Analyze the appropriateness, feasibility and risk of

different response options. SWOT Analysis

Source: Project, programme planning-Guidance Manual (page 20), IFRC; and Comprehensive
Food Security & Vulnerability Analysis Guidelines. Chapter 7. Preparing conclusions and
recommendations (page 6), WFP.
Content has been adapted to better fit with needs.

This document includes:

- Some basic information about SWOT Tool and how to conduct a SWOT Analysis
(participatory) process
- Some basic aspects and criteria that should be taken into account when assessing the
appropriateness of a response option.

SWOT Analysis is a way of systematically appraising different options. It is undertaken for each
suggested response option.

This tool can be used to facilitate participatory group discussions (brainstorming) to identify
and compare strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to different aspects of
the proposed response options.
It can be used in many different ways. Different definitions of each “SWOT” element can be
used by the implementing team, depending on what they want to analyse. Sometimes,
“strengths” and “weaknesses” are taken to be factors internal to an organization and
“opportunities” and “threats” to be external factors. An alternative is to define “strengths” and
“weaknesses” as current factors and “opportunities” and “threats” as future factors. A third
approach is not to use a fixed definition but to leave the exercise very open.

A SWOT analysis can reveal hidden obstacles to a potential project/programme, especially when
participants have a wide range of interests and knowledge. It can similarly identify positive
elements that may not be immediately evident. Used properly, a SWOT analysis can generate
valuable data quickly.

SWOT Analysis. Process:

- Workshop/work session organized with key participants from the Organization and
stakeholders (if needed)
- Go through each response option and discuss, identify and compare strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to different aspects of the proposed
response options
- Compile results. Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats are combined in a
matrix (see Tool). This helps when comparing response options, as each is described
according to the same format.
- Highlight (if needed) the main two-three strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats for each option to better compare different options.

Judgement still needs to be applied to decide upon the relative merits of different options.
In some cases, only one response option may be proposed. It is still advisable to undertake a
SWOT analysis, in order to check the appropriateness and feasibility of the response.

TOOL: EN_Template. SWOT Analysis

Next figure provides a brief example of a completed SWOT analysis (visualization) for one
Response Option.

SWOT Analysis Example (visualization technique)

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
- good knowledge of the community and - little influence over government
the context structures
- previous experience in this type of - change of internal structure (roles and
livelihoods intervention responsibilities of some supporting
- staff and volunteers trained in livelihoods departments could change –logistic,
and in agricultural good practices finance-)
- good relationship with other stakeholders
working in the area
OPPORTUNITIES THREATS
- good links with productive cooperatives - local government structures may not be
and financial services able to support the project
- funding and technical assistance are - communities may not be
available through technical partnership interested/willing to engage in this kind
with Universities and Research Centers of program/project

SWOT Analysis. Aspects and Criteria to take into account

The following criteria should be taken into account when assessing the appropriateness of
a response option.

Strengths and weaknesses

These reflect the appropriateness and feasibility of the response option.
The response should:
 Address the factors that have been identified as contributing to impact;
 Reflect the needs and priorities of the affected population (disaggregated according to
sex, age, etc.);
 Be compatible with local society and customs; and
 Be compatible with Implementing Organization Strategy and capacity
 Be compatible with interventions of the government or other agencies.

The response should not:

 Lead to dependency upon aid among any sector of the population;
 Have a negative impact on the local social, environmental, or economic situation (e.g. a
large food distribution might discourage agricultural production);
 Divert people from other important tasks (e.g. productive activities, caring, collection of
water and fuel);
 Expose the population or agency staff to security risks; or
 Stigmatize (e.g. by explicitly targeting people with HIV/AIDS or from certain ethnic
groups).
Opportunities:
 Environment (political/economic situation, culture, history, traditions, etc.) favorable to
project/programme implementation.
 Changes in government policies and regulations. The introduction of new government
policy that facilitates market functioning;
 The end of the wet season and the improvement of transportation; The next harvest;
 The signing of peace agreements;
 Other projects/organizations coming in with similar services (possibilities for
cooperation, complementary actions);
 Changes in availability of resources (human and financial, etc.)
 Organization benefits from the project/programme for its long-term development
(capacity-building or other project/program components)

Threats:
 Environment (political/economic situation, culture, history, traditions, etc.) not
favorable to project/programme implementation.
 Changes in government policies and regulations. Government policies that limit the
scope of trade or aid programmes;
 Deterioration of security;
 Lack of availability of key programme resources (e.g. fuel);
 Reduction of donor interest in the country;
 Other projects/organizations coming in with similar services (duplication: activities,
beneficiaries)
 Collaborators changing their strategy, activities and target groups diminishing capability
of collaborators (e.g. diminishing implementing capacity) changes in donor policies
 Risks related to the project/programme for the organization (i.e. side effects, hidden
costs in the short and long term, burden, additional staff, logistics to sustain in the long
term, public image/perception, etc.)

Also consider:
- Targeting criteria should be realistic, given social and cultural factors and the time available.
- It should be possible to undertake the response with the resources available. Consider
financial, material, and human resources (including expertise).
- It should be possible to implement the response in a timely manner, given the urgency of
the situation.