Swot Methodology

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/254214770
Swot Methodology: A State-of-the-Art Review for the Past, A Framework for the
Future
Article in Journal of Business Economics and Management · April 2011
DOI: 10.3846/16111699.2011.555358
CITATIONS
READS 93
5,987
3 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Sepehr Ghazinoory Tarbiat Modares University
81 PUBLICATIONS 693 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Mandana Azadegan-Mehr University of Tehran
5 PUBLICATIONS 110 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
IP Management View project
Professor, Tarbiat Modares University View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Sepehr Ghazinoory on 25 February 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
This article was downloaded by: [[email protected]] On: 12 April 2011 Access details: Access
Details: [subscription number 936315073] Publisher Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England
and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37- 41 Mortimer Street,
London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Business Economics and Management

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t926820195
Swot Methodology: A State-of-the-Art Review for the Past, A

Framework for the Future Sepehr Ghazinoorya; Mansoureh Abdia; Mandana
Azadegan-Mehrb a Department of Information Technology Management, Tarbiat Modares
University, Tehran, Iran b Department of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science &
Technology, Tehran, Iran
Online publication date: 12 April 2011
To State-of-the-Art 1, 24 cite — this 48 Article Review Ghazinoory, for the Sepehr Past, A , Abdi,
Framework Mansoureh for the and Future', Azadegan-Mehr, Journal of Business Mandana(2011)
Economics 'Swot and Methodology: Management, A 12: To link to this Article: DOI:
10.3846/16111699.2011.555358 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2011.555358
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or
sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy
of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising
out of the use of this material.

Journal of Business Economics and Management ISSN 1611-1699
print / ISSN 2029-4433 online 2011 Volume 12(1): 24–48
doi:10.3846/16111699.2011.555358
SWOT METHODOLOGY: A STATE-OF-THE-ART REVIEW FOR THE

PAST, A FRAMEWORK FOR THE FUTURE
Sepehr Ghazinoory1, Mansoureh Abdi2, Mandana Azadegan-Mehr3
1, 2Department of Information Technology Management, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

3Department of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran E-
mails: [email protected] (corresponding author); [email protected];
[email protected]
Received 29 December 2009; accepted 05 November 2010
Abstract. The SWOT analysis is the process of exploring the internal and external environments of an
organization and extracting convenient strategies based on its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.
This paper presents a literature review of SWOT analysis, based on a reference bank of about 557 papers
established through searching various databases. This paper reviews papers that have been published up to the
end of 2009. The origination and historical development of SWOT are explained first, followed by a survey on
trends & classifications in SWOT papers including journals, countries, years, people & contents. Then a
categorical analysis is conducted about application area and scope of SWOT. Also a methodological
development of SWOT is discussed. Finally, concluding remarks and a few suggestions and challenges are
presented for future studies. It is hoped that the paper can serve the needs of researchers and practitioners for
easy references of SWOT studies and applications, and hence promote SWOT future development.
Keywords: SWOT, TOWS , review paper, state of the art, strategic planning, strategy.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Ghazinoory, S.; Abdi, M.; Azadegan- Mehr, M. 2011. SWOT
methodology: a state-of-the-art review for past, a framework for future, Journal of Business Economics and
Management 12(1): 24–48.
JEL Classifications: M00, M30.
1. Introduction
Among many fads and fashions emerging constantly in strategic management field, dur- ing the recent
decades, the SWOT framework has enjoyed outstanding popularity among both researchers and
practitioners. This tool includes environmental analysis (the process of scanning the business
environment for threats and opportunities) and the organizational analysis (the process of analyzing a
firm‘s strengths and weaknesses) (Fig. 1). SWOT analysis is a widely used tool for analyzing internal and
external environments in order to attain a systematic approach and support for decision situations.
Copyright © 2011 Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (VGTU) Press Technika

www.informaworld.com/tbem
Journal of Business Economics and Management, 2011, 12(1): 24–48
WOWT
Strengths
Opportunities
Opportunities
SO strategies
Threats
ST
Threats
Weaknesses
Fig. 1. SWOT matrix
The impressive ability of SWOT is the matching of specific internal and external factors, which provides a strategic matrix t
sense. It is essential to note that the internal factors are within the control of the organization, for instance, finance, opera- tion
and other areas. On the other hand, the external factors are out of the organization›s control, such as the economic and politica
technologies, and its competition. The SWOT matrix consists of four combinations which are called the maxi-maxi (strengths
opportunities), maxi-mini (strengths/ threats), mini-maxi (weaknesses/opportunities), and mini-mini (weaknesses/threats) (W
1982). Although the SWOT analysis dates back to 50’s and 60’s1, Weihrich (1982) that introduced SWOT matrix as a tool f
analysis, can be regarded as the most important reference in this field that has provided some classic examples. After that time
been pointed in most of the references of strategic planning. Although this analysis seems out of date in comparison with rece
such as resource-based planning and competency-based planning Dyson (2004) pointing out the relation between SWOT and
approaches could show that SWOT is such a flexible framework which can combine with newer methods to offer novel meth
strategic planning has a lot of instruments and many approaches, thousands of researches and hundreds of papers have utilized
recent years. So we will review those papers in section 2. Papers of SWOT applications in different industries will be mention
3. Also the numerous papers that have mentioned the SWOT weaknesses and shortages and combining other instruments and
have tried to modify its methodology will be described in section 4. Integrating SWOT with other methods is reviewed in sec
concluding remarks on SWOT trends, methodology and applications in published papers will be presented in section 6. The a
paper is reviewing the literature of SWOT to answer questions such as: “what research methods are most commonly used?”, “
and areas are treated most often in the SWOT field?”, “what is the scope of these studies?” and “which journals or countries
highest number of papers using this technique?”. Such
1 SWOT analysis originated from efforts at Harvard Business School to analyze case studies. In the early 1950s, two Harvard business policy professors, George
C Roland Christensen, started to investigate organizational strategies in relation to their environment. In the late 1950s, another HBS business policy professor, Kenneth Andre
thinking by stating that all organizations must have clearly defined objectives and keep up with them. In the early 1960s, classroom discussions in business schools were focus
strengths and weaknesses in relation to the opportunities and threats (or risks) in their business environments. In 1963, a business policy conference was held at Harvard, where
widely discussed and seen as a major advance in strategic thinking (Panagiotou 2003).
25
S. Ghazinoory et al. SWOT methodology: a state-of-the-art review for the past, a framework for the future
questions have already been raised with the objective: “to improve our knowledge in
26 this field”. It is hoped that this p
the needs of interested readers for references of SWOT studies and applications, and hence promote the future development of SW
2. Review of published SWOT papers
2.1. Data collection We decided to focus our study on papers published in refereed journals, not therefore including sources such
papers presented at conferences. This was based on the belief that academics and practitioners usually prefer using journals to ac
disseminate novel knowledge. Other resources, such as books, are generally confined to the dissemination of previously establish
Therefore the papers were checked that there was ‚SWOT‘ or ‚TOWS‘ acronym in title, abstract or keywords of them. To condu
review, databases have been searched and papers that have been published in indexed journals, up to the end of 2009, were reco
databases are:
– Web of Knowledge – Science direct – Blackwell – IEEEXplore – Oxford University Press – ProQuest – Springer – Wiley – SA
– IOS Press – Beech tree publishing – Project Muse – Group Dynamic – Emerald insight In total, 557 papers on SWOT were fou
databases, which have been evaluated in this literature review, however total number of papers seemed to be more than 557 cas
papers had been found on more than one databases.
2.2. Trends & Classifications in SWOT papers Based on our survey, papers on SWOT have been published for 28 years, the e
back to 1982. No paper on SWOT was published between 1982, when the earliest paper was released, and 1987. SWOT analysis
considered very long lasting method. Actually it did not use to be common so much before 1993, but the number of its publicatio
from 2000 and the largest number of papers (72) was published in 2008 as was shown in Table 1.
In order to better analyze the growth, we divided the period under study into six categories. Each category shows the numb
papers every five years until 2009 as can be seen in Fig. 2. The growth in the number of papers in recent years shows that inte
analysis is increasing among researchers. It can be observed in Table 1 that 54% of whole papers on SWOT were published in
was shown in Fig. 2.
Table 1. Number of papers on SWOT in each year
Year Number Percent (%) Year Number Percent (%)
1982 1 0.2 1996 11 2.0
1983 0 0.0 1997 10 1.8
1984 0 0.0 1998 15 2.7
1985 0 0.0 1999 14 2.5
1986 0 0.0 2000 28 5.0
1987 1 0.2 2001 21 3.8
1988 1 0.2 2002 35 6.3
1989 3 0.5 2003 43 7.7
1990 0 0.0 2004 48 8.6
1991 2 0.4 2005 63 11.3
1992 2 0.4 2006 50 9.0
1993 6 1.1 2007 48 8.6
1994 8 1.4 2008 72 12.9
1995 7 1.3 2009 68 12.2
Total 557 100

