Internal Factor Assessment for Strategic Analysis
Order ID |
53563633773 |
Type |
Essay |
Writer Level |
Masters |
Style |
APA |
Sources/References |
4 |
The perfect number of Pages to Order |
5-10 Pages |
Description/Paper Instructions
Internal Factor Assessment for Strategic Analysis
IFAS
Develop an Internal Factor Analysis Summary (IFAS) for your selected case study following the guidance in Chapter 5.
Helpful Hint #1: internal factors are those the firm as control over. I will be doing reality checks when reading your work, asking, “Does the firm control this activity?”
Helpful Hint #2: your explanation/comments column can make all the difference (as it did in the EFAS) in my answer to the question above.
Helpful Hint #3: yes, 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. But a wiser student would modify the names, so this situation didn’t arise.
EXAMPLE
The Strategic Audit: A Checklist for Organizational Analysis
5-6. Construct an IFAS Table that summarizes internal factors
One way of conducting an organizational analysis to examine a company’s strengths and weaknesses is by using the Strategic Audit found in Appendix 1.A at the end of Chapter 1. The audit provides a checklist of questions by area of concern. For example, Part IV of the audit examines corporate structure, culture, and resources. It looks at organizational resources and capabilities in terms of the functional areas of marketing, finance, R&D, operations, human resources, and information systems, among others.
Synthesis of Internal Factors (IFAS)
After strategists have scanned the internal organizational environment and identified factors for their particular corporation, they may want to summarize their analysis of these factors using a form such as that given in Table 5–2. This IFAS (Internal Factor Analysis Summary) Table is one way to organize the internal factors into the generally accepted categories of strengths and weaknesses as well as to examine how well a particular company’s management is responding to these specific factors in light of the perceived importance of these factors to the company. Use the VRIO framework (Value, Rareness, Imitability, and Organization) to assess the importance of each of the factors that might be considered strengths. Except for its internal orientation, this IFAS Table is built the same way as the EFAS Table described in Chapter 4 (in Table 4–5). To use the IFAS Table, complete the following steps:
In Column 1 (Internal Factors), list the 8 to 10 most important strengths and weaknesses facing the company.
In Column 2 (Weight), assign a weight to each factor from 1.0 (Most Important) to 0.0 (Not Important) based on that factor’s probable impact on a particular company’s current strategic position. The higher the weight, the more important is this factor to the current and future success of the company. All weights must sum to 1.0 regardless of the number of factors.
In Column 3 (Rating), assign a rating to each factor from 5.0 (Outstanding) to 1.0 (Poor) based on management’s specific response to that particular factor. Each rating is a judgment regarding how well the company’s management is currently dealing with each specific internal factor.
In Column 4 (Weighted Score), multiply the weight in Column 2 for each factor times its rating in Column 3 to obtain that factor’s weighted score.
In Column 5 (Comments), note why a particular factor was selected and/or how its weight and rating were estimated.
Finally, add the weighted scores for all the internal factors in Column 4 to determine the total weighted score for that particular company. The total weighted score indicates how well a particular company is responding to current and expected factors in its internal environment. The score can be used to compare that firm to other firms in its industry. Check to ensure that the total weighted score truly reflects the company’s current performance in terms of profitability and market share. The total weighted score for an average firm in an industry is always 3.0.
As an example of this procedure, Table 5–2 includes a number of internal factors for Maytag Corporation in 1995 (before Maytag was acquired by Whirlpool) with corresponding weights, ratings, and weighted scores provided. Note that Maytag’s total weighted score is 3.05, meaning that the corporation is about average compared to the strengths and weaknesses of others in the major home appliance industry.
Internal Factor Assessment for Strategic Analysis
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE |
NO RESPONSE |
POOR / UNSATISFACTORY |
SATISFACTORY |
GOOD |
EXCELLENT |
Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) |
Zero points: The student failed to submit the final paper. |
20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly address the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explain key concepts or ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points or claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. |
30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not fully explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts or ideas, though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims or points, but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. |
40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content, identifying and explaining most of the key concepts and ideas, using correct terminology, explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. |
50 points: The essay illustrates an exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content, identifying and explaining all of the key concepts and ideas, using correct terminology, explaining the reasoning behind key points and claims, and substantiating, as necessary or useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. |
Use of sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points) |
Zero points: The student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. |
5 out of 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements, and/or the format of the citations is not recognized as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable The student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of the research collected for the paper. |
10 out of 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. There are frequent errors in the APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. |
15 out of 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used effectively to support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in references and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. |
20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to provide compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. The APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses references above the maximum required in the development of the assignment. |
Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) |
Zero points: The student failed to submit the final paper. |
5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas or points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or there are numerous grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors |
10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering, and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors |
15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. |
20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation; and logical organization; and the essay is error-free. |
Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) |
Zero points: The student failed to submit the final paper. |
3 points out of 10: The student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. |
5 points out of 10: The appearance of the final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. The font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too much or too little paper |
7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. |
10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. |
|
|
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
|
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!! |
|
|
PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!