The Process of Internal Environment Appraisal
The Process of Internal Environment Appraisal
ORGANISATIONAL APPRAISAL
Introduction
Corporate Strengths:
A strength is a strong point for the company i.e., something a company is good at
doing or characteristic that gives it an important capability.
Strength can be a skill, a competence, a valuable organizational resource or
competitive capability or achievement that gives that company an advantage.
It refers to competitive advantages and other distinct competencies which a
company can exert in the market place.
The management and performance of organization can also be analyzed with the
help of ‘7-s' Framework, developed by McKinsey and co., a leading consulting
firm of USA.
According to this framework, strategy is only one element that determines the
performance.
The first three elements: strategy, structure and systems are consider the ‘hard'
elements and the next four shared values, skills, staff and style are considered as
the ‘soft' elements.
With the help of this framework a competitive competitor analysis can provide
deep insight on the strengths and weakness of the competitors.
Corporate Weakness:
Here, the analyst compares the characteristics under examination with past performances.
An improvement over the past performance may be seen as strength, and a decline a
weakness. Before, arriving at such conclusion, it is always advisable to check the
reliability of the ‘past' in future. In a large number of situations ‘past' may not be valid for
future and this would certainly invalidate our assessment or judgment.
Here, the basis of judgment is ‘what ought to be' the level of performance to classify a
particular element into a strength or a weakness. Thus, based on theory, expert opinion,
industry practices or personal opinions, one can develop ‘norms' for evaluation.
As its basis for judgment, this criterion utilizes the action successful direct competitors or
potential competitors. It is based on the premise that a firm must, at the minimum, meet
the actions of the competitors. Thus, if the industry practice of providing 60 days credit to
the trade is not followed, it may be considered a weakness.
One criterion is seldom sufficient for a complete evaluation of a firm. Some elements like
‘financial strengths' may be evaluated better on ‘historical' and ‘competition' criteria; and
‘marketing' may be best evaluated on the basis of ‘competition' and ‘critical factors for
success criterion.
Strengths and weaknesses may exist in varying degrees. Some may view an organisation
as very strong which others may consider it not that strong. The same may apply to its
weaknesses. This would call for measurement of strengths and weaknesses. There are
three measures 1. Attribute Measures, 2. Effectiveness Measures and 3. Efficiency
Measures.
1. Attribute Measures
2. Effectiveness Measures
The use of three types of the measurements is a function of the degree of specificity
possible for a given element or characteristic. Attribute measurement is simply a listing
of the capabilities of an organisation; an effectiveness measure relates to the abilities of
an organisation to achieve objectives; and an efficiency measure is concerned with the
optimum conversion of firm's resources into desired output. The type of measurement a
firm would employ will be a function of - the characteristic which is being measured and
the level within the organisation which is to utilize the measurement.
Marketing
Production/Operations/Technical
Personnel
1. Management personnel.
2. Employees skill and morale.
3. Labour relations/costs compared to industry and competition.
4. Efficient and effective personnel policies.
5. Effective use of incentives to motivate performance.
6. Ability to level peaks and valleys of employment.
7. Employee turnover and absenteeism.
8. Specialised skills.
9. Experience.
Organisation/General Management
1. Organisational structure.
2. Firm's image and prestige.
3. Firm's record for achieving objectives.
4. Organisation communication system.
5. Overall organisational control system effectiveness and utilisation.
6. Organisational climate.
7. Use of systematic procedures and techniques in decision making.
8. Top management skill, capabilities and interest.
Bates and Eldredge have suggested what has been described as conceptual
approach to analyse strengths and weaknesses.
According to them, the format for analysis can be divided into three
dimensions : Management, Operations, and Finance.
These three dimensions would be common for a majority of the organisations.
'‘Management''dimension covers top management functions and broader issues
encompassing the total organisation. Some of these could be strategic planning
processes and systems, organisation climate and culture, managerial succession,
top management values etc.
At the corporate level, i.e. at the level of corporate strategy, the strategist must
begin the assessment of organisational strengths and weaknesses with an analysis
of firm's management.
To a large extent, the quality of top management determines and affects corporate
strengths and weakness, not only the current but the ‘potential' strengths as well.
As an illustration, Bates and Eldredge have suggested the following dimensions to
evaluate the strategic planning system of a firm.
Critical Factors: Identification of the present and future conditions having a bearing
on the achievement of objectives.
