Mendelow's matrix: prioritise your stakeholders the right way
You've mapped your project's stakeholders and the list turned out long — maybe twenty names. Giving everyone the same attention is impossible, and choosing by gut feeling is risky. Back in 1981, researcher Aubrey Mendelow proposed a way to prioritise that is so simple it is still used everywhere: sort stakeholders by power and interest.
The model was presented in a conference paper on how organisations scan their environment, but it is in project and strategy work that it has had its real breakthrough. It is usually called the power–interest matrix, and it turns an unmanageable list of names into a clear plan for who needs what from you.
What does the research say?
Mendelow's starting point is that stakeholders differ in two crucial ways. The first is power: how much ability do they have to influence — can they stop, delay or change what you are doing? The second is interest: how much do they care, how likely are they to actually get involved? By assessing each stakeholder on both dimensions you get four groups, and each group warrants its own approach.
Stakeholders with high power and high interest are your key players — these are the people you need to collaborate closely with and involve in decisions. Those with high power but low interest should be kept satisfied: they don't care about the details, but if they become unhappy they can cause serious problems. Those with low influence but high interest should be kept informed — they are often your best ambassadors. And for those with both low power and low interest, monitoring with minimal effort is enough.
One important nuance, which Mendelow himself touched on, is that the picture is not static. Power and interest change: a quiet stakeholder can wake up when the change starts to bite, and a reorganisation can shift power overnight. The matrix is therefore perishable — it needs updating, not a one-off exercise.
What does this mean for you as a project manager?
Differentiate your communication. A common mistake is sending the same status report to everyone. With the matrix as your foundation, you can instead give key players dialogue and involvement, give the powerful-but-uninterested short reassuring check-ins, and give the engaged people without formal power regular, honest information.
Spend your time where the risk is. The person with high power and low interest is often the most dangerous quadrant in the matrix — they are invisible in the day-to-day but can sink the project at a single decision point. Book those meetings before you need them — a short check-in in calm times is cheap insurance against a no when the stakes are high.
Update at every phase transition. Review the matrix when the project enters a new phase or when the organisation changes. Ask yourself: who has moved since last time, who is new on the map, and what does that mean for my communication plan? Ten minutes is often enough to catch what matters most.
How to practise this
The matrix tells you who to talk to — but not how the conversation should go. Keeping a powerful but uninterested executive satisfied, or facing an engaged critic, are skills that take practice. In Project-simulator you practise these stakeholder conversations against AI counterparts in a safe simulator environment and get evidence-based feedback on your own wording. You can try it free for a week.
In Project-simulator you practice these conversations against an AI counterpart and get feedback grounded in research like this.
Try free for 7 days