. Years ago, I was leading an ops overhaul that was supposed to streamline internal reporting. Everything looked good on paper, timelines, budget, resource allocation. I checked every box… Except one: I didn’t fully engage the stakeholders who would actually use the system every day. 🚨Big mistake. Within 3 weeks of launch, adoption lagged, teams worked around it, and leadership questioned the ROI. That’s when it hit me—involvement doesn’t equal alignment. Just because stakeholders are informed doesn’t mean they’re invested. So I changed my approach. Here’s what I did: • Identified key influencers across departments, not just top execs, but daily users and frontline managers. • Used long-form discovery sessions to understand their actual pain points (not just the ones listed on a dashboard). • Built a feedback loop into every sprint cycle. Small changes. Real-time validation. • Created internal linkages between project goals and departmental KPIs (this one’s huge). The result? 🎯 41% faster implementation. ✅ 3X higher adoption in the first 30 days. 💬 Consistent stakeholder engagement from kickoff to post-launch. Why does this matter for you? If you’re a project manager, ops lead, or department head, especially in finance, tech, or healthcare, here’s your reality: 📌 You’re juggling timelines, compliance, and team bandwidth. 📌 You’re expected to “drive transformation” and still “not disrupt the day-to-day.” 📌 You’re measured by results but those results start with buy-in. So ask yourself: Are you just updating stakeholders or are you empowering them to shape outcomes? That’s the difference between a delivered project and a sustained solution. If you’re tired of rework, delays, or lukewarm adoption, start by rethinking how you engage your stakeholders. Involve early. Involve meaningfully. Involve often. ✅ Start with a 30-minute alignment session before you build your next project charter. ✅ Don’t just collect feedback—co-create the solution with the people who live it. You’ll thank yourself later. Let’s stop managing projects and start leading with people who matter. #ProjectManagement #StakeholderEngagement #LeadershipInAction

Projects don’t fail because of tools. They fail because of relationships. Stakeholder mapping isn’t bureaucracy — it’s how you build trust before you need it. It’s how you identify the voices who can accelerate progress… and the ones who can quietly stall it. Too often, teams treat stakeholders as obstacles — people to manage, not engage. But here’s the truth: if you don’t bring them in early, they’ll slow you down later. I use my Audit–Align–Act approach for every complex initiative 👇 1️⃣ Audit – See the full landscape Identify everyone touched by the work — directly or indirectly. Decision-makers, downstream users, quiet influencers. Understand the landscape early so you can anticipate tension and find allies. Stakeholders aren’t roadblocks. They’re early warning signals and success partners — if you know how to engage them. 2️⃣ Align – Understand influence, interest, and motivation Not every stakeholder carries the same weight. Audit for interest (who cares) and influence (who decides). Then go deeper: ↳ What’s their background? ↳ What’s their currency — recognition, data, control, speed? When you understand what drives people, you can advocate with them, not around them. 3️⃣ Act – Plan how you’ll engage This is where trust turns into strategy. Plan engagement based on what you’ve learned about each stakeholder: ↳ Who needs visibility and consistent updates? ↳ Who prefers a one-on-one conversation? ↳ Who values brief summaries versus detailed decks? ↳ Who can be a bridge to other groups? And yes — this also means making time for the informal moments. ↳ The hallway check-ins, coffee chats, or casual lunches where people let their guard down and share what’s really on their mind. ↳ Those touchpoints often reveal more than formal meetings ever will. ↳ Because influence is built one genuine interaction at a time. Stakeholder mapping isn’t a kickoff exercise. It’s a living process that strengthens alignment, relationships, and culture. If you’re not mapping your stakeholders, you’re leaving your success to chance. How do you ensure all stakeholders are seen and heard in your projects? ♻️ Repost to share with your network. ➕ Follow Janet Kim for more stories on leadership and career transformation. ~~~~~~ 📩 Want more strategies like this? Subscribe to Level Up Weekly - link in the Featured section. ~~~~~~ I leverage 19 years in Stanford tech to help emerging leaders think strategically, build influence, and execute with confidence, so you’re seen, heard and valued.

Poor planning or bad execution isn't always why projects fail or derail isn’t. Sometimes, the real culprit is inadequate stakeholder involvement. When stakeholders are disengaged, slow to respond, or absent from critical conversations, the project starts to lose its grip on reality. The project manager is then left in an impossible situation often expected to deliver strategic results without the strategic alignment to back it up. You start seeing the signs: →Delayed feedback →Unclear or shifting requirements →Last-minute interventions that disrupt months of work And when the project doesn’t land as expected, all eyes turn to the project manager. But here’s the truth most people won’t say out loud: No matter how skilled or experienced you are as a PM, you cannot carry the weight of a disengaged stakeholder on your back. 📌 You may be able to control the process, the communication, the rhythm but you can’t control people’s priorities, their availability, or their level of interest. And yet, when things go wrong, the burden falls on you and this is where it gets deeper. But it doesn’t have to be this way. Remember the best project managers aren’t just taskmasters, they’re strategic connectors. 📍They map out who matters early. 📍They tailor how they engage each voice. 📍They stay relentlessly proactive about keeping people in the loop even when it feels one-sided. 📍They document the silence. 📍They escalate when necessary. 📍They build trust with those who do show up. And when they do this consistently: ✅ Their projects land closer to business needs ✅ Their teams are protected from unnecessary chaos ✅ They earn a reputation for driving real, measurable impact That’s where the career shift happens because because organizations take notice. The PM who understands stakeholder dynamics isn’t just seen as a doer, they’re seen as someone who understands the business. And that’s the difference between managing tasks and leading outcomes. So if you’re a project manager navigating low stakeholder engagement, know this: It’s not a reflection of your worth or ability. But how you respond? That’s where your power lies. Stakeholder involvement isn’t always within your control but managing its impact is. And when you master that, you’re not just saving projects but shaping strategy, building credibility, and making your mark where it matters most. Think about one project where stakeholder disengagement nearly cost you success. What would you do differently now with the experience you have today? Follow 👉 Benjamina Mbah Acha for insights that help you plan, execute, and deliver projects with confidence.

