Identifying and Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations

Identifying and Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public
Relations -
A Guide for Students and Practitioners
Marianne Eisenmann, MBA
PR/Communications Practitioner (Retired)
John Gilfeather
President, John Gilfeather & Associates
Abstract
Stakeholder management is fundamental to the practice of public relations. This
paper builds on the seminal 2006 paper by Professor Brad Rawlins, Prioritizing
Stakeholders for Public Relations. It provides practitioners’ perspectives on defining
stakeholders in corporate and non-profit settings, in addition to applying the
prioritization models presented in Professor Rawlins’ paper to a case study.
Table of Contents
Introduction ..............................................................................................................................2
Part One – Managing Stakeholders and Publics............................................................3
An edited version of Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations, Brad L. Rawlins
2006
Part Two – Guide to Implementing Stakeholder Prioritization Models ……...…17
Who Are Stakeholders ..................................................................................................................17
Corporate Stakeholders..............................................................................................................................17
Not-for-Profit Stakeholders......................................................................................................................25
Applying the Models for Stakeholder Identification and Prioritization......................29
Case Study ........................................................................................................................................................29
Evaluation of Stakeholders based on the Case Study....................................................................31
Linkage Model...........................................................................................................................................32
Attribution Model ....................................................................................................................................33
Situational Theory of Publics (Grunig Model).............................................................................37
Communication Strategy Model........................................................................................................38
Master List of Stakeholders for Case Study .......................................................................................39
Measuring Stakeholder Perception and Relationships .....................................................40
References.........................................................................................................................................41

2
Introduction
In 2006 the Institute for Public Relations (IPR) published a popular Gold Standard
paper, Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations, by Brad L. Rawlins, a member of
IPR’s Commission on Public Relations Measurement and Evaluation. (Rawlins 2006)
Subsequently, an edited version of the original paper, prepared by the original
author, was included as a chapter in the book, An Overview of the Public Relations
Function (Bowen et. al. 2019)
As part of the IPR Measurement Commission’s strategic goal to make the library of
resources more accessible to students, instructors and practitioners, we have
revisited the original paper. Designed for use in the classroom and by practitioners
developing strategic stakeholder communications plans, this paper includes two
parts:
Part One: The 2019 “chapter” version of the original paper, Managing Stakeholders
and Publics, with permission of the publishers. This is an abbreviated version of the
original 2006 paper, also prepared by Professor Brad L. Rawlins. (Bowen et. al.
2019)
Part Two: A companion piece to serve as a guide to facilitate the understanding and
implementation of stakeholder prioritization at the academic or practitioner level.

3
Part One - Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations
Managing Stakeholders and Publics
By Brad L. Rawlins
Chapter 7 from An Overview of the Public Relations Function (Bowen, S.;
Rawlins, B.; Martin, T. 2019 Business Expert Press). Excerpted and used
with publishers permission.
Based on Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations (Rawlins, B. 2006
Institute for Public Relations [IPR]).

4
Managing Stakeholders and Publics
One of the most important steps in strategic public relations is to accurately
identify the publics with whom you want to build relationships. A popular axiom
for public relations is that there is no such thing as a “general public.” In essence,
an organization has a variety of key groups each of whom bring different
expectations to their relationship. These differences help an organization segment
its publics into groups with similar values and expectations. There are several
approaches to identifying and prioritizing stakeholders and publics for
communication. An understanding of these main approaches to stakeholder
management offers a theoretical foundation and a practical guide to practicing
strategic public relations.
Stakeholder Management and Prioritizing Publics
Experts in stakeholder management offer different ways of identifying key
stakeholders or publics. At the heart of these efforts is the question: “How much
attention does each stakeholder group need, deserve, or require?”
Because it is impossible that all stakeholders will have the same interests in and
demands on the organization, stakeholder management should be about
managing stakeholders’ potentially conflicting interests.1 Once organizations have
identified their stakeholders, there is a struggle for attention: whom to pay
attention to, whom to prioritize for more attention, and whom to ignore. Choosing
to sacrifice the needs of one stakeholder for the needs of another is a dilemma
with which many organizations struggle. When these conflicts arise, it is
important for the success of the organization that it has prioritized each
stakeholder according to the situation.

Defining Stakeholders and Publics
A stakeholder is a group or individual who is affected by or can affect the success of
an organization.2 The definition has been expanded to include groups who have
interests in the organization, regardless of the level of its interest in them.
Employees, customers, shareholders, communities, and suppliers are the most
common stakeholders for a typical organization.
Grunig and Repper differentiated the terms “stakeholder” and “public” in the
following way: Organizations choose stakeholders by their marketing strategies,
recruiting, and investment plans; but, “publics arise on their own and choose the
organization for attention.”3 This classification relied on John Dewey’s definition: A
public is a group of people who face a similar problem, recognize the problem, and
organize themselves to do something about it.4 Therefore, publics organize from the
ranks of stakeholders when they recognize an issue and take action.
Identifying Stakeholders by Linkage to Organization
Organizations should attempt to identify all of their stakeholders. Some of these
will be continuous stakeholders while others may be temporary, according the
situation. Devising a stakeholder map will show linkages and help to anticipate
communication strategies.
Using a linkage model can help an organization identify stakeholders before
narrowing classification by their attributes.5 The model breaks stakeholders into
four groups: enabling, functional, diffused, and normative. We use these categories
to identify as many stakeholders as possible, while recognizing that the categories
are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
• Enabling stakeholders have some control and authority over the
organization, such as stockholders, board of directors, elected officials, or
legislators and regulators. When enabling relationships falter, the oversight
can be increased, and the autonomy of the organization limited, restricted,
or regulated by government.

6
• Functional stakeholders are essential to operations; they are divided
between input—providing labor and resources to create products or
services (e.g., employees and suppliers)—and output— receiving the
products or services (e.g., consumers and retailers).
• Normative stakeholders are associations or groups with which the
organization has a common interest. These stakeholders share similar
values, goals, or problems—often including competitors that belong to
industrial or professional associations.
• Diffused stakeholders include publics who have infrequent inter-action
with the organization, and become involved based on the actions of the
organization. These are the publics that often arise in times of a crisis;
linkages include the media, the community, activists, and other special
interest groups.
The linkage model should help the organization identify all of its continuous
stakeholders. The challenge in any situation is in identifying the stakeholders that
arise according to the issue, so it is useful to identify potential issues before
identifying stakeholders, as we discuss in detail in Chapter 10. With the increased
use of social media, issues may arise and gain salience through stakeholder
initiative. These actions by concerned stakeholders may result in recruiting
additional stakeholders unforeseen by the organization. Examining “issue
arenas”—the social arena where people are connected by an issue—helps the
organization identify the stakeholders likely to be involved and prioritize
accordingly.6
Stakeholder networks make each group more influential. For example, a diffused
stakeholder group gains more influence when it is networked with enabling
stakeholders. When you consider the “issue arena” and how the stakeholders may
be connected, you are less likely to overlook the influence of one of the groups.
Identifying key issues and areas of interest for each group, as well as their sphere

