ACCA SBL December 2026: Mendelow's Matrix Scores Nothing Until You Recommend a Strategy

Plotting stakeholders on Mendelow's matrix earns almost nothing in SBL. The marks sit in the next sentence: what you will actually do about each one.

What the examining team keeps seeing

In SBL, stakeholder requirements typically ask you to analyse, evaluate or recommend. Candidates draw the power/interest grid in words, label four boxes, and stop. That is description. It reads like a textbook, and the marking guide rewards application to the case.

The grid is a tool to reach a decision, not the answer. Examiners want to see that a stakeholder's position changes what the board should do, and that you understand the trade-off. A powerful, low-interest regulator and a powerful, high-interest institutional investor need very different handling, and your answer should show it.

Two other habits cost marks. First, listing every stakeholder in the case, which spreads you thin when two or three drive the scenario. Second, ignoring the conflict between them. If shareholders want a dividend and employees want investment, say so, and say which you would prioritise.

This also feeds Professional Skills. Prioritising the key stakeholders and giving a justified recommendation is exactly what supports your Analysis, Evaluation and Commercial acumen marks.

Worked example

Wrong: "The government has high power and high interest so it is a key player. Employees have low power and high interest so should be kept informed."

Right: "The government is a key player because the licence renewal depends on its approval. The board should open early talks on the safety plan, since losing the licence would end the business. Employees have low power individually, but a strike would halt production. Keep them informed on the restructuring to protect output, but do not let their concerns override the licence issue."

The second answer uses the same model. It adds the case fact, the consequence and a priority.

What to do

1. Pick the two or three stakeholders that matter. Spend your time on the ones the scenario hinges on, and say why the others are secondary.

2. Use the "so what" test. After every classification, write one action: engage, consult, inform or monitor, tied to a case fact.

3. Name the conflict and take a side. One sentence on which stakeholder wins and the risk of that choice.

The bottom line

The pass mark is 50%, and you do not need perfection to get there. You need applied answers that make a decision. Stop labelling boxes. Start recommending.