175
350
57
300
1 5 18
250
1980–1984
200 1985–1989 1990–1994 1995–1999 2000–2004 2005–2009
1985–1989 1990–1994 1995–1999 2000–2004 2005–2009
150
100500
Fig. 2. Number of papers on SWOT

301
Among 425 papers which their origins are recognized, about forty five percent (45%)
28 of whole SWOT papers were pr
countries: UK, USA, and India2. Top ten ranked countries in providing SWOT papers were shown in Table 2. ‘Marketing Intellig
Planning’ and “Health Policy” are the journals which have published the highest number of SWOT papers (9 papers). ‘Long Ran
cupies the third rank with 6 papers (Table 3). Application variety of SWOT caused to publish 557 papers in 424 journals! Table 4
in order of the number of their papers. Also, the number of papers on which the author was the first among collaborators is seen a
table. If two authors had an equal rank, then the number of papers on which their name appeared first was compared. We should
Weihrich, who was the initiator of the method.
Table 2. Top 10 countries on SWOT papers
Rank Country Number of paper
1–2 UK, USA 52
3 India 50 4 China 35 5 Turkey 15
6 Germany 13 7 Iran 12
8–9 Finland, Australia 11 10 Poland 10
Table 3. Top 10 journals on SWOT papers
Rank Journal Number of paper
1–2 Marketing Intelligence & Planning
Health Policy
9
3 Long Range Planning 6
4 Promet-Traffic & Transportation 5
5–10 Management Decision 4
Managerial Auditing Journal
Forest Policy and Economics
Journal of the Institution of Engineers British Food Journal Ekonomicky Casopis
2 Notice: some of these articles were presented by two or more countries.
Table 4. Top 10 authors on SWOT papers
Author Number of papers as first author Number of other papers Total
Kajanus, M. 1 6 7
Ghazinoory, S. 5 1 6 Kangas, J. 2 4 6
Kurttila, M. 2 4 6 Arslan, O. 3 1 4
Lee, S. F. 3 1 4 Er, I. D. 0 4 4 Weihrich, H. 3 0 3
Kumar, S. 3 0 3 Lee, K. L. 3 0 3
Table 5. Top 10 cited papers on SWOT until July, 1th, 2010 in Scopus
Author Year Paper title Cited times
Jackson et al. 2003 Recent Research on Team and Organizational Diversity: SWOT Analysis and Implications 114 Rizzo and Kim 2005 A S
the field of virtual
reality rehabilitation and therapy
67
Weihrich 1982 The TOWS Matrix A Tool for Situational Analysis 64
Kurttila et al. 2000 Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process AHP in SWOT analysis – a hybrid method and its
application to a forest-certification case
64
Hill and Westbrook 1997 SWOT Analysis: It’s Time for a Product Recall 51
Ho 2008 Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications – A literature review 39 Gordon et al. 2000 Strategic planning in medical
enhancing the learning environment for students in clinical settings

36
Hackbarth and Kettinger 2000 Building an E-business strategy 32 Dyson 2004 Strategic development and SWOT analysis at the University o
Houben et al. 1999 A knowledge-based SWOT-analysis system as an instrument for strategic planning in small and medium sized enterpri
24
29
To assess SWOT papers based on citation frequency, we presented top 10 papers based
30 on their citation counts3. Th
been cited 24 or more times in data banks (Table 5). The largest number of citation of a paper (114) is belonged to Jackson et
Rizzo and Kim paper (2005) and Weihrich (1982), with 67 and 64 times of citation, occupied second and third rank.
2.3. Approaches in SWOT studies The contents of SWOT papers could be divided into methodological, case study and applied
papers:
– Methodological papers provide a new idea on SWOT structure and its concept. – Case study papers guide the practice, offer the
recommendations for action and
explain the stages to be fulfilled. – Applied-methodological papers are mixture of methodological and case study approaches, on
these papers have modified or changed the SWOT method, so that they can provide an adaptive method and adjust SWOT to the
– Major part of SWOT studies (91%) are case study in different areas and industries. Meanwhile only 5% of whole papers are all
methodological category and 4% of them is allocated to applied-methodological (Table 6 and Fig. 3).
Table 6. Approaches in SWOT papers in each year
2 9–289 3
1
99 4
1
99 5
1
99 6
1
99 7
1
99 8
1
99 9
1
99 0
1
00 1
2
00 2
2
00 3
2
00 4
2
00 5
2
00 6
2
00 7
2
00 8
2
00 9
2
00 l
2
ato
t%
Methodological 2 – 1 – 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 5 1 1 2 2 2 27 5 Case study 8 6 7 7 10 9 12 13 22 16 33 41 40 61 48 43 68 64 508 91
Applied- methodological
– – – – – – 1 – 4 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 2 22 4
Case study Methodologic 27; 5%
and Methologic 22; 4%

