Desgining a Framework for Acquisition of Competitive Intelligence 0.2 Using Best Worst Method (BWM)

• Main Authors: Mona Jami Pour, Elham Rahmati, Mahnaz Hosseinzadeh, Ghazale Taheri
• Format: Article
• Language: fas
• Published: University of Tehran 2019-09-01
• Series: ‫مدیریت بازرگانی
• Subjects: Competitive intelligence 0.2; Social commerce; Social Media; Web 0.2; Best-Worst Method (BWM)
• Online Access: https://jibm.ut.ac.ir/article_72541_fce6c85866ebf6dcac844205ef55ab2d.pdf
• ISSN: 2008-5907; 2423-5091

Objective Given the rich database in social media and the need to gain competitive intelligence from such data-driven technologies, the companies are in need of a framework for acquiring Competitive Intelligence 0.2 to as the guidelines. Despite the importance of Competitive Intelligence 0.2 in the literature, most studies have focused on competitive intelligence acquisition tools such as text mining, visualization, emotion analysis, and relationship analysis. However, there is no comprehensive and practical framework that encompasses various aspects of Competitive Intelligence 0.2. Therefore, the purpose of the present study is to design a Competitive Intelligence 2.0 framework that helps organizations sustain and continue to their activities in such a dynamic competitive environment. Due to budget constraints in organizations and the complexity of the dimensions presented in the framework, it is finally attempted to rank and determine the importance of each dimension using multidisciplinary decision making tools in order to determine the priorities in investment.   Methodology The present applied study is descriptive in terms of data collection. In order to prioritize the identified categories, dimensions, and sub-categories, the standard BWM questionnaire was designed and distributed among eight marketing and social media executives and experts who had practical experience in the field. Accordingly, the researchers will identify the priorities and weights of the categories, dimensions and subcategories.   Findings The proposed framework consists of three components of process, content and context, which is more comprehensive than the other frameworks presented before. Despite the many differences from traditional competitive intelligence, Competitive Intelligence 0.2 also requires contextual factors such as the need for infrastructure, organizational culture, organizational readiness, and business processes. Besides, sub-indicators of "the distributed computations across the organization" from the technology dimension and "exploiting the potential of social networks to attract joint venture" were eliminated from the socio-strategic deminsion of the framework.   Conclusion In this study, competitor intelligence factor 0.2 was the most important factor in the content of competitive intelligence 0.2. Given this, in order to improve the status of the company regarding this dimension, it is recommended that the companies take measures such as identifying the strengths and weaknesses of competitors using customer-contextual comparative commentary, raising awaness of the competitors' advertisments and product services by analyzing the competitor website, identifying the rivals’ new products through competitor website analysis and etc. "extracting concepts and patterns" is the most weighed factor of "Competitive Intelligence", so the companies need to have up-to-date tools and techniques to discover practical knowledge, concepts, and patterns hidden in massive volumes of data within social networks to proactively identify opportunities and threats in the competitive environment. On the other hand, the "technology" dimension is the most weighted among the other components of the "Competitive Intelligence Background 0.2". Technological infrastructures such as supplying suitable hardware and software to launch systems, having teams of experts in technology, securing accounts, secrets and company information, and improving the compatibility of new technology with the organization's former technology are necessary in the application of new technologies in organizations. This may be the reason for the importance of this index in the present study.