History teaches us the importance of evaluation and classification. Most
military, political and commercial intelligence failure has not been due to
inadequate information collection, but due to poor evaluation of available
information.
Many analytical tools/techniques exist to facilitate management deci-
sion making and such techniques provide vehicles for forecasting/specu-
lating competitive intent. Common techniques included are as follows:
● SWOT/portfolio analysis: The classic SWOT or portfolio analysis (e.g.
Boston Matrix, Ansoff Matrix, etc. see later chapters) are applied to the
competitor(s) in question.
● Behavioural traits: While not an absolute indicator of future action, it is
true to say that organisational leaders tend to repeat past successful
behaviour and avoid previous mistakes. Therefore, to some degree,
future behaviour is likely to be predictable. Understanding the behav-
iour and reactions of rival corporate leaders to given sets of circum-
stances can be highly revealing of future intent.
● War gaming: In-house teams take on the simulated role of competitors
for a workshop exercise. The team is provided with actual data and
asked to simulate the strategies/actions they believe the competitor is
most likely to follow. Their responses are then analysed in a de-brief
session. Numerous advantages stem from this process, such as; identi-
fying competitors’ weaknesses, enhancing teamwork and identifying
information ‘gaps’ relating to knowledge of competitors.
● Synthesis reports: Information from numerous sources is collated under
common key themes. It is possible to electronically scan large amounts
of text for key words (e.g. brand names, patent applications, etc.) and
selectively extract/flag information. Techniques such as word and pat-
tern analysis can identify underlying themes and trends.
● Mission statement Analysis: The main aim of analysis is to predict what
a competitor will do. Therefore it is possible to analyse competitors’
mission statements in order to establish their goals, values and generic
strategies. Analysing how mission states have changed or been inter-
preted over time is highly insightful. Rumours of likely activity can be
checked against a rival stated mission. Does the rumour seem to
equate with overall corporate aims?
Dissemination
CI needs to be tailored to meet user needs. Effective dissemination is
based on clarity, simplicity and appropriateness to need. CI should (if
merited) form the basis of competitive action plans. A useful test is to con-
sider what are the implications of the intelligence not being passed on?
If there are no real implications, it is questionable whether it is necessary.
Research shows that many CI projects fail during this phase. Therefore,
presentation of CI is critical. Pollard (1999) recommends developing struc-
tured templates for reports, as follows: (i) information – bullet points,
Competitive intelligence 43