Case study 508; 91%
Fig. 3. Approaches in SWOT papers (percentage)
3 The information about cited times is exist in SCOPUS data bank for each article.
3. Application areas and scopes of SWOT papers
A review of most frequent areas and scopes which SWOT has been applied in case studies or applied-methodological papers is pr
7. The main problem in making of this review is that there is no classification on SWOT applications in previous papers. Th
classified them based on our reading of the papers.
Table 7. Areas and scopes in case studies and Applied-methodological papers on SWOT
Area Content number percentage
Health & healthcare life scenario planning, elderly care, Primary Care,
hospital, public health, nursing, mental care, ...
67 12.6
General management of companies
Management and strategic planning in business, companies, firms, Offshore outsourcing, ...
37 7.0
Marketing & market planning
Marketing and market planning at local, national, regional and international levels
32 6.0
Learning & education Learning & education at school, university &
organization
28 5.3
Agriculture Fishing, feed and food, dairy, olive, farming, ... 88 16.6 Medicine & pharmacy clinical diagnosis, surgery, dental, pharmacy, ... 25
information, computer, software, ... 22 4.2 Environment Cleaner production, wastewater, solid waste, ... 30 5.7 Textile Textile, clothing, garme
3.0 Forestry research station, forest management, forest
and Park, ...
25 4.7
Tourism Rural, urban, cruise, ... 39 7.4 Manufacturing Shipbuilding, machine tools, Machinery, motor
vehicles, ...
12 2.3
Transportation Ports, airline, airport, sea passenger, road, ... 20 3.8 Metal titanium alloys, metal powder, foundry, ... 10 1.9 Electronic Cable
1.1 Library Library Fundraising, library strategic planning, ... 4 0.8 Construction Construction 7 1.3 Oil & gas Oil and natural gas 4 0.8 Mili
Cosmetic Cosmetic 3 0.6 Financial Finance 3 0.6 The rest Newsprint, service, banking, hydraulic power
generation, NIS, program development, legislation, gaming, foreign policy, economic policy, national economic, ...
53 10.0
Total 530 100
According to Table 7, some of the most common fields of SWOT applications (according to Table 7) are reviewed in below:
31
3.1. Agriculture
32 It is a bit surprising that the fields which SWOT is used the most, is agriculture and its sidelong fields – wh
fields and industries may be more expected to be involved in strategy formulation and implementation process. The first work in
paper by Faesel and Hill (1995), though using SWOT in agriculture prevailed almost since 2002 and many papers published sinc
interesting point is that these papers are mostly belonging to developing countries (particularly India) and them often assessing
condition in a specific geographic region rather than strategic positioning of a special organization. For example, Wah and Meric
released a paper which can be mentioned here.
3.2. Health& health care Regarding to the big amount of journals in health field, it is not surprising that the number of papers in
as well, so one of the first applied SWOT papers (Lanzotti 1991) is related to this field. The number of papers published in this fi
its peak within 2002 and 2003 but it has decreased in recent years. In addition, the most common usage of SWOT in health field
strategy formulation of research and treatment centers. A paper by Lane et al. (2008) can be mentioned as an example.
3.3. Tourism Using SWOT in tourism field has started later than other fields; and the first article is Ravindranath (1997). But thi
ascending so it has increased every year so the biggest number has published in 2009. The most of articles in this field assess tou
in a particular geographic area or a special city (mostly in developing countries) and several papers have published assessing tou
provinces of China, as an example a paper by Gu ShiCheng et al. (2009) can be mentioned.
3.4. General management of companies Initial and predictable application of SWOT has been in the field of companies manag
strategy formulation for them in corporate level or one of its functions (of course, SWOT application in marketing will be separa
the next section). After the advent of SWOT, the published papers within the first years focused on strategy formulation for com
the first one which was Weihrich’s work, (1982) presented a real example for Volkswagen Company. In addition, the most cited
(Jackson et al. 2003) belongs to this field.
3.5. Marketing& market planning Since the main application of strategy planning has been in marketing, not surprisingly there
articles in this field. The first two (Giles 1989) (Piercy, Giles 1989) have been published in Marketing Intelligence & Planning. A
example, Novicevic et al. (2004) can be mentioned.
3.6. Environment The first article in this field is belonging to Glasson (1999) and no paper published up to 2002. Then, the sign
of papers, published in this field mainly resulted from papers which have been published in recent 3–4 years. An interesting poin
the papers of environment field have conducted in national level, for instance Ghazinoory and Huisingh (2006). In addition Loza
(2007) article is one of the good ones.
3.7. The rest 10 percent of whole categorized papers belong to “the rest” category including News- print, service, banking, hydra
generation, NIS, program development, legislation, gaming, foreign policy, economic policy, national economic and etc. As it i
these subjects are in macro level and topics such as policy making (for example, Sharma et al. 2009), macroeconomics (for exam
al. 2008) and national innovation system (for example, Ghazinoury and Ghazinoori 2006) have been conducted. The number of t
papers is increasing constantly; it means that in many new fields, SWOT, as an analytical tool is being used.
3.8. Levels of SWOT applications SWOT is generally used for policy making, decision making and strategy mak- National 33% R
planning). In the review of SWOT papers, we identified that SWOT analysis has been used in three levels: corporate, national an
planning. 33% of case study and applied-methodological
Corporate 64% papers were about national planning.
Fig. 4. Three levels that SWOT analysis has 3% were about regional planning, and
been used for them 64%were in corporate level (Fig. 4).
4. Methodological development of SWOT
As SWOT framework does not have a strictly defined structure, sometimes it becomes an art more than a science, which makes i
practitioners to use SWOT and extract strategies of it. However, there have recently appeared many methodological works on SW
more rigorous and operational. Most of these researchers have pointed to SWOT difficulties and then proposed some solutions to
shortcomings. These works are briefly summarized below for practitioners to understand and to apply SWOT in a more objective
way. Weihrich (1982) introduced SWOT and pointed to two difficulties in applying this method:
– Time dimension in SWOT matrix; – Complexity of Interactions of Situational Factors.
33
34
He Strenght
Opportunity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
proposed preparing several SWOT Matrixes at different points of time to solve the first and us
0 + 0 0 + + 0 0 0 2+0 0 + 0 0 0 + 0 0 300 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 +
matrix to solve the second (Fig. 5). None of them unfortunately was no- 4++ + 0 0 + 0 + + + 5+0 + 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 6+0 0 0 + 0 0 0 + +
ticed in practice. After 1982 for many years, no meth- 7++ 0 + + 0 + + + + 800 0 0 0 + 0 0 + 0 9+0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
+
+00+00000
odological modification in SWOT happened, Even Hill and Westbrook (1997) said:
Fig. 5. Interaction matrix (Weihrich 1982)
“It may be time to relinquish our fondness for SWOT analysis which seems now to have passed its sell-by date, because of funda
about the intrinsic nature of SWOT
– The length of the factors lists; – No requirement to prioritize or weight the factors identified; – Unclear and ambiguous words a
No resolution of conflicts; – No obligation to verify statements and opinions with data or analyses; – Single level of analysis is a
required; – No logical link with an implementation phase”. Also Pickton and Wright (1998) introduced the SWOT limitations (F
Subsequent papers gradually in addition to pointing out SWOT limitations, proposed the solutions to modify it: Beeho and Prent
that the major attractions of SWOT analysis are: first, it is familiar and, second, it is ‚user friendly‘, as it does not require the nee
information or computer systems. Indeed, SWOT analysis offers a simple structured approach to identifying a company‘s strengt
weaknesses and comparing these to opportunities and threats faced by the organization due to its environment. But it has some of
for example:
– SWOT analysis is global to a product (or attraction in this case) and can be un-
focused;
Inadequate definition of factors Lack of prioritization of factors
Over-subjectivity in the generation of factors: compiler bias
•Factors which appear to fit into more Factors which arc given Factors missed out: lack of comprehensiveness than one box/category too much emphasis Serendipity in
factors •Factors which do not appear to fit well Factors which are given Disagreement over factors and to into any box/category too little emphasis which b
belong •Factors described broadly: Factors which are given Factors represent opinions not fact
lack of specificity equal importance
•
Lack of information to specify factors accurately

