It was Carl Jung, the Swiss psychotherapist and ying to Sigmund Freud’s yang, who spoke about the balance we all need between our hidden, shadow side and the light we all carry.
Complex, participatory stakeholder interactions in the context of business and government suffer from a similar dilemma to this everyday internal struggle. For powerful entities and organisations the secret is to avoid the extremes of tyranny that come with excess power, and the submissiveness that comes with none. Power asymmetry is inherent and present in all stakeholder relationships. What is required is heightened levels of awareness and consciousness by the actors to reduce its negative effect. This is achieved through a process of active management and the co-development of mechanisms that promote common interests that can positively impact stakeholder relations.
This is not always easy, but again Jung offers some pointers. He tells us that by making the unconscious conscious we can direct our lives and our interactions. Simply by holding up a mirror to ourselves we can reveal hidden depths. This goes for companies, governments, and institutions as much as it does for the leaders who shape them and the people who give them heart.
Why does this matter?
Unwittingly, as I went through the process of obtaining my doctorate in business administration from GIBS, the significance of power asymmetric relationships and the impact of this imbalance on stakeholder relations in South Africa became clearer.
After more than a decade in mining, coordinating stakeholder relationships and managing sustainability and risk functions in the C-suites of Xstrata, Glencore, Impala Platinum, and Anglo American South Africa, I knew better than most the extent of the investments being made to upgrade infrastructure and improve the quality of life of mining communities. Ensuring that communities accept mining operations on their doorsteps, as part of a broader social licence to operate, was and is a significant driver for mining companies in South Africa and greater Africa.
Yet the relationships that mining companies had with communities were often dysfunctional and confrontational. I surmised there had to be another way, and what I found has relevance for the mining industry I expressly studied, as well as South African business and national engagement as a whole. I can’t think of a single instance of human collaboration and interaction that would not be improved by applying a more meaningful lens to the power dynamics underpinning stakeholder engagement.
This should be our north star – and it is within our reach.
During my fieldwork, one comment stayed with me: that miners spend a lot of time planning for the future. This is true. Mines produce 25-year revenue paths, make life-of-mine calculations, and arrive at educated assumptions about ore reserves and costs over one or two decades.
What they don’t do is create a future-focused social development plan for the communities impacted by their operations. What seems to be missing is a strategic foresight by mining leaders that asks what we want to see from communities. What is their end-state? In the case of mining, the resource is finite and depleting. At some point the mine will close and the community’s financial lifeline will be gone. What happens then?
Shared value means empowering all the relevant actors in this mining example to consider the big picture, understand the real needs of the community, plan together, seek out opportunities for synergy, support new industries, reduce community dependence on the mine, empower communities to be self-reliant, upgrade their trade skills and commercial acumen, and co-create the end-state. This is the north star, and the journey starts with an understanding that relationships are never equal.
It’s never 50-50
Perfect power symmetry is not an attainable ideal. As a rule of thumb, the narrower the power gap, the better the relationship. The wider the gap, the more it manifests conflict and fissures. Some asymmetry is inevitable – which is not necessarily a bad thing as it helps to drive plans forward – but when industries become so dominant this always creates an oversized power advantage. German philosopher Jürgen Habermas termed this state of affairs a “morally illegitimate outcome”.
It’s particularly important for dominant industries such as mining or agriculture, infrastructure development, oil and gas to be aware of this asymmetry and the dangers of unmoderated power. Failure to do so skews the power balance even more, potentially giving rise to conflicts, tensions and disagreements that pit stakeholders against each other.
One of the darkest moments in recent South African mining history, the 2012 Marikana massacre in Rustenburg, claimed the lives of 34 mineworkers after armed police shot 112 platinum miners taking part in a far-reaching strike. The events at Marikana highlighted not only the power asymmetry between the mining firm and its employees, but the historic power imbalance between the community and the mine, as well as the mine and local police.
A comment by miner Thobisile Jali, reported by News24, takes us into the mind of Marikana employee-stakeholders: “The truth is that we live like pigs here while the mine smiles when we dig that platinum and make them rich. We have nothing to show for these long hours we work here. We have to provide for ourselves here and our families back at home. Our children need to get a better future.”
While Jali’s words reverberate with frustration and anger, less powerful stakeholders and employees are not totally without influence. As Marikana shows, stakeholders have coercive power in the form of collective action and strikes. However, when stakeholders feel their only course of action is to unleash disruption, then trust has often been significantly, and irreparably, eroded.
The pillars of positive power
Fortunately, not every strike leads to a Marikana and not every stakeholder engagement ends in a stalemate. Like marriages, some stakeholder relationships work better than others, so delving into the positive actions or behaviours that help to mitigate power asymmetry is a good place to start improving stakeholder engagement.
