Combine Swot Ahp

7/26/2019 Combine Swot Ahp

1/5

131

Abstract Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats

(SWOT) analysis examines both internal factors (strengths and

weaknesses) and external factors (opportunities and threats) of

current situation of an organization. In decision making, SWOT

analysis does not provide effective tool because of its deficiencies

in assessing decision alternatives. SWOT analysis with multi-

criteria decision making technique which is called Analytic

Hierarchy Process (AHP) can replenish the deficiency in decision

making. In addition, using the combined SWOT and AHP, itcould enhance effectiveness ofdecision making. In this study, the

application of combined SWOT and AHP in military decision

making will be dealt.

I ndex TermsSWOT, AHP, Decision making, Multi Criteria

Decision Making -MCDM,

I. INTRODUCTION

e make decisions to move toward a better future. Yet our

thinking and decisionmaking processes are not always as

sound as we might imagine. All of us, even the most

skilled advanced leaders, are subject to predictable cognitive

and affective constraints and limitations which can distort and

bias our judgment and decisions. But humankind has one

particularly powerful and redeeming quality; through

conscious deliberate examination of past experiences and

imagined futures, we can learn, adapt and advance [1].

Decision making is the study of identifying and choosing

alternatives based on the values and preferences of decision

maker. Making a decision implies that there are alternative

choices to be considered, and in such a case we want not only

to identify as many of these alternatives as possible but to

choose the one that best fits with our goals, objectives, desires,

alues, and so on [2].

People often lack important information regarding a

decision, fail to notice available information, face time and

cost constraints, and maintain a relatively small amount of

mit AHLAT, War Colleges Command, Army War College, 4. Levent,34330, Pbx: +90 212 398-0100/3262, stanbul-Turkey, e-mail:[email protected].

information in their usable memory [3]. For this reason,

making decision involves risk or uncertainty [4]. To reduce

risk or uncertainty a little bit and make effective decision,

SWOT and AHP must be used together.

This mixed method has been employed in many fields such

as developing strategic application plan, forest-certification

case,[5] electronics firm [6], manufacturing firm [7],

evaluation factor in tourism planning.[8] To our knowledge,

this is the first SWOT-AHP study applied in the military. Inthis sense, there is a common saying for the road to victory

we cant measure that we dont know, we cant control thatwe cant measure and we cant manage that we cant control. [9] So in the armed forces, when commanders face

multidimensional problems, they need basic things to decide.

Thanks to this hybrid method [10], it can assist on what

should be done for ambiguous situations. Hence, this

philosophy in a way is essential for success.

II.

SWOTANALYSIS

SWOT analysis is the most common techniques that can beused to analyze strategic cases [11]. SWOT is a frequently

used tool for analyzing internal and external environments to

attain a systematic approach and support for a decision

situation. [12]. SWOT analysis is an uncompleted qualitative

examination and mostly an internal and external environment

factor list.[13]

It is useful for both showing the current situation of the

organization and analyzing the future status of organization. In

order to give a response for changes in the world, organization

must pursue internal and external environment, thereby it can

develop a strategy [14].

Application of Combined SWOT and AHP: A

Case Study for Military Decision Making

. Ahlat

W


2/5

132

As shown in figure 1, organization can do this by making

analysis of internal environment, then analyzing external

environment. While internal environment analysis finds

strengths and weakness, external environment analysis can

determine opportunities and threats.

III.

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP)

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a multi-criteria

decision making (MCDM) method that helps the decision-

maker facing a complex problem with multiple conflicting and

subjective criteria. [15] The Analytic Hierarchy Process

utilizes qualitative descriptions to define a problem and to

represent the interactions of its parts. It also makes use of

quantitative judgments to assess the strengths of these

interactions. The decision maker first identifies his or her main

purpose in solving a problem. Criteria are chosen and

weighted according to the priority of their importance to thedecision maker. The different alternatives are then evaluated in

terms of these criteria, and a best one or best mix is chosen.

The alternatives are then potential solutions to the problem.

[16]

AHP is based on four steps: Problem modeling, weights

valuation, weights aggregation and sensitivity analysis [17].

