Lurati, F., & Zamparini, A. (2018). Communication SWOT Analysis. In R. L.

Heath & W. Johansen (Ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Strategic

Communication (Vol. 1, pp. 272-280). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Communication SWOT Analysis

FRANCESCO LURATI and ALESSANDRA ZAMPARINI
Università della Svizzera italiana (USI), Switzerland

In this entry, the SWOT analysis framework (one of the most used analytical tools in
strategy development) is applied to communication strategy development and commu-
nication planning.
A SWOT analysis is a general framework used by managers to identify strategies
through the investigation of a (business) organization’s internal strengths and weak-
nesses, as well as its external opportunities and threats. The internal analysis considers
factors an organization generally controls, such as its resources, processes, and products.
The external analysis considers factors that characterize the environment, including
competitors’ and partners’ organizational characteristics as well as the relevant social,
technological, economic, environmental, and political (STEEP) trends. Organizations
usually have little or no control over external factors (Fleisher & Bensoussan, 2003). The
confrontation between internal and external factors allows the organization to iden-
tify strategic issues. Based on these issues, alternative states can be formulated to solve
those issues while strategies and plans can be articulated to foster these needed states
(Wilson, 2008). Thus, strategy development and planning emerge in the intersection
between internal and external factors.
A communication SWOT analysis considers specific factors pertaining to the execu-
tion of communication and its outcome. It also examines factors defining the commu-
nication environment in which the organization operates (see Figure 1).

Communication strengths and weaknesses

The internal analysis aims to understand the “organization’s status” and “its standing
with important groups in its environment” (Cornelissen, 2014, p. 184). Four factors
are considered, namely communication execution, stakeholder relationships, identity
of the organization, and reputation of the organization (see Figure 2).
The first factor to be considered in the internal analysis is communication execu-
tion. The quality of the communication is often ignored in strategic exercises, leading
communication managers to develop unnecessary measures instead of simply trying
to improve the way communication is performed. Communication managers should
first assess how communication is executed in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, and
professional standards. For this task, the models for the evaluation of communication
programs (Broom, 2013) can provide the framework for formulating questions such as:

The International Encyclopedia of Strategic Communication. Robert L. Heath and Winni Johansen (Editors-in-Chief),
Jesper Falkheimer, Kirk Hallahan, Juliana J. C. Raupp, and Benita Steyn (Associate Editors).
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2018 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
DOI: 10.1002/9781119010722.iesc0203
2 C O M M U N I CAT I O N S WO T A N A L Y S I S

Factors Strengths Weaknesses

Communication execution
Internal

Relationships
Identity
Reputation

Factors Opportunities Threats

Competitors’ communication
weaknesses and strengths
(communication execution,
External

relationships, identity, and reputation)

Social, cultural, technological, economic,
environmental, and political trends and
topics
Stakeholders’ characteristics

Figure 1 Factors considered in a communication SWOT analysis.

REPUTATION IDENTITY
To what extent does the Does the organization have
organization meet its an inspiring purpose? Do its
stakeholders’ values provide guidance? To
expectations? what extent are its different
identity perspectives
aligned?

RELATIONSHIPS
What is the quality of the relationships between the organization
and its stakeholders?

COMMUNICATION EXECUTION
To what extent is communication executed efficiently, effectively,
and in line with the professional standards?

Figure 2 Description of the factors considered in the analysis of an organization’s communi-

cation strengths and weaknesses.

• Is the preparatory work done appropriately; is it based on adequate formative

research; is the communication plan built on clear goals and SMART objectives;
do the communication activities and communication materials meet the required
standards; and are the communication channels mastered professionally?
• Does the implementation of the plan reach the intended stakeholders?
 C O M M U N I CAT I O N S WO T A N A L Y S I S 3

• Does the implementation of the plan generate the intended communication impacts
and effects (Lindenmann, 2001)?