Resources: Identification and provision for resources required to meet present and future
conditions for achieving objectives.
Objectives: Clearly spelt out results and details of the means to be used to measure
accomplishment.
A firm's performance is largely determined through its financial performance like sales
revenue, profits net worth, divided pay out, etc. A number of dimensions within finance
viz., capital structure, capital budgeting, dividend policy, debt policy, interest cost, credit
policies, management of working capital etc., need to be examined to assess a firm's
strengths and weaknesses.
After the corporate audit on three dimensions: management, finance, and operation have
been done. Bates and Eldredge suggest consolidation of all these dimensions to develop a
profile. This is shown below:
Strengths and Weaknesses Profile
Dimension
Basis of Comparison
Ranking
Existing
Strengths of weaknesses
Management
Financial
perations
The purpose is to ensure that the strategist is aware of a basis of comparison and
its appropriateness to the factor under assessment.
Ranking indicates degree of importance of the factor under assessment to the
orgnisation's success.
All critical factors should have a ranking in one in their respective dimensions.
A brief description of what exists.Strengths or weaknesses are coded as follows:
0- neutral; +=strength, and the more pluses, the greater the strength; -weakness
and the more minuses, the greater the weakness.
The earlier framework of Bates and Eldredge suggested a diagnosis around three
dimensions: Management, Finance, Operations. Almost a similar approach has been
suggested by Ansoff. This is shown below:
GRID for Organization Audit
Facilities Equipment
Personnel Skills
Organisational capabilities
Management capabilities
R&D
Operations
Marketing
Warehousing Retail outlets Sales Offices Transportation equipment Training facilities for
sales staff Data processing equipment
Door-to-Door selling Retail selling holesale selling Direct industry selling Dept. of
Defense selling Cross-industry selling Applications engineering Advertising Sales
promotion Servicing Contract administration Sales analysis Data analysis Forecasting
Computer modelling Product Planning Background of people Corporate culture
Direct sales
The ‘rows' contain various functions and the ‘columns' capabilities. With the help of
comprehensive checklist, you can identify the relevant characteristics for a firm vis-à-vis
various functions.
The 7 ‘S' framework can be used both all the corporate level as well as at the functional
level. One such matrix for the corporate level is shown below:
The 7 ‘S' Framework Functions
Dimension
Marketing
Finance
Human Resources
Production
1. Strategy
2. Structure
3. Systems
4. Shared Values
5. Skills
6. Style
7. Staff
a)The level at which the exercise of corporate audits (strengths and weaknesses) is being
performed.
c)The ‘use' which management wants to make of the strengths and weaknesses analysis.
If the idea is to reformulate a corporate strategy, management may employ two or three
frameworks to have different viewpoints for the total organisation. If the use is ‘gap
analysis' in some specific functional area, it may confine to only one framework, using
the various ‘measures' to come to sound decisions.
1. Strategy and Super ordinate Goals- The concept of strategy includes purposes,
mission, objectives, goals and major action plans and policies. Super ordinate
goals may be considered to be the equivalent of the term organisational purposes.
Super ordinate goals refer to a set of values and aspirations that goes beyond the
conventional formal statement of corporate objectives. Superordinate goals are the
fundamental ideas around which a business is built. They are its main values.
2. Structure- The design of organisation structure is a critical task of the top
management of an organisation.Organisational structure refers to the relatively
more durable organisational arrangements and Relationships. It prescribes the
formal relationships among various positions and activities.
3. Systems- refers to all the rules, regulations and procedures, both formal and
informal that complement the organisation structure. This includes production
planning and control systems, cost accounting procedures, capital budgeting
systems, recruitment, training and development systems, planning and budgeting
systems, etc.,
4. Style- The style of an organisation becomes evident through the patterns of
actions taken by member of the top management over a period of time. The
aspects of business most emphasised by members of the top management tend to
be given more attention by people down in the organisation.
5. Staff- is the process of acquiring human resources for the organisation and
assuring that they have the potential to contribute to the achievement of the
organisation's goals.
6. Skills- is one of the most crucial attributes or capabilities of an organisation. The
term skills include those characteristics which most people use to describe a
company. These are developed over a period of time and are a result of the
interaction of a number of factors: performing certain tasks successfully over a
period of time, the kind of people in the organisation, the top management style,
the organisation structure, the management systems, the external environmental
influences etc., Hence, when organisations make a strategic shift it becomes
necessary to consciously build new skills.