When modeled, it can be seen in fig.2. First, to find the best

strategy, the items of SWOT should be determined as a main

criterion. Then its items (strength, weakness, opportunities and

threats) must be evaluated as a sub-criterion. After determining

the weights, it should be modeled pairwise comparisons. At

each node of the hierarchy, a matrix will collect the pairwisecomparisons of the decision-maker. Once the comparisons

matrices are filled, priorities can be calculated. The traditional

AHP uses the eigenvalue method. As priorities make sense

only if derived from consistent or near consistent matrices, a

consistency check must be applied. The last step is to

synthesize the local priorities across all criteria in order to

determine the global priority. [18]

IV.

APPLICATION OF SWOT AND AHP IN DECISION MAKING

Complex decisions are usually characterized by a large

number of interacting factors. The problem is how to properly

assess the importance of these factors in order to make

tradeoffs among them; how to derive a system of priorities that

can guide us to make good decisions by choosing a best

alternative. SWOT factors which are not independent of each

other may even be a relationship among some factors. Because

the factor weights are computed by assuming that the factors

are independent, the weights including the dependent relations

could be different. It can affect the strategies to choose while

possible changes in the factor weight may change the priorities

of alternative strategies. Therefore, it is necessary to employ

analyses which measure and take the possible dependencies

among factors into account in SWOT analysis. SWOT analysis

is performed using the AHP which allows measurement of

dependency among SWOT factors. SWOT analysis alone cantexplain the importance of each factor that identified at the

result of examination. It must be used with the values of the

factors. AHP has the advantage of permitting a hierarchical

structure of the criteria, which provides users with a better

focus on specific criteria and sub-criteria when allocating the

weights.[19]

Decision making is the thought process of selecting a logical

choice from the available options. When trying to make a good

decision, a person must weigh the positives and negatives ofeach option, and consider all the alternatives. For effective

decision making, a person must be able to forecast the

outcome of each option as well, and based on all these items,

determine which option is the best for that particular situation.

In this process, decision makers should: identify the problems,

construct the preferences, evaluate the alternatives, and

determine the best alternative(s) [20] but where is the SWOT

and AHPs place in decision making process. In order tounderstand situation, place of SWOT and AHP will be showed

in figure 3.

Fig. 1.SWOT analysis internal and external environmental elements

Fig. 2. The hierarchical structure of the AHP

STRENGHTS

OPPORTUNTES

WEAKNESS

THREATS

INTERNAL ENVIRONMENT

EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT

SWOT


3/5

133

V. METHODOLOGY AND APPLICATION

In fact, all decision making theorists agree that values and

beliefs jointly influence willingness to act under uncertainty.

However, there is considerable disagreement about how to

measure values and beliefs, and how to model their influence

on decisions. Therefore, first it needs to be modeled problem.

To do this, the decision-maker(s) should structure the problem,

which can be divided into three parts: goal (best strategy to

win war), criteria (strengths, weakness, opportunities, threats

and its sub-criteria) and alternatives (attack, defend andwithdraw) [21].

Step 1:Define the problem and goal.

The decision-maker first identifies his or her main purpose

in solving a problem.

Step 2: Criteria are chosen and weighted according to the

priority of their importance to the decision-maker.

In this case, we used the SWOT analysis to assess the

situation of tactical level. In table 2, strength, weakness,

opportunities and threats must be applied to pairwise

comparison. Then sub-criterion must be applied to pairwise

comparison compatible with the alternatives. Our alternativesare offensive, defense and withdraw.

Step 3:The different alternatives are then evaluated in terms

of these criteria, and best one or best mix is chosen.

Firstly, in military decision making process, it begins with

the receipt of the mission. [22] Then mission is analyzed.

While those are happening, SWOT analysis must be done with

a view to mission. But SWOT analysis is not enough to

evaluate actual danger. So what should be done when

everything changes so fast? Used with AHP, it helps us which

strategy can be best for making decision.

