Stakeholder Analysis: A Case Study Example

Context

This case study is based on practical implementation guidance shared during Health Procurement Africa’s (HPA) Ask the Expert webinar on stakeholder analysis. The session presented applied approaches from Nigeria and Ethiopia, delivered by HPA procurement experts, illustrating how public-sector health procurement teams can undertake stakeholder analysis.

Watch the full Ask the Expert webinar recording here.

Introduction

Stakeholder analysis is a structured approach for identifying individuals, groups, and organisations that have an interest in, or may be affected by, a procurement activity. In public-sector healthcare procurement, stakeholder environments are often complex, with multiple actors influencing priorities, funding, governance, and service delivery.

A robust stakeholder analysis helps procurement teams understand stakeholder expectations and concerns, align engagement approaches, and reduce delivery risks associated with misalignment, conflict, or communication gaps.

The Stakeholder Analysis Framework

The webinar presented a practical process for stakeholder analysis: identify stakeholders, categorise them, understand expectations and concerns, plan engagement and communication, and then monitor and review as circumstances change.

A common categorisation method is Mendelow’s Power–Interest Matrix, which groups stakeholders by their relative power and level of interest in a procurement.

	High Interest	Low Interest
High Power	Manage closely (Key players)	Keep satisfied
Low Power	Keep informed	Monitor (minimal effort)

The webinar emphasised that power and interest should be assessed as relative (not absolute) to ensure meaningful differentiation across the matrix.

Developing the Stakeholder Analysis

A structured approach involves three stages: stakeholder identification, categorisation and engagement planning.

Stakeholder Identification

Stakeholders may be internal (within the buying organisation) or external. In public-sector healthcare, the ‘customer’ can include those who pay for services, those who receive services, and those who benefit from services, which may be different groups. Additional stakeholders may include government bodies, donors, suppliers, regulators, health facilities, community representatives, and media commentators.

Categorisation

After identification, stakeholders are categorised to determine an appropriate engagement approach. The webinar highlighted categorisation using the Power–Interest Matrix, and the usefulness of considering whether stakeholders act as blockers or enablers when implementing change.

Engagement and Communication Planning

The webinar recommended moving from general intentions (e.g., “communicate regularly”) to defined methods and channels. A stakeholder communication plan can specify communication methods, frequency, and key messages tailored to stakeholder needs.

Case Application: Health Sector Reform (Nigeria)

A practical case from Kaduna State, Nigeria, described how a health supplies management agency undertook stakeholder analysis to support reforms, including reviewing the law establishing the agency and revitalising an integrated sustainable health supply system to strengthen continuity of health supplies.

Illustrative Stakeholders Identified

Stakeholder Group	Examples Referenced in the Case
Government oversight and policy	Honourable Commissioner of Health; Director of Pharmaceutical Services; national supply chain coordination programme
Funding and partners	Development partners and implementing partners (including major donors/investors)
Service delivery network	State Primary Healthcare Board; in-charges of health facilities; tertiary hospital leadership
Internal enabling functions	Finance; legal/regulatory; IT administration; procurement unit leadership
Supply market	Suppliers supporting uninterrupted availability of health supplies

Mapping and Engagement Approach

Stakeholders were mapped using the Power–Interest Matrix to determine who to manage closely, keep satisfied, keep informed, or monitor. A consultative approach was used to build buy-in for reform and to align priorities across internal, external, and connected stakeholders.

Example Communication Planning

Stakeholder / Forum	Purpose	Communication Method	Frequency	Responsible Lead
State DRF committee & community structures	Policy and operational decisions for commodity system reforms	Meeting (digital / in-person as appropriate)	Monthly	Director of Pharmaceutical Services / Agency leadership
Development & implementing partners	Updates on procurement and supply challenges; coordination of support	Virtual updates and check-ins; reports	Regular (e.g., monthly/periodic)	Agency leadership / Procurement unit
Wider stakeholders (retreat/health forum)	Identify gaps, surface concerns, resolve conflicts, align reform direction	Workshop/retreat engagement	As needed for reform milestones	Agency leadership

Implementation Challenges

Challenges highlighted included conflicting stakeholder interests and priorities, communication gaps, political influence and power dynamics, and resource constraints. The case noted mitigation measures such as early engagement and advocacy to build buy-in, regular feedback, and conflict resolution through structured forums (e.g., retreats) to establish a common ground.

Dynamic Review

Stakeholder analysis and management is a continuous process. The webinar emphasised monitoring and reviewing stakeholder power, interest, and expectations over time, adjusting engagement methods and messages as circumstances change.

Conclusion

This case demonstrates how stakeholder analysis supports procurement and supply chain reform in complex public-sector health environments. By identifying stakeholders, mapping relative power and interest, and implementing a structured communication plan, procurement teams can improve alignment, transparency, and sustainability of change initiatives.

More like this

All itemseast