SWOT analysis

SWOT analysis (or SWOT matrix) is a strategic planning and strategic management technique used to help a person or organization identify Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats related to business competition or project planning. It is sometimes called situational assessment or situational analysis.^[1] Additional acronyms using the same components include TOWS and WOTS-UP.^[2]^[3]

This technique is designed for use in the preliminary stages of decision-making processes and can be used as a tool for evaluation of the strategic position of organizations of many kinds (for-profit enterprises, local and national governments, NGOs, etc.).^[4] It is intended to identify the internal and external factors that are favorable and unfavorable to achieving the objectives of the venture or project. Users of a SWOT analysis often ask and answer questions to generate meaningful information for each category to make the tool useful and identify their competitive advantage. SWOT has been described as a tried-and-true tool of strategic analysis,^[5] but has also been criticized for its limitations such as the static nature of the analysis, the influence of personal biases in identifying key factors, and the overemphasis on external factors leading to reactive rather than strengths-based strategies. Consequently, alternative approaches to SWOT have been developed over the years.

^ For example: Weihrich 1982, p. 54: "For convenience, the matrix that will be introduced is called TOWS, or situational analysis"; Sevier 2001, p. 46
^ Weihrich, Heinz (April 1982). "The TOWS matrix—a tool for situational analysis". Long Range Planning. 15 (2): 54–66. doi:10.1016/0024-6301(82)90120-0. S2CID 154914972.
^ Nutt, Paul C.; Backoff, Robert W. (Summer 1993). "Transforming public organizations with strategic management and strategic leadership". Journal of Management. 19 (2): 299–347 (316). doi:10.1016/0149-2063(93)90056-S. The SWOTs perspective is often used to pose questions for strategic management (e.g., Ansoff, 1980). Steiner's (1979) 'WOTS' approach, Rowe, Mason and Dickel's (1982) WOTS-UP, and Delbecq's (1989) 'TOWS' framework identify three of many derivations.
^ Silva, Carlos Nunes (2005). "SWOT analysis". In Caves, Roger W. (ed.). Encyclopedia of the city. Abingdon; New York: Routledge. pp. 444–445. doi:10.4324/9780203484234. ISBN 978-0415862875. OCLC 55948158.
^
Examples of the "tried-and-true" trope:
- Sevier, Robert A. (2001). "Not SWOT, but OTSW". Thinking outside the box: some (fairly) radical thoughts on how colleges and universities should think, act, and communicate in a very busy marketplace. Hiawatha, Iowa: Strategy Pub. p. 46. ISBN 0971059705. OCLC 48165005. Few people realize that there is an inherent danger in conducting a situational analysis using the old tried and true SWOT. The danger is this: When you look inside the organization first, you create a set of glasses through which you will look at the world. In doing so, you are highly likely to overlook significant opportunities and threats. See also Minsky & Aron 2021.
- Staples, Lee (2004). Roots to power: a manual for grassroots organizing (2nd ed.). Westport, Conn.: Praeger Publishing. p. 136. ISBN 0275969975. OCLC 56085984. The tried and true SWOT Assessment examines positive and negative factors as does a Force Field Analysis, but a SWOT has a particular focus on the upsides and downsides for the action group itself.
- Lambert, Ron; Parker, Tom (2006). Is that your hand in my pocket?: the sales professional's guide to negotiating. Nashville: Nelson Business. p. 132. ISBN 0785218777. OCLC 63125604. Before you as a salesperson can develop a strategy, you have to assess the situation. We recommend the tried-and-true SWOT analysis. You start by taking a look at your Strengths and Weaknesses, your Opportunities and any Threats. Then you do exactly the same thing from the perspective of each of your competitors.

[1] For example: Weihrich 1982, p. 54: "For convenience, the matrix that will be introduced is called TOWS, or situational analysis"; Sevier 2001, p. 46

[Weihrich1982-2] Weihrich, Heinz (April 1982). "The TOWS matrix—a tool for situational analysis". Long Range Planning. 15 (2): 54–66. doi:10.1016/0024-6301(82)90120-0. S2CID 154914972.

