Tools & Resources: The Influence Map
Finding the people who actually move change.
A practitioner tool for change communicators
Every organization has two maps. The first is the org chart — the formal structure of titles, reporting lines, and stated authority. The second is the influence map — who people actually turn to when they are uncertain, whose read on a situation gets repeated, whose skepticism or buy-in shapes how a change lands.
Most change efforts are designed around the first map. This tool helps you build the second one.
HOW TO USE THIS TOOL
— Use this tool in the weeks before a major change is announced, while you still have time to act on what you find.
— Work through it with someone who has been in the organization long enough to know the informal dynamics — not just the formal ones.
— Revisit it at key milestones. Influence networks shift, especially during change.
— Use what you find to inform who you bring in early, in what order, and with what information.
I. The Informal Anchors — who people actually watch
These are the people whose behavior is determinative — not because of their title, but because others look to them when they need to know how to feel about something. They may not be vocal in meetings. They may not be in the steering committee. But their read on the change will circulate regardless.
Who do people go to in this organization when they are genuinely uncertain about something?
Name 3 to 5 people. Do not filter for seniority or enthusiasm.
For each person, what gives them their standing? What makes people trust their read?
Consider: tenure, track record, relationships, perceived independence, access to information
Which of these people have the most reach — whose skepticism or buy-in would travel furthest?
II. The Skeptics — whose resistance is worth understanding
Skeptical voices are not obstacles to route around. They are often the most credible voices in the room precisely because their enthusiasm is not assumed. If you can understand their concerns and bring them in genuinely, their eventual support carries weight that no official communication can replicate.
Who among your informal anchors is likely to be skeptical of this change?
What is the nature of their skepticism? Check all that apply.
▫ They have seen initiatives like this fail before
▫ They are concerned about the impact on people they care about
▫ They do not trust the rationale or the decision-making process
▫ They have information or context that leadership may not have
▫ They are generally resistant to change regardless of content
▫ Other:
What would it take for each skeptic to form a genuine opinion rather than a reactive one?
Consider: information they do not have, concerns that have not been heard, involvement in the process
III. The Engagement Plan — who you bring in, when, and how
This section is the operational heart of the tool. The goal is not to secure buy-in before it is earned. It is to give the right people real enough information, early enough, that they can form a genuine view — and to hear what they actually think before the change is locked.
Which people on your influence map do you need to engage before the communication goes out?
Rank by reach and skepticism. The highest-reach skeptics go first.
For each person, what do you need them to know that is not in the all-staff communication?
Think: the reasoning behind the decision, the trade-offs considered, what is still uncertain
What do you need to hear from them before you finalize the approach?
What might they know that you do not? Where might your plan break?
How will you engage them — and who is the right person to have that conversation?
Consider whether a formal briefing or an informal conversation is more appropriate for each person
IV. After the Announcement — monitoring the informal signal
The influence map does not stop being relevant once communications go out. The informal network is where you will first see whether the change is landing as intended — or whether a different interpretation is taking hold.
Who will you check in with in the first two weeks after the announcement — not to manage the message, but to hear what is actually circulating?
What signals will tell you that the informal network is moving the change forward?
What signals will tell you that it is not?
One Action
Before this change is announced, identify one person from Section I or Section II who is not currently in your engagement plan. Decide what it would take to bring them in genuinely — not to brief them, but to hear what they know. Schedule that conversation this week.
One conversation, before it is too late to act on it.
Arcana Communications ~ Where meaning meets change.
© 2026 Arcana Communications. All rights reserved. Not for distribution, reproduction, or resale without permission.
