Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
Leadership & Managing People
Strategy / MBA Resources
Case Study SWOT Analysis Solution
Case Study Description of Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad?
In recent years, much has been written about evidence-based- or fact-based- decision making. The core idea is that decisions supported by hard facts and sound analysis are likely to be better than decisions made on the basis of instinct, folklore or informal anecdotal evidence. And many organizations have invested heavily in data processing infrastructure and analytical tools based on assumption that better evidence-based decision will follow from these investments. But research by the authors suggests that evidence is not as frequent an input to a decision process as managers like to think. Instead, what occurs is decision-based evidence making -sometimes without managers even understanding, that it's happening. The authors address three key questions: Why does decision-based evidence making occur in organizations? Is decision-based evidence making the necessarily bad? And, if decision-based evidence making is inevitable in organizations, what can be done to lessen its negative impacts? To help answer those questions, the authors explain how decision making is affected by the contexts in which problems are presented- and how those contexts can demand different ways of using evidence, depending on whether the evidence is being used to make, inform or support a decision.
Swot Analysis of "Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad?" written by Peter Tingling includes – strengths weakness that are internal strategic factors of the organization, and opportunities and threats that Evidence Decision facing as an external strategic factors. Some of the topics covered in Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? case study are - Strategic Management Strategies, Operations management and Leadership & Managing People.
Some of the macro environment factors that can be used to understand the Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? casestudy better are - – competitive advantages are harder to sustain because of technology dispersion, increasing transportation and logistics costs, digital marketing is dominated by two big players Facebook and Google, cloud computing is disrupting traditional business models, supply chains are disrupted by pandemic , talent flight as more people leaving formal jobs, there is increasing trade war between United States & China,
central banks are concerned over increasing inflation, banking and financial system is disrupted by Bitcoin and other crypto currencies, etc
Introduction to SWOT Analysis of Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad?
SWOT stands for an organization’s Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats . At Oak Spring University , we believe that protagonist in Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? case study can use SWOT analysis as a strategic management tool to assess the current internal strengths and weaknesses of the Evidence Decision, and to figure out the opportunities and threats in the macro environment – technological, environmental, political, economic, social, demographic, etc in which Evidence Decision 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 Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? can be done for the following purposes –
1. Strategic planning using facts provided in Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? case study
2. Improving business portfolio management of Evidence Decision
3. Assessing feasibility of the new initiative in Leadership & Managing People field.
4. Making a Leadership & Managing People topic specific business decision
5. Set goals for the organization
6. Organizational restructuring of Evidence Decision
Strengths Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? | Internal Strategic Factors
What are Strengths in SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The strengths of Evidence Decision in Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? Harvard Business Review case study are -
Ability to lead change in Leadership & Managing People field
– Evidence Decision 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 Evidence Decision in – penetrating new markets, reaching out to new customers, and providing different value propositions to different customers in the international markets.
Digital Transformation in Leadership & Managing People segment
- digital transformation varies from industry to industry. For Evidence Decision digital transformation journey comprises differing goals based on market maturity, customer technology acceptance, and organizational culture. Evidence Decision 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.
Highly skilled collaborators
– Evidence Decision has highly efficient outsourcing and offshoring strategy. It has resulted in greater operational flexibility and bringing down the costs in highly price sensitive segment. Secondly the value chain collaborators of the firm in Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? HBR case study have helped the firm to develop new products and bring them quickly to the marketplace.
Training and development
– Evidence Decision has one of the best training and development program in the industry. The effectiveness of the training programs can be measured in Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? Harvard Business Review case study by analyzing – employees retention, in-house promotion, loyalty, new venture initiation, lack of conflict, and high level of both employees and customer engagement.
Diverse revenue streams
– Evidence Decision is present in almost all the verticals within the industry. This has provided firm in Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? 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.
Cross disciplinary teams
– Horizontal connected teams at the Evidence Decision are driving operational speed, building greater agility, and keeping the organization nimble to compete with new competitors. It helps are organization to ideate new ideas, and execute them swiftly in the marketplace.
Superior customer experience
– The customer experience strategy of Evidence Decision in the segment is based on four key concepts – personalization, simplification of complex needs, prompt response, and continuous engagement.