The second factor to be considered is stakeholder relationships since stakeholders are

at the heart of the communication endeavor. Organizations communicate to build rela-
tionships and, through them, constitute the organization itself (McPhee & Zaug, 2000),
which also shapes its identity and reputation. The quality of the relationships an orga-
nization entertains with its internal and external stakeholders is the central element of
strategic communication. To assess relationship quality (Hon & Grunig, 1999), specific
aspects should be explored, such as:

• Is there an adequate balance between exchange relationships and relationships

aimed at benefiting the counterpart without expecting anything in return (i.e.,
communal relationships)?
• Are parties involved in the relationships able to influence their counterparts’ deci-
sions?
• Is there a solid trust relationship among the parties?
• Are relationships built on strong commitment?
• Are relationships a source of satisfaction?

The third factor to be considered is the identity of the organization. Identity is com-
plex and multifaceted: It is a set of concepts and statements that are central in the
self-definition of an organization; helps to differentiate it from other organizations; and
provides a sense of unity and direction over time (Albert & Whetten, 1985). An orga-
nization’s identity takes form in different ways. Members of an organization experience
it in terms of “culture”; they also perceive and evaluate it continuously, comparing it
with their own needs and expectations. Top managers formulate identity traits in terms
of “visioning.” Finally, communication managers formalize an organization’s identity
through “branding,” which—along with corporate behaviors—eventually contributes
to the images external stakeholders have of the organization. These processes of identity
formation and formulation are dynamic and inevitably are sources of identity multiplic-
ity (Hatch & Schultz, 2008). Numerous questions need to be addressed when assessing
the strengths and weaknesses of an organization’s identity and should touch on various
aspects, such as:

• Does the organization have a clear, inspiring, and compelling purpose?

• Is the organization guided by inspirational values?
• To what extent are the different identity perspectives aligned?
• Is the organization’s identity in line with the identity and expectations of its stake-
holders?

The fourth factor to be examined in a communication internal analysis is the reputa-

tion of the organization. Reputation is a value judgment expressed by the organization’s
stakeholders. They form this judgment based on their perceptions of how the organi-
zation has been, is, and will be able to fulfill its economic tasks and its role in society.
4 C O M M U N I CAT I O N S WO T A N A L Y S I S

Reputation takes shape around stakeholders’ expectations; it is influenced by multiple

factors (e.g., products, leadership, social responsibility), and develops over the long term
(Van Riel & Fombrun, 2007). To assess an organization’s reputational strengths and
weaknesses, a broad range of aspects characterizing the activities of an organization
needs to be considered, such as:

• What is the performance of the factors influencing the organization’s reputation

(i.e., the quality of its products and services; its ability to innovate; the workplace it
offers; its corporate governance standards; how well it performs as an actor in the
broad society; how well it is managed; and how it performs)?
• What is stakeholders’ level of familiarity with the organization?
• What is the overall reputational level?
• To what extent is the organization’s reputation influenced by commonalities such
as its industry’s and country’s reputations?

Communication opportunities and threats

The communication environment influencing an organization and its communication

is shaped by three external factors, namely competitors’ communication strengths
and weaknesses; broad social, technological, economic, environmental, and political
(STEEP) trends and topics; and the general characteristics of the organization’s
stakeholders.
The first factor to be considered in the external analysis is competitors’ communica-
tion strengths and weaknesses. Organizations can analyze the strengths and weaknesses
of their competitors’ communication by using the same framework applied for the inter-
nal analysis. Competitors’ communication weaknesses may translate into opportunities
for the organization whereas their strengths may be considered threats.
The second factor to be considered is STEEP trends and topics. Organizations are
operating in increasingly volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) condi-
tions, resulting from the ever-growing number of trends and topics that emerge in a
highly connected world. Some of these trends and topics may turn out to be oppor-
tunities for the organization, whereas others could be threats. Analyzing these con-
ditions is challenging, but vital. The main challenge resides in the need to determine
their relevance and urgency, as well as how they relate to each other. Many conceptual
frameworks, such as STEEP, DESTEP (demographic, economic, social, technological,
ecological, and political factors), and PESTE (political, economic, social, technological,
and ecological factors), are available to guide this analysis.
The third factor to be considered in the external analysis is stakeholders’ character-
istics, which matter at different levels. As seen earlier, the quality of the relationships
an organization has with its stakeholders constitutes a central concern in assessing its
communication strengths and weaknesses. Furthermore, as will be discussed later, once
the communication issues are identified, specific stakeholder characteristics concerned
with those issues need to be assessed. At this stage of the analysis, the task is instead to
identify the main characteristics of the general stakeholder environment in which the
 C O M M U N I CAT I O N S WO T A N A L Y S I S 5

