ABSTRACT
The turbulent and often dynamic state of firm’s operative environment compels its vulnerability to competitive forces and often implies imperative of change in corporate culture for survival. TOWS matrix model though applied in many manufacturing firms across the globe in meeting the growing challenges of competition and need for superior performance, have unfortunately not recorded equivalent results in Nigeria’s manufacturing industries. The limited adoption of TOWS matrix model is explained by a host of factors including firms’ organizational change culture, managerial capacity, and the comprehensiveness of environmental scanning elements.This study, therefore, assesses the prospects and challenges of applicability of TOWS matrix model in manufacturing firms in Nigeria. The methodology of study was the descriptive survey research design. The instruments used for data collection were the structured questionnaire, interview schedule and empirical research findings from available related literature. From a population of one hundred and ninety-two (192) registered manufacturing firms found in the south east area of Nigeria, and a management level employee population of 2,880 using a combination of Taro Yamane formula, Proportionate Stratified Sampling (PSS) and Multi-Stage Stratified Random Sampling (MSSRS) technique, twenty-eight (28) firms were eventually selected for the study, from which four hundred and twenty (420) management employees where issued questionnairewith 94.76% response rate. The result of the study showed existence of a positive and significant relationship between a firms’ organization change culture and her awareness of Tows Matrix model; firms’ human resource capacity and degree of application of TOWS matrix model; improvement in the competitive capabilities of firms’ products in relation to others in the best of class and application of TOWS matrix model in the past five years (2004-2009); comprehensiveness of firms’ environmental scanning elements and reliability of strategies formulated with TOWS matrix model; the low adoption of strategic alliance as a strategic choice in Nigeria manufacturing firms and extent of change resistance in firms. The study also showed prospects of TOWS matrix model in Nigeria manufacturing firms while revealing the challenges to its sustainable application. The conclusion of the study is that organisational culture, managerial development, comprehensiveness and scanning of environmental elements and adoption of strategic alliance as a strategic choice constitute critical imperatives in the application of TOWS matrix model in Nigeria manufacturing firms. The recommendation of the study include: entrenchment of organizational change as a deliberate corporate policy; improvement of firm’s awareness and intensity of adoption of TOWS matrix; and development of firm’s managerial capacity. The study’s major contribution to knowledge include: the development of an improved version of TOWS matrix model captioned ‘WEBBED TOWS MATRIX MODEL’.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title page                                                                                                i
Approval                                                                                                           ii
Certification                                                                                                     iii
Dedication                                                                                                       iv
Acknowledgements                                                                                              v
Abstract                                                                                                               vi
Table of Contents                                                                                          vii
List of Tables                                                                                                      xi
List of Figures                                                                                                   xiii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
-       Background of the Study                                                                1
- Statement of the Problem                                                                       5
-  Objectives of the Study                                                                  7
- Research Questions                                                                  7
- Research Hypotheses                                                                         8
- Scope and Area of the Study                                                                 9
- Significance of the Study                                                              9
1.8      Limitations of the study                                                                   10
1.9      Conceptual definition of key terms                                                    11
1.10    Operational definition of key terms                                                  12
1.11    Organization of the Study                                                              13
            References                                                                              14
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE
2.1      Conceptual Framework                                                              16
2.1.1   The Concept of Organisational change                                              16
2.1.2   Types of Organisational Change                                                      17
2.1.3   Dimensions of Organisational Change                                                19
2.1.4   Forces of Change in Organisations                                                    20
2.1.5   Organisations Change Resistance                                 22                         2.1.6           Strategies for Managing Change in Organisations              23
2.2      Conceptual Definition of Strategy                                        25
2.2.1   Levels of Strategy                                                                       28