Sustainable margins compare to other players in Leadership & Managing People industry
– Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? firm has clearly differentiated products in the market place. This has enabled Evidence Decision to fetch slight price premium compare to the competitors in the Leadership & Managing People industry. The sustainable margins have also helped Evidence Decision to invest into research and development (R&D) and innovation.
Operational resilience
– The operational resilience strategy in the Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? 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 switching costs
– The high switching costs that Evidence Decision 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.
High brand equity
– Evidence Decision has strong brand awareness and brand recognition among both - the exiting customers and potential new customers. Strong brand equity has enabled Evidence Decision to keep acquiring new customers and building profitable relationship with both the new and loyal customers.
Learning organization
- Evidence Decision 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 Evidence Decision is open place that encourages instructiveness, ideation, open minded discussions, and creativity. Employees and leaders in Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? Harvard Business Review case study emphasize – knowledge, initiative, and innovation.
Weaknesses Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? | Internal Strategic Factors
What are Weaknesses in SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The weaknesses of Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? are -
Interest costs
– Compare to the competition, Evidence Decision has borrowed money from the capital market at higher rates. It needs to restructure the interest payment and costs so that it can compete better and improve profitability.
Ability to respond to the competition
– As the decision making is very deliberative, highlighted in the case study Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad?, in the dynamic environment Evidence Decision has struggled to respond to the nimble upstart competition. Evidence Decision has reasonably good record with similar level competitors but it has struggled with new entrants taking away niches of its business.
Lack of clear differentiation of Evidence Decision products
– To increase the profitability and margins on the products, Evidence Decision needs to provide more differentiated products than what it is currently offering in the marketplace.
No frontier risks strategy
– After analyzing the HBR case study Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad?, it seems that company is thinking about the frontier risks that can impact Leadership & Managing People 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.
High dependence on existing supply chain
– The disruption in the global supply chains because of the Covid-19 pandemic and blockage of the Suez Canal illustrated the fragile nature of Evidence Decision supply chain. Even after few cautionary changes mentioned in the HBR case study - Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad?, it is still heavily dependent upon the existing supply chain. The existing supply chain though brings in cost efficiencies but it has left Evidence Decision vulnerable to further global disruptions in South East Asia.
High dependence on star products
– The top 2 products and services of the firm as mentioned in the Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? 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 Evidence Decision has relatively successful track record of launching new products.
High operating costs
– Compare to the competitors, firm in the HBR case study Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? has high operating costs in the. This can be harder to sustain given the new emerging competition from nimble players who are using technology to attract Evidence Decision 's lucrative customers.
Employees’ incomplete understanding of strategy
– From the instances in the HBR case study Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad?, it seems that the employees of Evidence Decision don’t have comprehensive understanding of the firm’s strategy. This is reflected in number of promotional campaigns over the last few years that had mixed messaging and competing priorities. Some of the strategic activities and services promoted in the promotional campaigns were not consistent with the organization’s strategy.
Increasing silos among functional specialists
– The organizational structure of Evidence Decision is dominated by functional specialists. It is not different from other players in the Leadership & Managing People segment. Evidence Decision needs to de-silo the office environment to harness the true potential of its workforce. Secondly the de-silo will also help Evidence Decision to focus more on services rather than just following the product oriented approach.
High bargaining power of channel partners
– Because of the regulatory requirements, Peter Tingling suggests that, Evidence Decision is facing high bargaining power of the channel partners. So far it has not able to streamline the operations to reduce the bargaining power of the value chain partners in the industry.
Capital Spending Reduction
– Even during the low interest decade, Evidence Decision 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.
Opportunities Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? | 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 Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? are -
Reforming the budgeting process
- By establishing new metrics that will be used to evaluate both existing and potential projects Evidence Decision can not only reduce the costs of the project but also help it in integrating the projects with other processes within the organization.
Leveraging digital technologies
– Evidence Decision 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.
Increase in government spending
– As the United States and other governments are increasing social spending and infrastructure spending to build economies post Covid-19, Evidence Decision can use these opportunities to build new business models that can help the communities that Evidence Decision operates in. Secondly it can use opportunities from government spending in Leadership & Managing People sector.
