Design Thinking for the Greater Good SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
Strategy & Execution
Strategy / MBA Resources
Case Study SWOT Analysis Solution
Case Study Description of Design Thinking for the Greater Good
The authors argue that innovation is a social process tied to human emotions and reliant on inexact methodologies in which humans collaborate and solutions emerge over time. The authors argue that Design Thinking is a key part of 'innovation 2.0'-a new approach to innovation that involves a different set of participants in the process and uses a different approach. For example, in Innovation 2.0, the focus is on developing previously-unseen possibilities rather than starting out with existing options. They provide examples of organizations that are embracing innovation 2.0 and show what it looks like in practice.
Authors :: Jeanne M. Liedtka, Randy Salzman, Daisy Azer
Swot Analysis of "Design Thinking for the Greater Good" written by Jeanne M. Liedtka, Randy Salzman, Daisy Azer includes – strengths weakness that are internal strategic factors of the organization, and opportunities and threats that 2.0 Innovation facing as an external strategic factors. Some of the topics covered in Design Thinking for the Greater Good case study are - Strategic Management Strategies, Strategy and Strategy & Execution.
Some of the macro environment factors that can be used to understand the Design Thinking for the Greater Good casestudy better are - – customer relationship management is fast transforming because of increasing concerns over data privacy, wage bills are increasing, cloud computing is disrupting traditional business models, digital marketing is dominated by two big players Facebook and Google, geopolitical disruptions, banking and financial system is disrupted by Bitcoin and other crypto currencies, technology disruption,
increasing transportation and logistics costs, there is backlash against globalization, etc
Introduction to SWOT Analysis of Design Thinking for the Greater Good
SWOT stands for an organization’s Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats . At Oak Spring University , we believe that protagonist in Design Thinking for the Greater Good case study can use SWOT analysis as a strategic management tool to assess the current internal strengths and weaknesses of the 2.0 Innovation, and to figure out the opportunities and threats in the macro environment – technological, environmental, political, economic, social, demographic, etc in which 2.0 Innovation operates in.
According to Harvard Business Review, 75% of the managers use SWOT analysis for various purposes such as – evaluating current scenario, strategic planning, new venture feasibility, personal growth goals, new market entry, Go To market strategies, portfolio management and strategic trade-off assessment, organizational restructuring, etc.
SWOT Objectives / Importance of SWOT Analysis and SWOT Matrix
SWOT analysis of Design Thinking for the Greater Good can be done for the following purposes –
1. Strategic planning using facts provided in Design Thinking for the Greater Good case study
2. Improving business portfolio management of 2.0 Innovation
3. Assessing feasibility of the new initiative in Strategy & Execution field.
4. Making a Strategy & Execution topic specific business decision
5. Set goals for the organization
6. Organizational restructuring of 2.0 Innovation
Strengths Design Thinking for the Greater Good | Internal Strategic Factors
What are Strengths in SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The strengths of 2.0 Innovation in Design Thinking for the Greater Good Harvard Business Review case study are -
Ability to lead change in Strategy & Execution field
– 2.0 Innovation is one of the leading players in its industry. Over the years it has not only transformed the business landscape in its segment but also across the whole industry. The ability to lead change has enabled 2.0 Innovation in – penetrating new markets, reaching out to new customers, and providing different value propositions to different customers in the international markets.
Low bargaining power of suppliers
– Suppliers of 2.0 Innovation in the sector have low bargaining power. Design Thinking for the Greater Good has further diversified its suppliers portfolio by building a robust supply chain across various countries. This helps 2.0 Innovation to manage not only supply disruptions but also source products at highly competitive prices.
Superior customer experience
– The customer experience strategy of 2.0 Innovation in the segment is based on four key concepts – personalization, simplification of complex needs, prompt response, and continuous engagement.