After conducting 44 interviews, I arrived at seven pillars that should underpin all stakeholder engagements:
- Agenda setting – Rebalancing power asymmetry is both a project and a product of social construction. This is why agenda setting should be a co-constructed and co-developed process. How a meeting agenda is set demonstrates either a lack of awareness about needing to reset the power imbalance, or a clear commitment to working constructively and collaboratively with all the affected and impacted stakeholders.
- Conflict management – Don’t just treat the symptoms, focus on the root causes of the conflict. This requires listening and engaging all stakeholders, and committing to honour promises.
- Collaborative decision-making – The views, ideas, insights and contributions of even the least powerful stakeholder must be taken on board so they feel included and valued. This approach builds lasting relationships that mutually reinforce the onboarding of all stakeholder interests.
- Power to promote interests – Each actor has interests that need to be promoted through a shared economic value creation model. As a framework for expressing, understanding, respecting, and honouring economic value undertakings, this approach promotes the interests of all stakeholders and embeds sustainable stakeholder management irrespective of power asymmetry.
- Stakeholder identification – This is a dynamic process that requires constant stakeholder identification due to changing demographic events such as immigration, shifts in social structures within affected communities, or rising numbers of vulnerable groups, such as unemployed youth or the victims of gender-based violence.
- Stakeholder engagement – Investing time, effort, and resources in building and nurturing relationships with stakeholders. Creating structures and platforms to engage in dialogue with various types of stakeholders in ways that respect their voices, values, culture, and needs.
- State of the relationships – Stakeholders must also play their part in the relationship, from respecting the rule of law and the protocols of the company to bringing proactive and constructive proposals to the table. It is also good to have an “objective feel” of the temperature on the ground, to gauge how stakeholders think or feel about the relationship.
To further help organisations moderate their own power symmetry, I also introduced a tool to help organisations to take their own temperature. The Stakeholder Relationship Barometer helps organisations gauge where they stand using a “good”, “average” or “bad” ranking. Together, the seven pillars and the barometer establish a baseline for all parties, one that does not hide the asymmetry but rather holds power to account and turns uncomfortable realities into opportunities to build trust.
How to push the reset button
Many organisations fall into the trap of thinking of stakeholders as a single homogenous group. Yet communities never fit into a neat template. What works for some might not resonate for others. Leaders must, therefore, actively engage in social construction by paying attention to the unique circumstances, situation, and surroundings of each stakeholder group, as well as dynamic changes and needs as they unfold. Cookie-cutter approaches just won’t do.
What is required is mindfulness about recapacitating the less powerful through skills transfer, knowledge sharing, clarity, and openness about the limitations and constraints faced by corporate entities. Plus, there must also be some investment in the relationship to help level the playing fields and build long-term trust.
When an organisation shows commitment, and seeks to build meaningful relationships based on reciprocity and respect, communities inevitably become staunch defenders of your assets. This, when it happens, is the very best measure of sustainability and economic value sharing.
Introducing the Stakeholder Relationship Barometer
The Stakeholder Relationship Barometer acts as a mirror for organisations looking to assess and understand the health and level of engagement in their stakeholder relationships. It highlights areas that need attention, and shapes the way forward and the corrective measures needed to keep these relationships on track. It can also serve as an early warning system, picking up friction and problems before they reach a critical tipping point, and setting the stage for appropriate corrective measures.
Ideally, an independent third party should be appointed – after due consultation and agreement between the organisation and its stakeholders – to conduct the barometer in an open, transparent, and ethical manner. This exercise should be undertaken annually, in order to track the health of the stakeholder relationship universe from year to year.
For stakeholders, this annual process reinforces their value and amplifies their collective voice. For businesses, the barometer provides a framework that speaks their language but looks at the issue through the lens of economic value sharing, restoration and good faith.
Try it out.
The Combat Boot
Very bad
As the name implies, this scenario smacks of a significant power imbalance, one in which power is wielded like a weapon, bullying is the norm and no effort is made at all to promote stakeholder interests. Given this oppressive, top-down and combative approach is it hardly surprising that it is only through conflict, violence, criminality, protests, riots, and disruptive mass action that stakeholders feel they can be heard. Once the festering frustrations reach the point of violence, it is very difficult to turn this situation around.
Nothing short of a full shift in the top leadership can start the process of reducing this power asymmetry. Anger and frustration at the board and the executive management teams becomes personal, new blood is needed. Introducing a stakeholder relationship expect to drive the process of establishing a meaningful engagement framework is also advisable. This turnaround in relationship should be driven from the very top of the organisation, and active steps must be taken to win back trust.