7
of influence and reach, would help an organization keep abreast of potential issues
before they become problematic.7
Prioritizing Stakeholders According to Attributes
Much of the literature in stakeholder management prioritizes stakeholders on the
basis of their attributes, but some researchers went further to develop a
comprehensive model that includes the attributes of power, legitimacy, and
urgency: the stakeholder typology.8 Here stakeholders are defined as risk bearers.
The concept of risk is used to narrow classification to identify stakeholders with a
legitimate claim. Stakeholders and organizations have an interdependent
relationship regarding the invested risk.
Stakeholders have power when they can influence other parties to make decisions
that the party would not have otherwise made. Legitimacy is determined by
whether the stakeholder has a legal, moral, or presumed credible claim that can
influence the organization’s behavior, direction, process, or outcome. Urgency
exists under two conditions: “(1) when a relationship or claim is of a time-sensitive
nature, and (2) when that relationship or claim is important or critical to the
stakeholder.”9 Urgency, then, requires organizations to respond to stakeholder
claims in a rapid fashion. Urgency alone may not predict the priority of a
stakeholder, especially if the other two attributes are missing. However, urgency
adds a dimension that is particularly salient to the practice of public relations,
because it is the urgent public that often attracts the attention of the media and
other stakeholders (see Figure 7.1).

8
Figure 7.1 Stakeholder typology
Source: Mitchell, R., B.R. Agle, and D.J. Wood. 1997. “Toward a Theory of Stakeholder
Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts.” Academy
of Management Review 22, p. 784, used with permission.
We use the combination of the three attributes to develop a prioritization strategy.
Accordingly, latent stakeholders possess only one of the attributes; expectant
stakeholders possess two attributes, and definitive stakeholders possess all three
attributes. If individuals or groups do not possess any of the attributes, they are
not considered stakeholders.
• Latent stakeholders have lower salience to an organization because they
only have one attribute. They are identified as dormant, discretionary, and
demanding.
o The dormant stakeholder has power but no legitimacy or urgency in its
claim. Therefore, its power remains unused.
o The discretionary stakeholder possesses legitimacy, but has no power to
influence and no urgency in the claim, and therefore is reliant on the
good will of the organization rather than exerting any pressure.

9
o The demanding stakeholder has urgency, but no legitimacy or power.
These groups can be bothersome, but not dangerous.
• Expectant stakeholders possess two attributes and are organized into
dominant, dependent, and dangerous stakeholders.
o Dominant stakeholders have power and legitimacy and, because they
can act on their claims, they receive much of management’s attention.
o Dependent stakeholders have legitimacy and urgency. Organizations
should be ethically responsible to stakeholders that have a legitimate
and urgent claim, and who depend on the organization to address and
resolve the claim.
o Dangerous stakeholders have urgency and power, but lack legitimacy.
Most of the time these stakeholders use formal channels to affect
change, but they may become violent or coercive to achieve their claims.
Advocacy groups sometimes engage in forms of protests, boycotts, and
(in extreme cases) damage to property and lives.
• The stakeholders who have all three attributes are definitive stakeholders
and have the highest priority.
An important tenet of the stakeholder typology is that it is flexible; any group can
acquire (or lose) power, legitimacy, or urgency depending on circumstances.
Therefore, an expectant stakeholder group can become a definitive stakeholder if
it acquires the third attribute. A dangerous stakeholder group can acquire
legitimacy, as has been the case with many nongovernmental organizations
(NGOs). A dependent stakeholder group, such as a community affected by
irresponsible corporate behavior, can acquire power by appealing to
governmental agencies or the judicial system.
The possession of multiple attributes contributes more significantly to the
prioritization of stakeholders, while perceived power and legitimacy are the most
influential attributes assigned by corporations.9 The higher the priority of a
stakeholder, the greater the corporate resources aimed at communicating with
these competing publics.

10
One dimension of stakeholder attributes missing from the stakeholder typology is
whether the stakeholder group is supportive or not. As previously noted, each of
these groups could be supportive or threatening, and stakeholder strategies would
be contingent on the level of support. A comprehensive model of stakeholder
prioritization should also identify whether dominant, dependent, dangerous, or
definitive stakeholders are supportive or threatening.
The Situational Theory of Publics Predicts Active or Passive Behavior
Grunig developed the situational theory of publics to explain and predict why
some publics are active while others are passive. This theory is useful because it is
predictive: situational theory can identify which publics will “communicate
actively, passively, or not at all about organizational decisions that affect them.”10
Those publics who do not face a problem are nonpublics; those who face the
problem but do not recognize it as a problem are latent publics; those who
recognize the problem are aware publics; and those who do something about the
problem are active publics. He identified three variables that ex-plain why certain
people become active in certain situations: level of involvement, problem
recognition, and constraint recognition (see Figure 7.2).
Level of involvement is measured by the extent to which people connect
themselves personally with a specific situation. However, people do not seek or
process information unless they recognize the connection between them and a
problem, which is the level of problem recognition. Whether people move
beyond information processing to the information seeking behavior of active
publics often depends on whether they think they can do something about the
problem. Constraint recognition is the level of personal efficacy a person believes
that he or she holds, and the extent to which he or she having an impact on the
issue is possible. Those who think that nothing can be done have high constraint
recognition and are less compelled to become active in the resolution of the
problem. Those with low constraint recognition believe that they can accomplish

11
Figure 7.2 Grunig’s situational theory of publics
Source: Rawlins, B.L. 2006. “Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations,” Institute for
Public Relations. https://instituteforpr.org/prioritizing-stakeholders, (accessed November 4,
2018), adapted and used with permission from Grunig.
something by communicating. Another important consideration is a variable called
the referent criteria: the guideline that people apply to new situations based on
previous experiences with the issue or the organization. A variant, the situational
theory of problem solving (“STOPS”), looks at how people’s referent criteria help
them face or explain problems.11
Active publics are likely to have high levels of involvement and problem
recognition, and lower levels of constraint recognition. Because they recognize
how the problem affects them, and they think they can do something about it, this
public will actively seek information and act on it. Aware publics will process
information and might act, but are limited by lower levels of involvement and
problem recognition, or higher levels of constraint recognition. Latent publics are
not cognizant of how an issue involves them or do not see the issue as a problem.
Latent publics could become active or aware as information changes cognitions
about the issue. The least involved public is a nonpublic: they are not connected to
the organization or issue.

12
Grunig tested the theory using problems that would create active and passive
publics to see how specific problems grouped publics. He found four kinds of
general public emerge around organizational problems:
1. All-issue publics, which are active on all issues.
2. Apathetic publics, which are inattentive to all issues.
3. Single-issue publics, which are active on a small subset of the issue that
only concerns them.
4. Hot-issue publics, which are active on a single issue that involves nearly
everyone and which has received a lot of media attention.
To summarize this step, active publics will have more priority over aware and
inactive publics because their urgency is greater. Whether stakeholders will
become active publics can be predicted by: whether the problem involves them;
whether they recognize the problem; and whether they think that they can do
anything about it.
One dimension missing from this model is whether the public is supportive or not.
Each of these groups could be supportive or threatening, and stakeholder
strategies would be contingent on the level of support.
Examining linkages, stakeholder typology, and the situational theory all move us
toward designing an optimal communication strategy for our stakeholders.
Communication Strategy with Stakeholders
Stakeholders who are also active publics are the top priority. Although it would be
convenient if active publics were always definitive stakeholders, human nature
precludes this from happening in a constant, predictable way. Therefore, an
organization must develop strategies to help mediate issues with priority publics.
These strategies will depend on whether the stakeholders are supportive or
nonsupportive and active or inactive.

