Chat with us, powered by LiveChat There ??should be 5 strategic factors for Strengths and 5 strategic factors for ??Weaknesses. Internal ??factors are those the firm has control over. ?'Does Amazon control this | Wridemy

There ??should be 5 strategic factors for Strengths and 5 strategic factors for ??Weaknesses. Internal ??factors are those the firm has control over. ?’Does Amazon control this

     

There   should be 5 strategic factors for Strengths and 5 strategic factors for   Weaknesses.

Internal   factors are those the firm has control over.  "Does Amazon control this activity or   not?" For instance, Amazon has control over the dates to release new   products, or what products to sell each year. But Amazon does not control the   economic conditions that would determine the demand for those products.

Fill   in the table in TemplateSA-EXH2-IFAS. The table has five columns:   Internal Factors, Weight, Rating, Weighted Score and Comments.

Use   short names for the factors but flesh them out in the comments so they make   sense when you approach them later on. A generically named factor can be   listed on both the EFAS and IFAS so long as the comments made the difference   clear between the two. You should modify the names, so this situation does   not arise.

Your   comments make all the difference in the quality of the EFAS.

Use the template for Exhibit 2 – IFAS

Use   the TemplateSA-EXH2-IFAS.docx as the template for your work.   Ensure that your format displays correctly and is readable.  Do   NOT copy from the text or from the Template IFAS text!  Use your own   critical analysis and critical thinking.  The template is provided to   assist you with the layout–i.e., make it easy for you to construct the   chart.  The template also gives you a good idea of the appropriate   explanations required in the Comments blocks about the why an SF, potential   quantified impact, how weighted, and how rated.

Comments Column

Comments   are expected to be 4-5 sentences in length and depth and offer a clear   explanation of the strategic factor (SF) in 4 aspects:

  • Why it is a strategic factor (SF), core competency (CC) or        distinctive competency (DC); (1-2 sentences only)
  • A quantified estimate of the potential impact (QPI) of the SF; (1        sentence only)
  • How you assign the weight; (1 sentence only) and
  • How you assign the rating. (1 sentence only)

Keep   the 4-5 sentences of your Comments in order for clarity and ease of   understanding.  The recommended order is:  Why SF comments; QPI   comments; Weight comments; and finally Rating comments.

How   to write the Why SF and QPI comments: For   the Why SF, explain WHY you selected this SF, WHY it is important to Amazon, and   WHAT is the potential impact on Amazon in the future. Clearly identify your   Core Competencies (CC) and Distinctive Competencies (DC) in the IFAS Comments   column.

For   the QPI comments, estimate the potential impact on Amazon in the future in a   quantitative manner using some metric:  sales, revenues, costs, market   share, profits, logistics pipeline, CSI, etc.  Express the quantitative   potential impact (QPI) in Dollars $$.  If you express the potential   impact in $$, that makes each strategic factor comparable against   the other strategic factors. And expressing the impact in sales makes them   even more easily comparable.   Make sure you are making significant   estimates based on the size of your company based on annual   revenue values in your 5-Y financials. You develop this estimate.

The   monetary value of the QPI is useful to compare the   strategic factors and rank them in relevance.  Ranking them   will help you to assign the Weights (2nd column   in the table) to each strategic factor. Use a positive analysis (quantitative)   rather than a normative analysis (feelings, desires).  Focus on what   is the potential gain for your SF opportunities or the   potential loss from a SF threat in the future.  History   lessons are not needed nor applicable.  You should estimate and predict   the impact in the future. Be creative. 

Don’t   develop future actions or alternatives here in the IFAS about how a firm may or should take action on a   particular SF.  The brainstorming development of those alternative   actions comes with the TOWS Analysis that we will start presenting in Module   4.

HINT:  To focus your thinking on addressing “why” you selected   each SF and “why it is important,” start your “why select/important” sentence   with words like this:  “I selected this SF because…..” or “This SF is   important because…”  By using this lead-in phrase you should be able to   concisely state why that particular SF is important.