Fig. 6. Limitations of SWOT (Pickton and Wright 1998)
•••
••••
– Owing to its simplistic nature and ease of use, the technique has been used in a slack manner and is susceptible to subjectiv
from managers who can present an unrealistic appraisal of company attributes. To refinement of it, a new type of analysis ha
proposed, ASEB (activities, settings, experiences, benefits) grid analysis. Ramos et al. (2000) solving the problem of non-wei
in SWOT used a model which supersedes the opportunities and threats of SWOT by the key issues in the environment when c
their impact on the identified strengths and weaknesses. This SWOT model scrutinizes the main strengths and weaknesses ag
issue in the environment. A score of “+” (or a weighted “++”) is proposed when there is a benefit to the organization such as
allows the sector to take advantage of or to counteract a problem arising from a key environmental change or when a weaknes
offset by the environmental change. A minus (or a double minus) is marked when there is an opposed effect on the organizati
strength would be reduced by the environmental change or a weakness would prevent the sector from overcoming the problem
with or accentuated by an environmental change. Hussey (2002) faced several flaws in SWOT exercises. For example:
– It is much harder for managers to identify strengths than things that they see as
wrong with the organization. – The insight of many managers is operational rather than strategic and conse-
quently much of what ends up being listed is not particularly useful. – It is a mistake to assume that managers always have the
and knowl-
edge that enables them to perceive a strategic strength or weakness. – It is too easy for something positive to be perceived as b
is. – The power and influence of managers involved in a SWOT process is not equal. – Some managers describe an effect as a
do not get to the causes. He thinks: “SWOT can’t ever become really useful unless it is related to a more careful analytical un
So in the next section, we will mention some exercises in this area.
5. Integrating SWOT with other methods
For improving the effectiveness of SWOT, many researchers have integrated it with other methods (especially analytical and
methods). Rudder and Louw (1998) proposed the SPACE matrix as a basis for SWOT analysis this matrix determining the or
strategic posture in the industry makes use of two internal dimensions (financial strength and competitive advantage) and two
dimensions (industry strength and environmental stability). The firm‘s strategic posture is then classifies broadly as: aggressiv
competitive, conservative or defensive. Also, Valentin (2005) introduced Defensive/Offensive Evaluation (DOE) as an effect
to SWOT analysis. Houben et al. (1999) believed that “many companies often only have vague ideas of their competitive stre
weaknesses, opportunities and threats”. Then they used
35
expert systems for developing a knowledge-based system that can assist managers of
36 small and medium sized compan
performing a SWOT analysis. Proctor (2000) suggested that executives can possess a powerful tool for generating sustainable str
specifying objectives, by combination the three techniques of cross-impact analysis, the TOWS matrix and brainstorming, One o
important researches to complete SWOT is the papers that have been presented by a Finnish team. They used Analytic Hierarchy
at least in 7 papers and combined it with SWOT to innovate a hybrid method4: AWOT. Kurttila et al. (2000) believe that when u
analysis lacks the possibility of com- prehensively appraising the strategic decision-making situation; merely pinpointing the num
in strength, weakness, opportunity or threat groups does not pinpoint the most significant group. In addition, SWOT includes no
analytically determining the importance of factors or of assessing the fit between SWOT factors and decision alternatives. For s
problems, they proposed a hybrid method (AWOT) with following steps:
– Step 1. SWOT analysis is carried out; – Step 2. Pairwise comparisons between SWOT factors are carried out within every
SWOT group; – Step 3. Pairwise comparisons are made between the four SWOT groups; – Step 4. The results are utilized in the
formulation and evaluation process. These researchers have utilized this algorithm with some changes for a forest-certification
al. 2000), for a multinomial logit model analysis in forest management decisions of private forest owners (Kurttila et al. 2001),
priorities among resource management strategies at the Finnish Forest and Park Service (Pesonen et al. 2001), evaluating the ma
strategies of a forestland estate (Kangas et al. 2003), using of value focused thinking in tourism management (Kajanus et al. 200
modern strategic decision support tools in the participatory strategy process in a forest research station (Leskinen et al. 2006). Th
combination of SWOT with another techniques such as statistical analysis, value focused thinking and Multiple Criteria Decision
(MCDS) methods. Applying the combination of SWOT and AHP in forest industry is not confined to Finnish researchers but Shr
(2004) have used this method for exploring the potential for Silvopasture adoption. Using structured methods of Multiple-Attribu
Making (MADM) especially AHP to quantify SWOT has been continued by Chang and Huang (2006) (Fig. 7). Also a review of
analytic hierarchy process and its applications with SWOT has been done by Ho (2008).
4 It should be noted that before them Yahya (1997) had used SWOT for cross-checking the result of
AHP method, but he had not integrated the method.
Step I: Decide what's to be compared
external and quantified performance The subjective quality performance

Step 2: Research and draft the key factors of internal and Objective
assessment to build a hierarchical structure Step 3: Collect data To investigate the weights sof key factors
Step 4: Questionnaire investigation using the AHP method
Step 5: Normalize the performance
Step 6: Calculate the internal and external weight score of the comparing object separately (normalization performance × weights) and determine
the benchmarking value Step 7: To calculate and compare the coordinate values of internal and
external assessment and then show them on the 4-quadrant coordinate
Fig. 7. Flowchart of Quantified SWOT analysis pattern (Chang and Huang 2006)
Using Analytic Network Process (ANP) instead of AHP in a hybrid method was the latest contribution to this area (Feglar et a
Yüksel, Dagdeviren 2007). In addition, Zaerpour et al. (2008) have integrated Fuzzy AHP and SWOT method. So these mo
more realistic and at the same time they got more complicated. Let’s remember that the core of strategic management (linking
worldview) is modeling, and SWOT is a tool for simplification of complex elements of strategic thinking (Grandy, Mills 20
balanced scorecard and quality function deployment (QFD) to combine with SWOT is one of the methods considered in recen
algorithm that called BSQ (A hybrid of balanced scorecard, SWOT analysis and quality function deployment) with a little d
been used by Hong Kong researchers (Lee, Ko 2000; Ko, Lee 2000; Ip, Koo 2004). Two main stages of development within t
systematic and holistic strategic management system are depicted in this method. The first stage is conjoining the SWOT anal
BSC. The SWOT is accomplished to develop the key performance indicators (KPI) with the four main perspectives of the bal
scorecard (Financial goals, Customer perspective, internal processes, Learning and growth). The second stage is to make use
methodology with the BSC›s KPIs identified as the “Whats” and the major strategies of Sun Tzu›s philosophies as the “hows
This system is customizable for both profit and non-profit organizations to develop holistic organizational strategic plans (Ko
There is an interesting point in that procedure: SWOT is a strategy planning exercise, so it is not the kind of thing one does ev
quarter. But BSC is a method
37
designed for use in ongoing management, and therefore it provides an opportunity for
38 routine use at regular intervals.
and BSC need the different periods of time in planning process. For solving this paradox, Ko and Lee (2000) mentioned: “Despit
there are four perspectives (financial, customer, internal processes, and learning and growth) as the key elements of organization
must be measured, the BSC remains a means of effectively measuring strategy rather than a means of deciding strategy”. This is
that Ko and Lee (2000) feel that “the SWOT analysis serves as a great “stepping stone” to build the key performance indicators (
BSC”. In the other words, The SWOT matrix precisely identi- fies the critical success factors which can be implemented into the
the different aspects toward the balanced scorecard. Also Ishino and Kijima (2005) have used soft systems methodology (SSM) i
to combine with SWOT and BSC. They have described a systems-based methodology called soft systems methodology for stra
communication (SSM-SC). SSM-SC employs SSM as well as SWOT and BSC maps for integrating thoughts and languages of th
(Fig. 8). As can be seen in that Fig. 8, SWOT analysis and the BSC maps are served as two strategy communication formats, but
between the findings of the SWOT analysis and the BSC maps and there is no mechanism for syn- thesizing the two in that pape
shows the difference between two mentioned papers (Ko, Lee 2000; Ishino, Kijima 2005) in integrating SWOT and BSC.
Fig. 8. The basic shape of SSM-SC (Ishino and Kijima 2005)
leads to selection of
Strategy-related problem situation expressed by SWOT analysis
Conceptual models integrated in terms of four BSC perspectives (strategy map)

