Stakeholders and Business Decisions

Understanding Stakeholders

Ruby Sturt: Alright, welcome back to the IBDP Business Management Success Podcast! I’m Ruby, back again with Eric. So last time we were all chatting about business objectives and vision—you know, mission statements, all that good stuff. Today we’re zeroing in on the people and groups who actually shape all those decisions. Basically, the stakeholders. You can’t have a business without them, right Eric?

Eric Marquette: Absolutely, Ruby. I think it’s one of those ideas that sounds simple but actually, it's a bit of a web. Stakeholders come in all types—internal ones like employees and managers, and then the external crowd, think suppliers, government, the local community…even competitors to a degree. Each one’s got their own stake in the business, hence the name, but what they want isn’t always the same.

Ruby Sturt: Yeah, and, just to keep things real, let’s toss in an example—like Starbucks. Internally, they’ve got their baristas and managers pushing for fair wages and decent rosters. Externally? Their local communities expect the cafes to be good neighbours, and their suppliers, often coffee growers overseas, need long-term contracts that actually pay enough to keep their farms afloat. Those are some seriously different priorities.

Eric Marquette: That’s a brilliant example. And what’s interesting is why each group matters. For employees, it’s job security, benefits, treatment—that's day-to-day stuff that impacts their lives. Shareholders, meanwhile, are—well, let’s be honest—way more interested in their dividends and increasing share prices. Sometimes those priorities align. But sometimes, as you can imagine, they’re completely at odds.

Ruby Sturt: Couldn’t agree more. I mean, there’s always gonna be people invested in different ways, and businesses have to juggle those interests. Actually, Eric, you once mentioned working with a retailer in the UK that had to face that head-on, right?

Eric Marquette: Yeah, spot on, Ruby. It was a mid-sized retailer dealing with a major sales slump. Suddenly, the managers were getting pressure from suppliers for prompt payments, but cash flow was tight, and employees were worrying about reduced hours or even layoffs. Trying to keep everyone happy, or even just kept afloat, was like spinning plates. Every decision had a knock-on effect—delay payments, and you risk losing suppliers. Cut staff, and morale drops through the floor, and service quality goes with it. Honestly, it really drove home how messy stakeholder balancing gets in real life.

Ruby Sturt: Yeah, totally. It's easy to forget that something as simple as a new product launch or a change in store hours can ripple out and hit all sorts of folks differently. Internal, external—the whole stakeholder gang. So, let’s get into the nitty-gritty of how their interests can actually conflict, yeah?

Conflict and Change Among Stakeholders

Eric Marquette: Right, conflict. It’s almost inevitable. Let’s start with the classic: profit versus wages. Shareholders want higher profits—that might mean holding back on wage increases for employees. Or, another classic: a company wants to expand, maybe build a new warehouse. That promises more jobs, sure, but what’s that do for the nearby community? For Amazon, it’s meant clashes with locals worried about traffic and noise, and environmental impacts as well. It’s rarely as simple as “more business is good for everyone.”

Ruby Sturt: Oh yeah, and then you’ve got organizational change, which is, like, a magnet for conflict. Just look at the big tech layoffs lately. So, a firm announces restructuring to “stay competitive”, and boom—employees are worried about jobs, local communities worry about spending power dropping, even suppliers lose regular orders. Suddenly, everyone’s a bit on edge.

Eric Marquette: And the pain doesn’t stop with the internal side. Think of what’s happening here in the UK when big retail chains shutter locations. Suppliers lose a major buyer, councils lose tax revenue, communities lose convenient shopping or even a local jobs pipeline. Change creates this domino effect; nobody’s immune.

Ruby Sturt: And honestly, that kind of ripple doesn’t care about borders. Closer to home for me, there’s been a mining project in Australia—massive one, out in the bush. You’ve got indigenous communities fighting to protect sacred sites. Then, there are employees supporting their families with these jobs, and, government folks worried about both tax revenue and public image. It gets messy, and sometimes there’s not a clear “winner.”

Eric Marquette: Exactly. And sometimes these conflicts force everyone to the table for uncomfortable, if necessary, conversations. Stakeholder management isn’t about making everyone happy. If anything, it's about making the least number of people angry—at least, in the short term. Shall we shift gears to why change, in particular, seems to always spark these things?

Inquiry, TOK Connections, and Tools for Stakeholder Decisions

Ruby Sturt: Definitely. So, here’s the big inquiry: “Why does change often bring conflict among stakeholders?” Let’s take, say, the restructuring of a tech company—maybe, I dunno, a mobile phone manufacturer. The execs spin it as adapting to a fast-changing market. But to employees, it just means, “Who’s next on the chopping block?” For the government, job losses can mean political headaches or pressure around unemployment rates. Customers, meanwhile, might fret about product quality or service slipping. Change shakes up everyone’s expectations and sense of security, right?

Eric Marquette: Yeah, and it’s this uncertainty that fuels conflict. Everyone’s trying to secure their own interests—the so-called pie metaphor, if you like, but the pie shrank and now you’ve got more folks scrabbling for smaller slices. What I find fascinating is how these tensions can sometimes, ironically, drive innovation. Which brings us, nicely, to a TOK angle: “Does competition between companies help or hinder knowledge production?”

Ruby Sturt: Oh, love this one! In the automotive industry, for instance, you see stakeholders pushing for greener, safer, smarter cars. Investors want market share and new tech, environmental groups want reduced emissions, and engineers are just itching to make something groundbreaking. Sometimes the tug-of-war over which interests win out—profit, ethics, innovation—actually drives genuine breakthroughs. But, on the flip, if competition gets nasty or short-sighted, you can get patents being locked away or dodgy business. Not always a win for knowledge, is it?

Eric Marquette: No, definitely not—it’s a double-edged sword, for sure. Alright, let’s wrap up with a bit of practical strategy. Say you’re a fashion brand facing heat from, let’s say, sustainability campaigners and impatient investors. Here's where tools like decision trees help. You map out choices: pick an ultra-green supplier—costs go up, investor nerves jangle. Stick with your cheaper status quo—activists pile on. Decision trees let you visualize outcomes, weigh stakeholder responses, and sometimes even spot a compromise nobody saw at first.

Ruby Sturt: That’s a great tip, Eric. Business isn’t about avoiding conflict but managing it smartly—and ethically! And I reckon that’s a good note to end on. So for everyone listening, think about a business story in the news, and try mapping the stakeholders and their interests. Next episode, we’ll dig into types of organisational structure—so stick around for that. Eric, enjoyed as always!

Eric Marquette: Always a pleasure, Ruby. Thanks everyone for tuning in. Map those stakeholders, and we’ll catch you next time. Cheers, Ruby!

Ruby Sturt: See ya, Eric. And see ya, everyone.