HINT:  To focus your thinking on addressing the quantitative   potential impact (QPI) in the future of each SF, be sure your QPI sentence   contains words like this:  “potential impact of $____” or “potential   increases to ____ are $____ per year” or “reduction in sales by $____ per   year.”  Be sure to state the potential impact in dollars so you can   compare the potential impacts of your various SF.

How   to write the Weight and Rank comments: To assign   weights, explain the importance of the SF to the firm’s future   survival.  Is the SF of vital importance or low importance on a scale of   1 to 0?  What is the impact of the SF on the future survival of   the firm?  What SF has the biggest impact?  Which one(s)   are the Big Dogs?  Make a logical explanation of why the weight you have   assigned is what it is.  Comparison and ranking between SF is a useful   technique to assign the weight.  See your potential $$$ impacts from   your “Why” analysis above. The bigger the $$$ impact is, the bigger the   weight should be.  Remember the weight column adds to 1.0.

HINT:  To focus your thinking on addressing the importance of   the SF to Amazon’s future survival, be sure to include the key word   “survival” in your weight sentence.

To   assign ratings provide an explanation of how   well, or how badly, Amazon is handling each specific external   SF RIGHT NOW – not in the future or not in the distant past – but   right now. Use the scale of 1 – 5, poor to outstanding;   comparing the firm’s performance against the industry standard rating of   3.  Give a logical explanation of why the rating you have assigned is   what it is.  Do they handle it well or are they lost?  Are they   performing in average way as other competitors are? Remember the industry   average performance is rated at 3.

HINT:  To focus your thinking on addressing how well your firm   is handling each SF, understand what the 1-5 scale means and then use your   rating number from the rating column with matching words (low, average, above   average, high, etc) in your rating sentence.

Example   of a good comments block:

SF   - Competent Senior Leadership

This   SF was chosen because of its significant positive impact on corporate performance   in sales, costs, and industry leadership.  Senior leadership is   considered a core competency.  Top management adds significant benefit   to OPC’s profit posture and stockholder satisfaction.  Effect on the top   line future sales revenue is estimated at 25% ($100M-$150M/YR).  This SF   is weighted very high at .15 as leadership is very important to survival in   the world economy.  OPC is rated highly at 4.5 as an industry leader   with a highly competent management team.

Point of View

Remember   to keep your decision-making at the strategic level –the Big Picture level.   You are acting at the CEO/SVP level. But you are also acting at the lower   levels to brainstorm, generate alternatives, perform critical analysis, and   make recommendations to the CEO/SVP levels. The decision-maker CEO/SVP decides on   the most important strategic factors.

Use TemplateSA-EXH 4-FinRatio.docx as Reference

The   financial ratios are explained in Chapter 13 and at the end   of Understanding Financial Statements, the reading we used in   Module One.

The TemplateSA-EXH4-FinRatio.docx is   only a reference because you will perform the calculations of your financial   ratios in Excel. In fact, the 5-Y financials of the firm you are working   about has a sheet that connects the financial ratio formulas with respective   data in Balance Sheets and Income Statements for the five years of analysis   in the same workbook.

.

           

 

       

EXHIBIT 2

INTERNAL FACTOR ANALYSIS SUMMARY (IFAS) on OLALLIEBERRY PIE COMPANY (OPC)

Internal Factors

Weight:

Rating:

Weighted

Score

Comments

Strengths:

S1: Competent Senior Leadership

.15

4.5

.675

This SF was chosen because of its significant positive impact on corporate performance in sales, costs, and industry leadership. Affect on the top line future sales revenue is estimated at 25% ($100M-$150M/YR). Top management adds significant benefit to OPC’s profit posture and stockholder satisfaction. Senior leadership is considered a core competency. This SF is weighted very high at .15 as leadership is very important to survival in the world economy. OPC is rated very high at 4.5 as an industry leader with a highly competent management team.