13
Communicators develop stakeholder strategies based on four groups: advocate
stakeholders (active and supportive), dormant stakeholders (inactive and
supportive), adversarial stakeholders (active and nonsupportive), and apathetic
stakeholders (inactive and nonsupportive), as shown in Figure 7.3.
Figure 7.3 Stakeholder by communication strategy
Source: Reprinted or used with permission of the Institute for Public Relations.
1. Advocate stakeholders: This is the group that you want involved in
supportive actions such as third-party endorsements, social media
campaigns, donations, investments, and attendance at functions.
Communication should be action and behavior oriented.
2. Dormant stakeholders: This is a group that is not ready to be involved. If
inactivity is due to lack of knowledge, messages should focus on creating
awareness and understanding of the issues that affect them. If the publics
are aroused, but not active, then communication should address potential
causes of apathy by reducing perceptions of constraints or using affective
cues to increase emotional attachment.

14
3. Adversarial stakeholders: The initial response to this group is to be
defensive. However, defensive communication will not work; it will only
entrench these stakeholders in their position. Instead, organizations should
use ethics, symmetrical communication, and conflict resolution strategies
that involve adversarial stakeholders to seek win-win solutions.
4. Apathetic stakeholders: The reaction to apathetic stakeholders is often to
ignore them. But, if this group faces an issue but is not aware of it, or does
not yet appreciate its resonance, it may still move to become an aroused,
then aware, and then active public. A better strategy is to increase
awareness of the issue, with an invitation to collaborate with the
organization on the issue, before it becomes a problem or crisis. Since it can
be difficult to get this group involved, most of the communication effort
should be focused on increasing the salience of the issue and invitations for
involvement.
Once strategies have been developed that address the stakeholders, there is one
last prioritization step. There are three types of publics involved in communication
strategies: key publics, intervening publics, and influentials.12 Key publics are
those whose participation and cooperation are required to accomplish
organizational goals. They are the stakeholders who have the highest priority
according to their power/dependency/influence attributes, the urgency of the
issue, and their level of active involvement in the issue. In Grunig’s model, the key
publics are called priority publics. To communicate effectively with these
stakeholders, an organization must understand them as much as possible. Priority
publics can be profiled by their demographics, lifestyles, values, media
preferences, cooperative networks, and self-interests. Effective strategies appeal to
the self-interests of the priority publics and reach them through the most
appropriate channels13.
The intervening publics pass information on to the priority publics and act as
opinion leaders. Sometimes these publics, such as the media, are erroneously
identified as priority publics, but intervening publics are somewhat like
ambassadors. If the expectation is that the message will be disseminated to others,

15
it is an intervening public. In most cases the media are intervening publics. Others
can also be important intervening publics, such as teachers who pass information
on to students. The success of many campaigns is determined by the strength of
relationships with intervening publics.
Influentials can be intervening publics, but they also affect the success of public
relations efforts in other ways. Influentials can either support an organization’s
efforts or work against them. Members of some publics will turn to opinion leaders
to verify or refute messages coming from organizations (i.e., third-party endorsers).
The opinion of these personal sources is much more influential than the public
relations messages alone. Influentials are independent opinion leaders who often
lend third-party credibility to public relations efforts. Therefore, successful
campaigns must also consider how messages will be interpreted by influentials that
act as intervening publics, adversaries, or advocates.
In summary, communication strategies should place priority on stakeholders that
become active publics and can influence the success of an organization or can appeal
to the other stakeholders with influence. Publics that are critical to getting the
information to the priority publics, such as the media, need to be recognized as
intervening publics and critical to the success of the communication strategy.
Influential groups or individuals may not be stakeholders in the organization, but
may be important in framing the way the message is interpreted by the priority
public, and therefore must be a part of the communication strategy.

16
Notes
1. Winn, M.I. 2001. “Building Stakeholder Theory with a Decision Modeling
Methodology.” Business & Society 40, pp. 133–66.
2. Freeman, R.E. 1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston, MA:
Pitman.
3. Grunig, J.E., and F.C. Repper. 1992. “Strategic Management, Publics, and Issues.”
In Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management p. 128.
4. Dewey, J. 1927. The Public and Its Problems. Chicago, IL: Swallow.
5. Grunig, J.E., and T. Hunt. 1984. Managing Public Relations. New York, NY:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Grunig and Hunt developed the model based on the
work of Thayer (1968); Esman (1972); Evan (1976); Parsons (1976).
Luoma-aho and Vos (2010).
6. Matta-Barrera, R., and K. Nofziger. 2013. “SEA Strategic Communications: A
Stakeholder Approach to Prioritize Communications Efforts.” Solutions, A
Publication of Edvance Research Inc. 5, pp. 1–8.
7. Mitchell, R.K., B.R. Agle, and D.J. Wood. 1997. “Toward a Theory of Stakeholder
Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What
Really Counts.” Academy of Management Review 22, pp. 853–86.
8. Boesso, G., and K. Kumar. 2009. “An Investigation of Stakeholder Prioritization
and Engagement: Who or What Really Counts.” Journal of Accounting &
Organizational Change 5, no. 1, pp. 62–80. doi:10.1108/18325910910932214
9. Boesso and Kumar (2009) Grunig (2005).
10. Kim, J.N., and J.E. Grunig. 2011. Situational Theory of Problem Solving:
Communicative, Cognitive, and Perceptive Bases. New York, NY: Routledge.
11. Wilson, L. 2005. Strategic Program Planning for Effective Public Relations
Campaigns. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

17
Part Two – Guide to Implementing Stakeholder Prioritization Models
The public relations and professional communication industry has myriad ways of
describing the people and groups which are essential to attaining key organizational
objectives. These people and groups are often called publics, constituencies, or
stakeholders. Of these, the authors have selected the term stakeholders, which
seems to best encompass the full range of interested parties.
Stakeholders allow organizations to operate and meet strategic goals. They drive an
organization’s reputation. Different stakeholders influence and are affected by
different corporate behaviors. Though message platforms require consistency, not
all messages apply to all stakeholders.
Stakeholders have tiered structures; important subgroups may require new
understanding and prioritization based on objectives, situations and organizational
priorities. Stakeholders can be passive or active, involved or disinterested, and can
comprise multiple and overlapping groups, each requiring their own strategies.
Accounting for this pool of stakeholders is one of the most essential steps in
strategic communication planning.
This paper seeks to build on the shoulders of the outstanding work of Professor
Rawlins by providing more detailed information on who key stakeholders are and
how they can be helpful or harmful to the reputation of organizations. In addition,
the authors have created a case study and applied the four models put forward in
the original paper.
Who are potential stakeholders?
When prioritizing stakeholders, it is important to be aware of the entire pool of
potential stakeholders. Many may be obvious, but the breadth and depth of potential
stakeholders is vast. This section identifies potential stakeholders in the Corporate
Sector and in the Not-for-Profit Sector. Not surprisingly there is some overlap.
Below is a guide to help in the assessment process.
I. Corporate Stakeholders can include:
A. Customers/Prospects/Distributors/Specifiers
B. Media
C. Employees
D. Government
F. Investment Community
G. Industry Associations/Professional Associations
H. Citizens
A. Customers/Prospects/Distributors/Specifiers

