| name | stakeholder-communication |
| description | Adapting technical communication for different audiences - engineers, product managers, executives, and customers. Use when communicating across functions, translating technical concepts, presenting to leadership, or building shared understanding with non-technical stakeholders. |
| allowed-tools | Read, Glob, Grep |
Stakeholder Communication Skill
A framework for adapting technical communication to different audiences, ensuring your message lands effectively whether speaking with engineers, product managers, executives, or customers.
When to Use This Skill
- Presenting technical decisions to non-technical stakeholders
- Writing status updates for different audience levels
- Translating complex technical concepts for business partners
- Building alignment across engineering, product, and business teams
- Communicating with executives (brevity, business impact)
- Customer-facing technical communication
- Cross-functional project coordination
Core Framework: Audience-First Communication
The Fundamental Question
Before any communication, ask: "Who is my audience and what do they need?"
Different stakeholders have different:
- Knowledge levels: Technical depth they can absorb
- Decision criteria: What matters for their decisions
- Time constraints: How much attention they can give
- Action orientation: What they need to do with this information
The Four Audience Types
| Audience | Primary Concern | Communication Style |
|---|---|---|
| Engineers | How it works | Technical depth, implementation details |
| Product Managers | What it does | Features, trade-offs, timeline impact |
| Executives | Why it matters | Business impact, risks, decisions needed |
| Customers | How it helps them | Benefits, reliability, trust |
Quick Adaptation Guide
For Engineers
Focus on:
- Technical architecture and design decisions
- Implementation approach and trade-offs
- Code quality, testing, and reliability
- Performance characteristics and constraints
Avoid:
- Over-simplified explanations (they'll feel condescended to)
- Hiding technical debt or known issues
- Vague timelines without technical justification
For Product Managers
Focus on:
- Feature capabilities and limitations
- Timeline and scope trade-offs
- User impact and experience changes
- Dependencies and risks to roadmap
Avoid:
- Deep implementation details (unless relevant to decisions)
- Technical jargon without context
- Binary answers when trade-offs exist
For Executives
Focus on:
- Business impact (revenue, cost, risk)
- Decision points requiring their input
- Progress against strategic objectives
- Resource implications
Avoid:
- Technical details (unless specifically asked)
- Problems without proposed solutions
- Lengthy explanations (get to the point)
For Customers
Focus on:
- Benefits and value they receive
- Reliability and trust signals
- Clear, jargon-free explanations
- What they need to do (if anything)
Avoid:
- Internal technical details
- Blame or excuses
- Uncertainty without reassurance
The Translation Principle
Technical → Business Translation:
| Technical Concept | Business Translation |
|---|---|
| "Refactoring the codebase" | "Improving system reliability and reducing future bugs" |
| "Database migration" | "Upgrading our data infrastructure for better performance" |
| "Technical debt" | "Accumulated shortcuts that slow new feature development" |
| "API rate limiting" | "Protection against system overload" |
| "Microservices architecture" | "Modular design that allows faster, independent updates" |
The Formula:
[Technical action] → [Business benefit] + [Risk if not done]
Example:
- Technical: "We need to upgrade from .NET 6 to .NET 8"
- Business: "Upgrading our framework ensures continued security support and enables 20% faster response times, avoiding security vulnerabilities when .NET 6 support ends in November"
Communication Patterns
The Executive Summary Pattern
For any executive communication:
- Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF): Lead with the conclusion or ask
- Context: Minimal background needed to understand
- Options/Recommendation: What you suggest and why
- Ask: What you need from them
Template:
**Summary:** [One sentence: what this is about and what you need]
**Context:** [2-3 sentences: why this matters now]
**Recommendation:** [What you propose]
**Ask:** [Specific decision or action needed]
**Details:** [Available if they want to dig deeper]
The Cross-Functional Update Pattern
For status updates that go to mixed audiences:
- Progress: What's done (accomplishments, metrics)
- Plans: What's next (upcoming work, timeline)
- Problems: What's blocking (issues, risks, needs)
Template:
## [Project Name] Update - [Date]
### Progress
- [Accomplishment with metric or outcome]
- [Accomplishment with metric or outcome]
### Plans
- [Upcoming work] - [Target date]
- [Upcoming work] - [Target date]
### Problems
- [Issue]: [Impact] - [Proposed solution or ask]
The Technical Decision Pattern
For communicating technical decisions to non-technical stakeholders:
- Decision: What we decided
- Why: Business rationale (not technical details)
- Impact: What changes for them
- Timeline: When it happens
Template:
**Decision:** We're [decision].
**Why:** This [business benefit] and [risk mitigation].
**Impact:** [What they'll see/experience differently].
**Timeline:** [When this takes effect].
Common Mistakes
Mistake 1: Same Message to All Audiences
Problem: Sending identical communication to engineers and executives.