integrates diffcrcnecs of thought and language of the members
n
oitautisComparison of e ht ev or pmi ot
the real situation and the model through a debate with a division of roles between the clients and the consultants
s rebmems tpmfinds out desirable and feasible solutions
orpPracticing and learning desirable
strategic communication
But in the last 4–5 years, several radical transitions in approaching on SWOT have been occurred that each one can be regarded a
innovation: – Following Curry (1996) discussed knowledge-based modeling for strategic decisions, Marti (2004) introduced an
SWOT analysis (Fig. 9) which takes into consideration the two main streams of modern strategic thought: the resource-based vie
activity-based view. This new approach used for a strategic knowledge benchmarking system (SKBC) that is a knowledge-based
information system framework .In addition, Dyson (2004) said: The application links SWOT analysis to resource-based planning
an iterative rather than a linear process and embeds it within the overall planning process. – A paper by Coman and Ronen (2009
recent work in this field. That paper claims to present a straightforward methodology for making a structured analysis of strength
weaknesses, which is done based on an analysis of important value- creating events and the strengths and weaknesses that caused
This focused SWOT methodology, using the core-competence tree and the current-reality tree, distils the strengths and weaknes
competences and core problems. These core competences and core problems are then linked into a plan of action aimed at preser
leveraging the organization’s core competences, while defending against exposure to core problems. – Novicevic et al. (2004) ar
wide and enduring popularity of SWOT, it has remained a theoretical framework with limited prescriptive power for practice and
significance for research which makes both practitioners and researchers disap- pointed because from Novicevic et al.’s point of
SWOT generates interesting questions, it provides little guidance to managers”. They also argue that
The Firm
The Industry Environment
1. Goals and Values
• Competitors
2. Resources and Capabilities
STRATEGY
• Customers
3. Structure and Systems
• Suppliers
The Firm
The world class industry segment competitors Benchmarkin
Benchmarking
1. Goals and Values
2. Resources and capabilities 2. Resources and capabilities •Core activities •Core activities •Core competencies STRATEGY
•Core competencies •Core knowledge
•Core knowledge
3. Structure and systems •
Strategic Benchmarking Benchmarking

3. Structure and systems
and competitive intelligence structure and systems
Fig. 9. Traditional SWOT analysis (top) & Extended SWOT analysis (down) (Marti 2004)
39
40
the Evaluative View of Competitive Factors (Competitive Intelligence-Driven)
functional overemphasis on SWOT “as a matching tool” has eclipsed other
useful aspects of the SWOT framework s
and the focus of the standard SWOT rote

lcframework on back-end planning has di- baaF)
llne oeverted attention from adding new dimen- rvtiOPPORTUNITIES THREATS
vitnirtoDecsions of front-end intelligence. As they png nUmionsay planning requires primarily objective nCaf loPdecision
intelligence -w delenibeVrequires primarily subjective judgments, akllceoaSTREN

