Five Common mistakes that destroy multi-sector CSR partnerships

Five Common mistakes that prevent and destroy multi-sector CSR partnerships

The private sector is playing an increasingly important role in development.  Companies from all sectors, including especially the extractive and fast moving consumer goods sectors, are investing in development initiatives in areas such as education, health, poverty alleviation and livelihoods, environment and gender equality.

The impact areas of these private sector social responsibility investments closely maps the impact areas outlined in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and anticipated impact areas of the soon to be adopted Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The MDGs and SDGs serve to guide the development activities of the member countries of the United Nations and the vast majority of development NGOs and organizations.  Official Development Agencies, national governments, multi-lateral and international organizations and NGOs focus development efforts on areas such as education, health, poverty alleviation and livelihoods, environment and gender equality

While the various private, public and civil society organizations noted above approach development with a focus on common areas, they often bring unique skills, experience and capacities to the work. 

In many cases these are complimentary and synergistic, at first glance, would seem to naturally invite partnerships and collaboration and the various sectors (e.g., ODA agencies, private sector, NGOs, etc.) even have stated goals of collaborating with each other in support of their development efforts. 

Simple logic would suggest that collaboration would result in efficiencies and more and better development impact per dollar spent or effort expended.

Value is lost for all partners and for society when 

multi-sector partnership opportunities fail to start or start and fail

Yet, the reality is that, while there are notable exceptions, this collaboration is not easy to achieve.  Whether on an individual project level or a strategic organizational level these natural partnership opportunities too often do not result in effective partnerships. 

Value is lost for the organizations involved but the real price is paid by their community partners who do not receive the full impact that they could have received had these natural partners found an effective way to collaborate.

Here are 5 common reasons why they start and fail, or even fail to start.

1.     Egos of main actors

This is common to the destruction of many different sorts of partnerships.  What makes multi-sector CSR partnerships more prone to ego related challenges is that, in many cases, the partnering organizations will have a general history of opposition or antagonism towards each other.

For industry to embrace and support the role that NGOs and development agencies can play in the success of a business or project is relatively new.  Similarly for NGOs and development agencies to acknowledge the important role of the private sector in development projects.  In many cases the sectors, or at least many organizations within them, have been actively opposed to each other.

These means that in some instances a 180 degree about face is necessary along with an acknowledgement that previous perspectives were flawed.  This can often be overlooked during the giddy early days of a partnership but will often come back in a destructive way as the partnership plays out over time

2.     Didn’t hang in through the tough stuff

Every partnership is bound to run into difficult challenges over time.  Project issues arise, personnel changes, partners have strong opposing views on external issues, finances come under pressure, etc.   Sometimes these come out of the blue and sometimes there is a slow build up over time.

In many instances if the partners can hang in there the issues will either resolve themselves, or they will find a mutually acceptable way to work through them.

However, for reasons discussed above, there are latent pressures in the partnership that can surface when other issues emerge.  This can make it more difficult to work through the inevitable issues and challenges that always show up.

Those partnerships that survive over time will find ways to hang in and work through the rough spots and will also actively seek to reduce the latent pressures.

Conflict and differences of opinion happen in every partnership.  All the time.  There are ways to systematically prevent conflict and disagreement from destroying partnerships

3.     Internal buy-in wasn’t there

Multi-sector CSR partnerships are often developed and negotiated by front line personnel with some level of support or acquiescence from corporate and NGO head offices.  They frequently end up in place and operating without ever really getting the attention of key senior stakeholders.

In many cases the partnerships bring both an expanded and enhanced ability to achieve some of an organization’s objectives and, along with that, constraints in other areas. 

As partnership and relations issues arise, as they always will, there is sometimes a sudden realization in the leadership ranks that the partnership has taken away degrees of freedom to act.  This can be exacerbated by historical organizational opposition as noted above.

When this happens you can have key internal stakeholders, who hadn’t really paid attention to the creation of the partnership and don’t have any ‘ownership’ in it, start to question both the partnership itself and the general principle of multi-sector CSR partnerships.

.

Keeping everyone pulling in the same direction takes ongoing effort.  Just because everyone pulls together at the start doesn’t meant that they will keep pulling in the same direction.  
Many things can happen to change aligned interests to opposing forces

4.     Only business is efficient mentality

Historically there has been a strong theme in many business sectors that business is inherently more efficient.  The theme maintains that because it more directly subjected to the demands of the marketplace, business is somehow more efficient than NGOs and governments.

