Stakeholder Cascades¶

Consequence Simulator

Beyond Stakeholder Mapping¶

Traditional stakeholder analysis asks: Who are the stakeholders? What are their interests? How do we manage them?

This document asks different questions:

• What happens to each stakeholder when consequences arrive?
• How do stakeholders affect each other?
• What cascades flow through human networks?
• Who gets hurt when things go wrong?
• Who has power you forgot about?

The Stakeholder Consequence Matrix¶

For each stakeholder, map not just their interest but their consequence exposure:

The Hidden Stakeholders¶

Your stakeholder list probably includes the obvious people. Here are the ones you missed:

The Absent Stakeholders¶

The Sleeper Stakeholders¶

The Lesson: Stakeholders you're not managing can become your most important stakeholders overnight.

Cascade Patterns: How Consequences Flow Between Stakeholders¶

Cascade Pattern 1: The Workforce Cascade¶

flowchart TB
    AI([AI Deployment]) --> AW[<strong>AFFECTED WORKERS</strong><br/>Jobs changed/eliminated]

    AW --> U[Union]
    AW --> RS[Remaining Staff]
    AW --> F[Families]
    AW --> IN[Industry Networks]

    U --> IA[Industrial action]
    RS --> MC[Morale collapse]
    F --> CI[Community impact]
    IN --> RD[Reputation damage]

    IA & MC & CI & RD --> POL[<strong>POLITICAL ATTENTION</strong>]

    style AI fill:#e3f2fd,stroke:#1976d2,stroke-width:2px
    style AW fill:#ef9a9a,stroke:#c62828,stroke-width:2px
    style POL fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#7b1fa2,stroke-width:2px

The Cascade: 1. Workers affected (first-order) 2. Union engages (second-order) 3. Remaining staff demoralized (second-order) 4. Families and communities affected (second-order) 5. Industry networks spread story (second-order) 6. Political attention arrives (third-order) 7. Project becomes liability (fourth-order)

The Timeline: - Weeks 1-4: Internal knowledge, quiet concern - Month 2-3: Union formal engagement - Month 4-6: Media becomes aware - Month 6-12: Political ramifications

Cascade Pattern 2: The Citizen Harm Cascade¶

flowchart TB
    ERR([AI Decision Error]) --> CIT[<strong>AFFECTED CITIZEN</strong><br/>Wrongful denial/penalty]

    CIT --> AP[Appeal]
    CIT --> COMP[Complaint to Agency]
    CIT --> ADV[Advocate Orgs]
    CIT --> SM[Social Media]

    AP --> SE[System exposed]
    COMP --> IR[Internal review]
    ADV --> SP[Systemic pattern found]
    SM --> VS[Viral story]

    SE & IR & SP & VS --> TM[<strong>TRADITIONAL MEDIA</strong>]
    TM --> CA[Class Action]
    TM --> PQ[<strong>PARLIAMENT QUESTIONS</strong>]
    PQ --> INQ[Inquiry / Royal Commission]

    style ERR fill:#ef9a9a,stroke:#c62828,stroke-width:2px
    style CIT fill:#ffcc80,stroke:#ef6c00,stroke-width:2px
    style TM fill:#fff9c4,stroke:#f9a825,stroke-width:2px
    style PQ fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#7b1fa2,stroke-width:2px
    style INQ fill:#ef9a9a,stroke:#c62828,stroke-width:2px

The Cascade: 1. Individual harm (first-order) 2. Complaint/appeal reveals systemic issue (second-order) 3. Advocates identify pattern (second-order) 4. Story finds media outlet (third-order) 5. Political pressure builds (third-order) 6. Formal inquiry (fourth-order)

The Robodebt Pattern: This is not theoretical. This is exactly how Robodebt unfolded: - Individual complaints - Pattern recognition by advocates - Media investigation - Political accountability - Royal Commission - Permanent institutional damage

