Clicca qui per scaricare

Condividi
L’utilizzo delle Evocazioni gerarchizzate nella SWOT analysis. Una proposta di metodo misto per la valutazione degli interventi educativi
Titolo Rivista: RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione 
Autori/Curatori: Roberto Fasanelli, Alessia Tuselli, Ida Galli 
Anno di pubblicazione:  2016 Fascicolo: 66 Lingua: Italiano 
Numero pagine:  27 P. 76-102 Dimensione file:  640 KB
DOI:  10.3280/RIV2016-066006
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più:  clicca qui   qui 


The overall objective of this study is to improve the usability of the SWOT analysis. The ultimate goal is to create a procedure that can overcome its limitations by integrating it with the Hierarchised evocations technique. Specifically, respondents will be asked to express themselves in three different steps: 1. freely associating five words to each of the factors (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) 2. verbally justifying the choice of each of the evoked terms; 3. classifying them according to the importance attributed. The output is a body of items treatable qualitatively and two quantitative indicators for each associated element: its frequency of appearance and the score of importance accorded to it. The intersection of these criteria, by using a similarity analysis and cognitive salience index, will identify weight, role and interdependence in respondents cognitions about each SWOT’s factor.


Keywords: SWOT Analysis; Hierarchised Evocations; Similarity Analysis; Graph Theory; Cognitive Salience Index; Mixed Methods.