Dig deep enough and you will find that perspective exists somewhere in most businesses and sometimes can permeate individual businesses and even large swaths of industry sectors.

This mentality can surface when problems arise and present barriers that prevent the challenges from being worked through objectively or prevent constructive solutions from emerging. 

Too often you will see much effort being put into finding confirming evidence of inefficiency, rather than a balanced analysis looking for examples of efficiency and inefficiency and their underlying causes. 

This can create a dangerous spiral that can undermine even the best partnerships.

5.     Business is too greedy mentality

The NGO equivalent of the Only business is efficient mentality is the Business is too greedy perspective. 

NGO partners that fall into this perspective are prone to examining business decisions only from this vantage point and not taking a more balance and objective approach to understand the ‘why’ of business decisions.

Confirming evidence is sought and focused on and more and more partnership and operational decisions of the business are seen as being based, at least partly on greed

There is another discussion on the relationship between greed and shareholder interest, which are often quite different.  Greed based decisions tend to be short-term and with narrowly defined interests.  Longer-term strategic shareholder interests are broader and provide much more scope for interest alignment.

As with the only business is efficient mentality the business is greedy perspective can create a partnership killing spiral of unbalanced confirming evidence.

These are some of the reasons that multi-sector partnerships, that start off with enthusiasm, potential and goodwill, can fall off the rails and turn aligned interest into lose-lose situations

Strategy and insight can turn opposing forces into aligned interests
Avoid the temptation to pull apart.  Find a way to win together

I will be posting more thoughts on this topic in the coming weeks.  If you are interested, we are offering a training forum on the subject in Ottawa, Canada in March see below.

Advertisement

One week Certified Executive Training Forum:  How to create & manage CSR/development partnerships between industry, NGOs, development agencies and governments.   March 9-13, Ottawa, Canada   USD$3,495 / $3,195 before Dec 31   

This five-day hands-on Certified Executive Training Forum will leave you ready to develop and implement multi-sector CSR and development partnerships that will help drive your organization’s success.  The program brings together a global group of executives and managers from industry, NGOs, development agencies and international organizations to learn with and from each other.

Whether you work with industry, NGOs, development agencies, international organizations, communities or other group involved in CSR and develop this program will help you and your organization to succeed

Led by an experienced global faculty with decades of strategic and ‘in the trenches’ experience in CSR and development partnerships the program will leave you with the tools and knowledge to be successful in negotiating and managing multi-sector CSR partnerships.  It is based on a pragmatic blend of lectures, case studies, group work, strategic simulations and facilitated and spontaneous group experiences that bridge theory and practice in a pragmatic and effective way. 

Register here: http://eepurl.com/7Iy6b or contact CSR Training Institute for more information here

Natural CSR Partnerships - Unnatural partners

Multi-Sector CSR Partnerships:  Industry, NGO, Development Agency collaboration on development

Multi-sector CSR partnerships can drive organizational successes and value creation.  Yet why do so many fail to start or start and fail?

Natural Partnerships – Unnatural Partners.  Business, NGOs and development agencies might have natural partnership opportunities but organizational history and the often conflicting perspectives of internal and external stakeholders can make these partnerships hard to realize.  Far too often they start and fail, or even fail to start.

The private sector is playing an increasingly important role in development.  Companies from all sectors, including especially the extractive and fast-moving consumer goods sectors, are investing in development initiatives in areas such as education, health, poverty alleviation and livelihoods, environment, gender equality and overall development partnerships.

These businesses strive to positively impact these areas at the community, local and national levels, recognizing that doing so is good for their business in many ways (or else why would they do it) and also good for the communities and countries in which they work.

The impact areas of these private sector social responsibility investments closely maps the impact areas outlined in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and anticipated impact areas of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The MDGs and SDGs serve to guide the development activities of the member countries of the United Nations and the vast majority of development NGOs and organizations.  Every member country approved the MDGs at a special Millennium Session of the United Nations.  Official Development Agencies (ODA), national governments, multi-lateral and international organizations and NGOs focus development efforts on MDG/SDG focus areas such as education, health, poverty alleviation and livelihoods, environment and gender equality

While the various private, public and civil society organizations noted above approach development with a focus on common areas and themes, they often bring unique skills, experience and capacities to the work.  Coupled with the natural diversity of their organizations this should/could add a lot of value to development efforts.  The synergies seem natural. 