TABLE I

COMPARISON LIST [23]

LAND SYSTEMS: MANPOWER:

Tanks (MBT / Light) Total Populations Armored Fighting Vehicles Available Manpower

Self-Propelled Guns Fit for Service

Towed Artillery Pieces Reaching Military Age Annually

Rocket Projectors (MLRS) Active Military Manpower

Active Reserve Military Manpower

RESOURCES:

AIR POWER: Oil Production

Total Aircraft Oil Consumption

Fighters/Interceptors Proven Oil Reserves

Attack Aircraft LOGISTICAL:

Transport Aircraft Labor Force

Trainer Aircraft Merchant Marine Strength

Helicopters Major Ports and Terminals

Attack Helicopters Roadway Coverage

Serviceable Airports Railway Coverage

FINANCIAL:

Annual Defense Budget

NAVAL POWER: External Debt

Total Strength Reserves of Foreign Exchange and Gold

Aircraft Carriers Purchasing Power Parity

Frigates

Destroyers GEOGRAPHIC:

Corvettes Square Land Area

Submarines Coastline

Patrol Craft Shared Borders

Mine Warfare Waterway Coverage

In this case, it is showed that most important think tank

organizations compare two countries when crisis arise. As

shown in table 1, global fire power and cia-fact book [24]

explain basic element of the comparison. Since this level is

strategic level, it is going to be reduced to the tactical level.

So, tactical level capabilities are analyzed consistent with

strategic level.

If reduced to brigade level, it must be like table 2. As seen in

table 2, decision makers evaluate the internal and external

factor. Then it should be modeled according to the situation.

Fig. 3. SWOT and AHPs place in decision making process


4/5

134

TABLE 2

PROBLEM MODELING

SUB-CRITERON Strenght Weakness Opportunities Threats

Available Manpower X

Towed Artillery Pieces X

Leadership X

Training X

Logistics X

Reserve Manpower X

Armored Fighting Vehicles X

Helicopters X

Land Area X

Intelligence X

Tanks (MBT / Light) X

Self-Propelled Guns X

Rocket Projectors (MLRS) X

Roadway Coverage X

Maintenance X

Mine field X

UAVs X

Attack Helicopters X

Attack Aircraft X

In table 2, strength, weakness, opportunities and threats must

be applied to pairwise comparison. Then sub-criterion must be

applied to pairwise comparison compatible with the

alternatives. Our alternatives are offensive, defense and

withdraw. This part will be explained via expert choice 2000

program. This program is used for AHP. Thanks to expert

choice 2000 program, table 2 will be analyzed and in the end

the best alternative will be decided.

Fig. 4.Pairwise comparison matrix of the main criteria (SWOT) with respect

to the Goal

As seen figure 4, after the comparison of the relative

importance with respect to goal, inconsistency must be below

0,1 otherwise it cant be accepted. After SWOT factors arecompared, it must be applied to all sub-criterias. Figure-5,

6,7,8 are the sub-criterias comparisons.

Fig. 7. Pairwise comparison matrix for the sub-criteria with respect to

Opportunities

Battle field is so dynamic that all information and

intelligence suddenly change. It must be evaluated everyminute. Through expert choice 2000, it becomes available to

see the effect of variables. As seen in figure 10, normal

analysis result is showed. But war always change as time pass.

The strength that we have may turn into the weakness, the

opportunities might transform into the threats. Dynamic

sensitivity exactly fits war changing conditions. For this

reason, it will be showed in figure 6.Fig. 5. Pairwise comparison matrix for the sub-criteria with respect toStrength

Fig. 6. Pairwise comparison matrix for the sub-criteria with respect to

Weakness

Fig. 8.Pairwise comparison matrix for the sub-criteria with respect to threats

Fig. 9. Best strategy


5/5

135

Fig. 10. Dynamic analysis result.

In battlefield, after the condition change, as seen figure 6,

(threats and weakness increased) program warns us to change

the strategy according to the condition.

VI.

CONCLUSION

In this case, we used the combined method to make

decision. Decision making in uncertainties are the essence of

military success. In crisis time, there are many organizations

that compare two countries which are on the brink of the war.

But their comparisons are at the strategic level. We applied it

from strategic level to tactical level. After that, by using

SWOT, we find the results of our comparison. As it is seen,

SWOT analyses alone do not provide an analytical means to

identify the importance of factors. And it is not enough to

assess decision alternatives. For this reason, SWOT analysis

deficiencies in the measurement and evaluation steps can be

alleviated by using AHP. This paper makes several importantcontributions to the military literature. First goal of this paper

is to use this hybrid method in military decision making.