  1. Abric, J. C. (2003). La recherche du noyau central et de la zone muette des représentations sociales. In J-C., Abric (Ed.), Méthodes d’étude des représentations sociales, (pp. 59-80). Ramonville Saint-Agne: Érès.
  2. Amaturo, E., & Punziano, G. (2016). I Mixed Methods nella ricerca sociale. Milano, IT: Carocci.
  3. Balamuralikrishna, R., & Dugger, J. (1995). SWOT analysis: A management tool for initiating new programs in vocational schools. Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, 12(1). Retrieved the 24th January 2016 from: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JVTE/v12n1/Balamuralikrishna.
  4. Benzécri, J.P. (1973). L’analyse des données. Paris: Dunod.
  5. Bezzi, C. (2006). La SWOT ‘dinamica’ o ‘relazionale’. Retrieved the 17th September 2015 from: https://bezzicante.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/swot-dinamica-o-relazionale-2006.pdf.
  6. Bezzi, C. (2007). Cos’è la valutazione. Un’introduzione ai concetti, le parole chiave e i problemi metodologici. Milano, IT: Franco Angeli.
  7. Burns, M. K., Jimerson, S. R., VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Deno, S. L. (2016). Toward a Unified Response-to-Intervention Model: Multi-Tiered Systems of Support. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.). Handbook of Response to Intervention (pp. 719-732). New York, US: Springer.
  8. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological bulletin, 56(2), 81.
  9. Fasanelli R., Galli I., & Sommella D. (2005) Professione caregiver. Studio delle relazioni tra pratiche assistenziali e rappresentazioni sociali della malattia di Alzheimer. Napoli: Liguori.
  10. Fasanelli R., Galli I., Liguori A. (2014). Aveugle ou tout simplement myope? La représentation sociale de la justice chez des étudiants des différents contextes socio-économiques. Les Cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale, 3(103), 469-495.
  11. Fawcett, S. B., Sterling, T. D., Paine-Andrews, A., Francisco, V. T., Richter, K. P., Williams, E., & Copple, B. (1995). Evaluating community efforts to prevent cardiovascular diseases. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.
  12. Finn, J. A., Bartolini, F., Bourke, D., Kurz, I., & Viaggi, D. (2009). Ex post environmental evaluation of agri-environment schemes using experts’ judgements and multicriteria analysis. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 52(5), 717-737.
  13. Flament, C. (1962). L’analyse de similitude. Cahiers du Centre de Recherche Opérationnelle, 4, 63-97.
  14. Flament, C. (1981). L’analyse de similitude: una technique pour les recherches sur les R.S. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 1, 375-396.
  15. Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Shaywitz, S. E., Lyon, G. R., Foorman, B. R., Stuebing, K. K., & Shaywitz, B. A. (1998). Intelligent testing and the discrepancy model for children with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 186–203.
  16. Galli I., Markova I., Bouriche B., Fasanelli R., Geka M., Iacob L., & Iacob G. (2010). La représentation sociale de la crise économique dans quatre différentes pays européens. Les Cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale, 87(3), 585-620.
  17. Ghazinoory, S., Abdi, M., & Azadegan-Mehr, M. (2011). Swot Methodology: A State-of-the-Art Review for the Past, A Framework for the Future. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 12(1), 24-48.
  18. Goossens L., Cooke R., Hale A., & Rodić-Wiersma L. (2008). Fifteen years of expert judgement at TUDelft. Safety Sci, 46, 234–244.
  19. Gorski, S.E. (1991). The SWOT team- focusing on minorities. Community Tech. Junior Coll. J., 61(3), 30–33.
  20. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255-274.
  21. Grize, J.B., Vergès, P., e Silem, A. (1987). Salariés ́ face aux nouvelles technologies. Paris: CNRS.
  22. Hampson, L. V., Whitehead, J., Eleftheriou, D., & Brogan, P. (2014). Bayesian methods for the design and interpretation of clinical trials in very rare diseases. Stat. Med, 33, 4186–4201.
  23. Hancock, L., Sanson-Fisher, R. W., Redman, S., Burton, R., Burton, L., Butler, J., Girgis, A., Gibberd, R., Hensley, M., McClintock, A., Reid, A., Schofield, M., Tripodi, T., & Walsh, R. (1997). Community action for health promotion: A review of methods and outcomes 1990-1995. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 13(4), 229-239.
  24. Hill, T., e Westbrook, R. (1997). SWOT analysis. It’s time for a product recall. Long Range Plan. 30(I), 46–53.
  25. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
  26. Koch, A.J. (2000). SWOT Does Not Need to be Recalled: It Needs to be Enhanced. Retrieved the 15th September 2008 from http://www.westga.edu/~bquest/2001/swot2.htm.
  27. Koo, L.C., e Koo, H. (2007). Holistic approach for diagnosing, prioritising, implementing and monitoring effective strategies through synergetic fusion of SWOT, Balanced Scorecard and QFD. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 3(1), 62–78.
  28. Leone, L., & Prezza, M. (1999). Costruire e valutare i progetti nel sociale. Milano, IT: FrancoAngeli.
  29. Marradi, A. (1996). Metodo come arte. Quaderni di sociologia, 10, 71-92.
  30. Marzana D., Pozzi M., Fasanelli R., Mercuri F., e Fattori F. (2015). The Relation Between Participatory Social Practices and Social Representations of Citizenship in Young Adulthood. Voluntas, First online: 03 June 2015.
