¿Cómo se puede gestionar la retroalimentación de las partes interesadas cuando hay opiniones contradictorias?

Effectively managing stakeholder feedback begins with identifying and prioritizing key stakeholders. Analyzing their roles, influence, and impact on the project allows us to strategize our engagement approach. Understanding the diversity within stakeholder groups helps tailor our methods of communication and feedback collection to address varied concerns efficiently.

In addition to strategic mapping and communications, it’s important to understand stakeholders’ preconceived perceptions going into any engagement. Conflicting opinions are often the by-product of the different set of perspectives and assumptions stakeholders bring to the table at the outset. Even before a project begins, each stakeholder likely has a different foundational view, set of assumptions, and opinions about the effort and the entity leading the engagement. I’ve found it’s therefore very important at the beginning of any endeavor to spend more time upfront covering the background, input and key assumptions, and provide stakeholders a common set of data and do more listening than talking to further inform engagement strategy.

Stakeholder Mapping is a great framework to map out who your stakeholders are and ensure there are no "missing voices". Many models prioritize stakeholders based on their mapping values on criteria such as Influence, Impact and Interest. This is not the only goal or objective of stakeholder mapping however, it is also about structuring and designing an appropriate engagement approach based on the needs of the different segments of stakeholders. It also gives you a framework for understanding the conflicting opinions.

Conflict often arises from either a disagreement over goals or alternatives to reach the goals. Work out which it is first. In terms of process, managing conflicting stakeholder feedback involves active listening, acknowledging all viewpoints, and finding common ground. Prioritize issues based on impact and urgency. Facilitate open discussions and aim for consensus. If conflicts persist, use a decision-making frameworks exploring needs and how to solve for them leaving no one left out. Keep communication transparent and document decisions to ensure understanding and accountability.

The issue here is that there is conflicting of opinion. In a professional set up decisions are based on facts or should I say scientific facts and not opinions. it is therefore prudent that when one is considering the “conflicting opinions”, facts are used to make decisions. It doesn’t matter who has power among the stakeholders, it is always the right information based on science, facts, and best practice that a professional is going to use to come to a conclusion. Relying on opinions is dangerous because it is based on perceptions, preferences, and sometimes resulting from being misinformed. When Communicating with the stakeholders, it is important to put a framework upfront for decision-making based on science, facts and best practice

Collecting a wide range of feedback through surveys, interviews, and discussions is crucial. Analyzing this data helps identify common themes and conflicting viewpoints. Utilizing analytical tools like SWOT analysis aids in organizing feedback, providing clarity on different perspectives, and guiding decision-making processes.

Identify Stakeholders: The first step is to identify who your stakeholders are. These can include customers, employees, suppliers, investors, and community members. Methods of Collection: Use various methods to collect feedback such as surveys, interviews, focus groups, and observation. Ensure anonymity where necessary to encourage honesty. Diverse Perspectives: Encourage stakeholders from different groups to provide feedback. This diversity ensures a wide range of perspectives and ideas. Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis: Use quantitative methods like statistical analysis for survey data and qualitative methods like thematic analysis for interview and open-ended survey responses.

After collecting and analyzing feedback and before addressing and incorporating it into your change plan, it is important to verify your results again with your stakeholders to ensure that your interpretation and data is correct. Also, by involving stakeholders in the verification process, they can provide more context, use cases and considerations to support their thinking and share with other stakeholders. When shown the collective view, individuals can often see the best way forward for the wider community, and set their individual interests aside.

Based on my experience, the importance of collaborative planning and decision-making cannot be overstated. When change is solely directed from the top, employees may comply out of obligation, yet lack genuine enthusiasm. In contrast, involving team members in the decision-making process and valuing their input can significantly reduce the need for later efforts to 'sell' a new vision or change. Ownership and passion for their work naturally follow when people feel their contributions are acknowledged. Furthermore, even if their specific suggestions are not adopted, the mere act of being heard fosters a willingness to embrace change more readily.