18
Corporations produce revenue by providing products and services to the marketplace.
The individuals who buy these products and services are customers or clients,
depending on the industry.
In the products arena, most companies market to their end customers, but sell
through wholesalers and retailers e.g., Sony Electronics, Procter & Gamble, Coca
Cola, Nike, etc. (Look around your home and see if there are any products that you
have bought directly from the manufacturer or producer.)
In the services arena, there is more direct selling - e.g., banks sell financial services
through their branches and websites to end customers; mutual funds are often
produced by one company and sold through brokers and financial advisors.
Key stakeholders in the distribution chain are:
• End customers – either businesses or consumers/households or both
• Retailers who have a direct relationship with end customers
• Wholesalers who distribute the company’s products to retailers
• Prospects – businesses and consumers who are potential customers for a
company’s products and services, but are not currently customers
In some industries, there is another link in the distribution chain – namely,
specifiers. For example, architects design buildings and specify which materials will
be used. Building products manufacturers market to architects to encourage the
specification of their products. Other examples of specifiers are interior designers,
building owners and consulting engineers.
Industry analysts who assess and track trends, review and rate products and
services in specific sectors, such as information technology (IT), insurance,
healthcare, financial services, independent of the manufacturer or provider can also
be important stakeholders. Examples include Consumer Reports, Edmunds,
Forrester, Gartner, etc.
Communications professionals focusing on these
customer/prospect/retailer/wholesaler/specifier/insiustry analyst stakeholders
include marketing, sales, public relations and industry/analyst relations
professionals working.
B. Media
Defining the media as a stakeholder is not an easy task. Over the years, media
enterprises have become more fractured, more highly targeted, more democratized
and less accountable. Certain classes of media (traditional and online) bear
attention:
• General business media – outlets that cover the gamut of business news and
opinion. Perhaps the best known of these are The Wall Street Journal and
CNBC, but also included are:

19
o The business sections on newspapers and regional/local business
publications.
o The business segments on television or radio broadcasts.
o Business-focused online sites, like Yahoo! Finance,
o Bloggers and podcasts that focus on financial news and analysis.
• Industry/trade media/newsletters – vertical industries typically have their
own media infrastructure with a variety of magazines, association
publications, newsletters, social media channels and web sites.
• Mass media – national newspapers, magazines and networks that target a
wide consumer audience.
• Niche media – cable, print and online sources that target very narrow
consumer audiences with very specific interests like public/private
partnerships, herbs, archery, antique windows, bungee jumping, etc.
• Special interest media – cable, print and online sources that target consumer
audiences with specific interests like politics, food, sports, home
improvement, travel, etc.
• Social media – interactive online platforms such as Twitter, Facebook,
YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, etc., allow the creation/sharing/exchange of
information and ideas via virtual communities and networks. Social media
are critical channels for individual influencers who are looked to by readers,
viewers, followers, subscribers as arbiters of taste, brands, opinions, etc.
Influencers, ranging from international celebrities or experts to bloggers
with a loyal and substantial number of followers, can be critical stakeholders.
The media relations team and social media specialists handle communications
and relationships with the media, including social media influencers, to ensure
they have accurate and timely information, appropriate access to executives and
product experiences so as to inform the public about products and services,
policies, practices and mission in a credible and consistent manner. If the
content is heavily product oriented, marketing may also be involved.
C. Employees
Most corporate annual reports say at some point that the key to the company’s
success is the dedication and hard work of its employees. Research has shown that
engaged employees are advocates for their companies, ambassadors for their
companies, and willing to expend discretionary effort to make their companies
successful.
Accordingly, employees are an important corporate stakeholder group. But like
other stakeholder groups, the employee population is not monolithic. Some
distinctions that need to be recognized are:
• Board of Directors (BoD)
• C-Suite

20
• Other management levels – senior management, middle management, front
line management
• Union workers vs. non-union workers
• Blue collar vs. white collar
• Geographic area
• Gender
• Age
• Race and ethnicity
• Salary level
Other stakeholders in the Employee arena are:
• Retirees – they can still be corporate ambassadors and often shareholders
• Alumni – some companies cultivate their alumni because they may become
customers/clients, influencers, or ambassadors.
• Prospective employees - individuals who have or are in the process of getting
the necessary skills to meet the company's needs – e. g., MBAs for consulting
firms, engineers for manufacturing firms.
Figure 1 Sample Organization Chart. There are many options for organizational
structure - hierarchical, flat, functional, and matrix.
Board of Directors made up of internal officers – CEO, CFO, e.g., and
outside/independent directors. A board of directors is an elected group of
individuals who represent shareholders. The board is a governing body that
typically meets at regular intervals and is responsible for setting policies for
Sample Corporate Organiza1on Chart
Board of
Directors (BOD)
Chief Execu1ve
Officer (CEO)
Chief Opera1ons
Officer (COO)
EVP/SVP/VP
Director/
Manager/Staff
Chief Financial
Officer (CFO)
EVP/SVP/VP
Director/
Manager/Staff
Chief Technology
Officer (CTO)
EVP/SVP/VP
Director/
Manager/Staff
Chief Marke1ng
Officer (CMO)
EVP/SVP/VP
Director/
Manager/Staff
Chief
Communica1ons
Officer (CCO)
EVP/SVP/VP
Director/
Manager/Staff

21
corporate management and oversight. Every public company must have a board of
directors. C-Suite executives are the top officers of the corporation as a whole and of
key functional areas. Titles typically include: Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief
Operating Officer (COO), Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Chief Communications Officer
(CCO), Chief Marketing Officer (CMO), and Chief Technology Officer (CTO).
Internal communications, typically under either the corporate communications
function or the human resources function, manages outreach to employees through
multiple channels in order to achieve the organization’s goals. This includes top-
down and lateral communications, engaging employees at different locations and
professional levels, and being attentive to employee feedback.
D. Government
A corporation’s ability to do business depends on government policies. How these
policies are formed varies widely in countries around the globe. In the U.S., there
are essentially three tiers of government:
The federal government is composed of three branches:
• Executive. Headed by the President of the Unites States, the Executive
Branch contains all the departments and agencies that are responsible for
enforcing the laws of the country that have been enacted by Congress.
Departments and agencies also establish regulations, which are the official
rules to control conduct.
• Legislative. The Legislative Branch is composed of the two houses of
Congress: the Senate (100 members – two from each state) and the House of
Representatives (435 members – at least one from each state. Members
represent on average 700,000 constituents.)
• Judicial. “Federal courts hear cases involving the constitutionality of a law,
cases involving the laws and treaties of the U.S. ambassadors and public
ministers, disputes between two or more states, admiralty law, also known
as maritime law, and bankruptcy cases…The Supreme Court is the highest
Court of the land.” (www.uscourts.gov)
The Legislative and Executive Branches are the most important stakeholders for
corporations.
• Legislation can have an immense positive or negative impact on a
corporation’s ability to do business. Accordingly, corporations try to
influence legislation so that it is favorable to their interests. This commonly
is known as lobbying.
• Lobbyists also keep in close touch with the parts of the executive branch that
oversee their operations. For example, a manufacturing company would
want to keep close tabs on regulations being developed in the areas of clean
air and water, worker safety, carbon footprints, unions, etc.

