SM Project

2010 – 2015

Strategic Plan

Table of Contents

Vision..................................................................................................................................................................4

Manzoor Ahmed # 53175

Syed Asif Moiz # 53239

Mohammad Ahmed # 52642

Niranjan Lal # 52653

Irfan

Taqi

Mission................................................................................................................................................................4

Objectives...........................................................................................................................................................4

INPUT STAGE...................................................................................................................................................5

Competitive Profile Matrix (CPM)......................................................................................................................6

External Factor Evaluation Matrix (EFEM)...........................................................................................................7

Internal Factor Evaluation Matrix (IFEM)............................................................................................................8

MATCHING STAGE.............................................................................................................................................10

Space Matrix.....................................................................................................................................................11

The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) Matrix...................................................................................................12

SWOT Analysis...................................................................................................................................................14

Internal Factors.......................................................................................................................................................14

Strengths.............................................................................................................................................................14

Weakness............................................................................................................................................................15

External Factors......................................................................................................................................................15

Opportunities......................................................................................................................................................15

Threats................................................................................................................................................................16

DECISION STAGE................................................................................................................................................21

QSPM................................................................................................................................................................21

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................24

Refreshing Our Plans for the Future

VisionPAK-KIET will be a leading institution of higher education. Its innovative-comprehensive programs and outstanding academicians will provide dynamic learning environment students.

Mission Providing state of the art education according to the expectations of its students. Broadening and deepening students’ ability to efficiently use business driven technology to

improve quality, productivity, efficiency and overall effectiveness of a business. Assuring institutional leadership through its innovative programs and excellence in teaching.

To attain this mission, we work diligently towards professional and ethical educational environment, which is based on trust and dignity.

Objectives To develop the centre as the premier of its kind in the Pakistan and to provide a high-quality

service to all of its users, reflecting the University's aspirations of excellence and inclusivity.

To make the library resources available in an accessible and open-to-all library, with its own dedicated study space

To disseminate resources to the community at large through celebratory events, conferences, seminars, presentations, publications, workshops and networks.

To manifest the University's commitment to research by maintaining and developing a prestigious online journal.

To work in partnership with the Pakistan Air Force in joint educational projects and ventures.

INPUT STAGE

Input stage deals with the information produced by assessing the existing strengths, weaknesses,

opportunities and threats. The general data obtained through the Company’s assessment process is

transformed into useful data, so as to explore the pitfalls of the Company and to precede towards the next

stage, that is, ‘Matching Stage’.

There three tools available to culminating the raw data in to useful information, these are;

The Competitor’s Profile Matrix (CPM)

External Factor Evaluation (EFE) Matrix

Internal Factor Evaluation (IFE) Matrix

The first two tools are related with external (uncontrollable) factors and the last one is concerned with

internal (controllable) factors.

Competitive Profile Matrix (CPM)

The Competitive Profile Matrix (CPM): It identifies a firm’s major competitors and their

particular strengths and weaknesses in relation to a sample firm’s strategic position.

PAF-KIET MAJU IQRA CBM IBA

Critical Success Factors

Weight

Rating

Weighted

Score

Rating

Weighted

Score

Rating

Weighted

Score

Rating

Weighted

Score

Rating

Weighted

ScoreService Quality

0.25

1 0.25 3 0.75 3 0.75 4 1 3 0.75

Qualified & Experienced Faculty

0.2 2 0.4 2 0.4 4 0.8 3 0.6 4 0.8

Financial Position

0.2 3 0.6 1 0.2 3 0.6 4 0.8 3 0.6

Admission Policies

0.2 2 0.4 3 0.6 3 0.6 3 0.6 4 0.8

Management Experience

0.15

3 0.45 2 0.3 3 0.45 3 0.45 4 0.6

Total 1 2.1 2.25 3.2 3.45 3.55

External Factor Evaluation Matrix (EFEM) External Factors Efficiency (EFE) matrix: EFE matrix provides a summarized view of the impact of

external forces or the perspective opportunities and expected threats being associated with an organization.