S2: Supplier Relationships

.10

4.5

.45

This SF was selected because it is a core competency and directly impacts OPC’s low raw material cost structure and high quality product. Suppliers work seamlessly with OPC Operations to deliver quality raw materials in a highly efficient just-in-time logistics system. Resource and production costs are maintained at a level about 20% below the industry average; saving OPC about $20-$40M/YR in the future. Weight is relatively high as this core competency is important to OPC’s survival and competitive position. Rating is 4.5 as OPC is performing at a level high above the industry norm.

S3: Product Quality and Uniqueness

.05

4.0

.20

This SF was added because of the olallieberry’s uniqueness and quality as it is formed into a quality consumer product by OPC. No other pie company can match OPC for its olallieberry pies. OPC pies can command a 10% premium price point over other brands because of proven and consistent quality and uniqueness. Potential impact on future sales revenue is positive at $5-$10M/YR. This SF is weighted low at .05 as not very important to firm’s survival. Rating is high at 4.0 since OPC’s pies are above industry quality.

S4: Employee Relations

.05

4.6

.23

I selected this SF because OPC has a very strong and supportive employee management, training, and development program which results in a very highly motivated, efficient and effective workforce. This restrains production and operating costs as 60% of COGS vice industry standard of 75%. Future savings projected in range of $10M – $15M/YR. This impacts very favorably on the overall cost structure and ensures that OPC can be competitive. Weight is low as costs are important to competitive position but SF is less important to survival than other SF. Rating is high at 4.6 as OPC sets the standard.

S5:Corporate Culture

.20

5.0

1.0

This SF is important because it is a distinctive competence that reverberates throughout the entire organization and provides a 20-30% cost and productivity advantage for OPC over its competitors. Future advantage is estimated at $125M – $200M/YR in cost savings. Maintaining the positive corporate culture is essential to survival in the increasingly competitive environment. Weight is high at .20 because of the importance of culture to the future survival of OPC. Rating is highest at 5.0 because OPC is the indisputable industry leader.

Weaknesses:

W1: Management Information System (MIS)

.20

2.0

.40

This SF is important because OPC’s MIS is outdated and behind times since they have not invested in a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. This weakness could have a very negative impact on future revenues and costs, 30-40% of sales ($120M – $160M/YR), since a modern MIS is not in use. Competitors have invested in modern ERP systems. Weight is high at .20 as this is very important to corporate survival. Rating is low at 2.0 since OPC has fallen behind its competition.

W2: Corporate Marketing

.05

1.5

.075

I selected this SF because Marketing is a weakness since OPC has not expanded its capabilities or strategic reach. OPC marketing is focused only on current market geographical and market share segments. Expanding sales/revenues is impossible with the current marketing orientation. Poor marketing is estimated to result in future lower sales by $15m – $30M/YR. Weight is low as this SF is important to drive future sales increases and attract new customers but not as important to corporate survival as other SF. Rating is low at 1.5 as OPC is lagging behind other competitors.

W3: Distribution Channels / Economies of Scale

.10

2.5

.25

I selected SF because OPC’s product distribution channels are focused only on the western states. It lacks all structure to expand domestically and internationally. OPC’s economies of scale are sufficient for current sales/revenues but woefully inadequate for expansion. Poor distribution may result in loss of $100M/YR in future sales. This SF is vitally important for the future survival of OPC since it needs to grow to remain competitive against other domestic and international pie producers. Weight is high at .10 as firm survival depends on improving capabilities. Rating is below industry standard at 2.5 since OPC has not taken the necessary strategic planning steps to prepare for future competition.