Fix: Create layered communication:
- Executive summary for leadership
- Detailed version for technical teams
- Customer-facing version if applicable
Mistake 2: Leading with Technical Details
Problem: Starting with how something works before why it matters.
Fix: Always lead with business impact, then offer technical details for those who want them.
Mistake 3: Assuming Shared Context
Problem: Using acronyms, project names, or references others don't know.
Fix: Define terms, provide context, link to background information.
Mistake 4: All Problems, No Solutions
Problem: Escalating issues without proposed solutions.
Fix: Always bring options. "We have a problem" → "We have a problem. I recommend X because Y."
Mistake 5: Binary Answers to Complex Questions
Problem: "Yes we can" or "No we can't" without nuance.
Fix: "Yes, with these trade-offs" or "Not as asked, but here's what we could do."
References (Load When Needed)
Detailed Frameworks
- Audience Adaptation Matrix: Complete communication tactics by audience type
- Technical Translation: Simplifying jargon for non-technical audiences
- Executive Communication: Business impact framing and brevity techniques
- Cross-Functional Alignment: Building shared understanding across teams
Related Skills and Commands
professional-communicationskill - General communication patternsdifficult-conversationsskill - Challenging stakeholder discussions/soft-skills:adapt-communicationcommand - Transform content for audience
Example Scenarios
Scenario 1: Explaining a Delay to Executives
**Situation:** Feature launch delayed 2 weeks due to unexpected technical complexity.
**Bad:** "The API integration is taking longer because the third-party
documentation was incorrect and we had to reverse-engineer their
authentication flow, plus we discovered race conditions in our queue
processing that required refactoring."
**Good:** "Launch is moving to [date] - 2 weeks later than planned.
The integration was more complex than estimated based on available
documentation. We've de-risked the remaining work and are confident
in the new date. Impact: [business impact]. No action needed from you
unless you have questions."
Scenario 2: Technical Update for Mixed Audience
**Situation:** Database migration completed successfully.
**For Engineers:**
"Migration complete. 2.3M records transferred with zero data loss.
Rollback scripts tested and available. New indexes improving query
performance by 40% on high-traffic endpoints. Monitoring dashboard
updated. On-call runbook in wiki."
**For Executives:**
"Database upgrade complete. System is faster and more reliable.
No customer impact during transition. Cost savings of $X/month
from improved efficiency."
**For Customers (if applicable):**
"We've upgraded our systems to serve you better. You may notice
faster load times. No action needed on your end."
Scenario 3: Requesting Resources
**Situation:** Need additional engineer for critical project.
**Bad:** "We're behind and need help."
**Good:** "Request: 1 additional engineer for [project] through [date].
Why: Current velocity puts us 3 weeks behind [strategic goal].
Adding capacity now enables on-time delivery.
Impact of not acting: [Specific business consequence].
Recommendation: Temporarily reassign [name] from [lower-priority work].
Cost: [Lower-priority work] delayed by [X weeks].
Ask: Approve reassignment by [date] to maintain timeline."
Anti-Patterns to Avoid
In Written Communication
- Wall of text: Break into scannable sections
- Buried lead: Put the key point first
- Jargon soup: Define terms or use plain language
- Missing ask: Be clear about what you need
In Verbal Communication
- Monologuing: Pause for questions and reactions
- Defensive posture: Be open to feedback
- Over-explaining: Match depth to audience interest
- Vague commitments: Be specific about next steps
Success Metrics
Effective stakeholder communication achieves:
- Understanding: They grasp what you're saying
- Alignment: They agree on direction or know how to disagree
- Action: They can take appropriate next steps
- Trust: They feel informed and respected
- Efficiency: Neither party's time was wasted
Version History
- v1.0.0 (2025-12-23): Initial release with audience-first framework