Chasms often separate natural development partners

They seem like natural partnerships

In many cases this focus on common themes and areas appear complimentary and synergistic, at first glance, would seem to naturally invite partnerships and collaboration and the various sectors (e.g., ODA agencies, private sector companies, NGOs, etc.) even have stated goals of collaborating with each other in support of their development efforts. 

Simple logic would suggest that collaboration would result in efficiencies and more and better development impact per dollar spent or effort expended for all parties.

That government, NGOs and industry would see a more and better impact for their spending and their efforts.

Yet, the reality is that, while there are notable exceptions, this collaboration is not easy to achieve. 

Natural Partnerships are too often held back by seemingly unnatural partners

Whether on an individual project level or a strategic organizational level these natural partnership opportunities too often do not result in effective partnerships.  Value is lost for the organizations involved but the real price is paid by their community partners who do not receive the full impact that they could have received had these natural partners found an effective way to collaborate.

Value is lost by communities and all stakeholders when 

natural partners can't bridge the chasm that separates them

The good news is that progress is being made.  There is increasing collaboration amongst business, NGOs and development agencies. 

ODA Agencies such as Germany’s GIZ, America’s USAID, Canada’s DFATD (formerly CIDA) and many others are developing and implementing programs that enable co-investing in development with private sector partners.

NGOs such as Care, World Vision, WUSC, Cordaid and many others are actively working to find productive ways of partnering with industry on CSR and development programs.

Companies such as Golden Star, Kosmos, Tullow, Newmont, Kinross, IAMGold and many others are working with NGOs and development agencies.

There are some great examples of success – for example see From Pariah to Exemplar: CSR & Stakeholder Engagement in Six Best Practices (here) for an analysis of a 2001 CIDA, Placer Dome, World Bank and various NGO partnership that was credited with ‘changing the social face of the South African mining industry’.

An early success and yet, the progress is, in my opinion, too slow. 

Development Agencies often have approval and operational criteria that is slow, cumbersome and makes the cost of the partnership way too high. 

NGOs too often struggle with fully embracing the value of partnering with the private sector and communicating that value effectively to their internal and external stakeholders, including especially individual and organizational donors.

Businesses struggle to accept and adapt to the execution speed, launch processes and reporting requirements of ODA agencies and NGO partners.

Much more can be done, and should be done.

-------------- 

The CSR Training Institute is interested to learn more about the successes and failures of Multi-sector CSR partnerships in the space where business meets society.

If you have a case study that you’d like to share please contact us (info@csrtraininginstitute.com) and we may be able to work with you to develop and publish your case study.

Willis Harman - Business and Responsibility for the Whole

In May 1996 I had the opportunity to spend a few days with Willis Harman at a World Business Academy meeting on Vancouver Island.  What a wonderful experience that was.

This morning, as I am trying to push through a report I am (as I often do when under pressure) finding productive ways to procrastinate (I claim it is making space for creativity to emerge).

Willis was an incredible visionary (see below), the Founder of the World Business Academy and architect of the visionary concept of Business and Responsibility for the Whole.

He argued that throughout history the dominant institutions in society had assumed some level of responsibility for the whole, or the society ended up not lasting long or well.  He noted that through time the dominant institutions had included; clan, tribe, church, nation-state and now we are clearly in a state where business is the most dominant institution in society.

In May 1996 I was just getting ready to enter the Sloan Fellowship program at Stanford Business School.  I was a bit apprehensive as my educational background was, well, unique at the least (I felt like I had earned a few degrees from the school of hard knocks but had never completed high school nor university.  A Masters from Stanford Business School was slated to be my first academic graduation.

Anyway, I had read many of Willis' writings prior to the meeting and was looking forward to meeting him.  He was even more interesting and insightful than I had imagined and very approachable.  When I confessed some of my apprehension to him he laughed it off and assured me I would enjoy the time at Stanford.

I left the week with him with an invitation to spend time with him when I was at Stanford and even had a half-formed plan that I would find a way to work with him and learn from him after graduation.

Unfortunately, soon after this Willis was diagnosed with cancer and did not last long.

His thinking and his energy helped to provide a lot of intellectual foundation for what is today called Corporate Social Responsibility.

I was very fortunate to have known him and spent some time with him, and my good fortune continues as I get to work and explore in that interesting space where business meets society.


Below is some more information on Willis and links to more on the internet.

Willis Harman (1918-1997)  founder of the World Business Academy (1987)—re-imagined the role of business from being solely focused on profit-making to include taking responsibility for the whole. Here is an excerpt:

Business has become, in this last half century, the most powerful institution on the planet. The dominant institution in any society needs to take responsibility for the whole — as the church did in the days of the Holy Roman Empire. But business has not had such a tradition. This is a new role, not yet well understood or accepted.

