The guide says: "Project Stakeholder Management includes the processes required to identify the people, groups, or organizations that **could impact or be impacted** by the project"
Doesn't this leave out people, groups or organizations that ARE CURRENTLY being impacted by the project? If a stakeholder becomes affected, do they switch from a Stakeholder to something else? I don't thinks so.
Perhaps this should be: "Project Stakeholder Management includes the processes required to identify the people, groups, or organizations that could or are impacted by the project
Maybe I'm reading this paragraph incorrectly? Saving Changes...
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
David, In my humble opinion, I think the sentence as is includes everyone as the guide gives you guidance in theory so assuming you did not start your project yet so in this case, it includes everyone. Does this make sense ? Saving Changes...
Bill Duncan! I worked with Bill on version 3 of the guide. (Showing my very old age now). I do like that he used the wording: "are, or may be affected" That clears up my nit-picking issue. The word "ARE" clearly includes the current stakeholders in the "Stakeholder Management" processes.
Thanks for jumping in! That's a very good thought - but I just can't make it say "everyone." Clearly the spirit is, (and has been for a long time) to be "everyone" but reading the guide literally it leaves a hole (I think). Maybe I'm just nit-picking.
Bill Duncan! I worked with Bill on version 3 of the guide. (Showing my very old age now). I do like that he used the wording: "are, or may be affected" That clears up my nit-picking issue. The word "ARE" clearly includes the current stakeholders in the "Stakeholder Management" processes.
I would agree that the language should be as clear as possible. People invariably twist technical language over time, so at least starting with as accurate a description as possible helps to avoid the slow creep towards distortion and confusion. I often settle disputes by pointing out that people are in violent agreement but both using inaccurate terminology. Saving Changes...