In this scenario, Joe is a representative of UWEAR uniform company and Bill who owns the Peninsula hotel chains. Joe and Bill have built both a personal and business relationship because Bill’s company has a uniform contract through Joe’s company. In their personal lives, the families often vacation and travel together. The contract between the companies is set to expire, and another company has offered Bill a 10% reduction in cost. He is asking Joe what he and UWEAR could counter offer to keep his business. Joe knows that he cannot afford to lose Bill’s contact because the hotel chain is over 50% of Joe’s territorial sales.
There could be potentially three stakeholders within this scenario. A stakeholder is someone that has a personal, professional, or financial interest in the outcome of a project. (Introduction to Project Management, 2012.) Bill has a vested interest in this contract negation because he wants to save money for his company, but also have a uniform company that provides a great service. He knows that if he stays with UWEAR he will continue to receive great service, but he will not be saving money. If he goes with the competitor that previously had his business, he knows the service will not be as good as UWEAR. Joe also is a stakeholder because if he loses Bill’s contract his job could potentially be affected at UWEAR. Joe has a responsibility toward his company to ensure the contract is not lost because he is aware of the potential impacts that his company could face. Both men also have their personal relationship at stake. Depending on the outcome of the contract negations, Joe could lose his job and may blame Bill. The employees of both companies could also be viewed as stakeholders. Finally, UWEAR the company is also a stakeholder. If the contract is lost, they may have to lay off employees to compensate for the loss of the large contract.
I think this would be a tough decision for all parties involved. Each party involved has a vested...