npbuilds Stakeholder Rotator — Re-state from Each Affected Party's Perspective
A thin coordinator that calls values-excavator (philosophy/ethics) with problem-statement framing and turns its output into alternative formulations that center different stakeholders.
The actual values excavation is done by values-excavator. This skill's value is the translation — surfacing whose perspective is centered in the current formulation and producing alternative statements from other parties' frames.
Most useful for adaptive typology (Heifetz: stakeholder interests ARE the problem) and wicked typology (Rittel: stakeholders define the problem differently). For well-defined or ill-defined typologies, this skill rarely changes the framing meaningfully.
Process
- Call
values-excavator(cross-domain — philosophy/ethics) with the problem statement and any context. - Receive: implicit values, competing goods, whose interests are centered vs invisible, the moral logic of the position.
- Identify the implicit primary stakeholder in the current formulation. Whose problem is this stated as?
- For each invisible-but-affected stakeholder, produce an alternative formulation stated from that stakeholder's perspective.
- Cap at 3–4 alternatives to avoid noise. Pick the stakeholders whose interests are most materially affected by the decision.
- Note tensions between stakeholder perspectives — these are the actual contested questions inside the problem.
Output Format
STAKEHOLDER ROTATION — [first 60 chars of statement...]
─────────────────────────────────────────────
Primary stakeholder (implicit in original): [whose problem this is, as stated]
Affected but invisible stakeholders: [list, from values-excavator]
Rotated formulations:
From [stakeholder 1]'s perspective: [restated statement]
What changes: [different success criteria / different acceptable solutions]
From [stakeholder 2]'s perspective: [restated statement]
What changes: [...]
From [stakeholder 3]'s perspective: [restated statement]
What changes: [...]
Tensions surfaced: [conflicts between perspectives — these are the contested questions]
Recommended: [whether the original framing is defensible, needs widening, or needs
explicit acknowledgment of which stakeholder it serves]
When to Run This Skill
| Typology / context | Run? |
|---|---|
| Adaptive (Heifetz) | Mandatory — adaptive problems require stakeholder rotation by definition |
| Wicked (Rittel) | Mandatory — wicked problems have contested formulations across stakeholders |
| Mess (Ackoff) | Recommended — the mess often is the stakeholder conflict |
| Ill-defined | Optional — depends on whether stakeholders are material |
| Well-defined | Skip — stakeholders are typically clear |
Audience tag public |
Recommended regardless of typology — public problems implicate broader stakeholder sets |
Failure Modes
| Failure | Response |
|---|---|
values-excavator unavailable |
Surface a degraded version: ask "whose interests are centered? Whose are invisible?" inline without the full values framework |
| Only one stakeholder is affected (truly individual problem) | Return "no rotation needed" rather than fabricating stakeholders |
| Stakeholder set is so broad that 5+ rotations would be needed | Group stakeholders into 2–3 classes (e.g., "users", "operators", "regulators") and rotate per class |
Output Contract for six-eyes
Called from Phase 4 (Reframe) when typology is adaptive or wicked, or when audience is public. Returns rotated formulations and surfaced tensions. The orchestrator may use a rotated formulation as the new working statement if it scores better on statement-grader, or surface the tensions as decision-relevant context for compression.
Scope Boundaries
- stakeholder-rotator handles: translating problem-statement framing to/from
values-excavator's input/output formats. - stakeholder-rotator does NOT: judge which stakeholder's framing is "right" — that's a values question for the user. Surfaces all reasonable framings; lets the user choose.
Connections
values-excavator(philosophy/ethics) — primary cross-domain callproblem-typology(binding-vow) — upstream input; adaptive/wicked typologies trigger this skillframe-rotator(binding-vow) — sibling reframing skill; complements stakeholder rotationinversion-tool(binding-vow) — sibling reframing skillwicked-vs-tame(binding-vow) — foundational reference for when stakeholder rotation is structural vs decorative
Sources
- Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership Without Easy Answers. (Stakeholder work is the adaptive work.)
- Rittel & Webber 1973. (Wicked problems have stakeholder-divergent formulations.)
- See [[wicked-vs-tame]] and
values-excavator(philosophy/ethics) for the full framework this skill coordinates with.