EFE matrix of PAF is presented below:

External Factor Evaluation Matrix for PAF KIET

Key External Factors

Opportunities Weight Rating Weighted ScorePartnerships in support of trust foundations 0.05 2 0.1Diversity of region (students – industry) 0.05 3 0.15External Community and University relationships 0.01 1 0.01Academic program expansion 0.1 4 0.4Expansion of cultural activities 0.01 1 0.01Expansion in infrastructure 0.02 2 0.04Growing demand for graduates 0.1 4 0.4Match between curricular & societal interests 0.01 1 0.01Technological advances 0.04 3 0.12

Threats

University’s budget crisis 0.07 3 0.21High inflation 0.06 2 0.12Economical and political Conditions of Pakistan 0.1 4 0.4Negative public perception 0.02 2 0.04Societal and student perception of education as solely a means to a job

0.01 1 0.01

Risk of losing prominent faculty and staff for genuinely better opportunities at other universities or locally

0.08 4 0.32

Growing competition from nearby public universities 0.15 4 0.6

Declining infrastructure 0.02 2 0.04Rapidly advancing technology 0.04 2 0.08Increased student enrollments without increased resources 0.06 2 0.12

Total 1 3.18

The ratings reveal how well the firm is performing in regards to that factor, where a 4 = the response is superior, 3 = the response is

above average, 2 = the response is average, and 1 = the response is below average.

Internal Factor Evaluation Matrix (IFEM) Internal Factors Efficiency (IFE) matrix: IFE matrix provides a summarized view of the impact of

internal forces or the strengths and weaknesses that exist in a company. IFE matrix of the PAF is presented

below:

Internal Factor Evaluation Matrix for PAF KIET

Key External Factors

Strength Weight Rating Weighted Score

Positive reputation in the external community(Good Ranking) 0.1 4 0.4Positive experience with those who interact with the campus 0.02 1 0.02Affiliation with Pakistan Air Force 0.2 4 0.8Fee discount policy 0.06 2 0.12Affordable fee structure 0.01 3 0.03Easy accessible location 0.03 3 0.09Strong MIS system 0.02 3 0.06Scholarships Programs 0.01 1 0.01

Weakness

Sluggish responsiveness to student and community needs 0.05 4 0.2Weak researches 0.04 2 0.08High and unequal workloads faculty & staff 0.03 1 0.03Low ability to hire & retain good faculty 0.1 3 0.3Low standard entrance system 0.05 2 0.1Lack of strong, pervasive presence in the external community 0.01 1 0.01Limited resources for faculty and staff development 0.01 1 0.01Highly competitive market for diverse faculty and staff 0.03 1 0.03Underfunding in many departments and programs 0.02 2 0.04Lack of financial support for faculty Scholarship 0.01 1 0.01Lack of Infrastructure 0.03 2 0.06Lack of recreational activities 0.01 1 0.01Limited library for research 0.03 3 0.09

Underutilization of and lack of organization for technology -- not taking full advantage of IT potential, e.g., integration in teaching in learning

0.02 2 0.04

Unstable vehicle parking system 0.05 3 0.15Do not have faculty dedicated to all degrees 0.06 4 0.24

Total 1 2.93

MATCHING STAGE

In this stage the input received from the input stage should qualify the subjectivity analysis through

different tools/matrices. By this way, a few subjective and useful strategies are short—listed which are

directly influential upon strategic decisions making. For this purpose, we have the following matrices:

SWOT Matrix

SPACE Matrix

BCG Matrix

IE Matrix

Grand Strategy Matrix

Each of the above matrices works within a particular horizon of analyses. We are going to apply SWOT, SPACE & BCG.

Space Matrix

SPACE Matrix: The ‘Strategic Position and Action Evaluation (SPACE)’ matrix has 04 quadrant plan

measures of which horizontal axis measure; ‘Competitive Advantage (CA)’ and ‘Industry Strength’, and the

vertical axis measure; ‘Financial Strength (FS)’ and ‘Environmental Stability (ES)’. The positive horizontal

and vertical axis are assigned numerical value from +01(worst) to +06 (best); similarly negative horizontal

and vertical axis are assigned numerical value from -06(worst) to -01 (Best). In this way, all the qualitative

and quantitative aspects of a business are translated into quantitative values.