Built into the concept of capitalism and free enterprise from the beginning was the assumption that the actions of many units of individual enterprise, responding to market forces and guided by the ‘invisible hand’ of Adam Smith, would somehow add up to desirable outcomes.

But in the last decade of the twentieth century, It has become clear that the ‘invisible hand’ is faltering. It depended upon a consensus of overarching meanings and values that is no longer present. So business has to adopt a tradition it has never had throughout the entire history of capitalism: to share responsibility for the whole. Every decision that is made, every action that is taken, must be viewed in the light of that kind of responsibility.

-       Willis Harman

Above copied from http://www.creativityatwork.com/2009/07/03/taking-responsibility-for-the-whole/ 

Business and Social Responsibility:
An Interview with Willis Harman

By Scott London

http://www.scottlondon.com/interviews/harman.html 

As one of the world's leading futurists, Willis Harman belonged to a handful of forward-looking thinkers and practitioners exploring a new role for business in creating a more prosperous and sustainable future.

Harman believed that we're living in a period of accelerating social and cultural change, one marked by economic globalization, spreading democratization, quickening technological advance, and burgeoning global communication. But in the midst of all this change, we're also faced with a host of unprecedented global challenges, from the population explosion and the depletion of the earth's natural resources to a deepening divide between the world's rich and poor.

Biography

Willis Harman, PhD was President of IONS from 1975-1996.

Widely recognized as one of the practical visionaries of our time, Willis Harman was deeply committed to working with the global transformation that is evidently part of our immediate future. He exemplified the integration of spiritual and intellectual knowing that is at the heart of the work of the Institute of Noetic Sciences, where he was president until his death in 1997.

For 16 years, Harman was Senior Social Scientist as SRI International, a global -futurist think-tank in Menlo Park, California. He was emeritus professor of Engineering-Economic Systems at Stanford University, and a member of the Board of Regents of the University of California.

His books include An Incomplete Guide to the Future, Changing Images of Man, Higher Creativity, Paths to Peace, New Metaphysical Foundations of Science,and Biology Revisioned, as well as a number of monographs, including, "A Reexamination of the Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science" and "The Scientific Exploration of Consciousness."

Data and management systems for CSR. Progress, but still far to go.

I just read an interesting article on the emerging role of data in making CSR & Environmental functions more efficient in companies.  Article by Matt VanTassel in Business Wired.  http://bit.ly/1weD7Gb 

It is difficult to quantify the costs and returns from CSR and environmental programs. No clear answers, but progress is being made.

Just the fact that there is more and more attention being paid to the issue is important. But, it seems like a long time for not so much progress.

One of the challenges is that while we need better data, and better management systems, we need to avoid letting data be king.  Data is important but needs to be used to guide and support an overall management system that is aimed at producing value for both shareholders and society.

Don’t get me wrong.  I’ve long been an advocate for more of a systems approach to managing Corporate Social Responsibility and stakeholder engagement.

I’m told that my 1999 paper, Beyond Beads n Trinkets, delivered at the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy’s 1999 Annual Conference, was the first to make the case and set out a management framework (looks pretty rudimentary now!  But, that was 15 years ago and these issues were just emerging)

Below is a graphic that I have used in presentations since the 1990s.  It is too often the case that well-meaning companies and managers approach CSR and stakeholder investments without well thought out management frameworks to help them be more efficient at creating value where business meets society.

 

Throwing money at social issues without a plan for creating social and shareholder value is not the answer

Progress is being made but we still have lots of room for improvement in management systems in this space.  

Especially in developing the tools and mechanisms that will allow companies and other development stakeholders to be more efficient at translating CSR and stakeholder program investments into social and shareholder value.

Congratulations to the Sustainability Practice Network for hosting the discussion at Baruch College in New York.

Don’t be an Altruistic Angel!

Why hide self-interest?  Do you really think you are fooling anyone?

Last week I was doing some work on corporate social responsibility and stakeholder communications.  As I reviewed various communications I was amazed at how often companies either hid, disguised or ignored their self-interest.

In case after case stakeholder and CSR projects were presented as solely in the interests of the stakeholders and ‘recipients’.  The company’s interest was never mentioned and often the language suggested that the company’s sole motivation was to make the world a better place.

Give me a break!  Does anyone believe that?

Who inside these companies actually thinks that the people who watch their videos or read their materials are going to really believe that it is all about the ‘recipients’ and the company doesn’t have any self-interest?