2.3      Organisational Culture and Strategy Relationship              37
2.4      Environmental Elements, Comprehensiveness and Scanning         39
2.5      Human Resource Capacity and Strategy Application                 46
2.6      Competitive Strategy and Operation Strategy                                47
2.7      The Concept of Strategic Planning                                    50
2.8      Theoretical Framework                                                    53
2.8.1   Theories of Strategic Planning Models                                               53
2.8.1.1 Mintzbergs Model                                                                              60
2.8.1.2 Ansoffs Model                                                                         61
2.8.1.3 Steiners Model                                                                              62
2.8.1.4 Wheelen and Hunger Model                                                       63
2.9   Strategy Formation Models                                                                  66
2.9.1 Synoptic Model                                                                                           66
2.9.2 Adaptive Model                                                                               67
2.9.3 Synthesis (Synoptic-Adaptive) Model   69                    Â
  2.10      Situational Analysis Models                                             69
2.10.1   Strength –Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT) Model   70      Â
 2.10.2   Critical Success Factors (CSF) Model                                    73
2.11      Matrix Models in Strategic Planning                                        75
2.11.1   Business Portfolio Matrix Model                                        76
2.11.2    General Electric’s (GE) Business Screen Matrix Model                   78
2.11.3   Strategic Factor Evaluation Matrix Models                               78
2.11.3.1 Internal Factor Evaluation (IFE) Matrix  Model                          79
2.11.3.2 External Factor Evaluation (EFE) Matrix Model                            83
2.11.3.3 Internal – External (IE) Matrix Model                               86
2.11.3.4 Strategic Position and Action Evaluation (SPACE) Matrix Model    87
2.11.3.5 Quantitative Strategic Planning Matrix (QSPM) Model     89
2.11.3.6 Grand Strategy (GS) Matrix Model                                      94
2.11.3.7 Threats-Opportunities-Weaknesses-Strengths (TOWS) Matrix Model    95
2.12       Review of Related Empirical Studies on Strategic Planning models-Firm’s Performance Relationship                                                             105
2.12.1 Empirical Evidence of Adoption, Benefits, Prospects and Challenges
of TOWS Matrix Model in firms                                               110
2.13 Summary of Related Literature Review 111
References                                                     117                                                                                       Â
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGYÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
3.0      Introduction                                                                               133
3.1      Research Design                                                                          133
3.2      Population of the Study                                                                      134
3.3      Sample Size Determination and Sampling Technique               134
3.4      Sources of Data                                                                          140
3.5      Instruments for Data Collection                                                          140
3.6      Validity of the Study Instrument                                              141
3.7      Reliability of the Questionnaire                                            143
3.8      Administration of the Questionnaire                               145
3.9      Method of Data Analayis                                                             146
           References                                                  148                                                                                                   Â
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
4.1      Introduction                                                                          149
4.2       Data Presentation and Analysis                                                    149
4.3      Test of Hypothesis –I                                                                      163
4.4      Test of Hypothesis –II                                                                                    170
4.5      Test of Hypothesis –III                                                                  176
4.6      Test of Hypothesis –IV                                                             182
4.7Â Â Â Â Â Â Test of Hypothesis-VÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 188
            References                                                                                           199
CHAPTER FIVE:
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS, SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS,
CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, CONTRIBUTION TO
KNOWLEDGE AND SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER STUDIES
5.0        Introduction                                                                                       200
5.1        Discussion of Results                                                                         200
5.1.1Â Â Â Â Â Discussion of Objective IÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 201
5.1.2Â Â Â Â Â Assessment of Hypothesis IÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 202
5.1.3Â Â Â Â Â Discussion of Objective IIÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 204
5.1.4Â Â Â Â Â Assessment of Hypothesis IIÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 205
5.1.5Â Â Â Â Â Discussion of Objective IIIÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 205