[3] Nutt, Paul C.; Backoff, Robert W. (Summer 1993). "Transforming public organizations with strategic management and strategic leadership". Journal of Management. 19 (2): 299–347 (316). doi:10.1016/0149-2063(93)90056-S. The SWOTs perspective is often used to pose questions for strategic management (e.g., Ansoff, 1980). Steiner's (1979) 'WOTS' approach, Rowe, Mason and Dickel's (1982) WOTS-UP, and Delbecq's (1989) 'TOWS' framework identify three of many derivations.

[4] Silva, Carlos Nunes (2005). "SWOT analysis". In Caves, Roger W. (ed.). Encyclopedia of the city. Abingdon; New York: Routledge. pp. 444–445. doi:10.4324/9780203484234. ISBN 978-0415862875. OCLC 55948158.

[5] Examples of the "tried-and-true" trope:
Sevier, Robert A. (2001). "Not SWOT, but OTSW". Thinking outside the box: some (fairly) radical thoughts on how colleges and universities should think, act, and communicate in a very busy marketplace. Hiawatha, Iowa: Strategy Pub. p. 46. ISBN 0971059705. OCLC 48165005. Few people realize that there is an inherent danger in conducting a situational analysis using the old tried and true SWOT. The danger is this: When you look inside the organization first, you create a set of glasses through which you will look at the world. In doing so, you are highly likely to overlook significant opportunities and threats. See also Minsky & Aron 2021.

Staples, Lee (2004). Roots to power: a manual for grassroots organizing (2nd ed.). Westport, Conn.: Praeger Publishing. p. 136. ISBN 0275969975. OCLC 56085984. The tried and true SWOT Assessment examines positive and negative factors as does a Force Field Analysis, but a SWOT has a particular focus on the upsides and downsides for the action group itself.

Lambert, Ron; Parker, Tom (2006). Is that your hand in my pocket?: the sales professional's guide to negotiating. Nashville: Nelson Business. p. 132. ISBN 0785218777. OCLC 63125604. Before you as a salesperson can develop a strategy, you have to assess the situation. We recommend the tried-and-true SWOT analysis. You start by taking a look at your Strengths and Weaknesses, your Opportunities and any Threats. Then you do exactly the same thing from the perspective of each of your competitors.

[6] Sevier, Robert A. (2001). "Not SWOT, but OTSW". Thinking outside the box: some (fairly) radical thoughts on how colleges and universities should think, act, and communicate in a very busy marketplace. Hiawatha, Iowa: Strategy Pub. p. 46. ISBN 0971059705. OCLC 48165005. Few people realize that there is an inherent danger in conducting a situational analysis using the old tried and true SWOT. The danger is this: When you look inside the organization first, you create a set of glasses through which you will look at the world. In doing so, you are highly likely to overlook significant opportunities and threats. See also Minsky & Aron 2021.

[7] Staples, Lee (2004). Roots to power: a manual for grassroots organizing (2nd ed.). Westport, Conn.: Praeger Publishing. p. 136. ISBN 0275969975. OCLC 56085984. The tried and true SWOT Assessment examines positive and negative factors as does a Force Field Analysis, but a SWOT has a particular focus on the upsides and downsides for the action group itself.

[8] Lambert, Ron; Parker, Tom (2006). Is that your hand in my pocket?: the sales professional's guide to negotiating. Nashville: Nelson Business. p. 132. ISBN 0785218777. OCLC 63125604. Before you as a salesperson can develop a strategy, you have to assess the situation. We recommend the tried-and-true SWOT analysis. You start by taking a look at your Strengths and Weaknesses, your Opportunities and any Threats. Then you do exactly the same thing from the perspective of each of your competitors.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]