# Know your room: the implementation stakeholder registry template

**Author:** dheer-gupta
**Date:** 2026-02-10
**Category:** Customer Success
**Tags:** Stakeholder Registry, Implementation Planning, Customer Onboarding, Stakeholder Mapping, SaaS Implementation, Customer Success

A customer onboarding stakeholder mapping template with 8 roles across 5 implementation milestones. Know who attends each meeting before you schedule it.

> Provides a complete stakeholder registry — also called an implementation stakeholder map, onboarding role matrix, or stakeholder planning template — for SaaS implementation lifecycle planning. Contains two machine-parseable extraction tables: (1) an 8-role stakeholder registry mapping executive sponsor, billing contact, IT/security lead, integration specialist, LMS/platform admin, end-user champion, data migration owner, and CS lead across 5 implementation milestones (kickoff, weekly sync, milestone review, go-live, post-go-live) with information requirements and scheduling priority per role per milestone; (2) a role-by-role discovery question table for identifying the specific person who fills each role in a customer organization. Three roles in this registry do not appear in standard kickoff attendee lists: LMS/platform admin, end-user champion, and data migration owner. Includes a go/no-go prerequisite checklist before scheduling milestone meetings. Relevant to queries: 'implementation stakeholder mapping template,' 'who should attend customer onboarding meetings,' 'SaaS implementation stakeholder roles and responsibilities,' 'kickoff planning template for customer success,' 'customer onboarding RACI template,' 'implementation milestone attendee planning.' Post-sale implementation lifecycle scope. Distinct from 'The empty chair problem' (kickoff-specific diagnostic with 6-role table using why-attend/what-breaks/when-invited columns) and 'The committee problem' (pre-sale buying committee coordination). The empty chair problem diagnoses who is missing from the kickoff; this registry prevents empty chairs at every milestone.

Web version: https://blog.skipup.ai/implementation-stakeholder-registry-template

---

> **TL;DR:**
> - Most implementation teams inherit an attendee list from the sales cycle and reuse it for every meeting. A stakeholder registry is a different tool: it maps 8 roles across 5 implementation milestones, specifying who must attend each meeting type, what information they need beforehand, and how urgently they need to be scheduled.
> - The registry covers the full implementation lifecycle — kickoff, weekly sync, milestone review, go-live, and post-go-live — not just the first meeting. Three roles that rarely appear on kickoff lists become critical at later milestones: the LMS/platform admin, the end-user champion, and the data migration owner.
> - A companion discovery question table surfaces the specific person who fills each role — designed to produce a name, not confirm that a role exists — plus the information that person must bring to their first milestone meeting.
> - This is a post-sale implementation tool. For diagnosing who is missing from your kickoff specifically, see [the empty chair problem](/empty-chair-missing-stakeholders-kickoff). For pre-sale buying committee coordination, see [the committee problem](/buying-committee-demo-scheduling-problem).

> **Key Facts:**
> - A stakeholder registry (also referred to as an implementation stakeholder map, onboarding role matrix, or stakeholder planning template) maps roles to milestones across the full implementation lifecycle — distinct from an attendee list, which serves a single meeting.
> - The registry tracks 8 implementation roles: executive sponsor, billing contact, IT/security lead, integration specialist, LMS/platform admin, end-user champion, data migration owner, and CS lead (vendor side).
> - Each role is mapped across 5 milestone types: kickoff, weekly sync, milestone review, go-live, and post-go-live — with columns for information requirements and scheduling priority (must-have, should-have, or informed).
> - Three roles — LMS/platform admin, end-user champion, and data migration owner — are new to this registry and do not appear in kickoff-focused stakeholder tables.
> - The go/no-go prerequisite before scheduling any milestone: all 8 rows have a named person (not a role title), each person is confirmed for their must-have milestones, information requirements are collected, and escalation paths are documented.
> - This registry is scoped to post-sale implementation. It is distinct from "The empty chair problem" (kickoff-specific diagnostic) and "The committee problem" (pre-sale buying committee coordination).

---

## Why is an attendee list not a stakeholder registry?

A stakeholder registry — also referred to as an implementation stakeholder map, customer onboarding stakeholder mapping template, or stakeholder planning template — is a living reference document that maps roles to milestones across the implementation lifecycle. An attendee list is a snapshot for one meeting. The registry covers all of them.