organization operates and that influence the overall communication climate. To do so,
managers can find useful characteristics by considering sociostructural variables that
affect the diffusion of innovation in a social group and ask questions such as:

• What level of social, psychological, economic, and physical risk are stakeholders
willing to endure to address specific issues?
• How uniform is the demographic, cultural, educational, political, and economic
profile of relevant stakeholders, and how does this translate in terms of diversity of
agendas and opinions?
• How intensive are the information exchanges among stakeholders?

Issues identification

A SWOT analysis helps managers identify key issues that organizations face and pro-
vides the framework for developing strategies that address those issues (Fleisher & Ben-
soussan, 2003). Issues take shape in the intersection between an organization’s internal
and external factors. A communication problem pertaining to communication execu-
tion, stakeholders’ relationship quality, organizational identity, or reputation dimen-
sions becomes an issue when it collides with broad environmental conditions.
An organization does face problems when its practices do not correspond with
stakeholder or societal expectations. However, these problems become issues when
they impair the organization’s ability to exploit opportunities or cope with threats—in
other terms, when they impair its ability to deal with the broad dynamics unfolding
in the environment. In fact, because those dynamics exist independently from the
activity of the organization, they affect the entire market and, thus, determine the
organization’s relative position and ability to compete, prosper, and survive. In contrast,
if those problems do not collide with external dynamics independent from an organi-
zation’s actions, they will not fundamentally challenge its functioning, future interests,
and—ultimately—survival. This explains why some “problematic” organizations can
also prosper. Therefore, in order to identify its communication issues, a company needs
to look at its communication strengths and weaknesses, and ask the following questions:

• Are the organization’s communication strengths adequately exploited to leverage

communication opportunities and cope with communication threats?
• Are the organization’s communication weaknesses adequately addressed to leverage
communication opportunities and cope with communication threats?

Issues emerge from the inability to use strengths and address weaknesses in order
to interface with the environment successfully. However, as shown in Figure 3, if
communication strengths are used successfully to deal with opportunities and threats,
they correspond to communication assets.
One or more stakeholder groups correspond to each issue. To complete their analysis,
communication managers need to identify and characterize these issues in terms of
 Internal factors
Communication strengths Communication weaknesses
1. 1.
2. 2.
3. 3.

Communication Issues Issues

opportunities States in which inadequate (or States in which internal
1. inadequately exploited) internal weaknesses have limited the ability
2. strengths have limited the ability to leverage external opportunities.
3. to leverage external opportunities.
External factors

Assets
States in which adequate (or
adequately exploited) internal
strengths have increased the ability
to leverage external opportunities.
Communication Issues Issues
threats States in which inadequate (or States in which internal weaknesses
1. inadequately exploited) have increased the potentially negative
2. internal strengths have limited the impact of external threats.
3. ability to address external threats.
Assets
States in which adequate (or
adequately exploited) internal
strengths have increased the ability
to address external threats.
Figure 3 Identification of communication issues and assets through SWOT analysis.

Communication Communication
strengths weaknesses

Issues Issues

Communication
Communication goals
opportunities
States in which internal
strengths are used to leverage
external opportunities.
Communication goals
States in which internal
weaknesses are overcome to
allow the leveraging of external
opportunities.

Issues Issues

Communication
threats Communication goals Communication goals
States in which internal States in which internal
strengths are used to address weaknesses are overcome to
external threats. address external threats.

Figure 4 Communication goals.

