The State of Competitive Intelligence within. New Zealand Private and Public Sector Organisations, страница 8

ƒ Assault  &  Warrior

The last two categories are the Assault & Warrior and these apply to companies who take competitive intelligence very seriously and devote considerable resources to this discipline.  At the top end of the scale, the warrior class companies conduct ‘war room’ exercises to investigate extensive patent searches, searches for counterfeit versions of their products and market gain & lost scenarios using competitive intelligence as a business practice tool. 

Examples of companies under this category include AT&T, Hoffman Laroche, L’Oreal, Mitsubishi and Shell (Rouach and Santi, 2001).

Following on from Rouach and Santi attitude categories (2001), Wright, Picton and Callow (2002) also identified similar competitive intelligence types when they conducted an empirical study in competitive intelligence types in the UK.  For example:

1.  Many companies were either unaware of competitive intelligence or regarded it as a non-viable exercise

2.  Most the companies/organisations studied had implemented competitive intelligence, but at a very low level and lacked the commitment or resource (resulting ‘ad hoc’ and reactive business actions).

3.  Only companies which exceed £10 million per annum implemented developed competitive intelligence frameworks.

4.  While these companies had implemented competitive intelligence frameworks, the companies only provide limited resources.  This can result in unstructured competitive intelligence processes being used and unclear business goals.  

While both these studies suggested that Europe is lagging behind the US corporate sectors, Murphy provides some insights which could be used by European companies to overcome these shortfalls and provides the following recommendations (Murphy, 2005 pg 15):

ƒ Competitive intelligence is part of everyone’s job description: 

Every member of the company/organisation should obtain or seek out useful intelligence to contribute to the company’s competitive intelligence efforts.

ƒ Competitive intelligence is identified and implemented as a separate business unit or function:  A company/organisation ensures that competitive intelligence follows a structured framework and formal reporting structures are in place. For example, the Proctor & Gamble competitive intelligence director takes charge of gathering of intelligence and reports directly to the company’s CEO. (Stephens, 2007)

ƒ Strategic and Tactical competitive intelligence:  

While strategic competitive intelligence can inform senior management of the potential risks and rewards, the tactical aspects could also be used to rally the company’s employees into implementing any rapid changes into their business environment through the insights gained by competitive intelligence.

Competitor Analysis Framework 

To assist with a strategic and tactical analysis, Bernhardt (1993) has created a framework for competitor analysis which can provide a greater overview than Porter’s five forces model (figure 1.0 on page 5).   This framework has been defined in figure 2.0 and provides a good insight into the environment from a competitor’s ‘point of view’.

Figure 2.0 Competitor Analysis Framework

While both, Porter’s approach and Bernhardt’s framework can support the strategic decision making process, they cannot replace sound judgement or logical thinking, from senior management questioning the current situation to determine “What are our goals and what is missing to achieve them?” (Bernhardt, 1993)

To assist with this goal, the most common competitive analysis technique is the SWOT analysis which can be used as a means to capitalise on strengths, address weaknesses, exploit opportunities and minimise threats (Stephens, 2007).  

Originally pioneered by Ken Andrews in 1971, SWOT analysis is a good tool for identifying  internal Strengths, Weaknesses, external Opportunities and Threats and measuring them against competitor’s goals, for example (Stephens, 2007, pg 8):