Yes. You will map a Theory of Change separately for each major stakeholder group — such as Resource Managers, Communities, Youth, Women — because their roles, actions, and outcomes are different.

Creating distinct maps for each group offers several advantages:

• Recognizes the unique perspectives and priorities of each group
• Captures specific power dynamics and relationships
• Acknowledges different starting points and capacity needs
• Reflects varied benefit expectations and risk exposures
• Allows for tailored engagement strategies

Major stakeholder groups typically include:

• Resource Managers (e.g., forestry officials, conservation organizations)
• Communities (e.g., villages, settlements, user associations)
• Identity Groups (e.g., women, youth, indigenous peoples)
• Governance Bodies (e.g., local councils, traditional authorities)
• Market Actors (e.g., buyers, intermediaries, service providers)

When determining whether to create separate maps for subgroups:

• Consider whether they have distinct roles in the project
• Assess if their outcomes differ significantly
• Evaluate if they face unique barriers or opportunities
• Determine if they require different engagement approaches
• Check if power dynamics affect their participation differently

For each stakeholder group, you'll develop:

• A specific set of starting conditions and capacities
• Unique activities and responsibilities
• Group-specific outcomes and indicators
• Particular benefit expectations
• Tailored timelines for change

The platform guides you through this process with:

• Templates specific to each common stakeholder type
• Side-by-side comparison views
• Guidance for common pathways by group
• Prompts to consider interrelationships
• Options to copy elements across maps where appropriate

Remember that individuals often belong to multiple stakeholder groups:

• A woman may be both a community member and a resource manager
• Youth may span different economic or social categories
• Indigenous people may have both traditional and formal governance roles
• Some stakeholders may move between groups over the project lifecycle

The platform helps navigate this complexity through:

• Cross-referencing between stakeholder maps
• Identification of shared outcomes across groups
• Documentation of potential conflicts or synergies
• Space to note intersectional considerations

Separate mapping often reveals distinctive patterns:

• Resource Managers typically focus on technical and regulatory outcomes
• Communities often prioritize livelihoods and service access
• Women may emphasize household wellbeing and time-saving
• Youth frequently value skills development and opportunities
• Indigenous Groups often center cultural preservation and rights

Pay special attention to:

• Different timescales for change between groups
• Varying perceptions of risk and benefit
• Distinct definitions of success
• Group-specific barriers to participation
• Unique contributions each group brings

After creating separate stakeholder maps:

• Identify shared outcomes that benefit multiple groups
• Highlight potential conflicts that require mediation
• Develop engagement strategies tailored to each group
• Create monitoring plans that track group-specific indicators
• Design adaptive management approaches responsive to varied feedback

The platform generates integrated reports that:

• Preserve the distinct voice and perspective of each group
• Highlight interconnections between stakeholder pathways
• Show how different groups contribute to overall project goals
• Identify potential synergies and trade-offs
• Present a holistic view while respecting diversity