  31. Masoni, V. (2000). Monitoraggio e valutazione dei progetti nelle organizzazioni pubbliche e private. Milano, IT: FrancoAngeli.
  32. McQueen, D. V. (2001). Strengthening the evidence base for health promotion. Health Promotion International, 16(3), 261-268.
  33. O'Hagan, A., Buck, C. E., Daneshkhah, A., Eiser, J. R., Garthwaite, P. H., Jenkinson, D. J., Oakley, J. E., & Rakow, T. (2006). Uncertain Judgements: Eliciting Experts’ Probabilities. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
  34. Panagiotou, G. (2003) Bringing SWOT into Focus. Business Strategy Review, 14(2), 8-19.
  35. Potvin, L., Haddad, S., & Frohlich, K. S. (2001). Beyond process and outcome evaluation: A comprehensive approach for evaluating health promotion programmes (pp. 45-62). In I Rootman, M. Goodstadt, B. Hyndman, D. V. McQueen, L. Potvin, J. Springett, & E. Ziglio (Eds.). Evaluation in health promotion: Principles and perspectives. Denmark: World Health Organization.
  36. Ravanavar, G.M., e Charantimath, P.M. (2012). Strategic formulation using TOWS MATRIX - a case study. International Journal of Research and Development, 1(1), 1-9.
  37. Rootman, I., Goodstadt, M., Hyndman, B., McQueen, D. V., Potvin, L., Springett, J., & Ziglio, E. (Eds.) (2001). Evaluation in health promotion: Principles and perspectives. Denmark: World Health Organization.
  38. Saaty, T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  39. Schember E., Tuselli A., Fasanelli R., e Galli I. (2015). The internal structure of the social representation of culture: an empirical contribution. International E-Journal of Advances in Social Sciences (IJASOS), 1(2), 174-179.
  40. Shinno, H., Voshioka, S., Marpaung, S., e Hachiga, S. (2006). Qualitative SWOT analysis on the global competitiveness of machine tool industry. Journal of Engineering Design, 17(3), 251-258.
  41. Spiegelhalter, D. J., Myles, J. P., Jones, D. R., & Abrams, K. R. (2000). Bayesian methods in health technology assessment: A review. Health Technol. Assess., 4, 1–130.
  42. Stufflebeam, D. (2001). Evaluation models. New Directions for Evaluation, 89, 7-98.
  43. Stufflebeam, D. L. (2003). The CIPP model for evaluation. In T. Kellaghan, & D.L. Stufflebeam (Eds.) International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 31-62). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  44. Sutrop, U. (2001). List task and a cognitive salience index. Field Methods, 13, 263–276.
  45. Tattari, S., Schultz, T., & Kuussaari, M. (2003). Use of belief network modelling to assess the impact of buffer zones on water protection and biodiversity. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 96, 119–132.
  46. Thurston, W. E., & Potvin, L. (2003). Evaluability assessment: a tool for incorporating evaluation in social change programmes. Evaluation, 9(4), 453-469.
  47. van de Schoot, R., Winter, S., Ryan, O., Zondervan-Zwijnenburg, M., & Depaoli, S. (2016). A systematic review of bayesian papers in psychology: the last 25 years. Psychol. Methods, 4 [Epub].
  48. Vergès, P. (1992). L’Evocation de l’argent : Une méthode pour la définition du noyau central d’une représentation. Bulletin de psychologie, 45(405), 203-209.
  49. Vergès, P. (1994). Approche du noyau central: propriétés quantitatives et structurales. In C. Guimelli (Ed.), Structures et transformations des représentations sociales (p. 233-253). Lausanne: Delachaux et Niestlé.
  50. Vergès, P. (1995). Représentations sociales partagées, périphériques, indifférentes, d’une minorité: méthodes d’approche. Les Cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale, 28, 77-95.
  51. Vergès, P. (2001). L’analyse des représentations sociales par questionnaires. Revue française de sociologie, 42(3), 537-561.
  52. Vergès, P., e Bouriche, B. (2013). L’analyse des données par les graphes de similitude. Retrieved the 3rd of June 2013 from: http://www.scienceshumaines.com/methodes-quantitatives-pour-les-sciences-sociales_fr_15151.html
  53. Wallerstein, N. (1993). Empowerment and health: The theory and practice of community change. Community Development Journal, 28, 218–227.
  54. Weihrich, H. (1982). The Tows Matrix – a Tool for Situational Analysis. Long Range Planning, 15(2), 54–66.
  55. Wheelan, T.L. e Hunger, J.D. (1998). Strategic Management and Business Policy (5th ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  56. Willis, D.S., e Thurston, M. (2015). Working with the disabled patient: Exploring student nurses views for curriculum development using a SWOT analysis. Nurse Education Today, 35, 383–387.
  57. Youker, B. W., Ingraham, A., & Bayer, N. (2014). An assessment of goal-free evaluation: Case studies of four goal-free evaluations. Evaluation and Program Planning, 46, 10-16.
  58. Zondervan-Zwijnenburg, M., van de Schoot-Hubeek, W., Lek, K., Hoijtink, H., & van de Schoot, R. (2017). Application and Evaluation of an Expert Judgment Elicitation Procedure for Correlations. Front. Psychol., 8, 90.



  1. Riccardo Tiscini, Alberto Dello Strologo, What drives the value of football clubs: An approach based on private and socio-emotional benefits in Corporate Ownership and Control /2016 pp. 673, DOI: 10.22495/cocv14i1c4art14

Roberto Fasanelli, Alessia Tuselli, Ida Galli, in "RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione" 66/2016, pp. 76-102, DOI:10.3280/RIV2016-066006

   

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association associazione indipendente e no profit per facilitare l'accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche