Stanley OranikaDirector Finance & Strategy| Virtus DeusF.C.T, Abuja, Nigeria
Can inanimate objects or living things, (not human) be classified as stakeholders in a project? Referring to a blog I read recently where frogs where given the status of stakeholders in a project. Saving Changes...
Joshua RenderProduct Owner| CognizantHarrisville, Ny, United States
I would think if a house or building were specially designated (historical designation), under the frog rule, it could be a stakeholder. But I kind of disagree with the labeling of the frogs or the building as the stakeholders. I think to be a stakeholder you have to be able to voice the possible impact to you, and in both of those people are the voices.
In both cases, you aren't dealing with or working with the house or the frogs or necessarily considering them directly. You are considering the laws and the people/population in the area. Your stakeholders would be the government(s) or some other such organization that you would work with to consider the implications of a frog or house. You are not considering the frog or the house, you are considering other people's opinions on what is "best" for the frog or the house.
...
1 reply by Daniel Stanton
Jun 04, 2018 9:29 AM
Daniel Stanton
...
But aren't the regulations written by people, on behalf of the frogs? It's sort of like a lawyer representing a client. So the frogs actually are the stakeholders, and the people writing and enforcing the regulations are effectively their agents.
Saving Changes...
Daniel StantonAuthor| Supply Chain Management For Dummies + LinkedIn Learning (Lynda.com) coursesCharlotte, Nc, United States
Jun 04, 2018 9:26 AM
Replying to Joshua Render
...
I would think if a house or building were specially designated (historical designation), under the frog rule, it could be a stakeholder. But I kind of disagree with the labeling of the frogs or the building as the stakeholders. I think to be a stakeholder you have to be able to voice the possible impact to you, and in both of those people are the voices.
In both cases, you aren't dealing with or working with the house or the frogs or necessarily considering them directly. You are considering the laws and the people/population in the area. Your stakeholders would be the government(s) or some other such organization that you would work with to consider the implications of a frog or house. You are not considering the frog or the house, you are considering other people's opinions on what is "best" for the frog or the house.
But aren't the regulations written by people, on behalf of the frogs? It's sort of like a lawyer representing a client. So the frogs actually are the stakeholders, and the people writing and enforcing the regulations are effectively their agents. Saving Changes...
Joshua RenderProduct Owner| CognizantHarrisville, Ny, United States
Daniel Stanton:
In the case of the lawyer, the person being represented still has some say (usually). They can choose their lawyer, they can choose guilty or innocent, they can choose to represent themselves. The lawyer can ask them questions and interact with them to know what they want. (Lawyers also set meetings to work on the client's behalf all the time and don't include the client, the prosecutor would go to the defendant's lawyer and not the defendant to discuss the case, making the defendant unimportant until judgement day).
In the case of the frogs or the house, how do we even know if the frogs or house actually want that group of people representing them? The people are still in control and there is no option to ask the frog directly. The group of people may be considering the frog (you hope), but your only option is to work with the people and no option to ask the frogs or house directly.
I suppose the end results are really the same, you still have to consider the frog or the house, albeit not directly - but you should be aware that you are actually working with people who claim to represent them. Saving Changes...
Michael DelaneyPartner| Delaney Management LLCWest Chester, Pa, United States
we have seen many instances of animals such as the snail darter having big impact on projects. In the snail darter case it was represented by a second year law student in a case that eventually went to the US supreme court. The animals or wet lands or monuments stakeholders can be represented by people or organizations and at times multiple. So when defining your stakeholders it would be prudent to include these types. Saving Changes...
I think we need to consider who and what is impact by our projects.
Whether it is a landmark physical or cultural. Animal or the habitat, do we understand the full impact of destroying a habitat what are the full impact. Saving Changes...
"We should be careful to get out of an experience only the wisdom that is in it - and stop there; lest we be like the cat that sits down on a hot stove-lid. She will never sit down on a hot stove-lid again, and that is well; but also she will never sit down on a cold one anymore."