Ability to recruit top talent
– 2.0 Innovation is one of the leading recruiters in the industry. Managers in the Design Thinking for the Greater Good are in a position to attract the best talent available. The firm has a robust talent identification program that helps in identifying the brightest.
Learning organization
- 2.0 Innovation is a learning organization. It has inculcated three key characters of learning organization in its processes and operations – exploration, creativity, and expansiveness. The work place at 2.0 Innovation is open place that encourages instructiveness, ideation, open minded discussions, and creativity. Employees and leaders in Design Thinking for the Greater Good Harvard Business Review case study emphasize – knowledge, initiative, and innovation.
Digital Transformation in Strategy & Execution segment
- digital transformation varies from industry to industry. For 2.0 Innovation digital transformation journey comprises differing goals based on market maturity, customer technology acceptance, and organizational culture. 2.0 Innovation has successfully integrated the four key components of digital transformation – digital integration in processes, digital integration in marketing and customer relationship management, digital integration into the value chain, and using technology to explore new products and market opportunities.
Diverse revenue streams
– 2.0 Innovation is present in almost all the verticals within the industry. This has provided firm in Design Thinking for the Greater Good case study a diverse revenue stream that has helped it to survive disruptions such as global pandemic in Covid-19, financial disruption of 2008, and supply chain disruption of 2021.
Organizational Resilience of 2.0 Innovation
– The covid-19 pandemic has put organizational resilience at the centre of everthing that 2.0 Innovation does. Organizational resilience comprises - Financial Resilience, Operational Resilience, Technological Resilience, Organizational Resilience, Business Model Resilience, and Reputation Resilience.
Operational resilience
– The operational resilience strategy in the Design Thinking for the Greater Good Harvard Business Review case study comprises – understanding the underlying the factors in the industry, building diversified operations across different geographies so that disruption in one part of the world doesn’t impact the overall performance of the firm, and integrating the various business operations and processes through its digital transformation drive.
High brand equity
– 2.0 Innovation has strong brand awareness and brand recognition among both - the exiting customers and potential new customers. Strong brand equity has enabled 2.0 Innovation to keep acquiring new customers and building profitable relationship with both the new and loyal customers.
Analytics focus
– 2.0 Innovation is putting a lot of focus on utilizing the power of analytics in business decision making. This has put it among the leading players in the industry. The technology infrastructure suggested by Jeanne M. Liedtka, Randy Salzman, Daisy Azer can also help it to harness the power of analytics for – marketing optimization, demand forecasting, customer relationship management, inventory management, information sharing across the value chain etc.
High switching costs
– The high switching costs that 2.0 Innovation has built up over years in its products and services combo offer has resulted in high retention of customers, lower marketing costs, and greater ability of the firm to focus on its customers.
Weaknesses Design Thinking for the Greater Good | Internal Strategic Factors
What are Weaknesses in SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The weaknesses of Design Thinking for the Greater Good are -
Skills based hiring
– The stress on hiring functional specialists at 2.0 Innovation has created an environment where the organization is dominated by functional specialists rather than management generalist. This has resulted into product oriented approach rather than marketing oriented approach or consumers oriented approach.
Slow to strategic competitive environment developments
– As Design Thinking for the Greater Good HBR case study mentions - 2.0 Innovation takes time to assess the upcoming competitions. This has led to missing out on atleast 2-3 big opportunities in the industry in last five years.
Capital Spending Reduction
– Even during the low interest decade, 2.0 Innovation has not been able to do capital spending to the tune of the competition. This has resulted into fewer innovations and company facing stiff competition from both existing competitors and new entrants who are disrupting the industry using digital technology.
Slow to harness new channels of communication
– Even though competitors are using new communication channels such as Instagram, Tiktok, and Snap, 2.0 Innovation is slow explore the new channels of communication. These new channels of communication mentioned in marketing section of case study Design Thinking for the Greater Good can help to provide better information regarding products and services. It can also build an online community to further reach out to potential customers.