Data collected is only as good as its acceptable levels of accuracy. For example, if the project is a highly complex rocket development or a nuclear power project, the higher levels of accuracy needed, must be defined pre-commencement and not post commencement. The stakeholders must be onboard in this aspect. If the project is a run of the mill RCC framed structure, the accuracy of data need not be of the same order of magnitude. Requiring the data to be too accurate, not commensurate with the complexity of project, can make project execution, monitoring and control and finally closing of project enormously difficult.

As you move up the hierarchy, topics become less clear and harder to judge. Different organizational cultures might cause different reasons for conflicts, but the way to solve them should be similar: Ensure everyone is on the same page, then try to understand each person's perspective. If you're the one making decisions, listen carefully to everyone's input because they often offer valuable insights from different viewpoints. The best scenario is that everyone is working towards the overall goal, not against it.

Address feedback by acknowledging it and providing clear, timely responses. Explain how it'll improve your change project, outlining benefits and trade-offs. Prioritize feedback that aligns with project objectives, scope, and criteria. Avoid unnecessary or unrealistic changes that could compromise project quality or feasibility. This ensures stakeholders feel heard and valued, while keeping the project on track and focused on its primary goals.

Acknowledgment: Acknowledge all feedback received, even if it’s not possible to act on all of it. This shows stakeholders that their input is valued. Conflict Resolution Strategies: When opinions conflict, use strategies like mediation, finding common ground, or seeking a third-party opinion. Transparent Communication: Be clear about what feedback will be acted upon and why. This transparency helps in managing expectations. Incorporate Feedback into Planning: Adjust project plans, strategies, or products based on the prioritized feedback. This may involve redesigning processes, products, or strategies.

Incorporating feedback that moves the change plan ahead to completion / or get more people committed to change plan isvery essential. Conflicting feedback can be overwhelming. Differentiate between feedback based on the action taken vs. feedback based at thought level. In my experience, feedback from stakehokder who have taken actions on the change plan, gives better results than the feedback given by stakeholder who are still fighting the change at thought level.

Any feedback, whether incorporated or not, must go into the lessons learnt or knowledge register, along with the proper perspective of why such change was made or not made. As data is likely to be humongous in nature, key words must be indexed into a global library so that future referencing can be easily carried out.

I normally ask people to explain why they think what they do. I then explain to them why others see it differently. Sometimes it helps people to see others point of view, and sometimes it just reinforces their view. There is no magical answer to this question.

Resolve the conflict and get aligned. Can be a very difficult process and is sometimes easier said than done. Extremely challenging when not all parties focused on the same goal. “Focus on the problem and not on who is right and who wrong”

Aligning your team to a common goal can assist in creating focused HEALTHY competition on the goal rather than internal NEGATIVE competition.

Effective stakeholder management is critical to the success of any project; hence, the need to understand the perspective of each stakeholder in the feedback conflict situation while reiterating the overall objective of the project. Objectively evaluating the viewpoint of each stakeholder within the context of the overall project objective and effectively communicating the outcome/impact of such evaluation on the project would promote stakeholder adoption and ultimately enhance project value/benefit realization.

Honest conversations. Coming together in 'fellowship' to explore why feedback is conflicting. The competing commitment isn't always rational - it could be emotional, political OR it could have nothing to do with the particular situation / project. Either way, get people together F2F or virtually and have a conversation. Use design principles to refocus on what is best for the team/organisation.

Managing conflicting stakeholder feedback requires more than monitoring; it demands an inclusive approach. Each opinion signifies diverse needs. Engaging stakeholders individually to grasp underlying concerns, seeking common ground is key. We need to foster open dialogue and collaboration platforms to reconcile differences. Flexibility in plans allows integration of feasible suggestions without compromising goals. I would also encourage adopting a "test and learn" approach. Implement small changes based on feedback, analyzing their impact before scaling. Iterative adaptation will foster a culture valuing diverse perspectives, resolving conflicting feedback harmoniously.

Closing the feedback loop is essential if you want the community, in particular, to engage with you again. Asking stakeholders how they want to be engaged is a great place to gain trust in the first place. As is being open about the complexity of decision making variables and what influence stakeholders can have. Be genuine.

