Your STRAMA paper format: a generic structure to follow

Programs vary: follow yours first

There is no single format for a strategic management capstone paper. Programs differ in what they call each part, how they order them, whether they use chapters, and what they require. This guide sets out the parts David's framework implies and says where each one comes from, and it asks nothing of you that your program does not.

• If your program gives a format, use it, and use this guide to see what each part needs.
• If your adviser asks for a different order or extra parts, follow the adviser.
• If neither says, this order is a reasonable default because each part uses what the one before it produced.

The order at a glance

1. Company background, vision and mission.
2. External audit: PESTEL, EFE and CPM.
3. Internal audit: IFE and financial analysis.
4. Strategy formulation: input, matching and decision stages.
5. Recommendations.
6. Implementation, financial projections and evaluation.

The order is the strategy-formulation framework's: understand the firm, audit the outside and the inside, use the matrices to turn the audits into strategies, choose, then say how you would carry it out and check it. The sections below take each part in turn and link to the guide for each matrix.

Company background, vision and mission

Introduce the firm and its industry: what it sells, to whom, where it operates, and the history that matters to the analysis. State its vision and mission as the firm states them, with the source.

The mission and vision are tested later, not just recorded. Once the audits are done, say whether the firm's stated direction still fits what you found, and propose a change if it does not.

External audit: PESTEL, EFE and CPM

The external audit finds the opportunities and threats outside the firm. David's own audit groups the forces as economic; social, cultural, demographic and natural environment; political, governmental and legal; technological; and competitive. PESTEL is a common way programs organize the same audit.

• PESTEL analysis sorts the outside forces into six factors, each finding with a source.
• The EFE matrix turns the key findings into weighted opportunities and threats and one total.
• The competitive profile matrix compares the firm with its rivals on the factors that decide the industry.

Internal audit: IFE and financial analysis

The internal audit finds the strengths and weaknesses inside the firm, across its management, marketing, finance, operations and other functions. Support each one with evidence from the firm.

• The IFE matrix weights and rates the strengths and weaknesses, with the same arithmetic as the EFE.
• Financial analysis, such as ratios over several years, supplies the evidence for the financial strengths and weaknesses. Your program may ask for specific ratios.

Strategy formulation: the input, matching and decision stages

This part is David's strategy-formulation framework, the one the whole paper is organized around. It has three stages, and each stage uses what the one before it produced.

Input stage

The EFE, IFE and CPM are the input stage. They summarize the audits, and they are where you decide what is true about the firm and its environment.

Matching stage

The matching stage sets the internal and external findings against each other to suggest strategies. It uses the TOWS matrix (David's textbook calls it the SWOT matrix), the SPACE matrix, the BCG matrix, the IE matrix and the grand strategy matrix. Not every program asks for all five.

Decision stage

The QSPM compares the strategies you have chosen to take forward and ranks them, using weights from your EFE and IFE. It is the one place where the choice is argued with numbers.

Recommendations

Recommend the strategy or strategies the decision stage favors, and say why in terms of the matrices that came before. Name the strategies you considered and set aside, so a reader can see the choice was made and not assumed.

A recommendation should cite its evidence in the paper: the QSPM result, the quadrant or cell the matching matrices put the firm in, and the audit findings behind them. If the matrices disagree, say so and explain which one you weighted and why.

Implementation, financial projections and evaluation

Say how the firm would carry the recommendation out: who does what, in what order, with what budget. Then show what it would cost and return. Projected financial statements over the horizon your program sets need stated assumptions, and each assumption should trace to the audits or to a source.

Evaluation closes the loop: how the firm would know whether the strategy is working, which measures it would watch, and what result would prompt a change. Link the measures back to the factors the audits found important.

Worked example: Tala Provisions (fictional)

Tala Provisions, Inc. is a fictional coffee roaster. The table follows its numbers through the matrices of the first four parts: what each produces, and what reads it next. The values come from the worked example in each matrix's own guide.

Read it from the top. The EFE total of 2.90 and the IFE total of 3.10 are the two axes of the IE matrix, and their factors and weights reappear in the QSPM. The QSPM then ranks the strategies the earlier matrices suggested, and its top choice, coffee subscription at 5.15, is what the recommendations part would argue for.

BCG is left out of the table because Tala is a single business. The BCG guide gives it four invented divisions only to have something to plot, and the BCG matrix suits a firm that really has several.

Every number in your paper should trace back to a source. Open the sample EFE and see which rows still need one. Try the sample EFE, no account needed.

Common mistakes

What your panel will ask

How do your matrices connect?

Walk the chain in order: the audits produce the EFE and IFE, their factors feed the matching stage, and the QSPM ranks the strategies using the same factors. Have the page for each link ready.

Where did this number come from?

Name the matrix or the cited source, and show the row. If the number is an assumption, say so and say what it rests on.

Why is this strategy in your recommendations?

Point to the QSPM result and to the quadrant or cell the matching matrices put the firm in. If you set aside a strategy that scored well, say why.

What would change your recommendation?

Name the factor or assumption the result depends on most, and say what you would expect if it moved. This shows you know which part of the chain carries the weight.

Where it goes next

Start with the external audit: PESTEL analysis into the EFE matrix. When you reach matching and decision, the TOWS matrix and the QSPM are where the strategies are made and then chosen.

Every number in your paper should trace back to a source. Open the sample EFE and see which rows still need one. Try the sample EFE, no account needed.

Sources

Method: Fred R. David's strategy-formulation framework, as set out in his Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases. The order of parts here is a generic reading of that framework, not a rule from the book or from any program. Check the edition your program uses for page references.

Tala Provisions, Inc. and its sources are fictional, made up for this guide. The values are the worked examples of the guides linked above.