swot analysis

10-03-2011 Francisco Coelho 1

Strengths

• …

• …

• ...

Weaknesses

• …

• …

• …

Opportunities

• …

• …

• …

Threats

• …

• …

• …

SWOT

• SWOT– Strength

– Weaknesses

– Opportunities

– Threats


Reflexão Estratégica

EFAS

Albert S. Humphrey, 1960-1970 ???

Internal Factor Analysis Summary (IFAS)

Internal FactorsWeight Rating

Weighted

ScoreComments

1 2 3 4 5

1.00

Strengths

Weaknesses

Total Weighted Score

Notes: 1. List opportunities and threats (5–10 each) in column 1. 2. Weight each factor from 1.0 (Most Important) to 0.0 (Not Important) in Column 2 based on that factor’s probable impact on the company’s strategic position. The total weights must sum to 1.00. 3. Rate each factor from 5 (Outstanding) to 1 (Poor) in Column 3 based on the company’s response to that factor. 4. Multiply each factor’s weight times its rating to obtain each factor’s weighted score in Column 4. 5. Use Column 5 (comments) for rationale used for each factor. 6. Add the weighted scores to obtain the total weighted score for the company in Column 4. This tells how well the company is responding to the strategic factors in its external environment A weighted score of 3.0 means average performance..

Source: T. L. Wheelen and J. D. Hunger, ―External Strategic Factors Analysis Summary (EFAS).‖ Copyright © 1991 by Wheelen and Hunger Associates. Reprinted by permission.

Internal Factor Analysis Summary (IFAS):Maytag as Example

Internal FactorsWeight Rating

Weighted

ScoreComments

1 2 3 4 5

1.00

Strengths

• Quality Maytag culture

• Experienced top management

• Vertical integration

• Employee relations

• Hoover’s international orientation

Weaknesses

• Process-oriented R&D

• Distribution channels

• Financial position

• Global positioning

• Manufacturing facilities


Quality key to success

Know appliances

Dedicated factories

Good, but deteriorating

Hoover name in cleaners

Slow on new products

Superstores replacing small

dealers

High debt load

Hoover weak outside the

United Kingdom and

Australia

Investing now

3.05

.15

.05

.10

.05

.15

.05

.05

.15

.20

.05

5

4

4

3

3

2

2

2

2

4

.75

.20

.40

.15

.45

.10

.10

.30

.40

.20

External Factor Analysis Summary (EFAS)

External Factors Weight RatingWeighted

ScoreComments

1 2 3 4 5

1.00

Opportunities

Threats


Notes: 1. List opportunities and threats (5–10 each) in column 1. 2. Weight each factor from 1.0 (Most Important) to 0.0 (Not Important) in Column 2 based on that factor’s probable impact on the company’s strategic position. The total weights must sum to 1.00. 3. Rate each factor from 5 (Outstanding) to 1 (Poor) in Column 3 based on the company’s response to that factor. 4. Multiply each factor’s weight times its rating to obtain each factor’s weighted score in Column 4. 5. Use Column 5 (comments) for rationale used for each factor. 6. Add the weighted scores to obtain the total weighted score for the company in Column 4. This tells how well the company is responding to the strategic factors in its external environment. A weighted score of 3.0 means average performance.Source: T. L. Wheelen and J. D. Hunger, ―External Strategic Factors Analysis Summary (EFAS).‖ Copyright © 1991 by Wheelen and Hunger Associates. Reprinted by permission.

External Factor Analysis Summary (EFAS): Maytag as Example

External Factors Weight Rating Weighted

ScoreComments

1.00

Opportunities

• Economic integration of

European Community

• Demographics favor quality appliances

• Economic development of Asia

• Opening of Eastern Europe

• Trend to “Super Stores”

Threats

• Increasing government regulations

• Strong U.S. competition

• Whirlpool and Electrolux strong globally

• New product advances

• Japanese appliance companies

Total Scores

.20

.10

.05

.05

.10

.10

.10

.15

.05

.10

4

5

1

2

2

4

4

3

1

2

.80

.50

.05

.10

.20

.40

.40

.45

.05

.20

Acquisition of

Hoover

Maytag quality

Low Maytag presence

Will take time

Maytag weak in this

channel

Well positioned

Well positioned

Hoover weak globally

Questionable

Only Asian presence is

Australia

3.15

1 2 3 4 5

51 2 3 4

Strategic Factor Analysis Summary (SFAS)

