A Guide to Categorising Stakeholders

Once stakeholders are mapped, prioritisation is the process of turning that map into a working engagement plan. It involves four steps:

Score each stakeholder against influence, urgency and legitimacy
Group them into engagement tiers based on those scores
Assign engagement methods to each tier (individual plans for high priority, group communications for lower priority)
Review priorities at each project phase as influence, urgency and legitimacy shift over time

Mapping tells you who your stakeholders are and where they sit. Prioritisation turns that picture into action, determining which stakeholders need individual engagement plans, which can be managed through group communications, and how your team's time should be allocated across the full stakeholder landscape.

The frameworks most commonly used to support this, the influence/interest matrix and the Salience Model, don't just categorise stakeholders. When applied as prioritisation tools, they translate scores and classifications into clear engagement tiers. Those tiers, and the priorities behind them, then need to be reviewed and updated as projects move through phases, which is where a dedicated stakeholder management platform earns its place over spreadsheets.

How to use an interest/influence matrix

The interest/influence matrix is a powerful tool for identifying the weight and type of communication appropriate to each stakeholder and stakeholder group.

As you can see in the diagram below, the interest of the stakeholder is plotted along the ‘x’ axis, whilst the influence is plotted on the ‘y’ axis.

Attributing a stakeholder with a score from 1 to 10 for both these categories will provide a point to plot in one of four quadrants.

The communications strategy can then be informed by using the three levels of engagement (informing, consulting, and collaborating).

Using the three levels of engagement approach ensures that a suitable amount of engagement is provided to each quadrant and that each stakeholder group is satisfied.

Influence-Interest

Using the salience model

The salience model takes the concept of classifying stakeholders even further, with a Venn diagram of three parameters - urgency, power and legitimacy - used to segment eight stakeholder types:

Salience-Model-1-1

Dimensions:

Power is attributed to a stakeholder who has the ability to influence the project or its outcomes.
Legitimacy is the level of involvement and interest a stakeholder has with the project.
Urgency relates to the time that a stakeholder expects attention, responses and actions.

The eight stakeholder types:

1. Dormant: stakeholders who have power but no legitimacy or urgency. They aren't actively engaged but could become a force if activated. Keep them informed at a baseline level and watch for triggers that might bring them into play.

2. Discretionary: stakeholders that have legitimate interests but have little influence or urgency. Despite the low power, they must meet their needs as they have high legitimacy.

3. Demanding: those who require attention and want their needs addressed. They have no power but still can influence other stakeholders.

4. Dominant: these stakeholders have power and interest in the project and must be managed closely, but without urgency in mind.

5. Dangerous: stakeholders with influence and urgency that can represent problems and must be managed cautiously.

6. Dependant: those who have a legitimate interest and demand urgency but no power of their own. Keep close watch, they often gain influence by allying with more powerful stakeholders, particularly during contentious phases of a project.

7. Definitive: the category of stakeholders you must manage closely as they have influence, interest and urgency.

8. Non-stakeholders: this group has no influence, urgency or legitimacy, so you won't be managing them for your project.

A stakeholder identified as ‘dormant’ requires a more hands-off, informative approach, whilst a 'definitive' stakeholder needs a much more engaged approach, using collaborative and consultative tools on top of being kept informed.

The salience model allows a deeper understanding of each stakeholder’s needs, and when used correctly, can better inform the communications strategy and the digital tools you need to use.

Project areas of influence

Beyond influence and salience, a geographical approach can also be helpful to categorise your stakeholders based on their proximity to your project.

Separate the geographical areas into four zones:

Zone 1: Major
Zone one is the closest to the project site. These interactions/impacts on stakeholders will be on a widespread basis (such as daily).

Zone 2: Moderate
Zone 2 stakeholders frequently deal with the project (interactions/impacts). These aren’t as specific as zone 1, but still important.

Zone 3: Minor
In zone 3, a stakeholder interaction with your project will be limited in time and potentially restricted to a specific phase of the project.

Zone 4: Negligible
Interactions could occur on an incidental or occasional basis with stakeholders in this zone, and impacts are either very limited or nonexistent.

From prioritisation to engagement tiers

Prioritisation only matters if it changes how you engage. Whichever framework you use, the output should be a clear set of engagement tiers that determine how much of your team's time each stakeholder receives, what channels you use, and how often you make contact.

The standard tier model used across regulated industries and major infrastructure projects:

Tier 1, Manage closely
High-influence, high-urgency, high-legitimacy stakeholders. These get individual engagement plans, named relationship owners, regular one-to-one contact and direct access to project decision-makers. Examples include statutory consultees, key regulators, MPs on the route of a scheme, and major landowners.

Tier 2, Keep satisfied or keep informed
Stakeholders with two of the three Salience dimensions, or those in the middle quadrants of the influence/interest matrix. These get structured group communications, scheduled briefings, project newsletters and proactive updates ahead of milestones. Examples include parish councils, local interest groups and statutory bodies with a watching brief.

Tier 3, Monitor
Lower-priority stakeholders who still need awareness. These get broad communications, public-facing project updates and ad-hoc engagement when specific issues emerge. Examples include the wider community, regional press and adjacent local authorities.

