SWOT Analysis for Project Planning and Evaluation
Given the number of important ventures that have had difficult births, experienced growing pains, have been marred by youthful indiscretions; and eventually grew into mature institutions that we have finally come to accept; it seems prudent that government and project planners should henceforth design important ventures with proper tools.
SWOT Analysis is one of those tools that should be in the toolbox of every planner and evaluator who is involved in project design, implementation, and evaluation. The same holds true for crafters of government policy. Those in government circles who propose and draft legislation that will impact their constituents, should design that legislation with materials of hardened steel that are strong enough to last; and with minimal maintenance. Quality construction materials should also be galvanized to prevent undue rusting. Most important, the nuts and bolts of that superstructure of legislation should employ tools suitable for fastening, tightening and securing the prototypes at the construction phase; and to allow for long-term, in- service maintenance procedures. SWOT Analysis is one of those tools.
SWOT is an acronym that stands for Strengths : Weaknesses : Opportunities : Threats
As an analytical tool that should be in every planner’s toolbox, SWOT must be used according to the directions, if the nuts and bolts of the proposed project/legislation are going to be tight enough and of the right size. Part of the procedure, however; is to faithfully include each component of SWOT before final approval of the prototype can ensue. That is to say, a proper analysis must use proper tools to torque standards, in the prescribed manner. A mechanical technician torques the nuts; and a SWOT planner torques the components by discussing the Strengths and the Weaknesses; but also the Opportunities and the Threats that are intrinsic in most complex but untested inventions.
In the real world there are few inventions that were originally introduced with outright perfection. Nor are there many clear-cut win/win situations with regard to legislation and public policy. There is a tendency to take sides on a policy issue, but we know that every coin has two sides (and an edge), thus we should be mindful of both the pros and the cons of any issue. Although there are a few seemingly bullet proof dogmas to which we all might agree are good ideas, a good idea with virtually no drawbacks is not sufficient grounds for short-circuiting a SWOT analysis.
Some Strengths may be obvious in the proposed design of, let us say, for example; a health care system in the United States. For purposes of discussion we shall refer to that system as HOD, for Health Over Disease. We all want to be healthy and to stay healthy. The drafters of HOD legislation promise that everyone will be covered, and at relatively low cost, if we enroll in the HOD program. That would be an obvious Strength of the HOD plan. But since every coin has two sides and an edge, it is also an obvious Weakness that HOD would be costly to set up and subsequently to maintain, with recurring costs as yet undetermined. Nonetheless, those are valid points to be considered. However, proper use of SWOT as a tool requires the mechanical technician to go beyond just applying torque to tighten or loosen nuts; and the planner to go beyond the mere mention of Strengths and Weaknesses. The SWOT Analysis requires that the operator identify and describe potential Opportunities and Threats.
The virtue of SWOT as a tool is that it absolutely requires that the operator or user to always draw up a list of demonstrable Strengths and Weaknesses, to the best of their ability or knowledge; and present both categories as part of the analysis. Furthermore, the inclusion of Opportunities and Threats as part of the analysis moves beyond the common objectivity of factual content; and gives the user great leeway to delve into the theoretical, the abstract, or to the potential conditionality. Things that are not mainstream issues but are legitimate concerns should be, and are, mandated for listing under Opportunities and Threats. Finally, persons who apply SWOT are obliged to put all of the components into the same package, regardless of their personal preferences about the desirability of a policy such as HOD, or their opinions about the relative strengths or weakness of the factors listed. Needless to say, the subjectivity of the items perceived and presented in the Opportunities and in the Threats sections are somewhat likely to be personal and hypothetical; and often are based to some extent on individual knowledge emanating from professional experience or a priori knowledge.
Beyond the more obvious nuts and bolts of the prototype HOD that can be tested with listed Strengths and Weaknesses, the SWOT Analysis system always includes a section wherein a presentation of future Opportunities for improvement and change can be listed and perhaps explained; and a section where potential Threats to the machinery, itself, can also be discussed, in addition to merely listing them. And that is where SWOT becomes a more sophisticated tool than a hand-held wrench used to tighten the nuts and bolts of HOD’s Strengths, or to loosen them to obviate its Weaknesses.
Opportunities and potential improvements that may result in re-design at any stage of HOD or its components is a key element in the SWOT Analysis. The mere inclusion of the Opportunities section, as a distinct and separate category of discussion, suggests that HOD or other similar proposed projects are intended with long term applications; and have a correspondingly appropriate suite of implications for mid-course corrections and technical fixes that may be needed. SWOT is most appropriate to projects and policies that have longevity, durability and in-service maintenance in mind.
The final category of mandatory listing in the SWOT Analysis is that of Threats, real or perceived. As in the Opportunities section, items listed may be somewhat theoretical in nature because they are assignable to a future that has not yet been manifested. A good analyst, however; should be able to visualize some of the more obvious potential threats. And a passionate analyst also would likely relish the opportunity to present thoughts and scenarios that others may have overlooked, or declined to consider. Nonetheless, the Threats section ought not be taken lightly; part of the reason for analysis, in the first place, is to consider as many aspects of the ups and the downs of project or policy implementation as is possible. Failure to mention real or potential threats on the part of the analyst would be doing a disservice to those who commissioned the SWOT Analysis, or any other type of analysis of issues that matter.
There are those in positions of power and/or political influence who may not support the use of SWOT as an analytical tool. For example, a political operative who supports the passage of HOD may be inclined to praise the Strengths but downplay the Weaknesses; while the opponents of HOD may attempt to withhold the findings of the analysis entirely, or discredit it as being inaccurate, of faulty design, or too preferential toward a limited group of constituents. They may wish to bury it and never acknowledge that a SWOT Analysis was ever conducted. If anyone in power with a personal agenda or those with political motives really want to obscure the findings or to obfuscate, for any reason, they might never take the SWOT tools out of the toolbox.