22
• The Executive branch enforces laws enacted by Congress and signed into law
by the President. The President appoints the heads of the federal
departments and agencies, some of whom make up the Cabinet. The Cabinet
and independent federal agencies are responsible for day-to-day
enforcement and administration of federal laws. These can be important
stakeholders to engage in order to understand their priorities and thresholds
as they interpret regulations and monitor compliance.
Depending on an organization’s industry category, mission, and geographic
footprint, state and local governments can also be important stakeholders.
Modeled after the federal government, all state governments consist of three
branches: Executive, Legislative and Judicial. As long as their laws do not contradict
national laws, state government can make and enforce laws and prescribe policies
on commerce, taxation, healthcare, education, charter banks, money lending, zoning
regulations, licensing professions, and arranging elections.
Local government must be granted power by the state and generally includes two
tiers: counties and municipalities (cities or towns). Municipalities generally take
responsibility for parks and recreation services, police and fire departments,
housing services, emergency medical services, municipal courts, public
transportation, and public works (streets, signage, sewers, etc.).
The government relations team focuses on these stakeholders, bringing strategic
priority to managing relationships at the local, national, and international level to
foster appropriate policy, oversight and regulation.
E. Investment Community
Institutional Side – Investors or advisors who are investing on behalf of an
institution. Institutions include banks, insurance companies, pension/retirement
plans, mutual funds, hedge funds, foundations, etc. Key stakeholders are
• Buy-side securities analysts (working for the institutions).
• Sell-side securities analysts (working for institutional brokerage firms).
• Portfolio managers who own the corporation’s stock or are potential owners
because their investment objectives fit the characteristics of the
corporation’s stock profile.
Most of these stakeholders are located in key U.S. and global financial centers. But
some could be in smaller cities and towns.
Individual Side – Investors who are investing on their own behalf and advisors who
assist them. Key stakeholders are:
• Sell-side securities analysts (working for brokerage firms).

23
• Retail Registered Representatives or stockbrokers who work for retail
brokerage firms and are paid commissions for trades – usually dealing with
lower net worth investors.
• Wealth advisors/managers (Registered Independent Advisors (RIAs),
advisors/managers at banks, brokerage firms, etc., dealing with high net
worth investors.
• Individual shareholders of a specific corporation.
• Other individual investors who are potential stakeholders.
Media focused on Investment Community Stakeholders
• Newspapers: Wall Street Journal, business sections of New York Times,
Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, etc.
• Niche publications: Barron’s, IBD, Kiplinger, etc.
• Ratings services: Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s, Fitch, Morningstar, etc.
• Newsletters, blogs and podcasts produced by investment advisors big and
small and other experts in the field: e.g., Market Mondays, Stock Club, Let’s
Talk Stocks, Women and Money
The investor relations department (typically reporting to the CFO and coordinating
with the corporate communications department, manages communications between
the executive team and the financial community keeping them informed about
activities, and in the case of publicly-held companies, handling communications with
investors and shareholders to ensure they have a full understanding of the
prospects and strategies which underpin the corporations value.
F. Industry Associations/Professional Associations
Trade associations - membership organizations, usually nonprofit, made up of a
collection of companies and firms with common interests or who work in a common
industry. The purpose of trade associations typically is to promote and develop
commercial opportunities be the voice of the members to lawmakers or
communities and, in some cases set ethical and measurement standards. (e.g.,
National Association of Homebuilders, National Restaurant Association, Jewelers of
America.)
Professional Associations – nonprofit membership organizations formed to further a
specific profession and the interests of people engaged in that profession and the
public interest by facilitating connection, communications, education, innovation,
mentoring, ethical standards and certification/licensing. (e.g., American Society of
Civil Engineers, American Nurses Association, American Bar Association.)
The distinction is not uniform; some professional associations also accept certain
corporate members, and, conversely, trade associations may allow individual
members. The activities of both trade and professional associations are similar and

24
the ultimate goal is to promote, through cooperation, the economic activities of the
members while maintaining ethical practices.
Typically the marketing team and product managers, supported by corporate
communications, would lead communications to build relations with these
stakeholders, but senior management could be involved, particularly in setting
industry standards or policy development.
G. Citizens
Ordinary people are stakeholders because they also can assist or impede a
corporation’s ability to do business. In their daily lives, people act in different roles
that are important to corporations.
• Citizens are consumers. They buy companies’ products and services or they are
prospective buyers.
• Citizens are influencers. By word of mouth and through social networks, they
pass along positive or negative information about corporations, brands,
products, and services.
• Citizens can vote for officeholders and policies that may be favorable or
unfavorable to the corporation’s interests.
• Citizens are in communities that host corporate operations. As such, they have a
say in whether a plant or a superstore will be built in their communities. NIMBY
(Not in My Back Yard) conflicts can be expensive for corporations.
• Citizens are employees, prospective employees, former employees, and retirees.
As noted before, they can be advocates and ambassadors for the corporation – or
not.
• NGO’s or other independent activist group or grassroots organizations
representing the collective interests of some/all citizens around a specific issue,
can be allies or adversaries. Either way, they give citizens power and can
influence decision-making. Examples are numerous on both local and
international levels, but include American Red Cross, Amnesty International,
Consumer Watchdog, Greenpeace International, U.S. PIRG and, World Wildlife
Fund (WWF).
o Some advocacy groups are funded by special interest groups,
corporations or others e.g. AstroTurf groups
Under the corporate communications function overseeing all external and internal
communications, many public relations specialties engage with citizens including
media relations, social media specialists, community relations, and internal
communications.