The point of tiering isn't to spend less time on stakeholders, it's to spend the right time on the right ones. A blanket approach treats everyone the same and ends up under-serving Tier 1 while over-communicating with Tier 3. Tiering fixes that imbalance.

Why prioritisation isn't a one-off exercise

Stakeholders don't sit still. A community group that's quiet during planning may become highly active once construction starts. A councillor with limited interest in option development may become central once a route is announced in their ward. A regulator's priorities can shift overnight when a new policy lands.

Prioritisation needs to be a living process. Priorities shift when:

Projects move between phases, planning, consenting, delivery, operation, each phase activates different stakeholder groups
New issues emerge, an objection, a regulatory change, a media moment, can move a stakeholder up several tiers
Stakeholder positions change, a council reshuffles, a community group gains a new chair, a key contact retires
Influence networks evolve, a minor stakeholder allies with a major one, a coalition forms against a scheme

For long infrastructure programmes running over five years or more, quarterly review of stakeholder priorities is the minimum. Annual review risks missing critical shifts. Major projects in regulated sectors should be re-scoring stakeholders every time a phase gate is passed or a significant external event occurs.

This is where spreadsheets fall over. A static stakeholder list captures who your stakeholders were when you built it, not who they are now. Re-prioritising in Excel means rebuilding the analysis from scratch every quarter, which is why most teams stop doing it. A stakeholder management platform keeps prioritisation live: scores update, tiers shift, and the engagement plan adjusts automatically.

Keeping prioritisation live with Tractivity

Stakeholder prioritisation is only useful if it stays current. Tractivity is a stakeholder management platform built to keep prioritisation live rather than static. Stakeholders can be scored against the criteria that matter to your project, grouped into engagement tiers, and re-scored as projects move through phases or as new issues emerge.

That means your engagement plan reflects what's actually happening on the ground, not what you assumed at the start. For organisations delivering long-running programmes in regulated sectors, water, energy, transport, healthcare, this is the difference between prioritisation that informs decisions and prioritisation that gathers dust.

Talk to us today to learn how Tractivity can help you improve your stakeholder engagement.

Key takeaways

Stakeholder prioritisation is the step that turns a stakeholder map into an actionable engagement plan
The three Salience criteria, influence, urgency, legitimacy, give you the assessment framework; the engagement tiers give you the operational output
High-priority stakeholders need individual engagement plans, lower-priority groups can be reached through structured communications
Priorities shift as projects move between phases, new issues emerge, and stakeholder positions change
Static prioritisation (spreadsheets) decays quickly; live prioritisation in a stakeholder management platform reflects what's actually happening on the ground

Frequently asked questions

What is stakeholder categorisation? Stakeholder categorisation is the process of grouping stakeholders based on shared characteristics, most commonly power, legitimacy, and urgency, so that engagement and communication efforts can be targeted and proportionate. It is a key step in stakeholder analysis and forms the foundation of an effective communications plan.

What is the interest/influence matrix? The interest/influence matrix is a four-quadrant tool that plots stakeholders according to their level of interest on one axis and their level of influence on the other. Each stakeholder is assigned a score from one to ten for both criteria, placing them in a quadrant that determines the appropriate level and type of engagement.

What are the eight types of stakeholders in the Salience Model? The Salience Model classifies stakeholders into eight types based on combinations of power, legitimacy, and urgency: dormant (power only), discretionary (legitimacy only), demanding (urgency only), dominant (power and legitimacy), dangerous (power and urgency), dependant (legitimacy and urgency), definitive (all three attributes), and non-stakeholders (none of the three).

What is the difference between the interest/influence matrix and the Salience Model? The interest/influence matrix is a simpler tool suited to most projects, categorising stakeholders into four broad groups based on two criteria. The Salience Model is more nuanced, using three dimensions, power, legitimacy, and urgency, to produce eight distinct stakeholder types, enabling a more granular understanding of each stakeholder's needs and appropriate engagement approach.

Can stakeholders be categorised geographically? Yes. A geographical zone approach divides stakeholders into four zones based on their proximity to a project: major (daily interaction), moderate (frequent interaction), minor (limited to specific phases), and negligible (occasional or incidental contact). This approach is particularly useful for infrastructure, construction, and community-facing projects.

What is the difference between stakeholder mapping and stakeholder prioritisation? Stakeholder mapping is the process of identifying who your stakeholders are and plotting them according to criteria such as influence, interest, power, legitimacy, and urgency. Prioritisation is the next step: using those positions and scores to decide where engagement effort should be concentrated. Mapping produces a picture of your stakeholder landscape; prioritisation converts that picture into a ranked order of attention, resource allocation, and communication frequency.

How often should stakeholder priorities be reviewed? Stakeholder priorities should be reviewed at each significant project milestone, and at least every three to six months on long-running programmes. On major infrastructure or policy projects, a stakeholder's influence or urgency can shift considerably over the course of delivery; a previously dormant stakeholder may become definitive as a project enters their local area, or a key decision-maker may move on entirely. Treating prioritisation as a one-time exercise creates risk; keeping scores live and revisiting classifications regularly ensures engagement remains proportionate and well-directed throughout.