vritBtso they conclude that practitioners and (npiorCcresearchers need some formal template seDto deal with logical inconsistencies
perspective SWOT framework: a template for formal synthesis (Novicevic et al. 2004)
the process of matching the four SWOT components. SWOT components need to be appropriately configured for the de- velo
template. This paper adopts a cognitive approach of integrating marketing and intelligence views into a new “dual-perspecti
framework. It tries to recognize the difference in the underlying nature of planning and intelligence perspectives so that it can re
traditional SWOT into the dual-perspective form. The objective nature of the planning perspective calls for the situation analy
controllable and uncontrollable attributes (Fig. 10). – Panagiotou and Wijnen (2005) believe that the SWOT’s seductive simplic
to use it carelessly also this analysis does not provide a sufficient context for adequate strategy optimization. they claim this slop
with structural simplicity create the fundamental failures of the SWOT analysis as a tool which only produces short lists of non
generalized bullet points. Then they propose a composite “telescopic observations strategic framework” that is built step-by- ste
available conceptual frameworks and models in new relationships. In that framework, all macro-environmental factors that m
organization have been included in the form of an extended political-economic-social-technological analysis. The extra letter
stand for International, to reflect competitive challenges in global markets, Legal and regulatory, and Environmental and eco
variables of industry analysis, cost structures, and portfolio analysis have also been included. Equally, the industry’s key factors
the company’s core resources, skills, competencies and capabilities are also present. Cooperative undertakings such as alliance
networks and joint ventures have also been included, since they have the potential to change the competitive landscape of an or
user’s attention is further directed to total quality management (TQM) issues, organizational cultural aspects, structural consid
systems needs and e-commerce considerations. – In the last step, Ghazinoory et al. (2007) introduced a new point: SWOT usu
person‘s existing position and viewpoint, which can be misused to justify
a previously decided course of action rather than used as a means to open up new possibilities. It is important to note that som
can also be viewed as opportunities, depending on the people or groups involved (Morris 2005). There is a saying, “A pessim
who sees a calamity in an opportunity, and an optimist is one who sees an opportunity in a calamity”. Therefore in such am
(Emblemsvag, Kjolstad 2002) the use of fuzzy sets is justified to be applied. In fact a factor with certain membership value
of the categories. For example economic flourishing is an opportunity with 0.7 as membership value and it is a threat wi
value 0.3. Then they proposed an algorithm for rectifying the shortcomings and problems of the SWOT matrix through th
sets. The steps taken for this algorithm are as follows:
– Scaling the factors; – Aggregation of membership functions of internal and external factors; – Evaluation, prioritization an
strategies. In that algorithm, by quantifying the factors through the definition of fuzzy membership functions, evaluation of th
strategies is made possible and both qualitative and quantitative aspects of the factors are considered. The major approach of
algorithm was that in most cases the internal and external factors can‘t be fully recognized as positive or negative, because the
the organization could be observed within a wide spread which may include both positive and negative effects. On the other h
aggregation of internal and external factors which leads to extract a strategy in a usual matrix would depend on the intensity a
of the factors in this algorithm. Hence, these fuzzy membership functions and the extracted strategies can be well prioritized a
possible to concentrate upon strategies with higher priority in implementation stage. An applied example of implementation o
approach is seen in Kheirkhah et al. (2009).
6. Conclusion remarks
6.1. Remarks on trends in publishing SWOT papers The diversity of SWOT scopes is an interesting issue (Table 7). In fac
analysis has already been used in most of sectors at least in one case. Also none of the planning tools has been generalized to
someone wants to compare planning and mathematic knowledge, he can consider SWOT as four basic arithmetic operations (
subtraction, multiplication and division). However it is interesting that the number of SWOT papers on “health“” and “medici
considerable. The same diversity is observed in scientific journals. For example 557 papers from 424 journals have been publ
different disciplines. These papers are not limited to management field, SWOT papers are found in different databases includi
various fields of science The review of the papers shows that the authors are from different disciplines and a lot of papers hav
authors. Therefore team working and interdisciplinary collaboration in SWOT papers is prevalent.
41
It is noticeable that the number of UK papers is the same as USA papers (Table 2).
42 Also another interesting point is ab
occupies the third place. A search in Google trends (www.google.com/trends) shows an interesting point: the most of the search
Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia. So we can conclude that the number of submitted SWOT papers from these countries
rapidly in the near future. The limited number of authors who have more than one paper (Table 4) indicates that the specific resea
limited to a few authors.
The position of Weihrich, H. as the pioneer of SWOT concept within other authors is notable (Table 5), because we still see that
are cited from his paper (Weihrich 1982) by other authors. In addition, team working of Finnish (Kangas, Kurt- tila, Kajanus, P
Jackson and his colleagues is remarkable.
The quick and exponential growth of SWOT papers in recent years implies the idea that “SWOT does not need to be recalled”!
Most of the reviewed papers used SWOT in a case study and/or some of them developed its methodology (Fig. 3). The papers
methodology of SWOT based on a special case is only 4%. So, more work should be done in this area.
6.2. Some remarks on SWOT methodology SWOT concerns can be divided into two categories:
– The first category deals with problems in implementation of SWOT within organization. These concerns can be solved only b
and training the panel of SWOT effectively. Unfortunately only a few papers have paid attention to this area in order to solve the
should get more attention than before. – The second category deals with scientific concerns which we discussed in details
in section 4. Some of the trends in this area are: 1 – Integration of SWOT with other scientific techniques specially decision mak
quantifying techniques; 2 – Making intelligent SWOT by using corresponding techniques (which is more ingenious and it is a mo
3 – Time dynamism of SWOT needs more attention and usually gets neglected by most of the authors. The most important quest
trend is ‚how can today’s management extract tomorrow strategies based on S, W, O and T factors of yesterday?‘. Although Wei
1982 mentioned this problem and proposed its solution but fellow researchers did not put any further effort to this issue; – It is
SWOT flaws have been rectified by researches conducted so far, but those researchers overlooked the most important advantage
simplicity! – It is obvious that integrating the empirical and mathematical techniques within SWOT to fixing its flaws or malfunc
application complex. This is a key issue when researchers use SWOT technique.
6.3. General remarks It is clear that the use of SWOT in papers and planning researches will be continued in coming years. Thi
based on reviewing the trend of papers have been published so far and its continuation and reviewing the trend of SWOT evolu
this conclusion is based on the main advantage of SWOT approach in strategic planning: Basically, SWOT is a logical approach
organization should assess its external and internal environments to adopt its strategy. On the other hand SWOT is located betwe
planning and resource base approaches. Based on the above, we predict that the application and methodology of SWOT will be d
coming years, and therefore much research will be done in this area.
6.4. Prerequisites for effective application of SWOT In this stage, there is a question: What are the conditions under which a S
can create maximum value? For answering this question, we can consider two general problems of SWOT in the opinion of the m
criticizers of it (Hill, Westbrook 1997): 1 – SWOT was developed in an era of stable markets, however the major of today’s mark
dramatically dynamic nature of demand and the increasing prolifera- tion of segments. Of course, in our opinion, it’s not alway
rule. 2 – “Much of SWOT usage rarely amounts to much more than a poorly structured, very general, hastily conducted exercise
unverified, vague and inconsistent inventories of factors regarded by the proposing individuals as most important components o
organization’s strategic situation”. It is clear that imprecise or vague reference in such an analysis to factors external and inter
organization will always detrimentally affect communication and veri- fication of proposed factors and thus lead to inferior outco
analysis. It ap- pears that this common flaw in SWOT analysis is caused mainly by misconceived SWOT deployment, insufficie
skills and diligence, and strategic information gaps, no by the nature of SWOT! For solving these problems, we suggest a mode
conditions which a SWOT analysis can
Fig. 11. Proposed model for the have maximum effectiveness under them (Fig. 11).
best conditions for SWOT
The
e pytg nisUdesooLd
ebest zin ag
conditions for SWOT
rOStable Instable
Market dynamism
43
6.5. Two suggestions and one challenge on future researches5
44 In many cases, extracted strategies are not limited to S
WO and the strategies could be extracted from triple factors: WTO, SOW, etc. So we propose creating a joint area between SO,
WT cells and considering the integrative strategies in this area. In most of the strategic planning models, the objectives are determ
SWOT analysis. Therefore the strategies should be extracted to reach the objectives. In this regard, we suggest considering objec
appropriate place in SWOT matrix (Fig. 12).
Objectives
Opportunities Threats
Strengths
SO strategies
ST strategies
Integrative strategies
Weaknesses
WO strategies
WT strategies
Fig. 12. Proposed modifications on SWOT matrix
According to above figure, a key question comes to mind: whether the strategies have to be extracted based on the determined ob
then their validity gets evaluated in comparison with S, O, W and T factors? Or if the strategies have to be extracted based on fou
then their conformity should be assessed by the objectives? What can we do if a contradiction occurs? Which one should be chan
objectives, the strategies or the factors? If the answer to this critical question is not met and the link between strategies and objec
established effectively, all over strategic planning process will face to this challenge.
References
Beeho, A. J.; Prentice, R. C. 1997. Conceptualizing the experiences of heritage tourists: A case study of New Lanark World Heritage Village,
Management 18(2): 75–87. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(96)00103-3 Chang, H. H.; Huang, W. C. 2006. Application of a quantification SWOT an
Mathematical and Computer Modeling 43: 158–169. doi:10.1016/j.mcm.2005.08.016 Coman, A.; Ronen, B. 2009. Focused SWOT: diagnosin
and weaknesses, Inter- national Journal of Production Research 47(20): 5677–5689. doi:10.1080/00207540802146130 Curry, B. 1996. Know
modeling for strategic decisions, Marketing Intelligence & Planning 14(4): 24–28. doi:10.1108/02634509610121532 Diskiene, D.; Galiniene,
A. 2008. A strategic management model for economic development, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 14(3): 375–387
