How do you, or should you, keep stakeholders engaged when they're not directly impacted by the planned outcomes?

Stakeholder Management

Aaron Porter

Community Champion

IT Director| Blade HQ Payson, UT, United States

Most of us are familiar with complaints about meetings that could have been emails or done in half the time, if they were even needed. There are varied reasons for these complaints - sometimes it's because individuals don't feel like the project benefits or impacts them. Should you help them see the value they bring, or cut them loose?

What do YOU do?

Posted: Jan 17, 2026 3:52 PM

Sort By:

Kiron Bondale Retired | Mentor| Retired Welland, Ontario, Canada

Aaron -

A lot depends on their role as a stakeholder. If they are a key decision maker or someone who needs to be part of a working group there is no alternative to their being involved. However, if they are purely holding a stake in the project's success but won't be doing anything other than staying informed then understanding their preferences for being kept in the loop and following those should be sufficient.

Kiron

Posted: Jan 17, 2026 6:41 PM

Luis Branco CEO| Business Insight, Consultores de Gestão, Ldª Carcavelos, Lisboa, Portugal

Great question, and a very real tension in project work.

Before asking how to keep stakeholders engaged, it helps to clarify who is truly a stakeholder.
Being a stakeholder is not about being on a mailing list or invited to meetings. It means having something at stake in the project system.

If someone is not impacted by what the project delivers, and does not influence decisions, resources, risks, or acceptance, then a fair question is: in what sense are they a stakeholder?

A few practical distinctions help:

• Engagement is not meeting attendance.
Clear updates or targeted validation points often create more commitment than recurring meetings without decisions.

• Value is bidirectional.
When a stakeholder does not see value, the issue may be the project’s narrative, not the person.
Projects that cannot clearly explain why they exist tend to create noise, not engagement.

• Engagement should be proportional to risk and decision reversibility.
Irreversible decisions benefit from broader input.
Reversible, operational decisions require focus, not an audience.

• Reducing noise is an act of leadership.
Removing someone from a loop when no value is added protects time, accountability, and decision quality.

In short, I do not try to keep everyone engaged all the time. I focus on keeping the system healthy.
Conscious engagement, at the right moment and at the right level, is a sign of mature project governance.

Posted: Jan 18, 2026 4:57 AM

Lissette Indhira Pimentel Sosa

Community Champion

Program Manager| HARPER SRL Santo Domingo / Distrito Nacional, Dominican Republic

Start by clarifying why someone is a stakeholder and what role they really play. If they make decisions or own risks, they need to be involved. If they just need visibility, short and focused updates are enough.
I don’t try to keep everyone engaged all the time. Less noise, fewer meetings, and involving people only when their input matters keeps things healthier for everyone.

Posted: Jan 20, 2026 8:37 AM

Please login or join to reply

How do you, or should you, keep stakeholders engaged when they're not directly impacted by the planned outcomes?

Sponsors

Vendor Events

Guessing is not a strategy: How to build decision velocity with AI and real-time data

Newsletters