Activates when the conversation involves stakeholder analysis, sponsor identification, influence mapping, change impact assessment, coalition building, or questions about who needs to be involved in a transformation. Trigger phrases include "stakeholder map", "who are the stakeholders", "sponsor", "who has authority", "who needs to be on board", "influence", "coalition", "change champion", "who should be in the room".
From change-managementnpx claudepluginhub anthropics/claude-plugins-community --plugin change-management-pluginThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
Guides Next.js Cache Components and Partial Prerendering (PPR) with cacheComponents enabled. Implements 'use cache', cacheLife(), cacheTag(), revalidateTag(), static/dynamic optimization, and cache debugging.
Migrates code, prompts, and API calls from Claude Sonnet 4.0/4.5 or Opus 4.1 to Opus 4.5, updating model strings on Anthropic, AWS, GCP, Azure platforms.
Details PluginEval's skill quality evaluation: 3 layers (static, LLM judge), 10 dimensions, rubrics, formulas, anti-patterns, badges. Use to interpret scores, improve triggering, calibrate thresholds.
Stakeholder analysis maps four dimensions for each person identified:
Role impact,how significantly does this change affect what this person does day to day, the processes they depend on, and the outcomes they are measured against?
Influence level,how much can this person shape the attitudes and behaviors of others in the affected population, independent of their formal title?
Current support level,where does this person stand today: active supporter, passive supporter, neutral, passive resister, active resister? This is a current state assessment, not a target state goal.
Structural authority,this is the dimension most stakeholder analyses omit. The question: what decisions can this person actually make that would change the conditions around new behavior? A stakeholder with high influence but no structural authority is a communication target. A stakeholder with structural authority is a sponsor candidate.
Sponsor identification is not a title exercise. The qualifying question is specific: does this person have the authority and the will to make structural decisions?
Authority without will produces a sponsor who understands the need but defers the decision when pressure builds. These sponsors make excellent program champions. They are not structural decision-makers.
Will without authority produces a sponsor who wants to act but cannot. These sponsors are frequently the most vocal advocates in the room. They cannot close structural gaps.
The qualified sponsor has both. They can make a decision that cannot be walked back before go-live, and they have demonstrated the appetite to do so when the organization pushes back. This combination is rare. When it is present, name it explicitly. When it is absent, name that too.
Different stakeholder categories require different engagement approaches. The categories are:
Structural decision authority,must be engaged at the sponsor level. Their involvement is about confirming decisions, not building awareness.
Operational impact, high influence,must be engaged before the change program artifacts are finalized. Their resistance category matters. Structural resistance from this group is the highest-risk signal.
Operational impact, lower influence,engaged through communications and training. Their readiness is a delivery requirement.
Adjacent awareness,informed, not deeply engaged. Their involvement is scoped to what they need to execute their work.
Stakeholder analysis identifies who holds structural authority. It does not assess whether those people are ready to use it, willing to make irreversible decisions, or capable of holding a coalition together under pressure. A map that shows the right names in the right boxes does not confirm that those people will act when the moment requires it.