W4: Financial Position

.05

2.0

.10

This SF is important because OPC’s financial position has deteriorated over the recent past year as its ROI has fallen from 15% to 7% and the debt to asset ratio has ballooned. Stockholders are concerned. This recent poor financial position is a very important SF for OPC’s future as such a position may put OPC in a non-competitive position in the marketplace, stock market and bond market. Future costs to OPC may include higher borrowing costs of $10-$30M/YR and/or reduction in sales of $20M – $30M/YR. Weight is low at .05 since financial integrity and balance is important to survival but not as important as other SF. Rating is low at 2.0 as OPC is not executing up to industry standard.

W5: R&D System

.05

2.0

.10

I selected this SF because OPC’s R&D function is very poor. Developing new products has not been on the firm’s radar. Some market share may be lost to new products from competitors potentially losing OPC about $15-$20M/YR in sales. Weight is low at .05 as R&D competitiveness is important to survival but not as important as other SF. Rating is low at 2.0 as OPC’s R&D performance is below industry standard.

Total Scores:

1.00

3.48

1

4

,

EXHIBIT 4 RATIO ANALYSIS ON OLALLIEBERRY PIE COMPANY (OPC)

Historical for the Fiscal Years 1994-1998

 

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

Liquidity Ratios

 

Current Ratio

1.82

2.01

1.89

1.76

2.02

Quick Ratio

1.52

1.67

1.55

1.33

1.80

Inventory to Net Working Capital

0.18

0.15

0.17

0.19

0.13

Cash Ratio

7.22

8.30

4.52

1.55

1.02

 

 

Profitability Ratios

 

Net Profit Margin

4.0%

4.3%

4.5%

4.8%

4.9%

Gross Profit Margin

23.0%

24.1%

26.3%

27.5%

27.9%

Return on Investment (ROI)

8.7%

9.6%

9.9%

10.0%

9.9%

Return on Equity (ROE)

16.3%

15.6%

9.1%

17.6%

16.3%

Earnings Per Share (EPS)

$0.67

$0.88

$1.02

$1.29

$1.55

 

 

Activity Ratios

 

Inventory Turnover

3.4

4.7

5.5

6.6

6.4

Days of Inventory

91.6

81.2

78.4

74.3

75.2

Net Working Capital Turnover

12.0

10.5

12.3

13.6

9.3

Asset Turnover

2.2

2.1

2.1

2.2

2.0

Fixed Asset Turnover

3.7

3.6

3.5

3.7

3.9

Average Collection Period

5.3

6.5

8.2

13.2

23.8

Accounts Receivable Turnover

69.4

56.1

44.5

35.8

26.5

Accounts Payable Period

20.5

20.4

19.5

19.9

20.6

Days of Cash

1.7

2.0

4.3

5.9

4.0

 

 

Leverage Ratios

 

Debt to Asset Ratio

63.01%

64.55%

68.22%

60.00%

60.00%

Debt to Equity Ratio

75.00%

76.02%

83.44%

75.00%

75.00%

Long Term Debt to Capital Structure

23.05%

26.33%

19.56%

33.88%

32.00%

Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Ask A Question and we will direct you to our Order Page at WriteDemy. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Fill in all the assignment paper details that are required in the order form with the standard information being the page count, deadline, academic level and type of paper. It is advisable to have this information at hand so that you can quickly fill in the necessary information needed in the form for the essay writer to be immediately assigned to your writing project. Make payment for the custom essay order to enable us to assign a suitable writer to your order. Payments are made through Paypal on a secured billing page. Finally, sit back and relax.

Do you need an answer to this or any other questions?

About Wridemy

We are a professional paper writing website. If you have searched a question and bumped into our website just know you are in the right place to get help in your coursework. We offer HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE Papers.

How It Works

To make an Order you only need to click on “Order Now” and we will direct you to our Order Page. Fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Are there Discounts?

All new clients are eligible for 20% off in their first Order. Our payment method is safe and secure.

Hire a tutor today CLICK HERE to make your first order

Related Tags

Academic APA Writing College Course Discussion Management English Finance General Graduate History Information Justify Literature MLA