Skip to main content

CLIP Analysis

Field of application

Identifying key stakeholders is relevant in different circumstances:

  • Identifying key relevant #stakeholders in a local economy that can promote or undermine the process of local or social development efforts
  • Identify with students main stakeholders relevant in the area where they want to open their business
  • For an organisation like e.g. a university to identify #strategic partners that they want to involve in a process
  • For a support organisation that wants to #prioritize the stakeholders with which they are connected

Resume / Brief description

 

The CLIP analysis stands for Cooperation, Legitimacy, Interest and Power. After a brainstorming on relevant stakeholders in a certain context, the collected stakeholders are grouped according to the three criteria Legitimacy, Interest and Power. While some of them comply with not one of the criteria, others comply with one, two or all three. The CLIP framework provides the opportunity to structure the stakeholders in the once, which can be identified as dominant stakeholders or according to the rating, as forceful, vulnerable, respected, marginalized, dormant or influential stakeholders. Accordingly, this tells also a lot about whom to integrate in a strategic process.   

Target group

  • With max. 25 participants from different backgrounds like students, organisational representatives, businesses, support organisations
  • The tool can also be used individually to brainstorm on possible stakeholders relevant for your own business, organisation or objectives

Objectives

  • Identify strategic partners and stakeholders that should be integrated in a process
  • Differentiate the relevance of the potential partners
  • Identifying the stakeholders who might not have interest in a certain development but who are powerful to undermine the efforts
  • Identify a coalition of stakeholders that are relevant to keep an eye on to assure that the process is making progress

Requirements

Material

Time

 

Material:

·        2 pin boards, markers of 3 colors, moderation cards

Time:

·        The time of the workshop requires 1,5-2 hours.

Implementation - Overview

The methodology is realized in 3 phases   

image-1621430800345.png

Implementation - Guidelines

 

 

 

 

 

I.                  IDENTIFICATION OF RELEVANT STAKEHOLDERS

  • The workshop starts with the definition of the objective. On what issue do we want to identify key relevant stakeholders? is the question. Is it about identifying relevant business partners, a group of people with whom to create a network, stakeholders relevant to promote a local economy, a cluster or a business network, etc.?
  • Then the group (or the individual) starts to reflect about the relevant stakeholders that come into their mind. Here the focus is on brainstorming and not about discussing which ones are more or less important.
  • The group is writing each of the stakeholders that come into their mind, on a moderation card. For each stakeholder one moderation card. 
  • In general, it leads to 15-30 cards.
  • All cards are pinned on one pin board or laid out on the floor so that all participants can see all cards and think about additional relevant stakeholders.  
  • This process of brainstorming is in general without discussion. The idea is that participants bring in their different perspectives and ideas about relevant stakeholders.

 

II.                Differentiating between characteristics of each stakeholder

  • After the brainstorming the joint reflection starts on the characteristics of each of the mentioned stakeholders.
  • The facilitator explains that the stakeholders are now differentiated between stakeholders that have only one of the three criteria (power, interest, legitimacy), two of these characteristics or all three. 
  • Assessing the characteristics of each of the identified stakeholder is to a certain extent a subjective process. It is not helpful to discuss these issues. Reach of the participants have got their own opinion. Nonetheless, the collective impressions will give a good overall picture. Thus, the assessment process will be done in a way that everybody can give his or her opinion.
  • Then the facilitator hands out a marker in one colour (e.g. blue) and asks the participants to make a cross next to the card of the stakeholders they think are powerful. Participants go to the board and make their cross. At the end of the first assessment the facilitator will, jointly with the participants, count the number of crosses and identify the most powerful stakeholders. The facilitator writes a P on the cards with the most crosses.
  • Then the facilitator hands out a marker in another colour (e.g. black) and asks the participants to make a cross next to the card of the stakeholders they think have interest in the topic. Participants go to the board and make their cross. At the end of the second assessment the facilitator will again, jointly with the participants, count the number of crosses and identify the most interested stakeholders. Some of them might also be powerful ones. The facilitator writes an I on the cards with the most crosses.
  • Then the facilitator hands out a marker in another colour (e.g. black) and asks the participants to make a cross next to the card of the stakeholders they think have legitimacy in the topic. Participants go again to the board and make their cross. At the end of the third assessment the facilitator will again, jointly with the participants, count the number of crosses and identify the most interested stakeholders. The facilitator writes an L on the cards with the most crosses.
  • Finally the group will again assess the results together.

 

III.               DOCUMENTATION AND PRIORITISATION

  • After the assessment the facilitator will show the Venn diagram (see below) and explain it. The Venn diagram should have be drawn on the second pin board before the workshop. image-1621430827558.png
  • Together with the participants the facilitator will group the cards of the stakeholders according to the letters on the card.
  • Cards with a P, an I and an L will put into the centre of the circles and is clearly a dominant actor (and so on).
  • Once all the cards are located in the diagram, the group will have the chance to reflect on the outcome.
  • There are several questions that will be reflected on: What are the dominant partners we have to involve in our process? What are the dormant ones that are powerful and might undermine the whole process? What are the marginalized and vulnerable ones we want and need to integrate? Who are the influential and respected ones?
  • Apart from structuring the different stakeholders there is a last round of reflection necessary: Whom do we want to get more involved in the process? How can we do this? Which stakeholders might undermine the whole process? What can we do to overcome that risk?
  • The overall process of structuring stakeholders along the Venn diagram provides a good overview and opportunities to define strategic next steps.

Example of application:

Description of the context

Mesopartner made use of the CLIP analysis framework in many contexts related to local economic development and in regard to the identify main stakeholders relevant to promote certain clusters and sectors. IN this example we worked together with Rumanian colleagues from World Vision that wanted to promote the development of a suburb in Bukarest.

 

Identification of main stakeholders

image-1621430847671.png

The CLIP process started with a reflection on main stakeholders in smaller groups. For a first group brainstorming they used flipchart paper. The findings were then presented on a pin board and main stakeholders identified were written on cards.

 

Assessment of main stakeholders

Main stakeholders were then documented on a pin board and the assessment process started.

image-1621430888346.png

 

Documentation of findings on the Venn diagram

The assessment was then transferred to the Venn diagram. The latter was drawn on a pin board.

image-1621430900630.png

 

Final reflection

With the structuring of the different stakeholders and with the visualisation of the assessment the team observed several relevant aspects:

  • Several highly interested but marginalized groups were not included in the considerations of the team.
  • The team realized that two stakeholders that were not involved in the process could become a real danger for the process due to their string power and a lack of interest.
  • Some of the powerful players that in general also have an interest to become involved, have not been really asked how the team could involve them more and what their ideas are
  • Some ideas for the promotion of the suburbs will also create resistance (e.g. greening places, including parking places). Some stakeholders and even politicians might oppose some of the planned initiatives. The team has to be aware about that because these stakeholders can become dormant risks of they are not getting integrated from the beginning onwards.

Templates, Graphics for download

 

Additional format/references

Readings

·        A slightly adjusted approach to the CLIP analysis that changes interest with urgency as characteristic: https://i2s.anu.edu.au/resources/stakeholder-analysis-power-legitimacy-urgency