IAM is cross-functional in many aspects which in turn requires cross-functional governance (Maxim and Cser, 2017, p. 3, 13-14, Osmanoglu et al., 2013, p. 117-121, 212, Royer, 2013, p. 49, 53).

Accordingly, IAM programs and projects require skills, authority and will to bring stakeholders together. This and the organizational changes involved by the implementation or streamlining of IAM processes and systems explain the special importance of top management as an IAM stakeholder. Beside sponsorship and funding, top management must play a leadership role to drive IAM cross-functional initiatives ( Maxim and Cser, 2017, p.3, Royer, 2013 p, 53-56).

The end-user (or individual subject) is probably the most central stakeholder of IAM, yet he may be easily forgotten. At the end of the day, it is his identity and data that is being collected, processed and analyzed. This triggers compliance requirements with data privacy regulation. It is also the end-user who benefits from a productive and smooth IAM experience, from staff on-boarding to daily usage of IT systems. Or it is him suffers from blockages and productivity loss (Royer, 2013 p, 53-56).

HR is one more key IAM stakeholder as it manages the on-boarding and off-boarding of employees' identities in the organization, even though collaboration between HR and security is sometimes reported as not as easy as expected (Maxim and Cser, 2017, p. 3, Royer, 2013 p, 53-56).

Beyond top management, end-users and HR, a diverse ecosystem of stakeholders exist. These are the parties that influence or are influenced by IAM. The diversity of the parties involved inside and outside the organization is exemplified by the following List of IAM Stakeholders compiled from a non-exhaustive literature review.

Besides sponsorship, alignment, coordination and funding, (Royer, 2013 p, 53-56) observes other but still important advantages from actively engaging with stakeholders:

• Anchoring the IAM processes

• Revealing data sources thus providing a solid basis to analyse the existing situation and plan changes

Iverson and Kampman, 2017 recommends to continuously adapt the IAM program scope to stakeholders' consensus, to systematically document stakeholders' needs, priorities and success criteria and to entirely derive the IAM program objectives and priorities from stakeholders'.

In consequence, identifying and actively managing stakeholders is strongly recommended to avoid IAM pitfalls and prevent blockage from politically motivated agenda (Garibyan et al., 2014, p. 153, Peterson et al., 2008, p. 41). For instance, (Osmanoglu et al., 2013, p. 8) promotes the identification and engagement with with stakeholders as one of the first and most critical steps in an IAM program.

The relevance of these recommendations are corroborated by KPMG 2009’s survey showing that 51% of failed IAM projects were caused by lack of support from management and/or stakeholders (https://open-measure.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/BIB/pages/49316773, p. 30).