You are on page 1of 11

Strengths

•… •… • ...

Weaknesses
•… •… •…

SWOT
Opportunities
•… •… •…

Threats
•… •… •…

10-03-2011

Francisco Coelho

1

Humphrey.Reflexão Estratégica • SWOT – Strength – Weaknesses – Opportunities – Threats EFAS Albert S. 1960-1970 ??? 10-03-2011 Francisco Coelho 2 .

List opportunities and threats (5–10 each) in column 1. Hunger. . D.Internal Factor Analysis Summary (IFAS) Weight Internal Factors Strengths 1 2 3 Rating Weighted Score 4 Comments 5 Weaknesses Total Weighted Score 1. Source: T. 4. ―External Strategic Factors Analysis Summary (EFAS). 6.00. 3. Add the weighted scores to obtain the total weighted score for the company in Column 4. Use Column 5 (comments) for rationale used for each factor. Reprinted by permission.00 Notes: 1. 5. This tells how well the company is responding to the strategic factors in its external environment A weighted score of 3. Rate each factor from 5 (Outstanding) to 1 (Poor) in Column 3 based on the company’s response to that factor. The total weights must sum to 1. 2. Wheelen and J.0 (Not Important) in Column 2 based on that factor’s probable impact on the company’s strategic position. Multiply each factor’s weight times its rating to obtain each factor’s weighted score in Column 4.0 (Most Important) to 0. Weight each factor from 1. L.‖ Copyright © 1991 by Wheelen and Hunger Associates..0 means average performance.

20 .05 4 .20 Total Weighted Score 1.10 .05 .10 .05 .15 .Internal Factor Analysis Summary (IFAS): Maytag as Example Internal Factors Strengths • • • • • Quality Maytag culture Experienced top management Vertical integration Employee relations Hoover’s international orientation Weight Rating Weighted Score Comments 1 .05 .75 .45 4 5 Quality key to success Know appliances Dedicated factories Good. but deteriorating Hoover name in cleaners Weaknesses • Process-oriented R&D • Distribution channels • Financial position • Global positioning .05 .15 .00 3.40 .20 2 2 2 2 .15 .15 2 5 4 4 3 3 3 .05 .10 .40 Slow on new products Superstores replacing small dealers High debt load Hoover weak outside the United Kingdom and Australia Investing now • Manufacturing facilities .30 .

External Factor Analysis Summary (EFAS) External Factors 1 Weight 2 Rating 3 Weighted Score 4 Comments 5 Opportunities Threats Total Weighted Score 1. ―External Strategic Factors Analysis Summary (EFAS). 3. Source: T. Weight each factor from 1. Hunger. List opportunities and threats (5–10 each) in column 1. 4. 5. Reprinted by permission. This tells how well the company is responding to the strategic factors in its external environment. 2. D. .00 Notes: 1. Wheelen and J. 6. Rate each factor from 5 (Outstanding) to 1 (Poor) in Column 3 based on the company’s response to that factor. The total weights must sum to 1. Use Column 5 (comments) for rationale used for each factor. Multiply each factor’s weight times its rating to obtain each factor’s weighted score in Column 4.0 means average performance.0 (Most Important) to 0.0 (Not Important) in Column 2 based on that factor’s probable impact on the company’s strategic position. A weighted score of 3.00. Add the weighted scores to obtain the total weighted score for the company in Column 4.‖ Copyright © 1991 by Wheelen and Hunger Associates. L.

50 .40 .40 .S.15 .10 .10 .20 .05 .05 .10 .10 Rating Weighted Score Comments 4 5 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 Opportunities • Economic integration of European Community • Demographics favor quality appliances • Economic development of Asia • Opening of Eastern Europe • Trend to “Super Stores” 2 4 5 1 2 2 4 4 3 1 2 3 .80 .05 .20 Threats • Increasing government regulations • • • • Strong U.45 .External Factor Analysis Summary (EFAS): Maytag as Example External Factors Weight 1 .15 .10 .20 .00 3.05 . competition Whirlpool and Electrolux strong globally New product advances Japanese appliance companies Total Scores 1.05 .10 .

4. Rate each factor from 5 (Outstanding) to 1 (Poor) in Column 3 based on the company’s response to that factor. long term—over 3 years. Use Column 6 (comments) for rationale used for each factor. Hunger. Weight each factor from 1. List each of the factors developed in your IFAS and EFAS tables in Column 1. 3. 5. The total weights must sum to 1.00. check appropriate column (short term—less than 1 year.0 means average performance.‖ Copyright © 1997 by Wheelen and Hunger Associates. For duration in Column 5. Table 4.0 (Most Important) to 0. 2. A weighted score of 3. Reprinted by permission. Source: T.) 6.Strategic Factor Analysis Summary (SFAS) 1 2 3 Rating Weighted Score 4 Duration INTERMEDIATE 5 Comments LONG 6 Strategic Factors SHORT (Select the most important opportunities/threats from EFAS. . Multiply each factor’s weight times its rating to obtain each factor’s weighted score in Column 4. Wheelen and J.0 (Not Important) in Column 2 based on that factor’s probable impact on the company’s strategic position. D. Table 3.4 and the most important strengths and weaknesses from IFAS. intermediate—1 to 3 years. ―Strategic Factors Analysis Summary (SFAS).2) Weight Total Score Notes: 1. L.