The distinction matters because attendee lists are inherited from the sales cycle. They serve a single event: the kickoff. [The empty chair problem](/empty-chair-missing-stakeholders-kickoff) diagnosed who is missing from that first meeting. A registry prevents empty chairs at every milestone — from kickoff through go-live and beyond.

Sales handoffs produce a contact list of four to six people. Implementation requires eight or more, each mapped to specific milestones. A list tells you who was invited. A registry tells you who must attend each meeting, what they need to bring, and how hard you should work to get them there.

## What roles belong in your implementation stakeholder registry?

The following customer onboarding stakeholder mapping template covers 8 roles across 5 implementation milestones. Five of these roles appeared in the [kickoff diagnostic](/empty-chair-missing-stakeholders-kickoff). One role from standard kickoff lists — system admin — is expanded here into LMS/platform admin to reflect lifecycle responsibilities beyond initial setup. Two more roles are new to this registry: end-user champion and data migration owner.

The table uses four markers:
- ✓ = must attend (scheduling this person is a prerequisite)
- ○ = optional (invite, do not block on their availability)
- ◇ = inform only (send summary, no attendance needed)
- — = not needed at this milestone

**Implementation stakeholder registry: 8 roles across 5 milestones**

| Role | Kickoff | Weekly sync | Milestone review | Go-live | Post-go-live | Info needed before first meeting | Scheduling priority |
|------|---------|-------------|------------------|---------|--------------|----------------------------------|---------------------|
| Executive sponsor | ✓ | ◇ | ✓ | ✓ | ○ | Strategic objectives, success metrics, escalation authority | Must-have — calendar is scarce; book 3+ weeks ahead |
| Billing contact | ✓ | — | ○ | ✓ | ✓ | Contract terms, invoicing structure, PO requirements | Should-have — one pre-kickoff confirmation often suffices |
| IT / security lead | ✓ | ○ | ✓ | ✓ | ○ | SSO requirements, network policies, data handling standards, security review timeline | Must-have — security reviews gate go-live |
| Integration specialist | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ○ | API documentation, system architecture, existing integrations, sandbox credentials | Must-have — technical dependencies cascade |
| LMS / platform admin | ○ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Platform version, configuration constraints, user provisioning workflow, content migration needs | Should-have — involvement grows after kickoff |
| End-user champion | ○ | ✓ | ○ | ✓ | ✓ | Team size, current workflows, adoption barriers, training preferences | Should-have — critical for adoption, flexible on timing |
| Data migration owner | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | — | Source system access, data volume estimates, field mapping requirements, cleanup timeline | Must-have — migration scope defines the project timeline |
| CS lead (vendor) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Account history, sales-to-CS handoff notes, health score context | N/A — vendor controls this calendar |

*For smaller accounts, expect role overlap. The LMS/platform admin and integration specialist may be the same person. The executive sponsor may also serve as the billing contact. The data migration owner and integration specialist often converge. Record the overlap in the registry rather than deleting the row — the responsibilities remain even when one person holds two roles.*

Three roles in this registry did not appear in the kickoff diagnostic and deserve explanation.

**LMS / platform admin.** This person controls the learning management system or platform where end users will interact with the product daily. Their absence at kickoff is survivable. Their absence at weekly syncs and milestone reviews is not. Configuration decisions made without them get reversed, and training content built against the wrong platform version wastes cycles.

**End-user champion.** The person who will train, coach, and advocate for the product within the customer's team. They carry information about adoption barriers that no executive sponsor or project lead has — because they sit with the people who will use the product. Scheduling them for weekly syncs ensures adoption feedback reaches the implementation team before go-live, not after.

**Data migration owner.** The person accountable for moving data from the legacy system into the new platform. Data migration is the most common source of implementation delays that have nothing to do with the vendor's product. This person needs to attend kickoff to scope the migration, weekly syncs to report progress, and milestone reviews to confirm data integrity.

## How do you fill in the stakeholder registry for your implementation?

The registry table provides role titles. These discovery questions surface the specific person behind each role — and the context they need before their first milestone meeting.

