The prompt
Score 10 of 10, Excellent
Use it when You are working on a policy issue and need a sourced map of where each stakeholder stands and how much influence they have.
- {{policy}}
- {{audience}}
- {{sources}}
- {{stage}}
- {{known_stakeholders}}
- {{purpose}}
Full prompt and why it works
Prompt
Map the stakeholders in the debate over {{policy}}, for {{audience}}, from the sources below, so that they can see who supports and who opposes it, what each side actually wants and who could change the outcome, with every position traced to something the stakeholder said or did. Sources (statements, testimony, public comments, reports, news coverage, meeting notes), each labeled: """ {{sources}} """ Jurisdiction and stage of the policy (proposal, consultation, legislation, implementation): {{stage}} Stakeholders we already know of: {{known_stakeholders}} What we want to use the map for: {{purpose}} Produce, each with a heading: 1. Stakeholder table with the columns Stakeholder, Position (supports, opposes, mixed, conditional, unknown), Main interests, Influence (high, medium or low, with the reason), Evidence (source label and a short quote), Confidence (strong, some, thin). 2. The map in words: who falls in each of the four groups formed by position and influence, and what that means for our purpose. 3. Coalitions and splits: who is aligned, and where allies disagree on details. 4. Movable stakeholders: those whose position is mixed or conditional, with what their sources say would move them. 5. Gaps: stakeholders who would be affected but have not spoken in the sources, and what to look for. Keep it under 900 words, apart from the table. For example, a row in the right form: "Regional hospital association | Conditional | Funding for added staff | High: its members run most affected sites | Source 6: 'we can support the ratio only with transition funding' | Strong". That example shows the form only. Stay neutral. Do not assign a position without a source; write "unknown" instead. Do not infer anyone's position from their party, identity or the positions of similar groups, and do not guess at motives the sources do not show. Describe interests in the stakeholders' own terms. If sources disagree about a stakeholder's position, or a position changed over time, show both with dates. If a source is an opponent describing someone else's view, mark it as secondhand.
Variables
- {{policy}}
- The policy or proposal, for example "the proposed minimum staffing rule for clinics".
- {{audience}}
- Who reads the map, for example "our policy team" or "the board of our association".
- {{sources}}
- Your sources, each labeled, with the text or the relevant passages.
- {{stage}}
- Where and at what stage, for example "state legislature, committee hearings next month".
- {{known_stakeholders}}
- Stakeholders you already know of, or "none listed".
- {{purpose}}
- What the map is for, for example "deciding whom to meet before the hearing".
Why it works
- What to avoid. No position without a source and none inferred from party or identity, so the map shows what stakeholders said rather than what they might think.
- Format. One table with position, interests, influence, evidence and confidence for every stakeholder, then the map in words for the purpose you named.
- If unsure. Silent stakeholders are listed as gaps, conflicting sources are shown with dates, and secondhand accounts are marked as such.