40 .15 .2) SHORT Weight Rating S1 Quality Maytag culture (S) S3 Hoover’s international orientation (S) W3 Financial position (W) . Source: T. and Australia W4 Global positioning (W) O1 Economic integration of European Community (O) O2 Demographics favor quality (O) O5 Trend to super stores (O + T) T3 T5 Whirlpool and Electrolux (T) Japanese appliance companies (T) X X Acquisition of Hoover Maytag quality Weak in this channel Dominate industry X X X Asian presence Total Score 1. . Reprinted by permission. 2. A weighted score of 3.) 6. 4.10 . long term—over 3 years.10 . List each of the factors developed in your IFAS and EFAS tables in Column 1. 5. Table 4.45 . Rate each factor from 5 (Outstanding) to 1 (Poor) in Column 3 based on the company’s response to that factor. L.4 and the most important strengths and weaknesses from IFAS. Use Column 6 (comments) for rationale used for each factor.A.50 . 3. intermediate—1 to 3 years.. Hunger.10 5 3 2 2 4 5 2 3 2 . Table 3. Weight each factor from 1.‖ Copyright © 1997 by Wheelen and Hunger Associates. ―Strategic Factors Analysis Summary (SFAS).. Multiply each factor’s weight times its rating to obtain each factor’s weighted score in Column 4.05 Notes: 1.30 .00.K. For duration in Column 5. D.50 .20 .30 . The total weights must sum to 1.10 .0 (Not Important) in Column 2 based on that factor’s probable impact on the company’s strategic position. Wheelen and J.20 X X X X LONG Weighted Score Comments Quality key to success Name recognition High debt Only in N. check appropriate column (short term—less than 1 year.0 (Most Important) to 0.Strategic Factor Analysis Summary (SFAS): Maytag as Example Duration INTERMEDIATE Strategic Factors (Select the most important opportunities/threats from EFAS. U.10 .10 .15 .0 means average performance.20 .00 3.10 .

Wheelen.)  ESTRATÉGIAS (S. AS VANTAGENS DAS OPORTUNIDADES.)   ESTRATÉGIAS (F. Thomas L. Ed: 7 .  ESTRATÉGIA (S.A. J.Matching and Converting ANALISE SWOT PONTOS FORTES (S) PONTOS FRACOS(F)  LISTAGEM DOS PRINCIPAIS PONTOS FRACOS FACTORES INTERNOS  LISTAGEM DOS PRINCIPAIS PONTOS FORTES FACTORES EXTERNOS OPORTUNIDADES (O)  LISTAGEM DAS PRINCIPAIS OPORTUNIDADES AMEAÇAS (A)  LISTAGEM DAS PRINCIPAIS  AMEAÇAS     ESTRATÉGIAS (F.)    GERAR ESTRATÉGIAS QUE  GERAR ESTRATÉGIAS QUE UTILIZEM APROVEITEM AS OPORTUNIDADES OS PONTOS FORTES E APROVEITEM PELA ELIMINAÇÃO DE FRAQUEZAS.A.)   GERAR ESTRATÉGIAS QUE UTILIZEM  GERAR ESTRATÉGIAS QUE PONTOS FORTES PARA EVITAR MINIMIZEM PONTOS FRACOS E AMEAÇAS. David Hunger. EVITEM AMEAÇAS Strategic management .O.O.2000 10-03-2011 Francisco Coelho 9 .

60. Langford Lane. H. Kidlington OX5 1GB. Copyright 1982. April 1982. ―The TOWS Matrix—A Tool for Situational Analysis‖ p. Weihrich and Elsevier Science Ltd. The Boulevard. Weihrich. with kind permission from H. UK.TOWS Matrix INTERNAL FACTORS (IFAS) Strengths (S) Weaknesses (W) EXTERNAL FACTORS (EFAS) List 5 – 10 internal strengths here List 5 – 10 internal weaknesses here Opportunities (O) SO Strategies WO Strategies Generate strategies here that take advantage of opportunities by overcoming weaknesses List 5 – 10 external opportunities here Generate strategies here that use strengths to take advantage of opportunities Threats (T) List 5 – 10 external threats here ST Strategies Generate strategies here that use strengths to avoid threats WT Strategies Generate strategies here that minimize weaknesses and avoid threats Source: Adapted from Long-Range Planning. .

 ENFATIZAR REDUÇÃO CUSTOS. Strategic management .O. Ed: 7 . Thomas L.O. Wheelen. J.)  ADQUIRIR EMPRESA NOS USA PARA AUMENTAR QUOTA.Matching and Converting ANALISE SWOT FACTORES INTERNOS      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 FACTORES EXTERNOS           OPORTUNIDADES (O) INTEGRAÇÃO ECONOMICA EU EXIGÊNCIA QUALIDADE DESENVOLVIMENTO ECONOMICO ASIA EUROPA LESTE TENDÊNCIA P/ SUPERLOJAS AMEAÇAS (A) REGULAMENTAÇÃO GOVERNO CONCORRÊNCIA USA GLOBALIZAÇÃO CONCORRENTES NOVOS PRODUTOS CONCORRENTES JAPONESES  ESTRATÉGIA (S.  EMFAZE NOS NOVOS CANAIS (SUPERLOJAS)  ESTRATÉGIAS (S.A.A.)  EXPANDIR PRESENÇA NA EUROPA. David Hunger.)  UTILIZAR CANAIS DISTRIBUIÇÃO EXISTENTES PARA VENDER TOTALIDADE LINHA PRODUTOS  ENCONTRAR PARCEIRO ESTRATÉGICO PARA LESTE E ASIA  ESTRATÉGIAS (F.2000 10-03-2011 Francisco Coelho 11 .  ESTRATÉGIAS (F.  FUSÃO COM JAPONESES. REDUZINDO CUSTOS PRODUÇÃO E DISTRIBUIÇÃO.)  VENDER AREAS DE NEGÓCIO NÃO ESTRATEGICAS PARA REDUZIR DEBITO. MELHORANDO QUALIDADE.