Strategic Factors

(Select the most important opportunities/threats

from EFAS, Table 3.4 and the most important

strengths and weaknesses from IFAS, Table 4.2)

Total Score

Weight Rating Weighted

Score Comments

Notes: 1. List each of the factors developed in your IFAS and EFAS tables in Column 1. 2. Weight each factor from 1.0 (Most Important) to 0.0 (Not Important) in Column 2 based on that factor’s probable impact on the company’s strategic position. The total weights must sum to 1.00. 3. Rate each factor from 5 (Outstanding) to 1 (Poor) in Column 3 based on the company’s response to that factor. 4. Multiply each factor’s weight times its rating to obtain each factor’s weighted score in Column 4. 5. For duration in Column 5, check appropriate column (short term—less than 1 year; intermediate—1 to 3 years; long term—over 3 years.) 6. Use Column 6 (comments) for rationale used for each factor. A weighted score of 3.0 means average performance.Source: T. L. Wheelen and J. D. Hunger, ―Strategic Factors Analysis Summary (SFAS).‖ Copyright © 1997 by Wheelen and Hunger Associates. Reprinted by permission.

SH

OR

T

INT

ER

ME

DIA

TE

LO

NG

Duration 6

Strategic Factors

(Select the most important opportunities/threats

from EFAS, Table 3.4 and the most important

strengths and weaknesses from IFAS, Table 4.2)

S1 Quality Maytag culture (S)

S3 Hoover’s international orientation (S)

W3 Financial position (W)

W4 Global positioning (W)

O1 Economic integration of

European Community (O)

O2 Demographics favor quality (O)

O5 Trend to super stores (O + T)

T3 Whirlpool and Electrolux (T)

T5 Japanese appliance companies (T)

Total Score

Weight Rating Weighted

ScoreComments

1.00

Notes: 1. List each of the factors developed in your IFAS and EFAS tables in Column 1. 2. Weight each factor from 1.0 (Most Important) to 0.0 (Not Important) in Column 2 based on that factor’s probable impact on the company’s strategic position. The total weights must sum to 1.00. 3. Rate each factor from 5 (Outstanding) to 1 (Poor) in Column 3 based on the company’s response to that factor. 4. Multiply each factor’s weight times its rating to obtain each factor’s weighted score in Column 4. 5. For duration in Column 5, check appropriate column (short term—less than 1 year; intermediate—1 to 3 years; long term—over 3 years.) 6. Use Column 6 (comments) for rationale used for each factor. A weighted score of 3.0 means average performance.Source: T. L. Wheelen and J. D. Hunger, ―Strategic Factors Analysis Summary (SFAS).‖ Copyright © 1997 by Wheelen and Hunger Associates. Reprinted by permission.

SH

OR

T

INT

ER

ME

DIA

TE

LO

NG

Duration

3.05

.10

.10

.10

.15

.10

.10

.10

.15

.10

Quality key to success

Name recognition

High debt

Only in N.A., U.K., and Australia

Acquisition of Hoover

Maytag quality

Weak in this channel

Dominate industry

Asian presence

5

3

2

2

4

5

2

3

2

.50

.30

.20

.30

.40

.50

.20

.45

.20

Strategic Factor Analysis Summary (SFAS): Maytag as Example

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Matching and Converting


ANALISE SWOT

FACTORES INTERNOS

FACTORES EXTERNOS

PONTOS FORTES (S)

LISTAGEM DOS PRINCIPAIS PONTOS

FORTES

PONTOS FRACOS(F)

LISTAGEM DOS PRINCIPAIS PONTOS

FRACOS

OPORTUNIDADES (O)

LISTAGEM DAS PRINCIPAIS

OPORTUNIDADES

ESTRATÉGIA (S.O.)

