Salience Model Stakeholder typology defined

What follows is a condensed version of the stakeholder salience model developed by Mitchel, Agel, and Wood. It is useful for content strategists to classify stakeholders to aid project communications, planning and execution. Latent stakeholders possess one attribute. Expectant stakeholders have two elements, and those that possess all three characteristics are defined as definitive stakeholders.

1. Dormant stakeholders have power in the form of influence or resources, for example. However, they are not actively involved in the project so they are considered latent.  They should not be entirely dismissed as they are powerful, but they do not have to be managed unless they become actively involved in the project. 
2.  Discretionary stakeholders possess legitimacy but have no claims to, or urgency regarding the project.  They might be organizations within the larger community that could help the project.  The content strategist may choose to involve them in the project only if it benefits the project. For example it may be useful to ask a hospital to sponsor a fitness website. However if they are not engaged, chances are they will not get involved. 
3.  Demanding stakeholders possess urgency but are neither legitimate nor have enough power to affect the project.  While they can be bothersome they possess insufficient power or legitimacy to warrant attention.  For example a lone detractor who calls your office complaining that the video project is ethically flawed due to his vegetarian inclinations.
4. Dominant stakeholders are powerful and legitimate entities and must be considered when making decisions and providing communications. They expect responses to their needs and desires. Therefore they must be communicated to, in the appropriate manner.  Often they receive information through formal communications such as reports, statements and other forms of prepared documents.  Examples of dominant stakeholders are government agencies, creditors, c-level executives, community leaders and boards. 
5.  Dangerous stakeholders as the name implies are hazardous. They can be powerful and are definitely urgent.  They can sabotage projects. It is best to identify these stakeholders but not engage with them unless necessary.  Since they lack legitimacy these stakeholders may resort to coercion or other dangerous methods to assert their influence. For example, the recent cyberattack on Sony was perpetrated by a dangerous stakeholder. 
6.  Dependent stakeholders possess urgency and legitimacy but lack power.  They have a need and it may be legitimate but they require the help of those with power. Therefore, they are dependent on those with the power. For example, a stakeholder wants a feature added to a website that will help his customers. However, it is out of the scope of the project and of little interest to the team.  This stakeholder may gain the necessary advocacy if he convinces someone in management that this feature is critical and this could introduce changes to the project. 
7.  Definitive stakeholders possess all three attributes: power, legitimacy and urgency.  They can be customers, shareholders, boards, c-level executives, regulatory agencies and other powerful entities that require timely professional responses.  These stakeholders must be considered from project initiation to completion. A communication plan should be developed to engage them successfully and keep them satisfied. 
8.  Non stakeholders are not considered within the scope of the content creation project. 

Reference:
Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who
and What Really Counts Author(s): Ronald K. Mitchell, Bradley R. Agle and Donna J. Wood
Source: The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22, No. 4 (Oct., 1997)