No frontier risks strategy
– After analyzing the HBR case study Design Thinking for the Greater Good, it seems that company is thinking about the frontier risks that can impact Strategy & Execution strategy. But it has very little resources allocation to manage the risks emerging from events such as natural disasters, climate change, melting of permafrost, tacking the rise of artificial intelligence, opportunities and threats emerging from commercialization of space etc.
Workers concerns about automation
– As automation is fast increasing in the segment, 2.0 Innovation needs to come up with a strategy to reduce the workers concern regarding automation. Without a clear strategy, it could lead to disruption and uncertainty within the organization.
High cash cycle compare to competitors
2.0 Innovation has a high cash cycle compare to other players in the industry. It needs to shorten the cash cycle by 12% to be more competitive in the marketplace, reduce inventory costs, and be more profitable.
Products dominated business model
– Even though 2.0 Innovation has some of the most successful products in the industry, this business model has made each new product launch extremely critical for continuous financial growth of the organization. firm in the HBR case study - Design Thinking for the Greater Good should strive to include more intangible value offerings along with its core products and services.
Increasing silos among functional specialists
– The organizational structure of 2.0 Innovation is dominated by functional specialists. It is not different from other players in the Strategy & Execution segment. 2.0 Innovation needs to de-silo the office environment to harness the true potential of its workforce. Secondly the de-silo will also help 2.0 Innovation to focus more on services rather than just following the product oriented approach.
Slow decision making process
– As mentioned earlier in the report, 2.0 Innovation has a very deliberative decision making approach. This approach has resulted in prudent decisions, but it has also resulted in missing opportunities in the industry over the last five years. 2.0 Innovation even though has strong showing on digital transformation primary two stages, it has struggled to capitalize the power of digital transformation in marketing efforts and new venture efforts.
High dependence on star products
– The top 2 products and services of the firm as mentioned in the Design Thinking for the Greater Good HBR case study still accounts for major business revenue. This dependence on star products in has resulted into insufficient focus on developing new products, even though 2.0 Innovation has relatively successful track record of launching new products.
Opportunities Design Thinking for the Greater Good | External Strategic Factors
What are Opportunities in the SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The opportunities highlighted in the Harvard Business Review case study Design Thinking for the Greater Good are -
Manufacturing automation
– 2.0 Innovation can use the latest technology developments to improve its manufacturing and designing process in Strategy & Execution segment. It can use CAD and 3D printing to build a quick prototype and pilot testing products. It can leverage automation using machine learning and artificial intelligence to do faster production at lowers costs, and it can leverage the growth in satellite and tracking technologies to improve inventory management, transportation, and shipping.
Buying journey improvements
– 2.0 Innovation can improve the customer journey of consumers in the industry by using analytics and artificial intelligence. Design Thinking for the Greater Good suggest that firm can provide automated chats to help consumers solve their own problems, provide online suggestions to get maximum out of the products and services, and help consumers to build a community where they can interact with each other to develop new features and uses.
Changes in consumer behavior post Covid-19
– Consumer behavior has changed in the Strategy & Execution industry because of Covid-19 restrictions. Some of this behavior will stay once things get back to normal. 2.0 Innovation can take advantage of these changes in consumer behavior to build a far more efficient business model. For example consumer regular ordering of products can reduce both last mile delivery costs and market penetration costs. 2.0 Innovation can further use this consumer data to build better customer loyalty, provide better products and service collection, and improve the value proposition in inflationary times.
Harnessing reconfiguration of the global supply chains
– As the trade war between US and China heats up in the coming years, 2.0 Innovation can build a diversified supply chain model across various countries in - South East Asia, India, and other parts of the world. This reconfiguration of global supply chain can help, as suggested in case study, Design Thinking for the Greater Good, to buy more products closer to the markets, and it can leverage its size and influence to get better deal from the local markets.
