Purpose: Understand who influences, funds, delivers, or is affected by the initiative (identified through the problem framing process in Stage 2) and how they connect across systems. In practice, many key stakeholders will already have emerged during the problem definition and root cause analysis in Stage 2 - stakeholder mapping at this stage builds on that foundation.

Ideally, stakeholders should be involved as early as the problem definition stage, not just during implementation. Evidence from practice consistently shows that early engagement fosters ownership, surfaces blind spots, and increases commitment to shared solutions. If this did not happen at the problem definition stage, now is the moment to course-correct.

Start from your specific proposal and ask:

• Who already works on related issues?
• Who controls relevant resources, decisions or infrastructure?
• Who stands to benefit from the intervention — and who may resist?

Some tools you could use:

• Stakeholder Network Mapping – to visualise collaboration patterns, interdependencies, and resource flows.
• Interest–Influence Matrix – to assess each stakeholder’s power and level of engagement, specific to your initiative.

• WHO Stakeholder Mapping and Engagement Tool (2020) – to identify and categorise relevant partners across sectors in reproductive health and family planning service delivery.

Action: List and prioritise stakeholders across public authorities, civil society, community groups, private actors, and potential funders. Include “unusual but relevant allies” such as transport, housing, employment services, urban planning, retailers, public libraries or digital innovators - depending on the systemic drivers identified in Stage 2. Use this mapping exercise to prioritise engagement and begin building relationships with potential partners. Invite additional stakeholders into the mapping process and update the stakeholder map iteratively. For each key stakeholder, clarify what they gain, what they risk, and how they should be engaged. The map will form the basis for analysing motivations and incentives in Stage 4 and identifying potential investors in Stage 5.

Purpose: Understand what drives different stakeholders; essentially, "what's in it for them?", and tailor your engagement accordingly. Not every partner will be motivated by health outcomes alone. Some may prioritise cost savings, reputation, regulatory compliance, economic development, or social responsibility. Crucially, not every stakeholder needs to be engaged in the same way or to the same degree.

Some tools you could use:

• Stakeholder Analysis Matrix – to analyse interests, potential benefits, and engagement strategies.
• Stakeholder Engagement Spectrum – to plan engagement approaches (Inform → Consult → Involve → Collaborate → Empower).

Action: For each key stakeholder identified in Step 1, analyse their motivations, expectations, and concerns (financial, social, ethical, or reputational). Use these insights to design engagement strategies and identify areas where interests may align. This analysis prepares the ground for mapping incentives and aligning interests across partners in Stage 4, and ultimately for identifying actors who could contribute financially or non-financially to the initiative (see Stage 5).

Purpose: Create structures that support accountability, clarity, and long-term cooperation. As alliances expand, informal coordination is rarely sufficient. Clear governance arrangements help manage expectations, share risk, and prevent misunderstandings.

Some tools you could use:

• TPI Collaboration Spectrum Framework – to clarify the type and depth of collaboration across sectors.

• MIT Partnership Co-Design Toolkit - offers a disciplined, inclusive, and practical approach to co-creating better value chain partnerships.
• Nesta’s Partnership Toolkit – for managing innovation partnerships and setting shared evidence expectations.
• OECD Principles for Public–Private Partnerships – to guide equitable and effective partnership arrangements.

Action: Where appropriate, develop Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) or partnership agreements that define roles, resources, and decision-making structures. Establish multi-stakeholder governance bodies, including community or beneficiary representatives. Embed ethical clauses to ensure equity, transparency, and accountability through mechanisms such as public reporting and independent evaluation.

Purpose: Strengthen long-term collaboration through open communication, shared ownership, and transparency. In practice, this involves engaging partners through structured conversations: understanding their priorities and constraints, actively listening to their concerns, and identifying areas of shared interest. Making these perspectives explicit helps build trust and reduces misalignment later. Cross-sectoral work requires time and relationship-building. Differences in language, power, and institutional culture should be expected.

Some tools you could use:

• Tool for Assessing Intersectoral Partnership Functioning – a checklist for intersectoral partnerships for health promotion by WHO Collaborating Centre for Health Promotion Research
• Other Partnership support tools

Action: Invest time in relationship-building and joint learning. Create safe spaces for dialogue and negotiation, acknowledging and addressing power imbalances. Communicate progress and early successes openly to reinforce credibility and commitment among partners. Trust is often a precondition for unlocking innovative or blended financing mechanisms.

Purpose: Ensure that your partnership structure supports a realistic and sustainable financing approach.

Not every initiative requires blended or innovative finance. However, the way roles, responsibilities, and value are distributed within your alliance will influence how the intervention can be funded - whether through public budgets, grants, outcome-based mechanisms, or other arrangements.

Action: Together with your partners, clarify:

• Who is expected to pay, commission, or allocate resources?
• Which partners might contribute financial resources, in-kind assets, data, or infrastructure?
• Where could risk be shared or reduced through collaboration?
• What value does each partner expect in return?

Summarising this in a simple overview (e.g. who contributes, who benefits, and who carries risk) can help structure financing discussions. This reflection creates a clear bridge to Stage 5, where different financing structures and engagement strategies are explored in more detail.