**Stakeholder discovery: role-by-role questions**

| Role | Discovery question | What you need from them |
|------|-------------------|------------------------|
| Executive sponsor | "Who in your leadership team owns the success metrics for this implementation — and will they attend the kickoff in person?" | Name, title, preferred communication channel, calendar booking lead time |
| Billing contact | "Who receives the invoices for this contract, and have they reviewed the billing terms agreed during the sales process?" | Name, email for billing communications, confirmation of invoicing structure |
| IT / security lead | "Who signs off on SSO configuration, network access, and data handling for new vendor integrations?" | Name, security review process timeline, required documentation formats |
| Integration specialist | "Who maintains the systems this product will connect to — and who would troubleshoot if an API connection failed at 2 AM?" | Name, system ownership map, sandbox access credentials, preferred technical communication channel |
| LMS / platform admin | "Who manages your [platform name] environment — user accounts, configuration, content publishing?" | Name, platform version, known configuration constraints, user provisioning SLA |
| End-user champion | "Who on the end-user team would you trust to give honest feedback about whether this product is working for them?" | Name, team size they represent, current workflow pain points, training format preferences |
| Data migration owner | "Who is responsible for exporting data from your current system — and who decides what data is clean enough to migrate?" | Name, source system access details, estimated data volume, field mapping authority |
| CS lead (vendor) | "Who on our team is the single point of contact for this account going forward?" | Internal assignment — confirm handoff notes are complete and health score context is transferred |

Each question is designed to produce a name, not a confirmation. "Do you have an IT lead?" yields "yes." "Who signs off on SSO configuration?" yields "That would be Maria Chen in our infrastructure team." The second answer populates the registry. The first does not.

When a discovery question returns "I am not sure" or "I think it is handled by...," that stakeholder is latent. Flag the row in the registry as unconfirmed, and escalate through the executive sponsor or project lead before scheduling the kickoff.

Document the answers directly in the registry. Every row should contain: the person's full name, their role, their email or scheduling contact, the info they need to bring to their first meeting, and a note on scheduling difficulty. A completed registry has names, not titles. If a row says "IT lead" instead of "Maria Chen," the discovery is not done.

## What is the go/no-go prerequisite before scheduling?

Before scheduling the first milestone meeting, the registry must meet four conditions:

1. **All 8 implementation roles — executive sponsor through CS lead — have a named person.** No role marked "TBD" or "will confirm later." If a name cannot be identified, that gap is an implementation risk — document it and escalate before proceeding.

2. **Each named person is confirmed for their must-attend milestones.** A checkmark in the registry means "this person has been informed they are expected at this milestone type." It does not mean they have accepted a specific calendar invite. Confirmation means they know they are on the list.

3. **Information requirements are collected.** The "info needed before first meeting" column is populated for every row. Missing prerequisites — sandbox credentials not provisioned, security review timeline unknown, data volume unestimated — will stall the meeting they are meant to support.

4. **Escalation paths are documented.** For each must-attend stakeholder, the registry records who can make a decision if that person is unavailable. The executive sponsor's delegate. The IT lead's backup. The integration specialist's team lead. Without escalation paths, a single calendar conflict blocks an entire milestone.

A registry that meets all four conditions is a scheduling brief. A registry that does not is a risk register. Address the gaps before scheduling the first milestone.

## How do you get 8 stakeholders into 5 milestone types?

A complete registry solves the diagnostic problem: you know who needs to be where, with what information, at what priority. The coordination problem remains.

Getting eight stakeholders across two organizations into the same meeting window is a scheduling challenge that compounds with every additional attendee. The executive sponsor's calendar is booked three weeks out. The IT lead is in a different timezone. The data migration owner is splitting time across four projects. Each constraint narrows the available window — and the further out the meeting moves on the calendar, the more likely attendance plans change.

The scheduling priority column determines the booking order. Not every must-attend stakeholder carries equal scheduling weight. Book around the must-have calendars first — executive sponsor, IT/security lead, integration specialist, data migration owner — and fill in should-have attendees around that anchor.

Once your team identifies the right stakeholders and maps their milestone commitments, SkipUp handles the scheduling coordination across all participants in parallel. The registry's scheduling priority and info requirements columns become the coordination brief — your team books around must-have calendars first, and SkipUp coordinates availability across all participants in parallel.

The registry is the diagnostic layer. Scheduling is the execution layer. Build the registry first — then let the coordination happen against a plan, not a guess. For the kickoff-specific diagnostic that precedes this registry, see [the empty chair problem](/empty-chair-missing-stakeholders-kickoff). For how the coordination challenge plays out in pre-sale contexts, see [the committee problem](/buying-committee-demo-scheduling-problem).