Page 215 -
P. 215

CHAPTER 6 • STRATEGY ANALYSIS AND CHOICE  181

              environment may not be revealed in a single matrix. Third, SWOT analysis may lead the
              firm to overemphasize a single internal or external factor in formulating strategies. There
              are interrelationships among the key internal and external factors that SWOT does not
              reveal that may be important in devising strategies.


              The Strategic Position and Action Evaluation (SPACE) Matrix
              The Strategic Position and Action Evaluation (SPACE) Matrix, another important Stage 2
              matching tool, is illustrated in Figure 6-4. Its four-quadrant framework indicates whether
              aggressive, conservative, defensive, or competitive strategies are most appropriate for a
              given organization. The axes of the SPACE Matrix represent two internal dimensions
              (financial position [FP] and competitive position [CP]) and two external dimensions
              (stability position [SP] and industry position [IP]). These four factors are perhaps the most
              important determinants of an organization’s overall strategic position. 5
                 Depending on the type of organization, numerous variables could make up each of the
              dimensions represented on the axes of the SPACE Matrix. Factors that were included
              earlier in the firm’s EFE and IFE Matrices should be considered in developing a SPACE
              Matrix. Other variables commonly included are given in Table 6-2. For example, return on
              investment, leverage, liquidity, working capital, and cash flow are commonly considered to
              be determining factors of an organization’s financial strength. Like the SWOT Matrix, the
              SPACE Matrix should be both tailored to the particular organization being studied and
              based on factual information as much as possible.



              FIGURE 6-4

              The SPACE Matrix
                            Conservative          FP             Aggressive
                        • Market penetration   +6       • Backward, forward, horizontal
                        • Market development                 integration
                        • Product development  +5       • Market penetration
                        • Related diversification       • Market development
                                               +4       • Product development
                                                        • Diversification (related or unrelated)
                                               +3

                                               +2
                                               +1

                                                0
              CP                                                                      IP
                   –7  –6  –5  –4  –3  –2  –1   0       +1  +2  +3  +4  +5  +6  +7

                                               –1

                          Defensive            –2              Competitive
                        • Retrenchment                  • Backward, forward, horizontal
                        • Divestiture          –3            integration
                        • Liquidation                   • Market penetration
                                               –4       • Market development
                                                        • Product development
                                               –5

                                               –6
                                               –7
                                                  SP
              Source: Adapted from H. Rowe, R. Mason, and K. Dickel, Strategic Management and Business Policy: A
              Methodological Approach (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Inc., © 1982): 155.
   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220