5.1.6Â Â Â Â Â Assessment of Hypothesis IIIÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 208
5.1.7Â Â Â Â Â Discussion of Objective IVÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 209
5.1.8Â Â Â Â Â Assessment of Hypothesis IVÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 210
5.1.9Â Â Â Â Â Discussion of Objective VÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 212
5.1.10Â Â Â Assessment of Hypothesis VÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 214
5.2        Summary of Major Findings                                                        216
5.2A    Model Developed in this Research                                          217
5.3        Conclusion                                                                             219
5.4        Recommendations                                                                             222
5.5        Contribution to Knowledge                                                           224
5.6        Suggestion for Further Studies                                                      227
             References                                                                                              229
 Bibliography                                                                                232
List of Tables
Table   2.1     Application of IFE Matrix Model at Amazon              82
Table 2.2 External Factor Evaluation (EFE) Matrix Model for Morgan
Stanley Dean Witter (MSDW) 85
Table   2.3     Strategic Position and Action Evaluation Matrix Model for Morgan  Stanley Dean Witter (MSDW)                                        89
Table   2.4     Quantitative Strategic Planning (QSPM) Matrix Model for Pakistan State Oil Incorporated                                           93
Table   2.5     Empirical Studies on Strategic Planning Models – Firm’s Performance Relationship                                                                  106
Table 2.6 Summary of Lisrel Analysis Generated Results based on
Davis (2007) Study 111
Table 3.1 Computation of Number of Manufacturing Firms studied using
PSS/M.S.S.R.S procedure                                                   136
Table 3.2 Proportionate Allocation of 28 Firms in the states studied 137
Table  3.3      Departments and Number of Management Employees used in the  Study in the 28 firms                                                                                     138
Table 3.4 Allocation of Questionnaire to 28 selected manufacturing firms 139
Table  3.5      Empirical Validity of the Study Instrument                142
Table 3.6 Summary Reliability Statistics on items in the Questionnaire 144
Table 3.7       Number of Questionnaire Administered in the States       145
Table 3.8       Hypotheses and Stattistical Tools used for Analyses               146
Table 4.1       Return Rate of Questionnaire                                             149
Table 4.2       Analysis of respondents according to their departments                150
Table 4.3       Level of Respondents in Management hierarchy           150
Table 4. 4       Sex of Respondents                                                         151
Table 4. 5       Respondents years of service in firm                                151
Table 4. 6       Age of Respondents firms                                                     152
Table 4. 7       Educational Qualification of Respondents                        153
Table 4. 8       Firms Commitment to Strategic Planning                       154
Table 4. 9 Extent firms embark on Organizational Change as a Corporate Policy 155
Table 4. 9A    Extent Organisations Resist Change                                  156
Table 4. 10     Relationship between firm’s competitive abilities and adoption of strategic planning                                                            157
Table 4. 11 Awareness of TOWS matrix as a strategic planning tool 158
Table 4. 12 Application of TOWS matrix in manufacturing organizations 159
Table 4. 13     Extent firms apply TOWS matrix model                             160
Table 4. 14     Length of time firms have applied TOWS matrix model              161
Table 4. 15     Extent Organizational change culture relates to Awareness of TOWS  matrix model                                                                                162
Table 4. 16      Extent to which resistance to change in organisations relates to degree of application of TOWS Matrix model                                      163
Table 4.16A Computation of Correlation Coefficient derived from tables 4.9 and 4.11 164
Table 4.17 Extent Management Development is required in Strategic planning 167
Table 4.18      Extent firms’ Managerial abilities relate to degree of application of TOWS matrix model.                                             168
Table 4.19      Extent Management Expertise in terms of core skills, competences, and capabilities is required for successful strategy formulation using TOWS matrix model                                                    169
Table 4.20 Computation of Expected Frequencies derived from tables 4.2.17 and 4.2.18 171
Table 4.21 Computation of Pearson Chi-Square from Table 4.17 and 4.18 172
Table 4.22Â Â Â Â Â Improvement in identified performance measures in the past five years (2004-2009) of application of TOWS matrix model. Â Â Â Â Â Â 174
Table 4.23     Extent competitive capabilities of firms’ products have improved in relation  to others in the best of class in the past five years (2004-2009) of Application of TOWS matrix model.                    175
Table: 4.23A Computation of Correlation Coefficient derived from Tables 4.13 and 4.23 177
Table 4.24       Extent firms consider accurate assessment of environmental elements crucial in   strategic planning                                               179
Table 4.25 Extent Comprehensiveness of firms’ Environmental scanning elements relates to the reliability of strategies formulated with TOWS matrix model.                              180
Table 4.26 Computation of Expected Frequencies derived from tables 4.2.8 and 4.2.24 183
Table 4.27 Computation of Pearson Chi-Square from Table 4.8 and 4.24 184
Table 4.28 Use of Strategic Alliance in Nigeria Manufacturing Firms 186
Table 4.29    Low Adoption of Strategic Alliance relates to the extent of Change Resistance in manufacturing firms.                                      187
Table 4.29A Computation of Correlation Coefficient derived from Tables 4.9A and 4.26 188
Table 4.30    Existence of Inherent Problems/Challenges in the application of TOWS matrix model                                                                                        191
Table 4.31     Challenges to successful application of TOWS matrix model in manufacturing firms                                                      192
Table 4.32     Capacity to overcoming problems/challenges associated with the application  of TOWS matrix model in manufacturing firms.         194
Table 4.33 Benefits of applying TOWS matrix in manufacturing firms 195
Table
4.34 Prospects of Applying TOWS
matrix in manufacturing firm 197
List of Figures
Figure: 2.1         Nimmanphatcharin Internal Environment Model     40
Figure: 2.2         The Competitive Environment Model           43
Figure: 2.3         Strategic Planning Model                     60
Figure: 2.4         Mitzbergs Core Design School Model           61
Figure: 2.5        Steiners Planning Model                        63
Figure: 2.6        Wheelen and Hunger Model                  65
Figure: 2.7         SWOT Analysis Model              71
Figure: 2.8        Critical Success Factors Model                      75
Figure: 2.9         Boston Consulting Group (BCG) Matrix Model              77
Figure: 2.10       Internal Factor Evaluation (IFE) Matrix Model                81
Figure: 2.11       External Factor Evaluation (EFE) Matrix Model    84      Â
Figure: 2.12 Internal –External Factor Evaluation (IE) Matrix Model 86
Figure: 2.13 Strategic Positions and Action Evaluation Matrix (SPACE) Model 88
Figure: 2.14       Quantitative Strategic Planning (QSPM) Matrix Model 90      Â
Figure: 2.15       Grand Strategy (GS) Matrix Model                                94
Figure: 2.16      TOWS Matrix Model                                                    101
Figure: 2.17      TOWS Analysis of Daimler-Benz Manufacturing Company  104
Figure: 5.2.1 WEBBED TOWS Matrix
Model (Developed in this Study) 217
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
A major aim of enterprises is to build a market position strong enough and an organization capable enough in producing successful performance despite foreseeable events, potent competition, internal and external organizational problems (Nimmanphatcharin, 2003:13). Global competition requires that managers think of ways to change their organizations continuously to gain competitive advantage. The complexity of today’s operative environment necessitate adoption of a best practice strategic planning model in meeting contemporary challenges faced by organizations in terms of domestic and cross border product competitiveness (Faulkner and Bowman,2007:45).
Eze (2001:35) posits that both organizations and their managers are subject to changes which render once-effective approaches to competition ineffective. Ezigbo (2007:79) states that managers introduce changes to solve organizational problems like low productivity, laissez-faire attitude, conflicts, and competitive pressures.
The turbulence encountered by manufacturing organizations in Europe, America and the Far East in the late 1980’s coupled with competition introduced by globalization and free market economy forced firms to review the quality of their strategic formulations by putting in place a strategic planning framework known as the TOWS matrix that identifies threats and opportunities in the external environment and objectively seek to match them with identified internal organizations weaknesses and strengths in a logical manner in order to remain competitive (Eaton,1999:83).
Itami (2007:29) posits that the proactiveness necessary to place Nigeria’s manufacturing firms in the league of best practice firms for strategic leadership in their spheres of economic endeavour is lacking admist stiff competition and a diversity of industry and environmental challenges.
Strategy involves the critical decisions a firm makes about how to match its resources and strengths with its environment to create an advantage over its competitors. The decisions to pursue a strategy type be it, Business level (competitive) strategy, Corporate or Functional level strategy are viewed as measures that can fastrack or impede the adoption, adaptability and sustainability of strategic planning frameworks in organizations. The decisions are also rooted on certain organization culture which affects the resistance or acceptability of change. Furthermore, organisational ideology and strategic planning orientation be it Ansoff’s strategic planning model, Mintzberg’s design school model, Steiner’s company-wide planning, or Wheelen and Hunger’s strategic management model also determine the strategy a firm will pursue, as large scale preponderance of conservatism and resistance to change exist in firms.
Strategic Planning, being a management function relies on the competence of management-level employees for effective implementation. Arising from this, it is viewed that management’s human resource capacity in terms of core skills determines the extent to which it would pursue and implement strategic models be it of synoptic, adaptive or synthesis (synoptic- adaptive) origin.
The integration of management’s strategic intent in strategy development to drive organisations visions and missions are also seen as key to the sustainable application of TOWS matrix strategic planning model in meeting desired performance. Hoffer and Schendel (1978:25) posit that an effective planning model must explicitly include the visions and missions of the firm, an establishment of firm’s objectives, and an assessment of the current strategy based on a comprehensive scanning of environmental analysis elements. Studies by Wihioka (2006:89), shows that firms in Nigeria apply Strategic Planning processes with low degree of formality and comprehensiveness, and doubts the reliability of formulated strategies to assure firms of desirable performance.