GERAR ESTRATÉGIAS QUE UTILIZEM

OS PONTOS FORTES E APROVEITEM

AS VANTAGENS DAS OPORTUNIDADES.

ESTRATÉGIAS (F.O.)

GERAR ESTRATÉGIAS QUE

APROVEITEM AS OPORTUNIDADES

PELA ELIMINAÇÃO DE FRAQUEZAS.

AMEAÇAS (A)

LISTAGEM DAS PRINCIPAIS

AMEAÇAS

ESTRATÉGIAS (S.A.)

GERAR ESTRATÉGIAS QUE UTILIZEM

PONTOS FORTES PARA EVITAR

AMEAÇAS.

ESTRATÉGIAS (F.A.)

GERAR ESTRATÉGIAS QUE

MINIMIZEM PONTOS FRACOS E

EVITEM AMEAÇAS

Strategic management , J. David Hunger, Thomas L. Wheelen, Ed: 7 - 2000

SO Strategies

Generate strategies herethat use strengths to takeadvantage of opportunities

ST Strategies

Generate strategies herethat use strengths toavoid threats

WO Strategies

Generate strategies herethat take advantage ofopportunities byovercoming weaknesses

WT Strategies

Generate strategies herethat minimize weaknessesand avoid threats

INTERNALFACTORS

(IFAS)EXTERNALFACTORS(EFAS)

Strengths (S)

List 5 – 10 internalstrengths here

Weaknesses (W)

List 5 – 10 internalweaknesses here

Opportunities (O)

List 5 – 10 externalopportunities here

Threats (T)

List 5 – 10 externalthreats here

TOWS Matrix

Source: Adapted from Long-Range Planning, April 1982, H. Weihrich, ―The TOWS Matrix—A Tool for Situational Analysis‖ p. 60. Copyright 1982, with kind permission from H. Weihrich and Elsevier Science Ltd. The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington OX5 1GB, UK.


ANALISE SWOT

FACTORES INTERNOS

FACTORES EXTERNOS

PONTOS FORTES (S)

QUALIDADE CULTURA

EXPERIENCIA GESTORES

INTEGRAÇÃO VERTICAL

RELAÇÕES COM EMPREGRADOS

ORIENTAÇÃO INTERNACIONAL

PONTOS FRACOS(F)

R&D

CANAIS DISTRIBUIÇÃO

FINANÇAS

POSICIONAMENTO GLOBAL

FABRICAS

OPORTUNIDADES (O)

INTEGRAÇÃO ECONOMICA EU

EXIGÊNCIA QUALIDADE

DESENVOLVIMENTO

ECONOMICO ASIA

EUROPA LESTE

TENDÊNCIA P/ SUPERLOJAS

ESTRATÉGIA (S.O.) UTILIZAR CANAIS DISTRIBUIÇÃO

EXISTENTES PARA VENDER

TOTALIDADE LINHA PRODUTOS

ENCONTRAR PARCEIRO

ESTRATÉGICO PARA LESTE E ASIA

ESTRATÉGIAS (F.O.) EXPANDIR PRESENÇA NA EUROPA,

MELHORANDO QUALIDADE,

REDUZINDO CUSTOS PRODUÇÃO E

DISTRIBUIÇÃO.

EMFAZE NOS NOVOS CANAIS

(SUPERLOJAS)

AMEAÇAS (A)

REGULAMENTAÇÃO GOVERNO

CONCORRÊNCIA USA

GLOBALIZAÇÃO

CONCORRENTES

NOVOS PRODUTOS

CONCORRENTES JAPONESES

ESTRATÉGIAS (S.A.) ADQUIRIR EMPRESA NOS USA PARA

AUMENTAR QUOTA.

FUSÃO COM JAPONESES.

ESTRATÉGIAS (F.A.) VENDER AREAS DE NEGÓCIO NÃO

ESTRATEGICAS PARA REDUZIR

DEBITO.

ENFATIZAR REDUÇÃO CUSTOS.

Strategic management , J. David Hunger, Thomas L. Wheelen, Ed: 7 - 2000

Matching and Converting

swot analysis

Documents