Financial Strength (FS) Rating Environmental Stability (ES) Rating

Liquidity 5 Rate of inflation -6

Working capital 4 Technological changes -4

Cash Flow 3 Risk Involved in business -3

Leverage 1 Competitive pressure -1

Investment 2 Barriers to entry new markets -3

Average 3 Average -3.4

Y-axis ( ES + FS ) -0.4

Competitive Advantage (CA) Rating Industry Strength (IS) Rating

Market share -4 Growth potential 3

Product Quality -3 Financial stability 5

Customer Loyalty -3 Ease of entry new markets 5

Control over other parties -6 Resources utilization 4

Technological know-how -3 Productivity 5

Average -3.8 Average 4.4

X-axis ( CA +IS ) 0.6

CAA

ES

Conservative Aggressive

CompetitiveDefensive

FS

IS

Directional vector point is :( -0.4, 0.6)

The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) Matrix

BCG Matrix: The ‘The Boston Consulting Group (BCG)’ matrix is specially design to measure the market

captivity in terms of revenues. For this purpose BCG matrix measures ‘Relative market share

position’, that is, the ratio of the market share of a company to the market share of the largest rival

firm. There are 04 quadrants of a BCG matrix, which of which has its own set of strategies. These

quadrants are:

Quadrant I is termed as ‘Question mark’. The companies falling here has low or very low relative

market share in a growing or even rapidly growing industry. Therefore, such companies should either try

to penetrate through product development, market development or market penetration, or quit the market.

Quadrant II is termed as ‘Stars’. The companies falling here has high or very high relative market share

in a growing or even rapidly growing industry. They have resources available therefore, such companies

should go for integration blended with penetration strategies.

Quadrant III is termed as ‘Cash cows’. The companies falling here has high or very high relative market

share in a slowly declining or even rapidly declining industry. They do have resources but market trend

does not allow them to continue with the same products in the similar manner. Therefore, such companies

should try to develop products, diversify their business or retrench or even divest.

Quadrant IV is termed as ‘Dogs’. The companies falling here has low or very low relative market share

in a slowly declining or even rapidly declining industry. Neither have they had resources nor them the

market trend allows them to continue with the same business. Therefore, such companies should opt

retrenchment divestiture or even liquidation.

Mar

ket G

row

th

Market Share

100 % 50% 0%

1 100% 50%

0%

StarMBA - Marketing

Question MarkMBA - Finance

Cash CowsMBA – HR

DogsMBA – Supply Chain & MIS

SWOT Analysis SWOT Matrix: The ‘Strength Weaknesses Opportunities and Threats’ matrix reveals the following four

types of strategies:

SO (Strengths—Opportunities) strategy, which aims at utilizing the internal strength capitalize upon

opportunities available in the external environment.

WO (Weaknesses—Opportunities) strategy, which aims eradicating the existing weaknesses by availing

the available opportunities.

ST (Strategies—Threats) strategy, which aims at utilizing the internal strength to avoid or avert the

threats prevailing in the external environment.

WT (Weaknesses—Threats) strategy, which aims at reducing internal weaknesses and avoid external

threats.

SWOT matrix of PAF is discussed as follows:

Internal Factors

Strengths

Positive reputation in the market(Good Rank by HEC) Positive experience with those who interact with the campus Affiliation with Pakistan Air Force Fee discount policy Affordable fee structure Easy accessible location Strong MIS system Scholarships Programs Financially Sound

Weakness

Sluggish responsiveness to student and community needs Weak researches High and unequal workloads faculty & staff Low ability to hire & retain good faculty Low standard entrance system Lack of strong, pervasive presence in the external community Limited resources for faculty and staff development

