The Influencer Missing From the Register
CityServe is deploying a digital permit system across five agencies in 10 weeks. The stakeholder register lists 26 people, including agency directors and the IT security team, but not the deputy director who controls security approvals; that deputy has rejected two design documents without explanation. The project manager sends a monthly status report and a weekly dashboard. The dashboard shows 80% open rates, so the project manager believes communications are working. In reality, 60% of the 40 permit clerks say they have not heard how their jobs will change, and the union that represents them has filed a grievance after learning about role changes from an agency newsletter. Training has not started, three agencies have not nominated trainers, and the local business association is asking for a phased rollout. The mayor's office has publicly promised a January launch.
1. Diagnose the communication and stakeholder failure. Why are open rates a misleading measure, and how would you use an engagement assessment matrix?
Read the worked answer
Open rates measure transmission, not communication. The project manager is counting outputs-reports sent and opened-while the outcome is shared understanding and readiness. Evidence of failure: 60% of clerks unaware of job changes, a union grievance, three agencies without trainers, and two design rejections from an approver missing from the register. The deputy director is a high-power, high-interest stakeholder who was omitted, so security approvals were never planned. The union is not just a recipient; it is an influencer with formal leverage. Diagnose with an engagement assessment matrix: for each stakeholder, record current versus desired position (unaware, resistant, neutral, supportive, leading). The clerks are largely unaware or resistant; the union is resistant; the deputy is resistant but could become supportive if engaged early. The business association is supportive but wants a phased rollout. Communication planning should start from stakeholder interests and impact, not from a newsletter schedule.
2. Outline an engagement approach for the union and the deputy director. What should the project manager do differently with each?
Read the worked answer
For the union: meet before any further role announcements; acknowledge the grievance; explain the actual job impact and timeline; involve the union in designing transition and training; agree on a communication channel and a single source of truth. The goal is not to 'sell' the change but to negotiate the transition. For the deputy director: add them to the register as high power and high interest; request a design review with a clear decision agenda; ask what security criteria were missing and incorporate them; schedule approvals into the plan rather than reacting to rejections. For the clerks: use department briefings and peer champions, not only email. For the business association: offer a phased rollout option with criteria. Assign owners and dates, and align messages so the mayor's office, agencies, and union hear the same facts. Escalate only if the union or deputy blocks a required decision after engagement.
3. How should the project manager measure whether engagement is improving, and what governance action is needed before go-live?
Read the worked answer
Measure engagement outcomes, not communication volume: percentage of clerks who can state their role change and training date; training completion by agency; number of agencies with named trainers; design approvals obtained; grievance status and closed actions; deputy director attendance and sign-off; business association acceptance of the rollout plan. Add a short pulse survey before and after briefings. Review these at a weekly readiness meeting with agency leads and the union. If metrics stall, escalate with facts and proposed options, not blame. Update the communication plan when a stakeholder moves position, and record the union and deputy in the register with an engagement strategy. The 10-week go-live should have a readiness gate: no training, no launch. That is a governance decision the project manager should force into the open now, while there is still time to recover.