Lowering marketing communication costs
– 5G expansion will open new opportunities for 2.0 Innovation in the field of marketing communication. It will bring down the cost of doing business, provide technology platform to build new products in the Strategy & Execution segment, and it will provide faster access to the consumers.
Better consumer reach
– The expansion of the 5G network will help 2.0 Innovation to increase its market reach. 2.0 Innovation will be able to reach out to new customers. Secondly 5G will also provide technology framework to build new tools and products that can help more immersive consumer experience and faster consumer journey.
Reconfiguring business model
– The expansion of digital payment system, the bringing down of international transactions costs using Bitcoin and other blockchain based currencies, etc can help 2.0 Innovation to reconfigure its entire business model. For example it can used blockchain based technologies to reduce piracy of its products in the big markets such as China. Secondly it can use the popularity of e-commerce in various developing markets to build a Direct to Customer business model rather than the current Channel Heavy distribution network.
Loyalty marketing
– 2.0 Innovation has focused on building a highly responsive customer relationship management platform. This platform is built on in-house data and driven by analytics and artificial intelligence. The customer analytics can help the organization to fine tune its loyalty marketing efforts, increase the wallet share of the organization, reduce wastage on mainstream advertising spending, build better pricing strategies using personalization, etc.
Creating value in data economy
– The success of analytics program of 2.0 Innovation has opened avenues for new revenue streams for the organization in the industry. This can help 2.0 Innovation to build a more holistic ecosystem as suggested in the Design Thinking for the Greater Good case study. 2.0 Innovation can build new products and services such as - data insight services, data privacy related products, data based consulting services, etc.
Remote work and new talent hiring opportunities
– The widespread usage of remote working technologies during Covid-19 has opened opportunities for 2.0 Innovation to expand its talent hiring zone. According to McKinsey Global Institute, 20% of the high end workforce in fields such as finance, information technology, can continously work from remote local post Covid-19. This presents a really great opportunity for 2.0 Innovation to hire the very best people irrespective of their geographical location.
Finding new ways to collaborate
– Covid-19 has not only transformed business models of companies in Strategy & Execution industry, but it has also influenced the consumer preferences. 2.0 Innovation can tie-up with other value chain partners to explore new opportunities regarding meeting customer demands and building a rewarding and engaging relationship.
Identify volunteer opportunities
– Covid-19 has impacted working population in two ways – it has led to people soul searching about their professional choices, resulting in mass resignation. Secondly it has encouraged people to do things that they are passionate about. This has opened opportunities for businesses to build volunteer oriented socially driven projects. 2.0 Innovation can explore opportunities that can attract volunteers and are consistent with its mission and vision.
Leveraging digital technologies
– 2.0 Innovation can leverage digital technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning to automate the production process, customer analytics to get better insights into consumer behavior, realtime digital dashboards to get better sales tracking, logistics and transportation, product tracking, etc.
Threats Design Thinking for the Greater Good External Strategic Factors
What are Threats in the SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The threats mentioned in the HBR case study Design Thinking for the Greater Good are -
Backlash against dominant players
– US Congress and other legislative arms of the government are getting tough on big business especially technology companies. The digital arm of 2.0 Innovation business can come under increasing regulations regarding data privacy, data security, etc.
Technology disruption because of hacks, piracy etc
– The colonial pipeline illustrated, how vulnerable modern organization are to international hackers, miscreants, and disruptors. The cyber security interruption, data leaks, etc can seriously jeopardize the future growth of the organization.
Easy access to finance
– Easy access to finance in Strategy & Execution field will also reduce the barriers to entry in the industry, thus putting downward pressure on the prices because of increasing competition. 2.0 Innovation can utilize it by borrowing at lower rates and invest it into research and development, capital expenditure to fortify its core competitive advantage.
New competition
– After the dotcom bust of 2001, financial crisis of 2008-09, the business formation in US economy had declined. But in 2020 alone, there are more than 1.5 million new business applications in United States. This can lead to greater competition for 2.0 Innovation in the Strategy & Execution sector and impact the bottomline of the organization.