Cascade Pattern 3: The Vendor Dependency Cascade¶

flowchart TB
    VR([Vendor Relationship]) --> CS[<strong>CONTRACT SIGNED</strong><br/>Vendor has leverage]

    CS --> SA[Staff Skills Atrophy]
    CS --> KT[Knowledge Transfer Fails]
    CS --> BL[Budget Locked In]
    CS --> TD[Technical Debt Grows]

    SA & KT & BL & TD --> VL[<strong>VENDOR LEVERAGE</strong><br/>Price increases, service decreases]

    VL --> VA[Vendor Acquired]
    VL --> CANT[Can't Switch]
    VL --> COMP[Competitor Knows Your Weakness]

    VA & CANT & COMP --> STRANDED[<strong>STRANDED PROJECT</strong><br/>Can't continue, can't stop, can't switch]

    style VR fill:#e3f2fd,stroke:#1976d2,stroke-width:2px
    style CS fill:#fff9c4,stroke:#f9a825,stroke-width:2px
    style VL fill:#ffcc80,stroke:#ef6c00,stroke-width:2px
    style STRANDED fill:#ef9a9a,stroke:#c62828,stroke-width:2px

The Cascade: 1. Vendor relationship begins (first-order) 2. Internal capability degrades (second-order) 3. Vendor gains leverage (second-order) 4. Terms shift in vendor's favor (third-order) 5. External factors (acquisition, competitor) compound (third-order) 6. Strategic paralysis (fourth-order)

Cascade Pattern 4: The Leadership Cascade¶

flowchart TB
    ES([Executive Sponsor]) --> TRIG

    subgraph TRIG["<strong>TRIGGER EVENTS</strong>"]
        T1[Sponsor moves on]
        T2[Sponsor promoted]
        T3[Priorities change]
    end

    TRIG --> SEC

    subgraph SEC["<strong>SECOND ORDER</strong>"]
        S1[New sponsor lukewarm]
        S2[Project orphaned]
        S3[Budget vulnerable]
    end

    SEC --> THR

    subgraph THR["<strong>THIRD ORDER</strong>"]
        TH1[Team morale drops]
        TH2[Priorities shift away]
        TH3[Project becomes legacy]
    end

    THR --> FOUR["<strong>FOURTH ORDER</strong><br/>Project on life support<br/>Too embedded to kill<br/>Too neglected to succeed"]

    style ES fill:#e3f2fd,stroke:#1976d2,stroke-width:2px
    style TRIG fill:#fff9c4,stroke:#f9a825,stroke-width:2px
    style SEC fill:#ffcc80,stroke:#ef6c00,stroke-width:2px
    style THR fill:#ef9a9a,stroke:#c62828,stroke-width:2px
    style FOUR fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#7b1fa2,stroke-width:2px

The Cascade: 1. Sponsor engaged (prerequisite) 2. Sponsor changes (trigger) 3. Project loses protection (second-order) 4. Competing priorities win (third-order) 5. Zombie project (fourth-order)

Stakeholder-Specific Consequence Profiles¶

Profile: The Minister¶

What they care about: - Not being embarrassed - Positive media coverage - Question Time preparation - Election timing - Portfolio wins

Consequence sensitivity: - High sensitivity: Public embarrassment, opposition attacks, bad headlines - Medium sensitivity: Cost overruns, delays - Low sensitivity: Technical issues, implementation challenges

How they receive consequences: - Through media monitoring - Through departmental briefings (filtered) - Through Senate Estimates - Through Ministerial correspondence - Through caucus/party feedback

When they act: - When it threatens their position - When political cost exceeds political benefit - When they can't defend it in Question Time - When media sustained coverage begins

Cascade they trigger: - Kill the project entirely - Demand changes mid-stream - Distance themselves publicly - Launch "independent review"

Profile: The Union¶

What they care about: - Member jobs - Member conditions - Organizational power - Industrial precedent - Political relationships

