Search results

For competitive intelligence (CI) to evolve into a successful business discipline in a company, a culture of competitiveness should prevail. The extent to which CI is practiced in South Africa and the CI culture that exists in South Africa have remained a mystery until the late 1990s. It is the aim of this paper to assess the development of the CI culture since the late 1990s in South Africa and to make recommendations to enhance this culture.

For the empirical evidence, the results of two previous research projects were used. Questionnaires were used in these projects. The questions covered all areas of the intelligence cycle: planning and focus, collection, analysis, communication, process and structure, awareness and culture and attitudes towards CI. Data of the sample population to perform a sample selection was gathered from three sources, namely Reed Inc., the Kompass Southern African and the membership lists of the respective Export Councils. In both the projects, the respondents had to answer the questions on a five‐point Likert scale, where 1 equals either never or disagree and 5 equals always or strongly agree.

The results of observations and research projects show a sustained level of awareness of CI and a CI culture within South African companies since 1999. However, research into the CI practices of South African companies (both descriptive and empirical) and specifically into the CI practices of South African exporters has shown certain areas in which local companies lag behind other countries. In particular, in terms of the extent and depth of education, training and consulting services, South Africa is far behind most developed countries. With better training and education opportunities available, in particular in terms of strategic and competitive analysis and the management of CI, these weak areas of the discipline are sure to improve with time.

The research was built around the six key areas that, collectively, from the intelligence model as identified by Calof and Breakspear in 1999, i.e. planning and focus, collection, analysis, communication, process and structure, and organisational awareness and culture. Some of the key findings were that South African companies showed a general lack of appropriate processes and structures for CI; that there was little evidence that systems in companies assist the CI activities; that few companies could claim that CI was embedded in the whole company; little information sharing took place and people in the company in general did not know the focus of the intelligence activity.

The paper provides recommendations on ways to enhance and foster a competitive or CI culture in South Africa. Various ways to enhance a competitive or CI culture in countries and companies are proposed including CI awareness and training sessions for industry, company managers recognising the value of CI as a tool to enhance competitiveness and appropriate CI related training programmes.

The objective of the study was to compare competitive intelligence (CI) practices of exporters in South Africa and Belgium.

An e‐mail and postal survey in a sample of 292 Belgian and 309 South African exporting companies was carried out in which CI‐practices and opinions and attitudes towards CI were measured.

Most respondents report a “CI culture” in their companies. South African and Belgian exporters are, however, not yet well equipped and not very active to conduct effective CI, especially in the areas of planning, process and structure, data collection, data analysis, and especially skills development. In both countries CI‐activities are usually not organized in a separate department and, if they are, CI is mostly done in the marketing and sales department. Managers from both countries consider similar types of information important, and they rely on similar sources of information. Although the responsibility for CI is more a top management issue in Flanders than it is in South Africa, South African companies have on average a longer tradition of organized CI‐activity and more full‐ and part‐time staff is involved in CI‐activity. These differences can be attributed to the fact that, as compared to Belgium, South Africa is an emerging export country in which the need for more formalised CI‐activity focusing on the collection of relevant data is more apparent.

This is the first comprehensive study of CI‐practices in the two countries. The results lead to a number of recommendations for the exporting companies in both countries and in general add to the knowledge of the position of CI in companies.

Little empirical research has been conducted on competitive intelligence (CI). This paper aims to contribute to the quantitative strand of the CI literature by exploring and validating the theoretical constructs of the CI process.

Data from 601 questionnaires filled out by South African and Flemish exporters were subjected to exploratory factor analysis and construct equivalence analysis between the sub‐samples.

The results showed that the CI process consists of three constructs, while the context in which CI takes place consists of four constructs. This agrees to some extent with the literature. When verifying the constructs for both cultures it was found that all but one CI context construct can be viewed as equivalent in both groups. Bias analysis identified one item in the questionnaire that was biased. Via regression analysis it was also indicated that the context in which CI takes place influences the CI process to a large extent. The research identified size as an important influencing factor in a business' CI process.

Businesses involved in CI should take note that an improvement in their formal infrastructure, employee involvement and internal information processes could enhance their CI capability.

This paper contributes towards the formalising of the constructs of competitive intelligence.