SUMMARY:
VALUE CHAIN
Popular Visualization
The value chain, also known as value chain analysis, is a concept from business
management that was first described and popularized by Michael Porter in his 1985 best-
seller, Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance.
Firm Level
Activities
The value chain categorizes the generic value-adding activities of an organization. The
"primary activities" include: inbound logistics, operations (production), outbound
logistics, marketing and sales (demand), and services (maintenance). The "support
activities" include: administrative infrastructure management, human resource
management, technology (R&D), and procurement. The costs and value drivers are
identified for each value activity.
Industry Level
Significance
BENCHMARKING
Benchmarking
Introduction
This then allows organizations to develop plans on how to make improvements or adapt
specific best practices, usually with the aim of increasing some aspect of performance.
Benchmarking may be a one-off event, but is often treated as a continuous process in
which organizations continually seek to improve their
Costs
• Visit Costs - This includes hotel rooms, travel costs, meals, a token gift, and lost
labor time.
• Time Costs - Members of the benchmarking team will be investing time in
researching problems, finding exceptional companies to study, visits, and
implementation. This will take them away from their regular tasks for part of each
day so additional staff might be required.
• Benchmarking Database Costs - Organizations that institutionalize
benchmarking into their daily procedures find it is useful to create and maintain a
database of best practices and the companies associated with each best practice
now.
The cost of benchmarking can substantially be reduced through utilizing the many
internet resources that have sprung up over the last few years. These aim to capture
benchmarks and best practices from organizations, business sectors and countries to make
the benchmarking process much quicker and cheaper.
Types
Growth-share matrix
Introduction
The BCG matrix (aka B.C.G. analysis, BCG-matrix, Boston Box, Boston Matrix, Boston
Consulting Group analysis, portfolio diagram) is a chart that had been created by Bruce
Henderson for the Boston Consulting Group in 1968 to help corporations with analyzing
their business units or product lines. This helps the company allocate resources and is
used as an analytical tool in brand marketing, product management, strategic
management, and portfolio analysis.
Chart
BCG Matrix
To use the chart, analysts plot a scatter graph to rank the business units (or products) on
the basis of their relative market shares and growth rates.
The overall goal of this ranking was to help corporate analysts decide which of their
business units to fund, and how much; and which units to sell. Managers were supposed
to gain perspective from this analysis that allowed them to plan with confidence to use
money generated by the cash cows to fund the stars and, possibly, the question marks. As
the BCG stated in 1970:
Only a diversified company with a balanced portfolio can use its strengths to
truly capitalize on its growth opportunities. The balanced portfolio has:
• stars whose high share and high growth assure the future;
• cash cows that supply funds for that future growth; and
For each product or service, the 'area' of the circle represents the value of its sales.
The BCG Matrix thus offers a very useful 'map' of the organization's product (or
service) strengths and weaknesses, at least in terms of current profitability, as well
as the likely cashflows.
The need which prompted this idea was, indeed, that of managing cash-flow.
It was reasoned that one of the main indicators of cash generation was relative
market share, and one which pointed to cash usage was that of market growth
rate.
Derivatives can also be used to create a 'product portfolio' analysis of services.
So Information System services can be treated accordingly.
This indicates likely cash generation, because the higher the share the more cash
will be generated.
As a result of 'economies of scale' (a basic assumption of the BCG Matrix), it is
assumed that these earnings will grow faster the higher the share.
The exact measure is the brand's share relative to its largest competitor.
Thus, if the brand had a share of 20 percent, and the largest competitor had the
same, the ratio would be 1:1.
If the largest competitor had a share of 60 percent; however, the ratio would be
1:3, implying that the organization's brand was in a relatively weak position.
If the largest competitor only had a share of 5 percent, the ratio would be 4:1,
implying that the brand owned was in a relatively strong position, which might be
reflected in profits and cash flows.
If this technique is used in practice, this scale is logarithmic, not linear.
On the other hand, exactly what is a high relative share is a matter of some debate.
The best evidence is that the most stable position (at least in Fast Moving
Consumer Goods FMCG markets) is for the brand leader to have a share double
that of the second brand, and triple that of the third.
Rapidly growing in rapidly growing markets, are what organizations strive for;
but, as we have seen, the penalty is that they are usually net cash users - they
require investment.