Consequence sensitivity: - High sensitivity: Job losses, workload increases, surveillance - Medium sensitivity: Changed work practices, new skills required - Low sensitivity: Technology changes (if jobs protected)

How they receive consequences: - Through member complaints - Through delegate networks - Through formal consultation (if it happens) - Through media/political monitoring

When they act: - When member jobs threatened - When consultation obligations breached - When political opportunity exists - When pattern across employers emerges

Cascade they trigger: - Industrial action - Media campaign - Political pressure - Legal challenge - Pattern bargaining on AI clauses

Profile: The Advocate Group¶

What they care about: - Client/constituency welfare - Systemic fairness - Organizational profile - Funding relationships - Policy influence

Consequence sensitivity: - High sensitivity: Harm to clients, systematic discrimination - Medium sensitivity: Access issues, service quality - Low sensitivity: Process changes (if outcomes preserved)

How they receive consequences: - Through casework - Through hotlines/intake - Through research - Through network contacts - Through FOI requests

When they act: - When pattern of harm identified - When media opportunity exists - When legal case available - When funding supports campaign - When political timing right

Cascade they trigger: - Media exposure - Legal test cases - Policy campaigns - Funding of research - Coalition building

Profile: The IT Department¶

What they care about: - System stability - Security - Supportability - Standards compliance - Resource availability

Consequence sensitivity: - High sensitivity: Security incidents, outages, unsupported systems - Medium sensitivity: Integration challenges, technical debt - Low sensitivity: Business outcomes (not their problem)

How they receive consequences: - Through incident reports - Through change requests - Through helpdesk volume - Through security monitoring - Through vendor communications

When they act: - When systems fail - When security threatened - When resources overwhelmed - When standards breached - When audit findings emerge

Cascade they trigger: - System restrictions - Change freezes - Security escalations - Architecture reviews - Vendor escalations

Profile: Frontline Staff¶

What they care about: - Job security - Workload - Being able to do good work - Not being blamed for system failures - Career prospects

Consequence sensitivity: - High sensitivity: Job loss, surveillance, blame for AI errors - Medium sensitivity: Changed work, new skills required - Low sensitivity: Back-office changes (if not affected)

How they receive consequences: - Directly through work changes - Through team dynamics - Through management communications (often late/poor) - Through informal networks - Through union communications

When they act: - When workload unmanageable - When blamed for AI errors - When forced to enforce unfair decisions - When job threatened - When colleagues affected

Cascade they trigger: - Work-to-rule - Sick leave patterns - Quality deterioration - Whistleblowing - Exit (taking knowledge with them)

The Stakeholder Cascade Calculator¶

For each stakeholder, rate:

Cascade Risk Formula:

Cascade Risk = (Impact Severity × Influence Power) / Speed of Response

Higher number = faster, more damaging cascade

The Forgotten Stakeholder Exercise¶

Answer these questions:

1. Who has been affected by similar AI systems elsewhere?
2. What did they do?

3. How could they connect with your affected stakeholders?

4. Who would benefit from your failure?

5. Competitors? Critics? Political opponents?

6. How are they monitoring?

7. Who has power but no visibility?

8. Regulatory bodies?
9. Oversight agencies?

10. Parliamentary committees?

11. Who will still be here in five years?

12. When you're gone, who remains to manage consequences?

13. What will they inherit?

14. Who isn't in your stakeholder list but should be?

15. Be honest.
16. Add them now.

The Cascade Early Warning System¶

Monitor these signals for each stakeholder category:

The Rule: By the time it's in the newspaper, you've missed 20 early warnings.

The Stakeholder Consequence Map Template¶

Primary Stakeholders (Directly affected)¶

Secondary Stakeholders (Indirectly affected)¶

Sleeper Stakeholders (Not yet engaged but could be)¶

Forgotten Stakeholders (Should be on the list)¶

"Stakeholder management isn't about managing people. It's about understanding that every person is connected to other people, and consequences flow through those connections like electricity through a grid."