 C O M M U N I CAT I O N S WO T A N A L Y S I S 7

level of activity of their corresponding stakeholders, the influence the latter may have
on other stakeholders, and the impact they may have on the organization.

Communication goals

The ultimate aim of a communication SWOT analysis is the definition of the commu-
nication strategy. Communication goals are at the heart of a communication strategy.
Communication goals ensue from the SWOT analysis. They are a positioning statement,
to the extent that they describe the states an organization wants to promote in order to
see its issues settled (see Figure 4). As such, goals provide the strategic direction.
Communication managers will complete the communication strategy and plan by
defining specific objectives for each goal. Communication objectives are clear state-
ments that describe cognitive and behavioral outcomes that need to be achieved in order
to reach the states set in the goals.

SEE ALSO: Branding/Brand Management; Communication Channel; Communication

Effects; Communication Planning; Communication Strategy; Core Values; Corporate
Governance; Corporate Social Responsibility; Identity and Identity Management;
Issues Management; Mission and Vision; Organizational Culture; Relationships; Repu-
tation; Risk Management and Communication; Stakeholder; Strategic Communication;
Strategic Planning; Trust

References

Albert, S., & Whetten, D. (1985). Organizational identity. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.),
Research in organizational behavior (pp. 263–295). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Broom, G. M. (2013). Cutlip and Center’s effective public relations: International edition (11th ed.).
Harlow, UK: Pearson Higher Education.
Cornelissen, J. (2014). Corporate communication: A guide to theory and practice (4th ed.). Los
Angeles, CA: Sage.
Fleisher, C. S., & Bensoussan, B. E. (2003). Strategic and competitive analysis: Methods and tech-
niques for analyzing business competition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2008). Taking brand initiative. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hon, L. C., & Grunig, J. E. (1999). Guidelines for measuring relationships in public relations.
Gainesville, FL: Institute for Public Relations.
Lindenmann, W. K. (2001). Public relations research for planning and evaluation. Gainesville, FL:
Institute for Public Relations.
McPhee, R. D., & Zaug, P. (2000). The communicative constitution of organizations: A frame-
work for explanation. Electronic Journal of Communication/La Revue Electronique de Com-
munication, 10(1–2), 1–16. Retrieved September 29, 2017, from http://www.cios.org/www/
ejcmain.htm
Van Riel, C. B. M., & Fombrun, C. J. (2007). Essentials of corporate communication. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Wilson, J. W. (2008). Strategic communications planning. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.
8 C O M M U N I CAT I O N S WO T A N A L Y S I S

Further reading

Bensoussan, B. E., & Fleisher, C. S. (2013). Analysis without paralysis: 12 tools to make better
strategic decisions (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson FT Press.
Fleisher, C. S., & Bensoussan, B. E. (2015). Business and competitive analysis: Effective application
of new and classic methods (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson FT Press.
Smith, R. D. (2017). Strategic planning for public relations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Francesco Lurati is a professor of corporate communication at the Faculty of Com-

munication Sciences of Università della Svizzera italiana (USI) in Lugano, Switzerland.
He pursues research in the field of corporate communication, in particular, in the areas
of organizational identity and corporate reputation. He has published in the Journal of
Business Research, Corporate Reputation Review, Corporate Communications: An Inter-
national Journal, VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Orga-
nizations, International Journal of Strategic Communication, Strategic Organization, and
Journal of Public Relations Research. Educated as an economist, he received his doctoral
degree from the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. He regularly does consulting in
the field of communications management.

Alessandra Zamparini is lecturer and postdoctoral researcher at the Faculty of Com-

munication Sciences of Università della Svizzera italiana (USI) in Lugano, Switzerland.
Her research focuses on organizational identity and its implications for strategic and
organizational communication. She has published in Strategic Organization, Journal
of Management Inquiry, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Interna-
tional Journal of Strategic Communication, and VOLUNTAS: International Journal of
Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. She holds a PhD in Communication Sciences
and Economics and Management from USI and the University of Padua, Italy.