The reason for this is often because the growth is being 'bought' by the high
investment, in the reasonable expectation that a high market share will eventually
turn into a sound investment in future profits.
The theory behind the matrix assumes, therefore, that a higher growth rate is
indicative of accompanying demands on investment.
The cut-off point is usually chosen as 10 per cent per annum.
Determining this cut-off point, the rate above which the growth is deemed to be
significant (and likely to lead to extra demands on cash) is a critical requirement
of the technique; and one that, again, makes the use of the BCG Matrix
problematical in some product areas.
What is more, the evidence, from FMCG markets at least, is that the most typical
pattern is of very low growth, less than 1 per cent per annum.
This is outside the range normally considered in BCG Matrix work, which may
make application of this form of analysis unworkable in many markets.
Where it can be applied, however, the market growth rate says more about the
brand position than just its cash flow.
It is a good indicator of that market's strength, of its future potential (of its
'maturity' in terms of the market life-cycle), and also of its attractiveness to future
competitors. It can also be used in growth analysis.
Critical Evaluation
The matrix ranks only market share and industry growth rate, and only implies
actual profitability, the purpose of any business.
This is unfortunate, since such simplistic use contains at least two major problems:
Alternatives
As with most marketing techniques, there are a number of alternative offerings vying
with the BCG Matrix although this appears to be the most widely used (or at least most
widely taught—and then probably 'not' used). The next most widely reported technique is
that developed by McKinsey and General Electric, which is a three-cell by three-cell
matrix—using the dimensions of `industry attractiveness' and `business strengths'. This
approaches some of the same issues as the BCG Matrix but from a different direction and
in a more complex way (which may be why it is used less, or is at least less widely
taught). Perhaps the most practical approach is that of the Boston Consulting Group's
Advantage Matrix, which the consultancy reportedly used itself though it is little known
amongst the wider population.
Other Uses
The initial intent of the growth-share matrix was to evaluate business units, but the same
evaluation can be made for product lines or any other cash-generating entities. This
should only be attempted for real lines that have a sufficient history to allow some
prediction; if the corporation has made only a few products and called them a product
line, the sample variance will be too high for this sort of analysis to be meaningful.
SWOT ANALYSIS
Introduction
A SWOT analysis must first start with defining a desired end state or objective. A SWOT
analysis may be incorporated into the strategic planning model. Strategic Planning has
been the subject of much research.
First, the decision makers have to determine whether the objective is attainable, given the
SWOTs. If the objective is NOT attainable a different objective must be selected and the
process repeated.
The SWOT analysis is often used in academia to highlight and identify strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and threats.It is particularly helpful in identifying areas for
development.
The aim of any SWOT analysis is to identify the key internal and external factors that are
important to achieving the objective. These come from within the company's unique
value chain. SWOT analysis groups key pieces of information into two main categories:
Corporate Planning
As part of the development of strategies and plans to enable the organization to achieve
its objectives, then that organization will use a systematic/rigorous process known as
corporate planning. SWOT alongside PEST/PESTLE can be used as a basis for the
analysis of business and environmental factors.
Marketing management
In many competitor analyses, marketers build detailed profiles of each competitor in the
market, focusing especially on their relative competitive strengths and weaknesses using
SWOT analysis. Marketing managers will examine each competitor's cost structure,
sources of profits, resources and competencies, competitive positioning and product
differentiation, degree of vertical integration, historical responses to industry
developments, and other factors.
Marketing management often finds it necessary to invest in research to collect the data
required to perform accurate marketing analysis. Accordingly, management often
conducts market research (alternately marketing research) to obtain this information.
Marketers employ a variety of techniques to conduct market research, but some of the
more common include:
Using SWOT to analyse the market position of a small management consultancy with
specialism in HRM.[8]
STRATEGIC FIT
Strategic fit express the degree to which an organization is matching its resources
and capabilities with the opportunities in the external environment.
Tangible:
Intangible:
Several tools have been developed one can use in order to analyze the resources
and capabilities of a company.
These include SWOT, value chain analysis, cash flow analysis and more.
Benchmarking with relevant peers is a useful tool to assess the relative strengths
of the resources and capabilities of the company compared to its competitors.
Strategic fit can also be used to evaluate specific opportunities like M&A
opportunities.
Strategic fit would in this case refer to how well the potential acquisition fits with
the planned direction (strategy) of the acquiring company.
In order to justify growth through M&A transactions the transaction should yield
a better return than Organic growth.