Underfunding in many departments and programs

Lack of financial support for faculty Scholarship Lack of Infrastructure Lack of recreational activities Limited library for research Underutilization of and lack of organization for technology -- not taking full advantage of IT

potential, e.g., integration in teaching in learning Unstable vehicle parking system Do not have faculty dedicated to all degrees

External Factors

Opportunities

Partnerships in support of trust foundations Diversity of region (students – industry) External Community and University relationships Academic program expansion Expansion of cultural activities Expansion in infrastructure Growing demand for graduates Match between curricular & societal interests Technological advances

Hiring of Staff

Threats

University’s budget crisis High inflation Economical and political Conditions of Pakistan Negative public perception Societal and student perception of education as solely a means to a job Risk of losing prominent faculty and staff for genuinely better opportunities at other

universities or locally Growing competition from nearby public universities Declining infrastructure Rapidly advancing technology Increased student enrollments without increased resources

Strengths Weakness 1 Positive reputation in the

external community (Good Ranking)

1 Sluggish responsiveness to student and community needs

2 Positive experience with those who interact with the campus

2 Weak researches

3 Affiliation with Pakistan Air Force

3 High and unequal workloads faculty & staff

4 Fee discount policy 4 Low ability to hire & retain good faculty

5 Affordable fee structure 5 Low standard entrance system 6 Easy accessible location 6 Lack of strong, pervasive

presence in the external community

7 Strong MIS system 7 Limited resources for faculty and staff development

8 Scholarships Programs 8 Highly competitive market for diverse faculty and staff

9 Financially sound 9 Underfunding in many departments and programs

10 Lack of financial support for faculty Scholarship

11 Lack of Infrastructure12 Lack of recreational activities13 Limited library for research 14 Underutilization of and lack of

organization for technology -- not taking full advantage of IT potential, e.g., integration in teaching in learning

Opportunities SO Strategies WO Strategies1 Partnerships in support of

trust foundations 1 Launch new management

sciences programs ( S1,O2,O4,O7)

1 New hiring in staff (W1,O10)

2 Diversity of region (students – industry)

2 Launch new engineering programs (S3, S4,O4,O9,O7,O2)

2 Expansion of Library (W2,W13,O6,O7)

3 External Community and University relationships

3 Expand the building (S9,O2,O5,O6)

4 Academic program expansion

5 Expansion of cultural activities

6 Expansion in infrastructure 7 Growing demand for

graduates 8 Match between curricular &

societal interests 9 Technological advances

10 Hiring in Staff

Strengths Weakness

1 Positive reputation in the external community (Good Ranking)



2 Weak researches

3 Affiliation with Pakistan Air Force

3 High and unequal workloads faculty & staff

4 Fee discount policy 4 Low ability to hire & retain good faculty

5 Affordable fee structure 5 Low standard entrance system

6 Easy accessible location 6 Lack of strong, pervasive presence in the external community

7 Strong MIS system 7 Limited resources for faculty and staff development

8 Scholarships Programs 8 Highly competitive market for diverse faculty and staff

9 Financially sound 9 Underfunding in many departments and programs


11 Lack of Infrastructure

12 Lack of recreational activities

13 Limited library for research

14 Underutilization of and lack of organization for technology -- not taking full advantage of IT potential, e.g., integration in teaching in learning

Threats ST Strategies WT Strategies

1 University’s budget crisis 1 Formation of Strong Partnership (S3,T1,T6,T7)

1 Hire qualified faculty(W4,W7,W8,W3,T6)

2 High inflation

3 Economical and political Conditions of Pakistan

4 Negative public perception

5 Societal and student perception of education as solely a means to a job

6 Risk of losing prominent faculty and staff for genuinely better opportunities at other universities or locally

7 Growing competition from nearby public universities

8 Declining infrastructure

9 Rapidly advancing technology

10 Increased student enrollments without increased resources

DECISION STAGE

Two alternative strategy were extract from university’s SWOT

1. Hire qualified faculty and start new academic Programs2. Expand and improve current programs and faculty

QSPMThis is the final stage of strategy formulation process. Whatever we have done so far in the previous two

stages gives us a broad spectrum of ideas regarding the possible options/strategies within given

circumstances. At this stage all the quantitative information received from the first two stages is blended

with intuition, to generate the most suitable alternate strategies to be opted within the given circumstances.

For this purpose, we have a tool called ‘The Quantitative Strategic Planning Matrix’ (QSPM) discussed

ahead.

Quantitative Strategic Planning Matrix (QSPM): It is a ranking strategy that reveals the most

appropriate alternative strategies. It is now depends upon the intuitive power along with analytical skills of

an individual which leads towards the best possible strategy within the given circumstances. At this stage,

we would list down the highly influential internal and external factors. Then we would weight them

according to their importance. Thereafter, we would select two alternative strategies that have highest

emphasis (frequency of repetition) among all the strategies suggested by the matrices in the input stage.

1. Hire qualified faculty and start new academic

Programs

2. Expand and improve current

programs and faculty

Opportunities Weight AS TAS AS TAS1 Partnerships in support of trust foundations 0.05 - -

2 Diversity of region (students – industry) 0.05 - -

3 External Community and University relationships

0.01 -

4 Academic program expansion 0.1 2 0.2 1 0.15 Expansion of cultural activities 0.01 -6 Expansion in infrastructure 0.02 -7 Growing demand for graduates 0.1 2 0.2 3 0.38 Match between curricular & societal interests 0.01 - -

9 Technological advances 0.04 1 0.04 1 0.04

Threats

1 University’s budget crisis 0.07 -2 High inflation 0.06 -3 Economical and political Conditions of

Pakistan 0.1 3 0.3 2 0.2

4 Negative public perception 0.02 2 0.04 2 0.045 Societal and student perception of education

as solely a means to a job0.01 - -

6 Risk of losing prominent faculty and staff for genuinely better opportunities at other universities or locally

0.08 -

7 Growing competition from nearby public universities

0.15 2 0.3 3 0.45

8 Declining infrastructure 0.02 - -9 Rapidly advancing technology 0.04 - -

10 Increased student enrollments without increased resources

0.06 -

1

Strength Weight

1 Positive reputation in the external community(Good Rank by HEC)

0.1 2 0.2 2 0.2


0.02 -

3 Affiliation with Pakistan Air Force 0.2 3 0.6 4 0.8

4 Fee discount policy 0.06 3 0.18 2 0.125 Affordable fee structure 0.01 3 0.03 2 0.02

6 Easy accessible location 0.03 3 0.09 2 0.067 Strong MIS system 0.02 2 0.04 2 0.048 Scholarships Programs 0.01 1 0.01 -

Weakness


0.05 1 0.05 2 0.1

2 Weak researches 0.04 2 0.08 2 0.083 High and unequal workloads faculty & staff 0.03 - -

4 Low ability to hire & retain good faculty 0.13 -

5 Low standard entrance system 0.05 2 0.1 2 0.16 Lack of strong, pervasive presence in the

external community 0.01 - -

7 Limited resources for faculty and staff development

0.01 -

9 Underfunding in many departments and programs

0.02 - -


0.01 1 0.01 2 0.02

11 Lack of Infrastructure 0.03 - -12 Lack of recreational activities 0.01 -13 Limited library for research 0.03 2 0.06 1 0.0314 Underutilization of and lack of organization for

technology -- not taking full advantage of IT potential, e.g., integration in teaching in learning

0.02 2 0.04 2 0.04

15 Unstable vehicle parking system 0.05 2 0.1 2 0.116 Do not have faculty dedicated to all degrees 0.06 3 0.18 3 0.18

1 2.85 3.02

Conclusion

Developing a QSPM makes it less likely that key external/internal factors will be overlooked or weighted inappropriately in deciding which alternative strategies to pursue.

Although developing a QSPM requires a number of subjective decisions, making small decisions along the way enhances the probability that the final strategic decisions will be best for the firm.

As evidenced for the PAF KIET examined in this study, the QSPM can be a useful strategic planning tool even. The university analyzed herein should “Expand and improve current programs and faculty”.

SM Project

Documents

Transcript of SM Project