The Exam Trap of Mendelow's Matrix Explained | ACCA SBL

SBL students — the Mendelow matrix is one of the most commonly used models in this exam, and candidates keep getting the strategies the wrong way round. So let's take a closer look.

The Mendelow matrix maps stakeholders by their power over the organisation and their interest in what it does.

Four quadrants. Four strategies. Simple enough — until you're under exam pressure and you assign the wrong strategy to the wrong box.

The examiner has flagged this exact mistake in recent reports. 
They note that candidates correctly identify where a stakeholder sits on the matrix, then recommend the wrong management approach. You're effectively finding the marks then throwing them away.

THE FOUR QUADRANTS

1. Low power, low interest = MINIMAL EFFORT
   These stakeholders can't influence you and don't particularly care. Monitor them, but don't waste resources engaging with them.

2. Low power, high interest = KEEP INFORMED
   They care a lot but can't do much about it on their own. Keep them in the loop. If you ignore them, they may band together and increase their collective power.

3. High power, low interest = KEEP SATISFIED
   They could cause you serious problems if they wanted to, but right now they're not paying attention. 
   Don't wake the sleeping giant. Keep them happy so they stay in this box.

4. High power, high interest = KEY PLAYERS
   They care and they can act. These are the stakeholders you must actively manage and involve in decisions.

The two middle quadrants are the ones candidates muddle.

They see "high interest" and think "keep satisfied."
They see "high power" and think "keep informed."

It's actually the opposite.

Think of it this way:

• You keep powerful people satisfied — because if they become dissatisfied, they have the power to do something about it.

• You keep interested people informed — because they already care, they just need information, not appeasement.

A hotel chain (Levwell) is considering acquiring a smaller rival (Dulit). You're asked to evaluate the stakeholders using the Mendelow matrix.

Levwell's Shareholders:
Power: High (they vote on the acquisition)
Interest: High (their investment is directly affected)
Strategy: KEY PLAYERS — actively involve in the decision, provide detailed financial analysis, seek approval

Dulit's employees:
Power: Low (they can't block the deal)
Interest: High (their jobs are at risk)
Strategy: KEEP INFORMED — communicate plans early, explain what the acquisition means for roles, reduce uncertainty

Levwell's bank:
Power: High (loan covenants could block financing)
Interest: Low (routine client, unless gearing changes significantly)
Strategy: KEEP SATISFIED — ensure covenant compliance, provide reassurance that the acquisition won't jeopardise repayment

Local community near Dulit's hotels:
Power: Low (no direct influence on the deal)
Interest: Low (unless job losses or closures are planned)
Strategy: MINIMAL EFFORT — monitor, but no active engagement needed at this stage

Placing a stakeholder on the matrix gets you one mark at best. The examiner wants you to go further:

1. Place the stakeholder (power and interest — with evidence from the scenario)

2. State the correct strategy

3. Explain what that strategy looks like in practice for THIS situation — not a textbook definition, but a specific action the board should take

"Dulit's employees should be kept informed" = 1 mark.

"Dulit's employees have high interest because their roles may be at risk following the acquisition, but low power as they cannot block the deal. The board should issue a clear communication plan outlining the timeline for integration decisions and any potential redundancy processes. Failure to do so risks increased staff turnover during the transition period, which would reduce the value of the acquisition." = 3-4 marks.

Same stakeholder. Same quadrant. Completely different marks.

Remember, stakeholders don't stay in one box forever. 
A low-interest stakeholder can become high-interest overnight if circumstances change. 
The bank that was barely paying attention suddenly cares a lot when gearing ratios start creeping up. The local community that didn't care becomes vocal when redundancies are announced.

If the question asks you to evaluate stakeholders before AND after an event, show the movement between quadrants. That's where the top marks live.

Good luck with your studying!

aCOWtancy is now an ACCA Platinum Approved Learning Partner — the highest level of ACCA approval. We're here to help you pass.