Harnessing reconfiguration of the global supply chains
– As the trade war between US and China heats up in the coming years, Evidence Decision 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, Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad?, to buy more products closer to the markets, and it can leverage its size and influence to get better deal from the local markets.
Developing new processes and practices
– Evidence Decision can develop new processes and procedures in Leadership & Managing People industry using technology such as automation using artificial intelligence, real time transportation and products tracking, 3D modeling for concept development and new products pilot testing etc.
Buying journey improvements
– Evidence Decision can improve the customer journey of consumers in the industry by using analytics and artificial intelligence. Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? 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.
Use of Bitcoin and other crypto currencies for transactions
– The popularity of Bitcoin and other crypto currencies as asset class and medium of transaction has opened new opportunities for Evidence Decision in the consumer business. Now Evidence Decision can target international markets with far fewer capital restrictions requirements than the existing system.
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 Evidence Decision 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.
Redefining models of collaboration and team work
– As explained in the weaknesses section, Evidence Decision is facing challenges because of the dominance of functional experts in the organization. Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? case study suggests that firm can utilize new technology to build more coordinated teams and streamline operations and communications using tools such as CAD, Zoom, etc.
Remote work and new talent hiring opportunities
– The widespread usage of remote working technologies during Covid-19 has opened opportunities for Evidence Decision 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 Evidence Decision to hire the very best people irrespective of their geographical location.
Lowering marketing communication costs
– 5G expansion will open new opportunities for Evidence Decision in the field of marketing communication. It will bring down the cost of doing business, provide technology platform to build new products in the Leadership & Managing People segment, and it will provide faster access to the consumers.
Changes in consumer behavior post Covid-19
– Consumer behavior has changed in the Leadership & Managing People industry because of Covid-19 restrictions. Some of this behavior will stay once things get back to normal. Evidence Decision 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. Evidence Decision 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.
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. Evidence Decision can explore opportunities that can attract volunteers and are consistent with its mission and vision.
Threats Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? External Strategic Factors
What are Threats in the SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix / Weighted SWOT Analysis
The threats mentioned in the HBR case study Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? are -
Consumer confidence and its impact on Evidence Decision 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.
Stagnating economy with rate increase
– Evidence Decision 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.
Regulatory challenges
– Evidence Decision 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 Leadership & Managing People industry regulations.
Easy access to finance
– Easy access to finance in Leadership & Managing People field will also reduce the barriers to entry in the industry, thus putting downward pressure on the prices because of increasing competition. Evidence Decision can utilize it by borrowing at lower rates and invest it into research and development, capital expenditure to fortify its core competitive advantage.
Learning curve for new practices
– As the technology based on artificial intelligence and machine learning platform is getting complex, as highlighted in case study Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad?, Evidence Decision may face longer learning curve for training and development of existing employees. This can open space for more nimble competitors in the field of Leadership & Managing People .
Shortening product life cycle
– it is one of the major threat that Evidence Decision is facing in Leadership & Managing People sector. It can lead to higher research and development costs, higher marketing expenses, lower customer loyalty, etc.
Environmental challenges
– Evidence Decision 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. Evidence Decision can take advantage of this fund but it will also bring new competitors in the Leadership & Managing People industry.
Technology acceleration in Forth Industrial Revolution
– Evidence Decision has witnessed rapid integration of technology during Covid-19 in the Leadership & Managing People industry. As one of the leading players in the industry, Evidence Decision needs to keep up with the evolution of technology in the Leadership & Managing People sector. According to Mckinsey study top managers believe that the adoption of technology in operations, communications is 20-25 times faster than what they planned in the beginning of 2019.
Barriers of entry lowering
– As technology is more democratized, the barriers to entry in the industry are lowering. It can presents Evidence Decision with greater competitive threats in the near to medium future. Secondly it will also put downward pressure on pricing throughout the sector.
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 Evidence Decision in the Leadership & Managing People sector and impact the bottomline of the organization.
Increasing wage structure of Evidence Decision
– Post Covid-19 there is a sharp increase in the wages especially in the jobs that require interaction with people. The increasing wages can put downward pressure on the margins of Evidence Decision.
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 Evidence Decision.
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.
Weighted SWOT Analysis of Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? 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 Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? 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 Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? 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 Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? 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 Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? 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 Evidence Decision needs to make to build a sustainable competitive advantage.