The Stiletto
Bad
In The Stiletto scenario, the stakeholder relationship is constrained, painful and marked by intense, stubborn disagreements and conflicts. Gaps open up in the relationship over time, fuelled by unfulfilled promises, lies and obfuscations. Frustration grows as issues are raised but brushed under the carpet. This puts the power-holder at loggerheads with the less powerful, leading to minor acts of criminality, peaceful sit-ins and instances of “quiet quitting” across the organisation. While townhalls are held and newsletters are shared, the voice of the employee-stakeholders in particular are not sought – the communication flows are still top-down. As the situation intensifies, it takes just one issue or challenge to trip this organisation into The Combat Boot scenario.
This situation is salvageable. Depending on the reasons behind the conflict, management changes might be necessary, but it is also possible that a stakeholder consultant and the implementation of an engagement framework may turn this situation around. Addressing reasons for stakeholder disgruntlement is key, so taking time to understand the issues of contention is vital. Being open about challenges facing the organisation is of critical importance as is listening and taking stock of the views of others.
The Sneaker
Mixed
The Sneaker gets the job done, it’s comfortable and has the look of a functional piece of footwear. Plus, it’s easy to keep clean with minimal effort. This makes The Sneaker deceptive. It represents a partial promotion of interests, where participation in agenda setting does have a place, and conflicts are partially resolved, but unfulfilled promises still linger. This means that despite having constructive stakeholder engagement in place, the potential for protests and disruptive mass action persists. This scenario stops just short of really incorporating stakeholder issues into the organisation’s decision-making.
In this scenario, the organisation’s leadership needs to dig deeper into the reasons behind power asymmetry and why some issues are still causing friction in the relationship. The Sneaker benefits from spending time with the Stakeholder Relationship Barometer, to pick up signs of deterioration in the relationships and actively looking for ways to improve the current status quo. How often, for instance, are stakeholders engaged with? What happens to these insights? What signs are on the horizon that need addressing now? Is the organisation actively working on this relationship – or have things become just too comfortable?
The Polished Dress Shoe
Good
A well-kept and polished dress shoe says a lot about the wearer. It shows pride in appearance, the investment of time, care and patience. The Polished Dress Shoe scenario speaks of the same characteristics. In this instance, time is spent polishing stakeholder relationships. Scuffs are identified early on, buffed out and attended to – not just one a year, but every single day. This highlights a situation where the needs of the organisation and its stakeholders are positively promoted and understand, where promises are fulfilled and interactions are transparent and open. Joint agendas are co-created and issues or conflicts are constructively dealt with. This is positive, dedicated stakeholder engagement in action.
In our ideal scenario, stakeholder relationships are not a means to an end. They are the foundation of the organisation’s strategy, they dictate policy, they determine long-term plans and invite opportunities to get together, debate and improve the organisation as a whole. This scenario recognises that stakeholder engagement is never done and dusted, it is a constantly evolving process and requires ongoing polishing and maintenance. Leadership buy-in is essential, having tools in place to constantly identify issues, and a long-term collaborative mindset underpin this approach. The Polished Dress Shoe requires leaders to build a vision that brings everyone on a shared journey towards a better future.
Practice exercise
Using the Stakeholder Relationship Barometer, can you place your organisation, your marriage, your community or church engagement into one of these quadrants?
Now, consider the remedial action and corrective measures you could apply.
Let’s use South Africa’s Government of National Unity (GNU) as a trial run. We’ve all watched the growing pains playing out since 2024. We’ve felt the misunderstandings, seen the power plays in action and watched as issues are patched up along the way. The GNU is a textbook example of multi-stakeholder power asymmetry in action. It’s not all “bad”, some of the engagements are “mixed” but we are seeing divergent groups trying to find common ground. That’s a positive start. However, getting to “good” will require more constructive listening, holding leaders to account, aligning goals, monitoring outcomes and, above all, consistent action with meaningful engagement built it along the way.
We would need to confront two critical questions:
- Who sets the agenda for GNU discussions? Is the agenda-setting process co-created and co-developed?
- What is the north star or end-state vision for the GNU? Unless this is clearly articulated, embraced, and endorsed by all the stakeholders, it will be difficult to harness powerful asymmetry and unleash the true potential of this great national initiative.
The process is undeniably hard and demanding. It requires a special breed of leader to keep power imbalances in check and intentionally work together to forge a better tomorrow. How do you shape up?
Dr. Andile Sangqu is Transnet SOC chairperson and executive in residence at GIBS. He has led institutional transformation across infrastructure, mining, and financial services, combining strategic vision with operational execution. His leadership approach emphasises stakeholder value creation, governance excellence, and sustainable performance, standards he has actively demonstrated during his own career. As former executive head at Anglo American South Africa, he maintained operational strength while preserving relationships with governments, labour, and communities. At Impala Platinum, Sangqu integrated environmental, social, and governance principles before industry mandate, demonstrating strategic foresight in risk management.
