The Problem

which is a private sector entity, took the lead on the project. Thus, we were forced into a
much more collaborative or facilitative approach.
This facilitative approach has had dramatic impacts upon the success of the project.
From the beginning, we had individual stakeholders representing each quadrant of the
Diagnostic Typology for Primary Stakeholders (see Figure 5). While most people fell
into the supportive category, there were some key players who filled the other areas as
well which required a great deal of effort and whose role in this process warrants further
discussion. First, we will begin with our marginal stakeholder. This was a representative
from the planning district who was originally tasked with spearheading the project. This
person clearly fit the characteristics of this type, bringing low levels of cooperation and
low levels of threat to the process. He was also very characteristic of a dependent
stakeholder, because while he possessed a sense of urgency, he lacked legitimacy and
power, increasingly so as the project progressed and more and more participants began to
have influential impacts on the ATIS project.
As the project progressed, the planning district representative became increasingly
marginalized, primarily because he maintained a great deal of ownership over the project,
and resisted losing control as it expanded and developed. This caused him to lose not
only a great deal of legitimacy in the eyes of the other stakeholders, but also, whatever
power he once maintained was subsequently lost. While he was initially a dangerous
stakeholder (possessing power and urgency), his perspective on the project continued to
reduce the amount of power he had, relegating him to the role of demanding stakeholder.
At this point, it is unclear what his role in the project will be, but it is clear that his ability
to directly influence the outcome is now severely limited.
As noted above, our mixed-blessing stakeholder was the representative from the state
transportation agency. This individual was extremely hesitant about the project, and we
knew that he could be extremely valuable if he could be brought on board, but also a
hindrance if he could not be brought on board. Initially, he was also clearly a dominant
stakeholder, who lacked the sense of urgency to become a definitive stakeholder. As
21