What Nigerian Peacebuilding Efforts Can Teach Us About Managing Complex Stakeholders

What Nigerian peacebuilding efforts can teach us about managing complex stakeholder relationships and making critical decisions under pressure

Have you ever felt like a hostage in your own project?

Picture this: You're sitting across from an executive stakeholder who holds all the cards. He controls the budget, manages the team you need to work with, and has the organizational authority to kill your project with a single email. Meanwhile, your only weapon is a PowerPoint deck and the hope that somehow, you can convince him that your solution is worth implementing.

Sound familiar? If you've ever found yourself in this power-imbalanced negotiation, where logic meets politics, where technical merit confronts territorial instincts, you know the feeling of being completely outgunned while trying to maintain professional composure.

Interestingly, recent research from Northwestern Nigeria reveals that project managers aren't the only ones facing impossible negotiation scenarios. In the volatile regions of Zamfara State, professional negotiators have developed sophisticated strategies for dialogue with armed bandit groups, situations where the power imbalance is literally life and death, and where traditional negotiation rules simply don't apply.

These seemingly worlds-apart scenarios share striking parallels: complex stakeholder dynamics, extreme power imbalances, limited resources, competing interests, and the need for creative solutions under intense pressure. Most importantly, both require finding ways to build trust and create value when the other party holds all the apparent power.

The BELMAT Approach

In Zamfara State, negotiators developed the BELMAT approach for dialogue with armed bandit groups, a methodology that achieved remarkable results in one of the world's most challenging security environments. Between May 2019 and February 2021, this approach facilitated the rescue of hundreds of kidnapped victims and the surrender of significant weapons caches.

Negotiation Works When It’s Earned, Not When It’s Easy

The Nigerian Context: The negotiation became effective precisely because it was positioned as "the last option" after military operations, economic sanctions, and other enforcement approaches had failed. The bandits understood that all other alternatives had been exhausted, which gave the dialogue process credibility and urgency.

Project Manager Takeaway: When you immediately jump into "let's meet in the middle" mode, you're actually signaling that you haven't exhausted your other options, and stakeholders know it. If you start negotiating right away, you're essentially admitting that your business case, data, and logic weren't compelling enough to stand on their own.

Before entering high-stakes negotiations, present your case based purely on merit, let stakeholders experience the consequences of the status quo, and put the burden of proof on them to propose viable alternatives. When you've thoroughly demonstrated why alternatives don't work, you're no longer the supplicant asking for approval, you're the expert who has done the analysis, and they need to bring equal rigor to challenge your conclusions.

Multi-Stage Engagement Process

The Nigerian Context: The BELMAT approach didn't rush into direct negotiation. It involved careful preparation, trust-building through intermediaries, and phased engagement. Each stage built upon previous interactions, creating momentum toward resolution while allowing both parties to save face and adjust their positions gradually.

Project Manager Takeaway: Structure complex stakeholder negotiations in phases rather than expecting breakthrough results in single meetings. Start with informal relationship-building, move to exploring mutual interests, then progress to formal agreement-making.

If you encounter stakeholder blockage, acknowledge the concern and propose treating it as a multi-phase issue: "This seems like something we should explore further. Let me think about what you've raised and come back with some options."

This removes the pressure-cooker atmosphere that often makes powerful stakeholders dig in their heels and demonstrates strategic thinking rather than bulldozing.

Focus on Underlying Needs, Not Stated Positions

The Nigerian Context: Nigerian negotiators discovered that bandit groups had underlying grievances beyond their immediate demands, issues of marginalization, economic opportunity, and social recognition. Armed robbery and kidnapping were symptoms, but the root causes were deeper socioeconomic and political issues. Addressing these fundamental concerns proved more effective than simply responding to surface-level demands for money or territory.

Project Manager Takeaway: Stakeholders are rarely saying 'no' just to annoy you. That executive who keeps shooting down your proposals might be concerned that your solution will make their team look incompetent. The department head demanding endless modifications could be worried that successful implementation will highlight years of inefficient processes they've been responsible for. The seemingly obstinate middle manager might be terrified that automation will eliminate half their staff. Until you understand what stakeholders are really protecting or pursuing, you're shadow-boxing.

Surface-level responses to surface-level objections rarely create lasting buy-in.

Managing Information Asymmetry Under Pressure

The Nigerian Context: Negotiators had to assess trustworthiness, predict behavior, and make commitments based on limited and potentially unreliable information. They couldn't wait for perfect intelligence, lives were at stake, but premature agreements often collapsed when based on false assumptions. They learned to build verification mechanisms directly into agreements.

Project Manager Takeaway: Create structured decision-making processes that can operate quickly without sacrificing quality. Verify information through multiple sources rather than relying on single channels. Build verification mechanisms into agreements through checkpoints and milestones that allow course correction. Use time-boxed analysis periods to balance urgency with thoroughness. Maintain flexibility by preserving options for adjustment as new information emerges. Resist stakeholder pressure to make hasty decisions during crises, most "urgent" decisions can withstand a brief structured analysis period.

Remember that different stakeholders react to different types of evidence. Some are sensitive to hard data and analytics, others respond to workforce surveys and employee sentiment, while still others are most influenced by customer feedback and market signals. The CFO might dismiss your user experience research but pay attention to cost-benefit analysis, while the HR director might ignore financial projections but respond strongly to employee satisfaction metrics. Multiply your information sources and types to speak each stakeholder's language with evidence they find compelling.