25
II. Not-for-Profit Stakeholders can include:
A. Donors
B. Clients/Members
C. Community
D. Partners
E. Media
F. Government
G. Employees
A. Donors
The lifeblood of non-profit organizations is money and money comes from donors,
grants, and revenue-producing products and services. How non-profits raise money
varies from one organization to another, but generally there are:
• Big donors – foundations, corporations, government, wealthy individuals.
These donors need to be cultivated all year long. Some may sit on the
organization’s board.
• Small donors – individuals and companies who give small amounts of money,
time, or goods to help the cause.
• Event participants – many non-profits have events (10K runs/walks,
bikeathons, dinners, silent auctions, etc.) to raise money. Events require
coordination of many stakeholders – participants, sponsors, local traffic
authorities, etc., to make the events worthwhile.
• Grants are awarded by foundations, government agencies and other entities
based on the quality of applications and fit with their mission. Writing
successful grant applications is a skill much needed in the non-profit world.
The people who award grants are key stakeholders for some non-profits.
• Revenue-producing goods and services can range from sales of merchandise
with the organization’s name (e.g., golf umbrellas) to partnerships with
product/service services providers (e.g., AARP’s partnership with United
Healthcare to provider Medicare Advantage coverage.) The buyers of these
products/services are key stakeholders.
Executives from many functional areas will be involved in managing relations with
donors depending on the extent of their support. Large donors and grant makers
will have the attention of the board of directors, executive director, development
director and even program managers. Communications and public relations teams,
and event and program managers will handle relationships with other, smaller
donors.
B. Clients/Members
Clients are the individuals for whom the non-profit has been established to help
(comparable to Customers in the corporate world). For example:

26
• In the health field, non-profits help people with particular medical conditions
– cancer, diabetes, heart disease, MS, etc., and their caregivers.
• In the public policy realm, there are non-profits with very broad charters
(like the ACLU and AARP) to very narrow purposes (like Save the Sound – a
non-profit dedicated to the well-being of the Long Island Sound.)
• In academia, clients include students, parents, alumni and prospective
students.
• In the art world, clients include members/subscribers and ticket-buyers.
• Clients do not have to be people. They can be animals (World Wildlife Fund)
or various aspects of the environment (Sierra Club)
• Sometimes clients and members are synonymous: MS Society (people with
MS and their caretakers), American Medical Association (doctors), American
Bar Association (lawyers.)
There is such a wide range of non-profits that even the above generalities do not
cover all the possibilities. “The Encyclopedia of Associations is a comprehensive
source of detailed information on over 135,000 nonprofit membership
organizations in the United States [and] provides addresses and descriptions of
professional societies, trade associations, labor unions, cultural and religious
organizations, support groups, fan clubs, and other groups of all types.”
(Encyclopedia of Associations 2015)
Depending on the organizational mission and structure, client/member
relationships could be managed by program managers, community relations or local
affiliates, membership managers, student affairs, and more.
C. Community
Non-profits often rely on local communities for fundraising and advocacy.
• Fundraising events like bikeathons, 5K or 10K runs, walkathons, awards
dinners, silent auctions and other activities rely on local community
involvement to be successful.
• Stakeholders go beyond participants. They include police and other safety
personnel, volunteer helpers, celebrity endorsers/speakers, local businesses
and others who make the event happen.
The community is also important for advocacy. Consider the 2020 Black Lives
Matter marches for which the communities showed up in unprecedented numbers
over the course of months.
• There are other smaller examples – e.g., community support for building
ADA-compliant ramps or embracing a new college campus building.
Community relations teams, program managers, and volunteer coordinators are
typically responsible for community stakeholders.

27
D. Partners
Many non-profits form partnerships to advance the cause for which they are
advocates,
• For example, a patient advocacy group may form partnerships with
pharmaceutical or medical device companies who make products for people
with the condition they are most concerned with.
• As mentioned previously, partnerships can embrace major commercial
ventures – e.g., AARP’s partnership with United Healthcare to provide
Medicare Advantage coverage.
Depending on the scope and purpose of the partnership, relationships could be
handled on many levels ranging from executive director to program manager,
membership director, or community relations director.
E. Media
Strong relationships with the media are always helpful and this is especially true in
the non-profit world where free media coverage and social media
content/conversation can stretch limited communications budgets and deliver
messages to stakeholders. Media coverage can cover many bases including:
• Fund raising events – 5K runs, bikeathons, etc.
• New medical breakthroughs
• Notices about meetings
• Advocacy messages
• Warnings about possible perils
Media stakeholders for non-profits include the same outlets as corporate: mass
media, local media, niche and social media channels.
The media relations team and social media specialists handle communications and
relationships with the media, including social media influencers, to deliver messages
about organizational mission and programs.
F. Government
Government bodies at the federal, state and local level give non-profits permission
to operate in myriad ways.
• Tax-exemptions
• Grants for research and other initiatives
• Legislation to support their mission – e.g., the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) has provided access to most of the United States to people with
mobility and other issues
• Permission to hold fund-raising events that entail use of public spaces

28
Depending on the nature of the task, the executive director and government
relations team will manage initiatives relevant to the organizations advocacy and
policy strategy. Development directors and program managers may handle other
activities.
G. Employees
Employees of non-profits, like many public service employees, have often foregone
more lucrative private sector jobs to support a cause in which they believe – be it a
medical cause, political advocacy, or spreading the joy of model trains,
• Accordingly, non-profits as employers need to tap into the dedication of
employees beyond wages and benefits.
• Emphasis must also be placed on the worth of the goals of the organization,
the progress that is being made, and the challenges and problems that need
to be overcome.
• As in all organizations, employees in not-for-profits are powerful advocates.
For non-profits, employee advocacy is important in getting the message out
in a credible manner.
• Engagement is also important in ensuring that employees are motivated to
give maximum effort to their tasks – especially important due to tight
budgets.
Depending on the size and structure of the organization, employee relations (and
sometimes volunteer relations) is managed by the human resources function with
larger organizations having an internal communications function as part of HR or
communications department.
*****************

29
Case Study
Introductory Note: This case history is entirely fictional. The bank cited does
not exist and literary license has been taken with the story line. The three
problems cited, however, are based on real events.
Third National Bank of Springfield
In 2008, there was a financial meltdown as mortgage-backed securities (MBS) lost
much of their value because the underlying mortgages were not sound. Too many of
these mortgages had been given to subprime applicants – that is, applicants whose
credit histories traditionally would have made them ineligible to borrow money to
buy a home. Easy-to-obtain mortgages led to a housing boom and buyers were
plentiful. The meltdown caused housing prices to drop. As a consequence, many
buyers who bought at the peak of the housing market had mortgages that were
bigger than the worth of their houses. The term used for this was “being
underwater.”
The Third National Bank of Springfield – commonly referred to as ThirdNat – had
aggressively issued subprime mortgages and then sold them so the assets could be
bundled into MBS and then sold to institutional investors as part of highly complex
securities known as derivatives. ThirdNat continued to service the mortgages it had
issued – that is, to collect interest and principal payments and to take action if
payments were missed -up to and including foreclosure. ThirdNat also collected
payments for real estate taxes and held this money in escrow until it needed to be
paid to the town or city.
Since ThirdNat had already made its money and sold the mortgages, servicing them
was not very profitable. Accordingly, ThirdNat did not place much priority on this
operation. It was thinly staffed, overworked, and seen by employees as a dead-end
job. In fact, the section of headquarters occupied by the mortgage services
department was known as Siberia.
Eventually, problems arose in Siberia.
• Molly and Aaron had bought a house in Kent before the crash and were
underwater. While distressing, this was not an immediate issue because
they had no plans to move, so the issue was moot. Both were employed and
they were able to make their monthly principal, interest, and tax payments
to ThirdNat. But, ThirdNat neglected to pay the taxes Molly and Aaron owed
to the town. This led to a drawn-out dispute with the town’s tax officials.
The town wanted Molly and Aaron to pay. Molly and Aaron demanded that
ThirdNat pay the town. ThirdNat, for its part, was not sure what was wrong
and took months to fix the problem.

