“No construction project is risk free” (Latham, 1994, p. 14). To pursue the success of construction projects, risk should be managed effectively (Chapman and Ward, 2004; Du et al., 2016; Zou et al., 2007). Construction projects are also frequently faced with complex problems related to stakeholders, including conflict among project team members such as clients and contractors (Hwang and Ng, 2016; Lehtiranta, 2014), as well as protest from external parties such as the affected community (Mok et al., 2015; Olander, 2007). Meta-analyses of stakeholder theory applications in a project context have shown that management of stakeholders is vital to the successful implementation of various kinds of projects, among which the construction industry is a dominant sector (Achterkamp and Vos, 2008; Littau et al., 2010). Despite the salience of both risk management (RM) and stakeholder management (SM) in construction projects, there are still numerous project failures resulting from poor management in risk and stakeholder (Flyvbjerg et al., 2002; Mok et al., 2015). It thus calls for much more effort from the theory and practice on these two critical issues. Efforts have been devoted to promoting the effectiveness of both RM and SM. However, these efforts are largely undertaken in isolation, with little crossover between the two areas. That is, the existing literature mostly endeavors to improve either RM or SM in individual areas, whereas integrated management of risks and stakeholders is an overlooked and under-researched area, impeding theoretical and practical developments of an overall approach to risk–stakeholder management. We propose that integrated management of construction risk and stakeholder is feasible and can promote the effectiveness of both RM and SM. We distinguish that both RM and SM comprise a process domain and an outcome domain, and the effectiveness of RM and SM covers the process and outcome domains. Integrated management in the project and the organization context has been demonstrated to reduce objective conflict, achieve more efficient resource allocation, improve mutual management effectiveness, and bring new perspectives for managerial practices, sustainable development, and so on (Bernardo et al., 2015; Kerzner, 2001; Loushine et al., 2006; Love et al., 2016; Rebelo et al., 2016). Hence, risk– stakeholder integrated management, if feasible, will be of benefit to project managers who, in many cases, have to concurrently manage complex, multiple tasks. We first conduct a systematic literature review to better understand whether and how RM and SM might be connected, namely, the possible linkage modes between construction risk and stakeholder management. After the identification of possible risk– stakeholder linkage modes, we aim to identify two-way benefits for construction RM and SM effectiveness through thematic analysis and discussion on each linkage. Finally, we propose future research directions for each risk–stakeholder linkage and an overall research roadmap for enabling mutual effectiveness in RM and SM and ultimately the establishment of IMSs for construction risks and stakeholders. With the research framework outlined in Fig. 1, the overall goal is to address the following two unanswered questions in the literature: (1) how do RM and SM connect according to the literature; (2) is risk–stakeholder integration feasible in construction and if feasible, can integration produce mutual benefits to the effectiveness of construction risk and stakeholder management in their management processes and/or management outcomes.