One case I looked at was a great supply chain development project. It created a lot of value for local producers in rural Africa and supported rural infrastructure development.  A true winner of a project. 

At the same time it reduced the companies need for expensive imported raw materials, reduced their foreign exchange exposure and created a valuable marketing opportunity for a new product.

While the company didn’t overtly position itself as an altruistic angel, not once did they acknowledge the value the company realized from the project.

Hiding self-interest is not only futile, it often negates much of the goodwill that can be created by the project in the first place.

To begin with, not acknowledging self-interest or, worse, hiding behind ‘do-gooderism’ isn’t credible, seems deceptive, and raises questions about what else the company might be trying to hide.  For any company that values open, honest communications it is a huge step back.

Secondly, it presents what could well be a strong, mutually beneficial project in a donor-recipient framework.  This not only creates the perception of inequality, it effectively diminishes both parties.

Let’s be honest.  There is value in it for the company or else why would they do it?  No company that I know of, or that plans to exist for long, is in the business of spending shareholder’s money without an expectation of value coming back to them.  Why would they?

It is far better to openly acknowledge self-interest AND the interest of stakeholders and/or society.  Be clear that the project meets needs of the company AND of stakeholders, that by collaborating each is getting something they want.

This puts partners on a more equal footing, is seen as infinitely more credible by all concerned and ultimately makes the project more sustainable and the company more believable.

And, most importantly, helps the company build trust and stronger relationships.

Does any of this apply to your CSR and stakeholder communications?  Maybe you want to check and find out?  I’ve checked a few.

28 Expert tips for engaging stakeholders in emerging markets

Compiled from contributions made by faculty and participants at an Executive program on How to effectively engage stakeholders in emerging markets.  Edited by Wayne Dunn

None of us is as smart as all of us

That was pretty clear this week in London as I spent a couple of days with a brilliant group of participants in a Stakeholder engagement program that Toby Webb (Innovation Forum) and I ran.  

We had a fantastic faculty for sure, but the experience and diversity of the participants brought as much to the overall experience as Toby, myself or the rest of the faculty.

The program, which focused on Successful stakeholder engagement in frontier markets included

•      20 hours of lectures, cases, group time

•      6 speakers/faculty with well over 125 years combined experience in frontier markets and combined experience in over 75 countries

•      7 case studies / scenarios

At the conclusion of the program the combined expertise of the faculty and participants identified 28 tips for engaging stakeholders in emerging markets. 

Some are glaringly obvious.  They are presented below in random order.

1.       Share credit – it will multiply.  Credit shared is goodwill created.  Acknowledge, recognize, praise and promote partners and collaborators (government, NGOs, communities, organizations, etc).  Do it every chance you can.  You gain much and lose nothing.

2.       Communication Training helps!  Everyone believes they are an excellent communicator.  Most of us are not!  Take training.  Make training available.  Try to make it mandatory.  Everyone in your company is a communicator, but make sure communications are kept memorable and simple, and trust your people to do the right thing

3.       There are no secrets.  Resist the urge to compartmentalize information.  Treat all communications as if they were going to be posted on the internet for all to see (because, that may just happen).  Act authentically but remember everything can and often will, end up on the record 

4.       Perception rules!  Remember there is no such thing as reality: There are only perceptions. This is why brand power works, because they are made of perceptions based on your view of the world.  Recognize the importance of perception in stakeholder engagement.  Prepare for it and work with it.  Perception is reality!

5.       Interest alignment.  Constantly search for alignment between company/project interests and stakeholder interests.  Be creative – sometimes real opportunities lie outside the box. Interest intersections, where your interests and stakeholder interests align are valuable gems.  Think inside and outside the box to find them.  Gems can be hiding in unexpected places.

6.       Partnerships are good.  Developing partnerships with on the ground NGOs are vital.  So are partnerships with governments, development agencies and others with shared objectives.  Look for shared interests and objectives and build on them.  They can help you to go further and be stronger when you get there.

7.       Help stakeholders understand why and what.  Show communities what is happening with their data, or risk negative speculation about your intentions.  Think of ways their data may be used to support their interests and objectives.

8.       Officiousness kills.  It will destroy trust and relationships.  Resist the urge to hide behind policy and procedure.  Work with relationships, not policy.  Make sure your team is fully onboard with this.

9.       Understand your risks.  Risk assessments for stakeholder management are very important. A sustainability issues matrix can help to understand, prepare and manage risks.  Make the matrix fit the realities of your project and your stakeholders.  One size DOES NOT fit all.