Building Trust in Hostile Environments

The Nigerian Context: Nigerian negotiators succeeded because they demonstrated genuine commitment to finding mutually beneficial solutions. They showed up consistently, honored small agreements even when it was difficult, and invested their own reputation in the process. They also understood local customs, communication styles, and value systems, adapting their approach to work within existing cultural frameworks rather than imposing external models.

Project Manager Takeaway: This is fundamentally about adapting to corporate governance and getting into your stakeholder's flow rather than forcing them into yours. Build trust through small wins before asking for major concessions. Be transparent about your constraints and motivations. Show up consistently, especially when things get difficult. Tie your success to stakeholder outcomes, put skin in the game.

Most critically, invest time in understanding the informal governance structures of your organization. Every company has its unwritten rules about how decisions really get made, what communication styles are respected, and which relationships matter most. The organiza­tional chart shows you the formal hierarchy, but successful project managers learn the informal power networks, the preferred meeting styles, the decision-making rhythms, and the cultural norms that actually drive behavior. Adapt your approach to work within these existing frameworks rather than trying to impose your preferred project management methodologies. Sometimes success means learning to present technical solutions in terms of business strategy, or framing innovation projects as risk mitigation, or timing proposals to align with budget cycles and executive priorities.

Risk Management in High-Stakes Situations

The Nigerian Context: Nigerian negotiators couldn't put all their resources into single solutions because the situation was too volatile and unpredictable. They maintained multiple dialogue tracks, prepared contingency plans, and preserved alternative options throughout the process. They also built de-escalation mechanisms into their processes to prevent small disagreements from spiraling into larger conflicts, essentially treating relationship breakdown as a critical risk to be actively managed.

Project Manager Takeaway: This is sophisticated stakeholder risk management. Develop multiple solution pathways simultaneously rather than betting everything on single approaches, diversify your stakeholder portfolio just like you would diversify project risks. Build contingency resources into critical plans for when key relationships deteriorate. Preserve relationships even with stakeholders who aren't currently aligned because today's opponent might be tomorrow's ally. Create decision points that allow strategy pivots when stakeholder dynamics shift. Most importantly, design conflict escalation protocols before you need them: establish neutral forums for addressing disagreements, create cooling-off periods, and maintain back-channel communications with key stakeholders. Treat stakeholder relationship breakdown as a project risk that deserves its own mitigation strategy.

The Paradox of Success

The Nigerian Context: Successful negotiations sometimes attracted new bandit groups seeking similar deals, creating unexpected complications. Success generated its own challenges as word spread that dialogue could produce results, leading to increased expectations and more complex stakeholder dynamics.

Project Manager Takeaway: Plan for the new challenges that success creates. Successful project managers often find themselves managing increasingly complex stakeholder expectations. Build sustainable processes, not one-off solutions. Document and systematize successful approaches so they can be replicated. Prepare for increased scrutiny and higher expectations after initial successes. Create systems that can scale without losing effectiveness as your reputation for handling difficult situations grows.

Practical Takeaways for Project Managers

The Nigerian experience demonstrates that even the most challenging stakeholder relationships can be transformed through patient, culturally-informed, and strategically-flexible approaches. Key principles include:

• Prepare for the long game, complex stakeholder negotiations require sustained engagement, not quick fixes.

• Invest in relationship intelligence, understanding stakeholder motivations, constraints, and cultural contexts is as important as technical project knowledge.

• Create safe spaces for honest dialogue, establish confidential forums where stakeholders can express real concerns without political consequences.

• Build trust through small wins, demonstrate reliability through consistent delivery on minor commitments before seeking major agreements.

• Maintain multiple options, avoid betting everything on single solutions or stakeholder relationships.

• Plan for success, have strategies for managing the new challenges that success creates.

The parallels between negotiating with armed bandits and managing complex project stakeholders reveal fundamental truths about human behavior under pressure. Both contexts require building trust with suspicious parties, making decisions with incomplete information, and finding creative solutions to seemingly intractable problems.

The key insight is that successful negotiation, whether with bandits or board members, requires moving beyond adversarial thinking toward collaborative problem-solving that addresses underlying interests rather than surface-level positions. In both contexts, the most sustainable solutions emerge when all parties feel their core concerns have been understood and addressed.

The next time you're facing a seemingly impossible stakeholder situation, remember: if negotiators can find common ground with armed bandits in volatile conflict zones, there's probably a way to work with even your most challenging project stakeholders.

Resources

Conflict Resolution and Negotiation:

• Mohammed, A. (2024). "The Last Option: Dialogues with Bandits as a Strategy for Conflict Resolution in Northwestern Nigeria" in Peacebuilding in Volatile Communities: Nigerian Experiences

• Lynch, J. & McGoldrick, A. (2005). Peace Journalism. Stroud: Hawthorn Press

• Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In

Change Management:

• PROSCI Change Management Methodology and Resources (www.prosci.com)

• Heath, C. & Heath, D. Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard

Project Management and Stakeholder Relations:

• Project Management Institute. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide)

• Kerzner, H. Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling

• Bourne, L. Stakeholder Relationship Management: A Maturity Model for Organisational Implementation

Risk Management:

• Hillson, D. Managing Risk in Projects

• Chapman, C. & Ward, S. Project Risk Management: Processes, Techniques and Insights