Week 5
Stakeholder Analysis of JIT
For this week's blog post, I performed a stakeholder analysis of a non-profit organization I've been heavily involved with for the past 15 months. Just in Time (JIT) for Foster Youth provides the support and comfort needs for foster youth that have "aged out" of the system -- that is, those who have turned 18, have become emancipated and are no longer wards of the state.
During this time in a foster youth's up to 50% become homeless within 18 months of emancipation, 25% end up in prison within two years, and only 1-3% graduate from college. Without the support that a family would normally provide, it's difficult for a foster youth to become successful on their own.
That's where JIT steps in. Through a handful of programs, JIT helps youth with basic needs, setting up their first apartment, college expenses, financial planning, career choice, and more -- as well as critical or immediate need for unforeseen expenses, such as a car breaking down or an advance on a rent payment.
Take a look at the Stakeholder Analysis below that I performed for JIT (apologies for the itty bitty size). Explanations of each stakeholder are below.
In my opinion, the most important stakeholder is the foster youth population, as this is an organization that serves their needs. However, I saw them as only having High Support/Medium Influence. While they are some of the top advocates for the organization, their influence is not great; they are certainly important for program suggestions, but they do not contribute to the organizational structure nor financial aspects of JIT.
The stakeholders that fall under High Support/High Influence are the Staff, Board of Directors, and Advisory Board/Honorary Board Members. These three groups exhibit the most decision-making power; there are also a number of highly influential and well-connected people within these groups, so without their advocacy, JIT would not have the donors or corporate support that they currently have.
I've listed 2-3 types of donors or endorsers on this list: Private (individuals), Corporate (businesses), and Celebrity. Out of these, Celebrity has Medium Support/High Influence; a professional baseball player and a professional football player are two of JIT's most well-known advocates, and without their public endorsements, JIT would not receive nearly the level of funding nor attention it receives. Secondly, Corporate donors have Medium Support/Medium Influence. Some corporations are very involved with specific programs of JIT's, and some are less involved in day-to-day aspects but simply wish to make a donation. Therefore, because of the varying types of corporate donors (in involvement, public influence, and size of donations), I've listed them in the middle of the graph. Finally, private donors have Medium Support/Low Influence. Private donors can be very generous, but perhaps do not have the same level of influence within JIT or within the public that a corporate donor or a celebrity endorser has.
Volunteers are extremely High Support/Low Influence. While their presence is necessary in order for the organization to function (I'm one of them!), their influence on the big decisions or structure of the organization is extremely minimal. However, their support is extremely high.
Finally, we have the Public and the Government. Public is Low Support/Low Influence; they are simply in the Monitor category until they become an advocate (in the form of a donor or a volunteer). And the Government is Low Support/Medium Influence. Since it's a non-profit, JIT is not a state-funded program. But, as they work with county and state child services, their policies have a certain level of influence over JIT's mission and programming.
In performing this activity, I was most surprised when I plotted the Foster Youth stakeholder point. As it's an organization that works for them, I would have assumed they would be in the very highest corner of the Partner square. While they are a Partner, certain other stakeholders -- staff, board of directors, and advisors -- exhibit more influence over JIT. Additionally, I could not think of a negative group that would be considered a Stakeholder. Can you think of any?
I'd like to perform this analysis with a few other companies. I am assuming all analyses of non-profits produce a similar graph to the one below, but how would a for-profit company be represented here? Would there be significant differences in those graphs compared to the one I made below? Would for-profit companies' stakeholder analyses vary greatly amongst each other?
I welcome your suggestions, feedback, and challenges!
nalysis below that I performed for JIT (apologies for the itty bitty size). Explanations of each stakeholder ar
Great analysis. How do you think the insights you obtained from conducting this stakeholder analysis might influence JIT's communication strategy? Do you they they are effectively communicating with key stakeholders?
ReplyDeleteI was found it interesting that you placed the Public in the monitor grid. Can you elaborate on this placement?
Hi Hannah,
ReplyDeleteI really liked your post.
The first thing that always comes to my mind with non-profit organizations is funding. Many times the influence of the funders and the board of directors are what dictates the strategy rather than the head of the organization.
How do you think greater influence from JIT's clients would effect the strategic communication, if any?
And do you feel that your executive leadership fully advocates for the youth, or is it a balance between politics and the mission?
Hannah, You did a great job, and I really enjoyed the stakeholder analysis.
ReplyDeleteYour post made me really interested in the youth and how they perceive the organization. What feedback have you gotten from them? While I understand that the organization is meant to help them in their growth as an independent adult, I'm wondering if there is ever some push-back from them not wanting or appreciating the assistance. I'm also curious as to how communication efforts are made with these youth -- can you elaborate? Are the primary stakeholders in tune with the feedback given from the foster youth?
Good evening,
ReplyDeleteThank you for the feedback! You both posed some great questions.
Dr. Neff, you make a great point in that much of the information I uncovered here with the stakeholder analysis may be used in a positive way for JIT. For example, as I do a lot of social media and marketing for the organization, I can help shape a better communication plan for the public. And, after looking at what groups hold the most power (the Partner square), I really think a better job could be done at communicating those Partners' decisions and meeting minutes to other stakeholders, such as volunteers and the youth. I believe the best way to raise involvement and empowerment is through effective communication of goals, strategies, and new initiatives.
In regards to the public, I suppose they may not be a stakeholder yet, but almost everyone knows the basics of foster youth and child services programs. With a little education and engaging, those in the public sector may move from the Monitor square to the Empower square by becoming donors, volunteers, or perhaps taking an even more active role within the non-profit.
Dayna, I think you've hit the nail on the head there in regards to who holds the true power within a non-profit: the funders and board of directors. I'd love to see some more examples of stakeholder analyses that are for-profit organizations. Who holds the power in those types of companies?
In regards to giving greater influence to JIT's clients, I assume you mean the foster youth the org serves? I cannot think of an example in how that would affect the strategic communication overtly, but I think it would certainly affect the direction and programming, which in turn would cause a trickle-down effect to strat comm. I thinking having a youth representative on the board of directors would be beneficial; I'll keep this idea and bring it up to the executive director in my next opportunity. Great thinking, Dayna!
This leads into your next point: I do think that the executive leadership fully advocates for the youth; politics are certainly present, but the organization is still small and young enough that the focus remains on the mission. However, perhaps having that youth representative in the board meetings would be a good reminder to the leadership that it's about serving the youth first and foremost. Having a youth present would also allow them to provide feedback to program suggestions or other initiatives, which may create even more advocacy for the youth.
Hi Hannah,
DeleteThanks for answering my questions and you are sooo right when you suggest that having a youth representative would be helpful at meetings. I believe your board would gain incredible insight.
I know of several non-profit entities that do exactly what you're referring to --have someone who represents the population they're serving in the board meetings, but many go a step further. They actually have that person serve as a board member.
Hannah,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your post. I really enjoyed it. I think I am going to go do an analysis on my own organization now and see what I come up with. You pose some great insights as well.