As a solutions consultant, I'm increasingly convinced that people are just as important in my work as the systems and processes I build 👇🏼 The systems and processes I implement for my partners have to be bolstered by people who have been prepared for them... otherwise I'll just be leaving a plethora of technical corpses scattered around their business. No one likes dead systems that work well in theory and in technicality, but that in the reality of the day-to-day are left → unvalued → unused → unwanted But avoiding that scenario takes work, and more then ever I'm learning that it takes [people work]. Adoption is not just about screen recordings and guides. I might design the perfect automated process, but real people still have to follow the SOP at the starting and ending points of that process. 📌 The point is, unless people are prepared and equipped, systems and processes will fail. There’s a sort of circular relationship between systems and processes catalyzing people, and people catalyzing systems and processes: Both need to be there. The question then is, how can consultants and agencies prepare their partners for the solutions they implement? ↳ I think it comes down to instilling a good understanding of the need for your solution, the value of it, and then working to monitor, incentivize, and enforce adoption. ↳ And this "people work" ideally extends beyond just your end-of-the-line stakeholder and instead reaches and engages each and every person that will actually touch or be affected by that system or process. That won't always be possible, and for certain solutions it might not be necessary. But by and large, I think this is a reasonable and helpful goal for me with each of my partners. There's so many ways to do this! Interviews, surveys, polls, presentations, flowcharts, frequent reiterations of the need and value, automated monitoring, etc. How do YOU prepare people for the systems and processes you implement? #consulting #operations #nocode #software #adoption

A perfect backlog doesn’t guarantee a successful deployment. Stakeholder misalignment is a hidden blocker in Agile delivery. Even with Jira dashboards, daily standups, and sprint velocity reports, projects stall when the right people aren’t looped in. Here’s what’s been effective in software deployment environments: • Involve business users in sprint demos Not just product owners. Real end users catch gaps early. • Use Confluence to document decisions Keeps knowledge centralized and reduces repeat questions at go-live. • Tag stakeholders directly in Jira No more “I didn’t know”, visibility drives accountability. • Make retrospectives actionable Capture not just what went wrong, but how to engage better next sprint. Stakeholder management isn’t a soft skill add-on. It’s a technical enabler when embedded into tools and process. In IT, adoption doesn’t come from code. It comes from collaboration. What’s your system for stakeholder alignment?

🧩 Who Actually Buys Pathology AI? 📌 Aligning with the Stakeholders Who Control Adoption 💡 Adoption isn’t just about model performance—it’s about stakeholder alignment. The buyer isn’t always the end user—and their priorities differ. 🚫 The person writing the check may never touch the tool. Pathologists may evaluate accuracy. Lab managers care about throughput. Hospital administrators scrutinize costs and liability. Pharmaceutical collaborators need trial-readiness, biomarker validation, and reproducibility. These priorities can sometimes pull in different directions—but when aligned, they create a powerful case for adoption. Understanding how these stakeholders influence each other—such as lab managers reporting to hospital leadership—helps you design for adoption, not just utility. Even technically strong tools stall when they only serve one group. Misalignment between stakeholders—like enthusiastic users and skeptical administrators—can break momentum. It’s easy to focus only on the end user—but real adoption depends on satisfying multiple decision-makers. Real adoption means aligning value across: 🩺 The End-User (Pathologist): trust, transparency, and improved workflow 🧪 The Operator (Lab Manager): efficiency, throughput, and integration 🏥 The Decision-Maker (Hospital Admin/Procurement): ROI, risk mitigation, and compliance 💊 The Strategic Partner (Pharma/Biotech): trial acceleration, patient stratification, and regulatory alignment Example: Imagine a tool designed for tumor quantification that delivers consistent results in testing—but struggles to gain traction because it doesn’t integrate with LIS (Laboratory Information System) platforms or support the throughput benchmarks lab managers require. With earlier engagement or user-centered design, this misalignment might have been prevented. By contrast, tools that engaged stakeholders early—like AI models for quality control—often gain traction by aligning value across clinical, operational, and financial axes. Misaligning your value proposition could stall even the most impressive tools. So what? Failing to align with stakeholders doesn’t just delay adoption—it risks wasted pilots, internal resistance, and budget rejection. AI adoption isn’t just a product problem—it’s a stakeholder alignment problem. Know who you’re building for and who you’re selling to. Map out each stakeholder’s goals early—then tailor your pitch, pilot, and metrics to speak to what matters most to them. 💬 Which stakeholder do you find hardest to align with—and why? #pathologyAI #AIadoption #digitalpathology #clinicalAI #healthtech #medtechsales #stakeholders #computationalpathology — Subscribe to 𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘝𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘐𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴 — weekly briefings on making vision AI work in the real world → Click "View my newsletter" under my name above