This section implies a very 'command and control', paternalistic approach. Where practical, I advocate for transparency and for collaborative evaluation. Gather the feedback Publish it Let everyone have a say about what should be acted on and when

Keep the feedback mechanism simple. Here is a simple framework everyone can use - Point of the impact straight forward - Discuss ideas for improvement - Align upon next steps - Set follow up

Managing stakeholder feedback when dealing with conflicting opinions requires enhancing the feedback culture within the organization. I've learned that creating an environment where feedback is seen as an opportunity for learning and improvement is crucial. For instance, when faced with conflicting feedback from different stakeholders, I focus on fostering open discussions where all perspectives are valued and considered. This strategy involves passively receiving feedback and actively engaging stakeholders in dialogue, seeking clarity, and understanding the underlying reasons for their viewpoints. Enhancing this feedback culture helps navigate conflicts and leverage feedback as a strategic tool for informed decision-making.

Enhancing feedback culture is not specific to the role of the change leader. This is a broader topic that is often initiated through HR as performance management relies on feedback and many leaders often need guidance on how to provide feedback, when, etc. At the same time, leaders and managers really set the tone for creating a feedback culture. However, I would suggest a flip to the script and focus on developing the coaching skills of leaders and managers. Feedback is essential but can often be directionless; coaching is forward moving and empowering.

Creating an environment that values open feedback and continuous learning is essential for handling conflicting opinions. Encouraging honest communication and acknowledging stakeholder contributions fosters trust. Regularly seeking and utilizing feedback on our management strategies helps in refining our approach to stakeholder engagement and conflict resolution.

Often those leading or advocating for a change become hyper invested in the change or outcomes from the change that they fail to hear the wisdom from stakeholders. Stakeholders have to have bought in to the problem and if they aren’t, whatever change being proposed may face resistance. Active listening is required. Advocates for the change may actually be wrong about the identified problem or the proposed solution or how that solution may create unintended consequences. If their assumptions are correct, being open and transparent while also engaging stakeholders as part of the solution mitigates rumors and creates buy in. Leaders must realize that getting it right matters more than being right.

Not all stakeholder feedback is created equal. Take the time to understand the role each stakeholder plays. Who can make or break the success of the project? Who has less influence? That will help you determine how to manage each stakeholders opinion. This is also a time to leverage your sponsors. Make sure to properly prep your sponsors, and hold them accountable to engage with their peers. Finally - build trust with each stakeholder by listening and exercising empathy. That goes a really long way.

Creating a safe environment for giving feedback and handling conflicts is the most important element in my opinion. This means cultivating open communication, actively listening to team members, promoting empathy, respecting diverse perspectives, and establishing clear guidelines for constructive feedback, fostering a culture where everyone feels heard and valued.

At times, conflicting feedback stems from lack of clarity. To help, there'd ideally be strategic intent, direction and integrated outcomes. When it comes to what success looks like, get key stakeholders involved, so they’re collaborators from the get-go. Collaboration aids in further clarity. Conflicting feedback in and of itself isn't a bad thing, in fact multiple perspectives help to illuminate blind spots and mitigate bias. It's how you handle the feedback that makes all the difference: - Is the feedback due to issues, risks or roadblocks? - Is it an opportunity to demystify or educate? - Does there need to be a re-alignment to the integrated outcomes or what success looks like?

You need active listening, finding common ground, and facilitating compromise. For example, if stakeholders disagree on project priorities, arrange a meeting where each party can express their concerns and objectives. Actively listen to understand the underlying interests behind their positions. Identify any shared goals or commonalities and propose solutions that address the key concerns of each stakeholder. For instance, if one group prioritizes cost savings while another focuses on quality, suggest a phased approach that initially targets cost efficiencies with planned enhancements for quality improvements later. By fostering open dialogue and seeking balanced solutions, you can harmonize conflicting opinions and advance the project.

Conflicting feedback is generally due to two main reasons - 1. lack of clarity and 2. lack of ownership and collaboration. Most of the time if you can share enough information to all the stakeholders to bring in clarity, you can resolve conflicting feedback situation. But in few rare occasions, when some of the stakeholders don't share ownership of the final result, it may end up in lack of collaboration from them and thus conflicting feedback. In such circumstances you should look to find ways to involve those stakeholders and make them partner and thus responsible in the end result. This will bring in collaboration and thus resolve conflicting feedback.