A variety of strategic planning frameworks based on synoptic, adaptive and synthesis (synoptic-adaptive) ideologies have been developed, showing the relationship of critical internal and external environment variables; including- The SWOT Analysis model, Critical Success Factors (CSF’s) models, and Strategic Factor Evaluation Matrix (SFEM) models- Internal Factor Evaluation (IFE) matrix model, External Factor Evaluation (EFE) matrix model, Internal-External (IE) matrix model, Strategic Positioning and Action Evaluation (SPACE) matrix model, Quantitative Strategic Planning (QSPM) matrix model, Grand Strategy (GS) matrix model, and matrix models – Boston Consulting Group (BCG) matrix model, and General Electric Business Screen Matrix.
These models aside from showing the relationship of critical internal and external environment variables are fraught with certain inherent structural and operational limitations that inhibit their individual and collective capabilities to providing feasible alternative strategies for firm’s competitive advantage, as do the TOWS matrix model (Weihrich and Koontz 2005:15; Hirsch, 2006: 327; Davis, 2007: 32). The limitations include the following:
- Inability to clearly identify the internal and external environmental scanning elements of a firm.
- Inability to provide guidance as to the comprehensiveness of environmental scanning elements.
- Inability to distinctively identify opportunities in order to take advantage of them.
- Inability to anticipate potential threats in order to effectively avoid them.
- Inability to give insufficient attention to the threats and constraints in the external environment.
- Inabilty to match or combine the internal and external environment variables of a firm in a logical and distinctive manner in order to arrive at feasible strategic alternatives.
- Inability to systematize the choice of strategy.
- Inability to depict the market position and competitive domain of the firm.
Furthermore, the strategic planning models also give the erroneous impression that a firm uses its strengths to take advantage of opportunities, but ignore other important relationships, such as the challenge of overcoming weaknesses in the enterprise to exploit opportunities. Organizations are known to respond more to threats than opportunities, as it is only a threat to the status-quo that compels a change. Furthermore, few people are sufficiently disposed to identify their strengths at the outset, but they tend to be aware of their weaknesses (Weihrich and Koontz, 2005:129).
According to Weihrich (1982:1), although the set of variables in the above stated models are not new, matching them in a systematic manner is, and this is the distinctive competence of the TOWS matrix model. Hoffer and Schendel (1978:56), Weihrich (1982:9) in evaluating the effectiveness of these matrix models suggest the development and adoption of a matrix in which both the competitive situation and market position of firms are depicted, by proposing the TOWS matrix model. Studies by Nimmanphatcharin, 2003:10; Weihrich and Koontz, 2005:136 aver that the TOWS matrix is a logical combination of external and internal environments in a distinctive manner in order to identify best strategies, which could be used at both corporate and business levels of an organization.
The TOWS matrix model, while not replacing other matrices, builds on the information provided by them to develop four coherent strategies that matches firms’ internal capabilities with firms’ external environment variables for competitive advantage . Competition among firms and across borders has been brought about by rapid changes in the world economic order and social changes (Eke, 2004:10).
Studies by Heller (2007:15) reveal that firms like Pactiv Corporation, Amsted industries, Brunswick Corporation, Hyundai heavy industries, Dresser Inc, FKI Plc, Fiskas Corporation, Federal Signal Corporation, Wal-Mart Inc, AT&T with established tradition for SWOT and other strategic planning models have drastically drifted to TOWS matrix in their organizational repositioning for competitive advantage and superior performance. The TOWS matrix model is also fast gaining grounds in large multinational manufacturing firms like Volkswagen, Daimler Benz, Winnebago industries incorporated, Timken Company, Companhia Vale Do Rio Doce, Bridgestone Corporation, Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG, Compagnie de Saint-Gobain, Snap-on Incorporated, Mitsuibishi Corporation, Pirelli & C.S.P.A, Alamo Group Inc, Matsushita Electric Works, Ltd, AGCO Corporation, Starbucks Corporation, just to mention but a few.
The Nigerian Manufacturing sector is at the brink of near collapse, as a result of low productivity, poor domestic and international competitiveness in a continuously changing business world (Obiozor, 2009:32). Giwa (2000:32) declares that Nigeria’s manufacturing firms must accept the challenges of present times and manufacture products that must meet international standards and apply business strategies that would make their organizations the least cost operators and preferred suppliers of consumer goods.
Unfortunately in Nigeria, there is a dearth of literature and empirical evidence to support the application of TOWS matrix strategic planning model in Nigeria’s manufacturing firms in order to explore its potentials as a best practice model that has positively impacted on many multinational manufacturing firms across the globe. From the foregone, this study seeks to explore the problems and prospects of applying TOWS matrix model in manufacturing firms in Nigeria.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM