Introduction
A lot of evolutions have in recent times been observed in the business strategic planning process. This is because businesses are more concerned about how they can maximize their earnings through cost minimizations. Various strategic planning methods have therefore been adopted to better the situation. The Opportunity Model is one of the methods used in strategic planning. In this model, the plan assists the firm to seek favorable solutions to the problems that are likely to face them and therefore mitigate the occurrence of losses. In the Opportunity Model, the senior management concentrates on creating a win-win situation where the firm benefits through utilizing a valuable chance in its operations. The Goal Grid method is an alternative strategic planning method. This is where a two-by-two matrix is developed to assist in answering the basic questions that mostly arise in the business world. The matrix uses ‘achieve, preserve, avoid and eliminate’ as the four major categories of answering questions of ‘do you need something?’ and ‘do you have it?’ This paper will seek to compare and contrast the above-mentioned methods of strategic planning. In addition, it will discuss how they differ from or augment the traditional SWOT analysis.
Comparison and contrast of Opportunity Model and Goal Grid
Some of the major similarities between the two models are as discussed below. The first one is shown by thorough scrutiny of both internal and external factors of a business enhances were the management to strategically position the objectives of the firm well. The internal factors facilitate efficiency in productions which boosts the firm’s output. On the other hand, proper analysis of the external factors assists businesses in market positioning. The two strategic planning methods which include the opportunity and the goal grid methods enable the firm to effectively and efficiently manage its operational techniques towards profit maximizations. This is because the opportunity method reaches out for the achievable value while in the goal grid method, the future achievements are the key issue in a firm. From the two methods, it’s important to have a different dimension when we are addressing problems facing the business communities. This is because if proper measures are being taken, the problem can turn out to be an opportunity towards which better returns are obtained (Morris, 2005, p. 50-56).
The second major similarity between the opportunity and the goal grid method is the simplicity in their implementation process. The models are easy to prepare and monitor the progress. In most cases, technical terms and complex procedures accompany many strategic planning methods but the opportunity and the goal grid method are simple to apply. According to Huber (2006, p. 289), the goal grid method provides for step-by-step a method that acts as a guideline to the policy implementers. Very little professional skills and knowledge are required to facilitate the method implementation.
Conversely, the two models have some major differences which are as discussed below. The opportunity method is mostly concerned with value and choice in which a firm may consider venturing for a future gain. Reactive measures are used in problem handling rather than pro-active measures. As a result, the business can cushion itself from severe losses. Consequently, the firm will use a problem or a challenge as a fundamental condition for an opportunity. This is because different choices and alternatives will be adopted to address the problem where only the effective one will be considered. In addition, the resource scarcity brings the importance of valuing the alternative solutions because, the lower the value the more profitable the method, and the higher the cost associated with addressing a problem the lower the profitability of the method. The plan cost, in this case, includes the development, training, implementation, testing, and evaluation cost which are associated with the program.
Alternatively, the goal grid method is a mathematical function formulated in matrix form and aims at developing future achievement consensus for an organization. This planning method emphasizes future business sustainability which guarantees continuity. Despite the mathematical formulation, the goal grid method is guided by four major elements which include achieve, preserve, avoid and eliminate. The four elements guide the senior management on the way forward when addressing the firm’s problems. Moreover, the method is also effective in the overall development of long-range strategic plans within an organization (Nickols & Ledgerwood, 2006, p, 37).
Differences from the traditional SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis
Both the opportunity and the goal grid methods used in strategic planning have an electronic version which ensures adequate accessibility in the market. The traditional SWOT analysis basically uses the firm’s strengths and opportunities to overcome weaknesses and threats. But the opportunity and goal grid method majors on the firm’s potentials and the position held in the market to plan for the future. The version makes the two models simple to implement since the procedures can be followed to the later. On the other hand, the traditional SWOT analysis was not much integrated electronically making it difficult to implement (Gilad, 2004, p. 96).
Considering that the two methods mostly concentrate with the organization’s future, model flexibility is highly encouraged. This is because the future comprises of unforeseeable events which ought to be integrated in the models. On the other hand, the traditional SWOT analysis focuses on the organizational objectives and goals which in most cases remain constant for a long period of time.
The alternative methods augmentation of the traditional SWOT analysis
Both the opportunity and the goal grid methods focus on finding solutions to the problems which limits the organizational operations. Solutions to such problems are sought in order to ensure successful performance within the organization. The same applies to the traditional SWOT analysis. All the strategic planning methods are also aimed at putting some checks and regulations which further assist firms to save and minimize their operational costs. The end result of all these models is increased profitability, efficiency and output productivity (Camillus, 1986, p. 170-176).
Conclusion
The success of business operations depends on the successful development and implementation of strategic planning methods. Proper planning also assists the firms to easily overcome the financial and administrative problems. Subjectively, the goal grid method is the best to use since it is simple and flexible to implement compared to the other methods. In addition, the method offers the basic and visible format for developing the organizational goals and directions. Such formats acts as guidelines towards the development of the achievable short-term and long-term objectives in firms.
References
Camillus, C. J. (1986). Strategic planning and management control: systems for survival and success. New York, Lexington Books. Web.
Gilad, B. (2004). Early warning: using competitive intelligence to anticipate market shifts, control risk, and create powerful strategies. New York, AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn. Web.
Huber, D. (2006). Leadership and nursing care management. Philadelphia, Elsevier Health Sciences. Web.
Morris, D. (2005). A new tool for strategy analysis: The opportunity model. Journal of Business Strategy, 26(3), 50-56. Web.
Nickols, F. & Ledgerwood, R. (2006). The goals grid as a tool for strategic planning. Consulting to Management, 17(1), 36-38. Web.