doi:10.3846/1392-8619.2008.14.375-387
5 The authors express thanks to Professor Alireza Aliahmadi for these suggestions.
Dyson, R. G. 2004. Strategic development and SWOT analysis at the University of Warwick, European Journal of Operational Research 152:
doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00062-6 Emblemsvag, J.; Kjolstad, L. E. 2002. Strategic risk analysis-a field version, Management Deci- sion 40
doi:10.1108/00251740210441063 Faesel, U.; Hill, R. 1995. Poland’s fruit industry in transition, British Food Journal 97(1): 21–26.
doi:10.1108/00070709510077944 Feglar, T.; Levy, J. K.; Feglar, Jr. T. 2006. Advances in decision analysis and systems engineering for mana
enterprises in a volatile world: Integrating Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks (BOCR) with the Business Motivation Model (BMM), Jou
Science and Systems Engineering 15(2): 141–153. doi:10.1007/s11518-006-5003-9 Ghazinoory, S.; Ghazinoori, S. 2006. Developing Iran’s go
strategies for strengthen- ing the national system of innovation using SWOT analysis, Science and Public Policy 33(7): 529–549.
doi:10.3152/147154306781778759 Ghazinoory, S.; Huisingh, D. 2006. National program for cleaner production (CP) in Iran: a framework a
of Cleaner Production 14: 194–200. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.11.002 Ghazinoory, S.; EsmailZadeh, A.; Memariani, A. 2007. Fuzzy SWOT a
of Intel- ligent & Fuzzy Systems 18(1): 99–108. Giles, W. 1989. Marketing Planning for Maximum Growth, Marketing Intelligence & Plannin
doi:10.1108/EUM0000000001041 Glasson, J. 1999. The first 10 years of the UK EIA system: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threa
Practice and Research 14(3): 363–375. doi:10.1080/02697459915652 Gordon, J.; Hazlett, C.; Cate, O. T.; Mann, K.; Kilminster, S.; Prince, K
Snell, L.; Newble, D. 2000. Strategic planning in medical education: enhancing the learning environment for students in clinical settings, Med
841–850. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00759.x Grandy, G.; Mills, A. J. 2004. Strategy as Simulacra? A Radical Reflexive Look at the Disci
of Strategy, Journal of Management Studies 41(7): 1153–1170. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00470.x Gu ShiCheng; Peng ShuZhen; Cheng P
JunQing. 2009. SWOT analysis of the tourism development in Dongping Lake area of Shandong Province, Journal of Landscape Research 1(7
Hackbarth, G.; Kettinger, W. J. 2000. Building an E-business strategy, Information Systems Man- agement 17(3): 78–93.
doi:10.1201/1078/43192.17.3.20000601/31243.10 Hill, T.; Westbrook, R. 1997. SWOT Analysis: It’s Time for a Product Recall, Long Range
46–52.
doi:10.1016/S0024-6301(96)00095-7 Ho, W. 2008. Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications – A literature review, European
Operational Research 186(1): 211–228. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2007.01.004 Houben, G.; Lenie, K.; Vanhoof, K. 1999. A knowledge-based SWOT
as an instrument for strategic planning in small and medium sized enterprises, Decision Support Systems 26: 125–135. doi:10.1016/S0167-92
Hussey, D. 2002. Company analysis: determining strategic capability, Strategic Change 1: 43–52. doi:10.1002/jsc.568 Ip, Y. K.; Koo, L. C. 20
formulation framework a hybrid of balanced scorecard, SWOT analysis and quality function deployment, Managerial Auditing Journal 19(4):
doi:10.1108/02686900410530538
45
Ishino, Y.; Kijima, K. 2005. Research Paper: Project Management Methodology for Stimulating Strategic Communication in Japan, Systems R
Behavioral Science 22(3): 209–221. doi:10.1002/sres.658 Jackson, E. S.; Joshi, A.; Erhardt, N. L. 2003. Recent Research on Team and Organi
Diversity: SWOT Analysis and Implications, Journal of Management 29(6): 801–830. doi:10.1016/S0149-2063_03_00080-1 Kajanus, M.; Ka
M. 2004. The use of value focused thinking and the A’WOT hybrid method in tourism management, Tourism Management 25: 499–506. doi:1
5177(03)00120-1 Kangas, J.; Kurttila, M.; Kajanus, M.; Kangas, A. 2003. Evaluating the management strategies of a forestland estate-the S-O
Journal of Environmental Management 69: 349–358.
46
doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2003.09.010 Kheirkhah, A. S.; Esmailzadeh, A.; Ghazinoory, S. 2009. Developing strategies to reduce the risk of hazar
transportation in Iran using the method of fuzzy SWOT analysis, Transport 24(4): 325–332. doi:10.3846/1648-4142.2009.24.325-332 Ko, A.
2000. Implementing the strategic formulation framework for the banking industry of Hong Kong, Managerial Auditing Journal 15(9): 469–47
doi:10.1108/02686900010357058 Kurttila, M.; Hamalainen, K.; Kajanus, M.; Pesonen, M. 2001. Non-industrial private forest owners’ attitude
operational environment of forestry a multinominal logit model analysis, Forest Policy and Economics 2: 13–28.
doi:10.1016/S1389-9341(00)00036-8 Kurttila, M.; Pesonen, M.; Kangas, J.; Kajanus, M. 2000. Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process AHP in
– a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case, Forest Policy and Economics 1: 41–52.
doi:10.1016/S1389-9341(99)00004-0 Lane, D. S.; Messina, C. R.; Cavanagh, M. F.; Chen, J. J. 2008. A provider intervention to improve color
screening in county health centers, Medical Care 46(9): 109–116. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e31817d3fcf Lanzotti, L. M. 1991. Staff participati
weakness, opportunity, and threats analysis, Journal of Nursing Administration 21(10): 67–69. doi:10.1097/00005110-199110000-00015 Lee
O. 2000. Building balanced scorecard with SWOT analysis, and implementing “Sun Tzu’s The Art of Business Management Strategies” on Q
methodology, Managerial Auditing Journal 15(1/2): 68–76. doi:10.1108/02686900010304669 Leskinen, L. A.; Leskinen, P.; Kurttila, M.; Kan
M. 2006. Adapting modern strategic decision support tools in the participatory strategy process – a case study of a forest research station, Fo
Economics 8: 267–278. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2004.06.007 Lozano, M.; Valles, J. 2007. An analysis of the implementation of an environmental
system in a local public administration, Journal of Environmental Management 82(4): 495–511. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.01.013 Marti, J.
Strategic knowledge benchmarking system (SKBS): a knowledge-based strategic management information system for firms, Journal of Knowl
Management 8(6): 31–49. doi:10.1108/13673270410567611 Morris, D. 2005. A new tool for strategy analysis: the opportunity model, Journa
Strategy 26(3): 50–56. doi:10.1108/02756660510597100 Novicevic, M. M.; Harvey, M.; Autry, C. W.; Bond, E. U. 2004. Dual-perspective SW
thesis of marketing intelligence and planning, Marketing Intelligence & Planning 22(1): 84–94. doi:10.1108/02634500410516931
Panagiotou, G.; Wijnen, R. V. 2005. The “telescopic observations” framework: an attainable strategic tool, Marketing Intelligence & Pla
155–171. doi:10.1108/02634500510589912 Panagiotou, G. 2003. Bringing SWOT into focus, Business Strategy Review 14(2): 8–10. doi:1
8616.00253 Pesonen, M.; Kurttila, M.; Kangas, J.; Kajanus, M.; Heinonen, P. 2001. Assessing the priorities using A’WOT among resource
strategies at the Finnish Forest and Park Service, Forest Science 47(4): 534–541. Pickton, D. W.; Wright, S. 1998. What‘s swot in strategic
Strategic Change 7: 101– 109. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1697(199803/04)7:2<101::AID-JSC332>3.0.CO;2-6 Piercy, N.; Giles, W. 1989. M
Analysis Work, Marketing Intelligence & Planning 7(5/6): 5–7. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000001042 Proctor, T. 2000. Management Tools: S
marketing management for health management: cross impact matrix and TOWS, Journal of Management in Medicine 14(1): 47–56.
doi:10.1108/02689230010340552 Ramos, P.; Salazar, A.; Gomes, J. Ä. 2000. Trends in Portuguese tourism: a content analysis of associati
representative perspectives, International Journal of Contemporary Hospi- tality Management 12(7): 409–416. doi:10.1108/095961100103
Ravindranath, N. G. 1997. SWOT analysis on coffee, Planters‘ Chronicle 92(12): 567–569. Rizzo, A.; Kim, G. J. 2005. A SWOT analysis
virtual reality rehabilitation and therapy, Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 14(2): 119–146. doi:10.1162/1054746053967094 Rudde
1998. The SPACE Matrix: A Tool for Calibrating Competition, Long Range Planning 31(4): 549–559. doi:10.1016/S0024-6301(98)80048
S.; Samuel, E. M.; Ng, E. W. J. 2009. Beyond the digital divide: policy analysis for knowledge societies, Journal of Knowledge Manageme
386. doi:10.1108/13673270910988178 Shrestha, R. K.; Alavalapati, J. R. R.; Kalmbacher, R. S. 2004. Exploring the potential for sil- vopa
in south-central Florida: an application of SWOT–AHP method, Agricultural Systems 81: 185–199. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2003.09.004 Valen
Away with SWOT analysis: Use Defensive/Offensive Evaluation instead, Journal of Applied Business Research 21(2): 91–104. Wah, K.; M
2009. Expanding marine fish culture in Malaysia, Aqua Culture Asia Pacific 5(2): 12–21. Weihrich, H. 1982. The TOWS Matrix A Tool fo
Analysis, Long Range Planning 15(2): 54–66. doi:10.1016/0024-6301(82)90120-0 Yahya, D. K. A. 1997. A decision making model to det
of developing tourism attraction clusters at regional level through analytical hierarchy process approach in context of total customer servic
Berkala Penelitian Pascasarjana Universitas Padjadjaran 8(1): 27–46. Yüksel, I.; Dagdeviren, M. 2007. Using the analytic network proce
SWOT analysis – A case study for a textile firm, Information Sciences 177(16): 3364–3382.
doi:10.1016/j.ins.2007.01.001 Zaerpour, N.; Rabbani, M.; Gharehgozli, A. H.; Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R. 2008. Make-to-order or make-to
by a novel hybrid approach, Advanced Engineering Informatics 22(2): 186–201. doi:10.1016/j.aei.2007.10.002
47
SSGG METODOLOGIJA: PRAEITIES IR ATEITIES ANALIZĖ
48 S. Ghazinoory, M. Abdi, M. Azadegan-Mehr
Santrauka
Straipsnyje nagrinėjama SSGG metodologijos samprata, apibūdinama kaip vidinės ir išorinės aplinkos tyrimas, pagrįstas silpnybių, stiprybių, ga
identifikavimu. Pateiktoji SSGG anali- zės literatūros apžvalga yra pagrįsta 557 straipsnių, pateiktų įvairiose duomenų bazėse, analize. Visi nagrin
publikuoti 2009 m. Pristatoma SSGG istorinė raida, aiškinami tyrimai ir kryptys, klasifikacija, žurnalai, kuriuose publikuojami tokio pobūdžio strai
autoriai, kontekstas, pritaikomumas ir jų sritys. Analizuojama SSGG metodologinė raida. Straipsnio pabaigoje pateikiamos išvados ir būsimų tyrimų g
Reikšminiai žodžiai: SSGG, žurnalų apžvalga, praeitis, strateginis planavimas, strategija.
Sepehr GHAZINOORY is an Associate Professor in the Department of Information Technology Man- agement, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran
his BSc, MSc and PhD in industrial engineering from the Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST). He has authored numerous books and ar
production, strategic planning and management of technology in Per- sian and English. He was also consultant to the Technology Cooperation Office (
President for four years and a senior consultant in formulating the National Iranian Nanotechnology Initiative. He is currently a consultant to diffe
organizations.
Mansoureh ABDI is a PhD candidate of science & technology policy making in the Department of In- formation Technology Management, Tarbiat M
Tehran, Iran. She received her BSc in industrial engineering from BuAli Sina University and her MSc in industrial engineering from Tarbiat Moda
thesis is about policy extracting to promote NIS in Iran by theory of con- straints. She is working on innovation network in Iran and compare with ot
case.
Mandana AZADEGAN-MEHR has received her BA in accounting (with honors) from the School of Economic Sciences, Tehran, Iran and her MBA f
of Science and Technology (IUST). She currently works as the Marketing manager of Iranian Congenial Mobile Co. (ICM Co.). She is also intere
strategic management of new technology-based firms and venture capital funds.

Swot Methodology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Swot Methodology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Swot Methodology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Journal of Business Economics and Management

Swot Methodology: A State-of-the-Art Review for the Past, A

Online publication date: 12 April 2011

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

out of the use of this material.

SWOT METHODOLOGY: A STATE-OF-THE-ART REVIEW FOR THE

Sepehr Ghazinoory1, Mansoureh Abdi2, Mandana Azadegan-Mehr3

1, 2Department of Information Technology Management, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

Received 29 December 2009; accepted 05 November 2010

JEL Classifications: M00, M30.

Copyright © 2011 Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (VGTU) Press Technika

Fig. 1. SWOT matrix

Table 1. Number of papers on SWOT in each year

Year Number Percent (%) Year Number Percent (%)

1982 1 0.2 1996 11 2.0

1983 0 0.0 1997 10 1.8

1984 0 0.0 1998 15 2.7

1985 0 0.0 1999 14 2.5

1986 0 0.0 2000 28 5.0

1987 1 0.2 2001 21 3.8

1988 1 0.2 2002 35 6.3

1989 3 0.5 2003 43 7.7

1990 0 0.0 2004 48 8.6

1991 2 0.4 2005 63 11.3

1992 2 0.4 2006 50 9.0

1993 6 1.1 2007 48 8.6

1994 8 1.4 2008 72 12.9

1995 7 1.3 2009 68 12.2

Total 557 100

Fig. 2. Number of papers on SWOT

enhancing the learning environment for students in clinical settings

and Methologic 22; 4%

Lack of information to specify factors accurately

5. Integrating SWOT with other methods

Step I: Decide what's to be compared

external and quantified performance The subjective quality performance

Step 4: Questionnaire investigation using the AHP method

Step 5: Normalize the performance

Conceptual models integrated in terms of four BSC perspectives (strategy map)

•Core competencies •Core knowledge

Strategic Benchmarking Benchmarking

and the focus of the standard SWOT rote

intelligence -w delenibeVrequires primarily subjective judgments, akllceoaSTREN

You might also like