Stakeholder mapping
Skill stanislavnianko/product-discovery-claude-skills/plugins/discovery-phase/skills/stakeholder-mapping
Curated Claude skill pack for structured product discovery
npx -y skills add stanislavnianko/product-discovery-claude-skills --skill stakeholder-mappingAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
[discovery-phase pack · discovery] Maps client-side AND agency-side stakeholders with their stakes, success metrics, concerns, decision rights, and conflicts. Two-tier map. Surfaces deal-breakers in week 1, not week 4. Produces stakeholder-map.md. Reads discovery-context.md.
SKILL.md
4.7 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Stakeholder Mapping
Part of the discovery-phase skill pack ·
discoverygroup · readsdiscovery-context.md(runprofile-builderfirst if missing).
Two-tier map for outsourcing reality: client stakeholders + agency stakeholders. The agency tier is the one most often forgotten, and it's where engagement-killers (sales conflict, delivery capacity, partner dependencies) live.
Step 1 — Read discovery context
Read discovery-context.md (sections 1. Client → Decision-makers, 3. Engagement → Runner role) and problem-canvas.md if it exists (anchors stakeholders against the actual problem).
If discovery-context.md is missing, ask the BA inline: "(a) name 1–3 client decision-makers + role; (b) engagement mode (pre-sale / paid discovery / delivery / staff aug)?" — tag any unverified stakeholder field as [ASSUMED]. Never block; recommend profile-builder for high-stakes work.
Step 2 — List client-side stakeholders
Identify 3-6 people on the client side. Cover these roles (combine if one person fills multiple):
- Decision-maker — whose approval ships this
- Budget owner — who pays
- Delivery owner (client side) — who'll integrate the result into their org
- Impacted teams — whose work is touched (CS, sales, ops, security, legal)
- Domain experts — compliance, security, accessibility — needed for sign-off
- A sceptic — the person most likely to block. Always include. If everyone is supportive, the map is incomplete.
Step 3 — List agency-side stakeholders
Often skipped. Typical roles:
- Engagement lead / account manager — owns the client relationship
- Delivery owner (agency side) — would lead build if engagement converts
- Discipline leads — engineering, design, QA — capacity gates
- Sales / partnerships — if pre-sale, has commercial pressure
- Domain SME — if the domain (healthcare, finance) requires specific expertise
- Finance / ops — for fixed-fee viability
Step 4 — Per-stakeholder fields
For each stakeholder (both tiers):
| Field | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Name + role + tier (client/agency) | |
| Their stake | What they win/lose from the outcome |
| Their success metric | How they personally know this is worth it |
| Their concerns | In their own words, ideally a quote |
| Input needed (and when) | Which discovery phase needs them |
| Decision rights | Approve / veto / advise / inform |
Step 5 — Surface conflicts
After both tiers are filled, scan the success-metric column. Conflicts often look like:
- Client sales wants "fast time-to-value" vs client security wants "SSO integration first"
- Agency sales wants "convert to delivery" vs agency engineering wants "scope this down or we'll miss deadlines"
- Client decision-maker wants "build it" vs client end-user manager wants "fix the workflow first"
Name conflicts on the map. Do not try to resolve them here. Resolution happens during proposal/SoW or in stakeholder workshops.
Step 6 — 15-minute async check-ins
Recommend (or send, if BA has the access) a 3-bullet async message to each high-stakes stakeholder:
- The problem-canvas one-liner.
- "Here's what I think your success criterion is — right?"
- "Anything you'd kill this engagement over? Say it now, not in 4 weeks."
Capture responses in the map.
Step 7 — Set review cadence
Pick one based on engagement timeline:
- Pre-sale sprint (≤2 wks): no recurring review, ad-hoc sync per major artifact
- Discovery sprint (3-4 wks): weekly async update, doc-based
- Delivery phase: bi-weekly stakeholder readout
- Staff aug: mirror client's existing rituals
Output
./discovery/stakeholder-map.md per ./template.md.
Append to _log.md: [stakeholder-mapping | YYYY-MM-DD] client_tier: <N>; agency_tier: <N>; conflicts: <N>; cadence: <cadence>.
Anti-patterns
- Skipping the agency tier. It's where the most fixable conflicts hide.
- No sceptic on the map. Find one. If you really can't, your discovery is happening inside an echo chamber.
- "We'll loop them in later." Stakeholders who learn about a project on week 4 veto it on week 4. Cheaper to absorb the veto on week 1.
- Static map. Update after major artifacts (insights, scope, prototype). Especially before any deliverable skill runs.