Second goal is to show benefits of the hybrid method in

military decision making in crisis time as it is very easy to

model and can give an idea to select the best alternative. Third,

by applying this method, military decision process time will

decrease. Of course, this is not the only one tool. This tool

mayjust provide one of best tools while making decision.

REFERENCES

[1]

P.B. Zimmerman, R.M. Kanter, Decision Making for Leaders, ASynthesis of Ideas from the Harvard University, Advanced Leadership

Initiative Think Tank, 2012, pp 7-8,

[2] Harris, R.; Introduction to Decision Making, VirtualSalt.

http://www.virtualsalt.com/crebook5.htm,1998

[3] Katherine L. Milkman, Dolly Chugh, ,How Can Decision Making BeImproved?, 2008,pp 3-4,

[4]

Steward, R., Strategic Implementation of IT/IS Projects inConstruction: a Case Study, Automation in Construction; 2002, pp.684-

685.

[5]

Kurttila, M; Pesonen, M.;J. Kangas, M. Kajanus, Utilizing the analytichierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis-a hybrid method and its

application to a forest-certification case, Forest Policy and Economics1, 2000, 4152.

[6]

Seker,Sukran;Ozgurler,Mesut;,Analysis of the Turkish ConsumerElectronics Firm using SWOT-AHP method, 8th International StrategicManagement Conference, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 58,

2012, pp.15441554[7]

Gorener,A., Toker K., Application of Combined SWOT and AHP: ACase Study for a Manufacturing Firm 8th International StrategicManagement Conference, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,

2012, pp 15251534[8]

Wickramasinghe, V. and Takano, S., Application of combined SWOTand Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for tourism revival strategic

marketing planning: A Case of Sri Lanka tourism, Journal of the Eastern

Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 8, 2010, pp. 954-969.

[9]

Unal, M., , Strategic Management and Leadership, BETA press, 2012,pp.24-28

[10]

Aktan C.C., New management technics in 20th , TUGIAD Press,1999,p.25

[11]

Hill, T. and Westbrook, R.,. SWOT Planning30, 1997, pp.46-52.[12]

Kotler, P.; Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning,Implementation and Control, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey,. 1988

[13]

Bryson J.M.; Strategic Planning for Public and NonprofitOrganizations, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1988

[14]

Wheelen, T.L. and Hunger, J.D.,. Strategic Management and BusinessPolicy, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA., 1995

[15]

Sharma, M. J., Moon, I. and Bae, H.; Analytic hierarchy process to

assess and optimize distribution network, Applied Mathematics andComputation, Vol. 202, 2008, pp. 256-265.

[16] Saaty, T.L; Luis, G Vargas;(1982) The Logic of Priorities; University

of Pittsburgh, Springer Science+Business Media, p.3-4

[17]

A.Ishizaka, A. Labib, Analytic Hierarchy Process and Expert Choice:Benefits and Limitations., ORInsight, 22(4), 2009, pp. 201220,.

[18] Saaty, Thomas L.; How to Make a Decision: The Analytic HierarchyProcess; European Journal of Operational Research; 48(1);; 1990,

pp.12-14

[19]

Yuksel, Ihsan; Dagdeviren, Metin Using the analytic network process(ANP) in a SWOT analysis A case study for a textile firm, ElsevierInc., 2007,pp. 33643382

[20]

Lunenburg, Fred C.; The Decision Making Process, national forum ofeducational administration and supervision journal volume 27, number

4, 2010

[21]

Gallego-Ayala, J. And Juizo D., Strategic implementation of integrated

water resources management in Mozambique; An AWOTanalysis,Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Vol 36, 2011, pp 1103-1111

[22]

US. Army, U. S. Field Manual 101-5: Staff Organization and

Operations. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1997.

[23]

http://www.globalfirepower.com/powerindex,

[24]

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world factbook/rankorder/

rankorderguide.html

Captain Umit Ahlat is a student in Army War College. He is interested in

Terrorism, Multi-criteria decision making.

Fig. 11. Subsequent dynamic analysis

Combine Swot Ahp

Documents

Transcript of Combine Swot Ahp