30
• Cathy and Bill bought their first house in Smithville. They were not sub-
prime mortgagees – she was an executive at an international not-for-profit
and he was employed by the government. ThirdNat claimed that Cathy and
Bill had not made their mortgage payments for three months running and
began to take action, including freezing their accounts and beginning
foreclosure proceedings. Cathy and Bill hired a lawyer to straighten out the
situation. Meanwhile, they had no credit and had to pay cash for essentials
like heating oil. Their lawyer got Third Nat to admit that there was an error,
but Third Nat could not correct the error in a timely manner. Two months
later ThirdNat foreclosed, and Cathy and Bill lost their home.
• Mary and Joe were looking forward to being mortgage free. After 30 years
of never missing a mortgage payment to ThirdNat, they were ready write
the last check. But the instructions for how to make the final payment were
confusing. Mary and Joe tried everything including calling, visiting a
ThirdNat branch bank, and trying to decipher instructions on the website.
Finally, they decided to pick the most logical way and sent in the check and
hope they did it right. They did not. They continued to receive notices that
the payment was due and could not find a way to dispute this. In the end,
they sent another check – essentially, paying the last month’s mortgage
twice. What should have been a happy occasion turned out to be an
expensive hassle.
These and other problems began to surface with increasing regularity. Tens of
thousands of ThirdNat mortgage holders were affected and began to talk.
They posted on social media, they contacted government officials, they spoke to the
media. ThirdNat was soon in crisis mode.
………………

31
Case Study Exercise
Using the models outlined in Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations (Rawlins
2006), we have applied the following typologies to the ThirdNat case history:
• Linkage Model
• Attribution Model
• The Situational Theory of Publics (Grunig Model)
• Communications Strategy Model
Readers will likely observe that prioritizing stakeholders is not an exact science.
While high and low priority stakeholders may be obvious, categorizing those in the
middle can be muddled. This is why it is important for practitioners to build
relationships with their stakeholders and know them well enough to anticipate their
reactions to specific situations. No organization has unlimited resources for
stakeholder engagement which is why the prioritization exercise is so important.
And, in some cases, prioritization should be done by function - e.g., investor
relations, government relations, community relations, public relations, etc.
In a practice setting, stakeholder prioritization may require approval by senior
managers and/or across functional areas. The models provide a theoretical
foundation to underpin the process and facilitate alignment within an organization,
assuring that the assessment is based on more than “gut feel” and will lead to design
of an optimal communications strategy.
A comprehensive list of the ThirdNat stakeholders is included at the end of the case
study exercise as a reference.

32
1. Linkage Model – Identifying Stakeholders by Linkage to the Organization
for Four Categories – Enabling, Functional, Normative and Diffused
The Linkage Model, the first step in the prioritization process, is useful to reveal the
breadth and depth of stakeholders. It looks beyond the obvious Enabling and
Functional stakeholders to an expanded group of Normative and Diffused
stakeholders, who may need to be prioritized in certain scenarios, like that of
ThirdNat where, as the crisis deepens, diffused stakeholders will become enabling
stakeholders.
ThirdNat Stakeholder Identification Using the Linkage Model
Enabling –
Control/Authority
Functional –
Provide/Receive
Normative –
Common
Interests
Diffused –
Infrequent
Interaction
Board of Directors
Federal Regulators
State Regulators
Securities Analysts
Portfolio Managers
Mortgage Customers
Corporate Customers
Personal Banking
Customers
Employees
Industry
Associations
Retirees/Alumni
Trade Media
Business Media
Social Media/
Expert Influencers
Mass Media
Federal Legislators
State Legislators
Citizens
Ind. Investors
Ind. Shareholders
Social Media/Non-
expert Influencers

33
2. Attribution Model - Prioritizing Stakeholders According to Attributes – Power,
Legitimacy and Urgency.
The prioritization of core stakeholders will likely be dynamic between ordinary
periods and a crisis period. The two tables below are designed to illustrate this
fluidity in the case of ThirdNat. Table 1 categorizes stakeholders based on attributes
during the pre-crisis period, while Table 2 provides the same analysis for the crisis
period. The attributes are variable for some stakeholders when the situation
changes.
Notably, during ordinary times, Dominant Stakeholders, such as media, expert
influencers, and federal regulators influence decisions through the attributes of
power and legitimacy. But in higher risk or crisis periods, they are likely to display
the urgency attribute as well and, therefore, shift to the highest priority Definitive
Stakeholder classification
Discretionary Stakeholders, such as mortgage customers and industry trade
associations, possess legitimacy only during stable times. But during a crisis period,
they may also demonstrate urgency and will shift to the Dependent Stakeholder
category:
Other stakeholder groups that shift prioritization classification during the ordinary
and crisis periods include:
• State regulators, with limited control over a national bank like ThirdNat, they
are Discretionary Stakeholders during ordinary times, with legitimacy but no
power or urgency. During a crisis period they can become Dependent
Stakeholders as urgency may be added to their attributes and press them to
take some action, such as hearings.
• Similarly, Industry Associations are Discretionary Stakeholders during
normal times exhibiting only legitimacy, but during a crisis period they may
add urgency to their attributes if industry-wide actions are possible, and,
therefore, become Dependent Stakeholders.
• Social media channels driven by non-experts are categorized as Dormant
Stakeholders in ordinary times when their potential power attribute is
unused (legitimacy is not an attribute of non-experts). In a crisis period they
can become Dangerous Stakeholders exhibiting both power and urgency.
For some stakeholder groups their classification remains unchanged in a crisis
period:
• Portfolio Managers and Boards of Directors maintain their Definitive
Stakeholder classification as they will have all three attributes – including

34
urgency - at all times as they have an interdependent relationship and
assume significant risk.
• Corporate customers and federal legislators are Dominant Stakeholders
demonstrating both power and legitimacy. Even in a crisis period urgency is
not a likely attribute for these stakeholders as legislation is a lengthy process
impacting the industry category, not an issue driven solution. Corporate
customers have different expectations from their banking relationship and,
unlike mortgage customers, have power to act if required.
• Applying the Attribute Model to the case study illustrates the dynamics of
stakeholder relationships within the organization based on circumstances
that can cause them to acquire or lose attributes. This is a consideration
when prioritizing stakeholders for communications strategy.
As mentioned in the original paper, the potential for stakeholders to be supportive
or threatening could also be a relevant attribute. For example, media, and expert
and non-expert influencers on social media channels, have the potential to be
threatening during ordinary times or in a crisis period depending on their
relationship with the organization and the issues that arise. Portfolio Managers and
Federal Regulators would likely be supportive during ordinary times, but could
become threatening during a crisis period.