10.   Stakeholders are human too.  Sometimes they will lie.  So will your bosses and your reports and your colleagues, and probably you too.  That’s life.  Get used to it.  Work with it.

11.   Own your shortcomings.  Your mistakes and shortcomings don’t go away if you don’t acknowledge them.  Own them, learn from them and move on.  Nobody expects perfection. Don’t be afraid to be human and fallible.  Honestly owning a mistake or shortcoming and moving on can build trust and strengthen relationships.  Trying to hide them can do the opposite.

12.   Realistic timeframes and budgets for stakeholder engagement are vital - and make sure your CFO understands and approves a realistic budget. Help them to understand the financial cost of stakeholder engagement failure.

13.   Early is better.  Stakeholders don’t expect perfection so don’t wait for everything to be perfect before you start stakeholder engagement. Engage early, engage often and build trust.

14.   Strategic Compliance.  Know why you are complying!  Effective stakeholder relationships requires a balance of compliance and strategy.  Don’t be seduced by the illusion of certainty in compliance.  Know what you want to be compliant with and why.  Don’t be afraid to venture into the uncertainty and ambiguity of strategic engagement practices.  That is often where the breakthroughs are found and value is created.

15.   You are motivated by shareholder value.  There is something in this for you and your company.  Own it.  Don’t ever try to hide behind do-gooderism at the corporate or individual level.  Your company is not a charity. Nobody will believe you if you try to present it as one.

16.   Press conference = you lose.  If you are in a stakeholder engagement press conference you’ve already lost!  A press conference is not engagement:  Any kind of confrontation means you have lost and need to rebuild.

17.   Smile.  Let your humility and humanity show.  Relax and enjoy meeting people and learning and being human: Early tension in meetings can be quickly relieved by smiling and being relaxed. 

18.   Do the right thing!  Use the phrase: "Let's get caught doing the right thing!" to build simple internal buy in.  Listen to the little voice inside – it is a great compass.

19.   Understand before understood.  Communication is critical.  Listening is key.  Seek to understand before you try to be understood.  Think about how you say things: Use soft language, not hard, emotion generating terms.  Try to understand the interests and motivations of your stakeholders.

20.   Everyone is the face of the company.  Every contact between the company and stakeholders builds or takes away from relationships.  Everyone should be trained in stakeholder engagement at some level.  Right person to right position: If you delegate, train and build capacity. Make sure your people know how do it right, never assume.  This means your bosses, your reports and others across the company. 

21.   Own your stakeholder relationships.  Use third parties as necessary (they can be very helpful) but don't contract out stakeholder engagement or difficult communications - your company must be the face stakeholders see and learn to trust.

22.   Expectations change (but seldom reduce).  Stakeholder expectations will shift and change.  But, guess what, corporate, government, and other expectations shift and change too.  That’s life.  Accept it and prepare for it.  Engage, monitor, scan and adjust as required.

23.   Learn from success and failure.  There are lessons in success and failure.  Analyze them both. Learn why you succeeded or failed and adjust.  Don’t expect the lessons to be absorbed without doing the work of analyzing and capturing them.

24.   Simplicity is good.  Complexity will cost you.  Simple guidelines beat complex prescriptive procedures every day of the week.  Be realistic.  If your stakeholder engagement plan, process, procedure is too complex who is going to follow it?  Would you?  Don't turn stakeholder engagement into box ticking!  Train and trust your people.  Give them room to be creative and responsive but let them know where the boundaries are.

25.   Interest intersections are critical.  Mapping stakeholders and interest mapping is vital, and must be reviewed often. Find and develop the interest intersections where win, win, win can be found.  Remember, be creative and think inside and outside of the box.

26.   All is not the same.  The importance of taking note of culture cannot be underestimated.  Things change from country to country and project to project.  Rigidity will often crack and break.  Allow room for adaptation to culture and use it when necessary. 

27.   Stay in touch.  Ongoing communications even when there is no obvious demand – Be open and transparent, it builds trust.  Think about being counter intuitive with regular communications about the good and bad. Get the balance right. Communicate frequently enough that you are not forgotten but not so frequently that you are ignored.  Don’t always wait for a big win, or failure.  Share the ebb and flow of dailyness once in a while.

Don’t be left at the starting line.  Compliance is the price of entry.  Go beyond.  Don't rely on compliance, or believe that claims of legality offer you meaningful defense or protection.