Regulatory challenges
– 2.0 Innovation needs to prepare for regulatory challenges as consumer protection groups and other pressure groups are vigorously advocating for more regulations on big business - to reduce inequality, to create a level playing field, to product data privacy and consumer privacy, to reduce the influence of big money on democratic institutions, etc. This can lead to significant changes in the Strategy & Execution industry regulations.
High level of anxiety and lack of motivation
– the Great Resignation in United States is the sign of broader dissatisfaction among the workforce in United States. 2.0 Innovation needs to understand the core reasons impacting the Strategy & Execution industry. This will help it in building a better workplace.
Stagnating economy with rate increase
– 2.0 Innovation can face lack of demand in the market place because of Fed actions to reduce inflation. This can lead to sluggish growth in the economy, lower demands, lower investments, higher borrowing costs, and consolidation in the field.
Consumer confidence and its impact on 2.0 Innovation demand
– There is a high probability of declining consumer confidence, given – high inflammation rate, rise of gig economy, lower job stability, increasing cost of living, higher interest rates, and aging demography. All the factors contribute to people saving higher rate of their income, resulting in lower consumer demand in the industry and other sectors.
Environmental challenges
– 2.0 Innovation needs to have a robust strategy against the disruptions arising from climate change and energy requirements. EU has identified it as key priority area and spending 30% of its 880 billion Euros European post Covid-19 recovery funds on green technology. 2.0 Innovation can take advantage of this fund but it will also bring new competitors in the Strategy & Execution industry.
Shortening product life cycle
– it is one of the major threat that 2.0 Innovation is facing in Strategy & Execution sector. It can lead to higher research and development costs, higher marketing expenses, lower customer loyalty, etc.
Barriers of entry lowering
– As technology is more democratized, the barriers to entry in the industry are lowering. It can presents 2.0 Innovation with greater competitive threats in the near to medium future. Secondly it will also put downward pressure on pricing throughout the sector.
Aging population
– As the populations of most advanced economies are aging, it will lead to high social security costs, higher savings among population, and lower demand for goods and services in the economy. The household savings in US, France, UK, Germany, and Japan are growing faster than predicted because of uncertainty caused by pandemic.
Capital market disruption
– During the Covid-19, Dow Jones has touched record high. The valuations of a number of companies are way beyond their existing business model potential. This can lead to capital market correction which can put a number of suppliers, collaborators, value chain partners in great financial difficulty. It will directly impact the business of 2.0 Innovation.
Weighted SWOT Analysis of Design Thinking for the Greater Good Template, Example
Not all factors mentioned under the Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, and Threats quadrants in the SWOT Analysis are equal. Managers in the HBR case study Design Thinking for the Greater Good needs to zero down on the relative importance of each factor mentioned in the Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, and Threats quadrants.
We can provide the relative importance to each factor by assigning relative weights. Weighted SWOT analysis process is a three stage process –
First stage for doing weighted SWOT analysis of the case study Design Thinking for the Greater Good is to rank the strengths and weaknesses of the organization. This will help you to assess the most important strengths and weaknesses of the firm and which one of the strengths and weaknesses mentioned in the initial lists are marginal and can be left out.
Second stage for conducting weighted SWOT analysis of the Harvard case study Design Thinking for the Greater Good is to give probabilities to the external strategic factors thus better understanding the opportunities and threats arising out of macro environment changes and developments.
Third stage of constructing weighted SWOT analysis of Design Thinking for the Greater Good is to provide strategic recommendations includes – joining likelihood of external strategic factors such as opportunities and threats to the internal strategic factors – strengths and weaknesses. You should start with external factors as they will provide the direction of the overall industry. Secondly by joining probabilities with internal strategic factors can help the company not only strategic fit but also the most probably strategic trade-off that 2.0 Innovation needs to make to build a sustainable competitive advantage.