35
Table 1: ThirdNat Stakeholder Prioritization by Attributes - during the pre-
crisis/non-crisis period.
Stakeholder Power Legitimacy Urgency
Definitive Stakeholders
Portfolio Managers X X X
Securities Analysts X X X
Board of Directors X X X
Expectant Stakeholders - Dominant
Mass Media X X
Business Media X X
Social Media/Expert Influencers X X
Federal Regulators X X
Corporate Customers X X
Federal Legislators X X
Expectant Stakeholders – Dependent
Expectant Stakeholders – Dangerous
Latent Stakeholders – Demanding
Latent Stakeholders - Discretionary
Mortgage Customers X
Personal banking Customers X
Trade Media X
Employees X
State Regulators X
State Legislators X
Retirees/Alumni X
Individual Shareholders X
Individual Investors X
Industry Associations X
Citizens X
Latent Stakeholders – Dormant
Social Media/Non-Expert
Influencers
X

36
Table 2: ThirdNat Stakeholder Prioritization by Attributes - during the crisis
period:
Stakeholder Power Legitimacy Urgency
Definitive Stakeholders
Mass Media X X X
Business Media X X X
Social Media/Expert Influencers X X X
Federal Regulators X X X
Portfolio Managers X X X
Securities Analysts X X X
Board of Directors X X X
Expectant Stakeholders - Dominant
Corporate Customers X X
Federal Legislators X X
Expectant Stakeholders - Dependent
Mortgage Customers X X
State Regulators X X
Industry Associations X X
Citizens X X
Expectant Stakeholders - Dangerous
Social Media/Non-Expert
Influencers
X X
Latent Stakeholders - Demanding
Latent Stakeholders - Discretionary
Personal Banking Customers X
Trade Media X
Employees X
State Legislators X
Retirees/Alumni X
Individual Investors X
Individual Shareholders X
Latent Stakeholders – Dormant

37
3. Situational Theory of Publics (Grunig Model)
This model further refines the prioritization process, predicting stakeholder
behavior using the three variables of level of involvement, problem recognition and
constraint recognition. In ThirdNat’s crisis situation there are a large number of
Active Publics who will seek information and act on it, and therefore are high
priority for communications. These stakeholders are connected to the issue,
recognize the problem and can have an impact. Aware Publics with higher
constraint recognition, will receive information and may act on it, and therefore also
need attention. Latent Publics are lower priority, but should not be ignored.
ThirdNat Stakeholder Prioritization Using Situational Theory of Publics
High Involvement Low Involvement
Problem-Facing Behavior
• High problem
recognition
• Low constraint
recognition
ACTIVE PUBLIC
Board of Directors
Securities Analysts
Portfolio Managers
Mortgage Customers
Trade Media
Federal Legislators
Federal Regulators
Social Media/Expert
Influencers
Corporate Customers
ACTIVE/AWARE PUBLIC
Business Media
Constrained Behavior
• High problem
recognition
• High constraint
recognition
AWARE/ACTIVE PUBLIC
Employees
Retirees/Alumni
State Legislators
State Regulators
LATENT/AWARE PUBLIC
Individual Shareholders
Industry Associations
Routine Behavior
• Low problem
recognition
• Low constraint
recognition
ACTIVE (REINFORCING)
PUBLIC
NONE/LATENT PUBLIC
Social Media/Non-expert
Influencers
Fatalistic behavior
• Low problem
recognition
• High constraint
recognition
LATENT PUBLIC
Personal Banking Customers
Mass Media
NON-PUBLIC
Citizens
Individual Investors

38
4. Communications Strategy Model – Prioritizing Stakeholders Based on
Active/Inactive, Supportive/Non-supportive
Communication strategies deployed by ThirdNat in this crisis scenario will be
guided by which quadrant the stakeholder sits in. The categorization is analogous to
a SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats). Advocates, a
small group of Active and Supportive stakeholders in this scenario, represent a
communications strength and will be deployed to participate in communications e.g.
deliver messages as spokespersons or participate in meetings/press conferences.
Dormant stakeholders are an opportunity to transition to Advocates, and will need
communications to build knowledge and understanding of the situation.
Communications strategy for Adversarial stakeholders needs to address their
potential threat, avoid a defensive approach, and seek to resolve questions, fears,
challenges and conflicts raised by the crisis. Apathetic stakeholders are a potential
weakness and shouldn’t be ignored as they may shift to another category.
ThirdNat Stakeholder Prioritization Using the Communications Strategy
Model
Stakeholder by Communica4on Strategy
ADVOCATE STAKEHOLDERS
• Board of Directors
• Employees (Some)
• Industry AssociaBons
ADVERSARIAL STAKEHOLDERS
• Mortgage Customers
• SecuriBes Analysts
• PorFolio Managers
• Trade media
• Federal Regulators and Legislators
• State Regulators and Legislators
• Corporate Customers
• Business Media
• Social Media/Expert Inﬂuencers
DORMANT STAKEHOLDERS
• Individual Shareholders
• Individual Investors
• Employees (some)
• ReArees/Alumni
• Personal Banking Customers
• Mass media
APATHETIC STAKEHOLDERS
• CiAzens
• Social Media/Non-expert Inﬂuencers
ACTIVE
INACTIVE
SUPPORTIVE NON-
SUPPORTIVE

39
Master List of ThirdNat Stakeholders
For reference, here is the Master List of ThirdNat Stakeholders identified for the
case study.
1. Board of Directors
2. Employees
3. Retirees/Alumni
4. Federal Legislators
5. Federal Regulators
6. State Legislators
7. State Regulators
8. Mortgage Customers
9. Corporate Customers
10. Personal Banking Customers
11. Industry Associations
12. Trade Media
13. Business Media
14. Mass Media
15. Social Media/Expert Influencers
16. Social Media/Non-expert Influencers
17. Securities Analysts
18. Portfolio Managers
19. Individual Shareholders
20. Individual Investors
21. Citizens
Applying the models to the case study is not an easy exercise. The authors debated a
lot of gray areas, including the willingness of senior management to address the
issues. Additional exercises could include: If you were counseling ThirdNat, what
process would you follow to analyze the situation and identify stakeholders? What
would you suggest they do to prioritize stakeholders?

40
Measuring Stakeholder Perceptions and Relationships
As the saying goes, you cannot manage what you cannot measure. Clearly, to
manage stakeholder relations, there should be metrics in place to measure how
different stakeholder groups – especially those who could have the most impact on
the organization – view the organization.
There are myriad ways in which to do such measurement, but these are beyond the
scope of this paper. The authors would refer those interested in pursuing this
further to review the research papers at the Institute for Public Relations
(instituteforpr.org) and the International Public Relations Research Conference
(iprrc.org).
https://instituteforpr.org/measuring-relationships/

41
References
Bowen, S., Rawlins, B., Martin, T. (2019). An Overview of the Public Relations Function
(Second Edition). Business Expert Press.
Encyclopedia of Associations, (2015). Gale Directory Library.
https://www.gcls.org/encyclopedia-associations-gale-directory-library
Rawlins, B.L. (2006). Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations. Institute for
Public Relations. https://instituteforpr.org/prioritizing-stakeholders/
United States Courts (2023). http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-
role-and-structure

Identifying and Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Identifying and Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations (20)

More from Olivia Kresic (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Identifying and Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations