Swot analysis Apple

Weaknesses World’s largest environmental volunteer non-profit organization Pioneer of and “volunteer vacations” An efficient model A large choice of expeditions (89) Grants can be obtained by a multitude of sources No employee assigned to travel Adventure travesties growing segment of the tourism industry best adventure travel agency World savior organization Impact on improving the world’s environmental heathenishly results measuring the concerns of MONGO volunteers Decrease of volunteers numbers A large choice of expeditions (89)

Disconnect between Sales and Marketing and Research ( not able to achieve both relevance and profitability) A bad marketing communication for volunteers Revenues from retail projects declined since 1993 Hard to keep its volunteers Bad organization marketing resources Increase of prices Brand identity Decrease of number of expeditions offered 8% of membership Lack of loyalty Decrease of 85% of the revenue between 2007 and 2008 Opportunities Threats American agencies only support projects in the USA.

Partnerships (HASH) Positive brand image for partnerships% of membership Corporations which work tit Earthward in order to improve their own image Criticisms of the voluntarism in the mid asses Strengths Earthward is a powerful non-profit organization that supported since its creation over 3,000 research projects with $MM and over 100,000 volunteers. Another point is this MONGO was the first to develop the concept of “volunteer vacations”, so it had a huge advantage, indeed this model deploys researchers, and non- specialists who give contributions come and help at the expedition, in order to have a an unforgettable experience.

It is a win-win. Earthward attracts these volunteers hanks to its diverse services. In fact it counts 89 cases of expeditions worldwide: Brazier’s dolphins Costa Erica’s Monkeys soot analysis Apple By Automotive MONGO. They do not pay attention if they have an academy or not or if they are independents, which is different from others foundations like WFM which is very selective. Another strength could be that Earthward with its no assigned employee permitted to the Protocol Investigators having their own staff Adventure travel is an important positive strength for Reattach because it is a small niche of the tourism industry.

The launch of В« soft adventures В», which involved less physical involvement and limited danger was a real success for the Earthward company. Earthward has been seen as the В« fastest growing segment of the tourism industry В». Adventure travel brought to the company a significant market share, and it is not comparable to the many large В« do-it-all В» outfitters existed. In 2007, National Geographic Adventure identified the organization as the best adventure travel company in education and 6th best overall; this is a benefit for the brand image of the company.

Earthward answers all of the criteria (climate change, sustainability, oceans and biodiversity) to become a world savior organization like WFM, Greenback, Conservation International and the nature conservancy The impact on improving the world’s environmental heath gave two avenues, multiplier effect of volunteers (65000 volunteers in 37 years) and the scientific knowledge with research projects. We can see on the exhibit 6, that different criteria are pretty well marked. Weaknesses: We can observe on the exhibit 1, that the number of volunteers has decreased since 1993 (over 3000 in 1993 and approximately 1750 in 2008).

This is a bad point for the company, who has less workforce than in the past, so the work to do during expeditions is less efficient. Another weakness is that the foundation has a huge disconnect between Sales and Marketing and Research. In fact what Sales and Marketing are selling is different from what Research is proportioning for them to do. The marketing gave wrong information, and consequences were that Protocol investigators did not get experiences expected. We can see all these weaknesses had for consequences a decline of its revenues since 1993, and it cannot success to have ewe and keep volunteers.

Its marketing is a weakness too. 70% of its resources were expended on getting repeat business rather than acquiring new customers, but their prices increased so demand decreased due to the elasticity of the demand. In fact 1% increase resulted in a field rate decrease of 2%. Brand identity has a problem too; the science organization and engagement organization are never put together in the message of Earthward. So brand identity is not unified and will probably never be like WFM and Greenback with a household name.

With a decrease of expeditions offered volunteers decreased too, because the destination is the second one most important factor (after subject), for volunteers. On the exhibit 9, since 1996 less and less volunteers come back more than once. Opportunities Considering the opportunities we can notice that as American agencies only supports projects in the US so for the researchers who wants to do international field work it could be a good option for them. Partnerships are a great opportunity for Earthward. Effectively, grants, partnerships represent 57% of the revenue in 2007.

For example, HASH gave $MM during five years and 2,000 HASH employees were fielded as volunteers. In 2007, HASH gave again $MM for researches. Cataracts and Wells Fargo;Co are two large partners too. A research center was created sponsored teachers too. Cataracts lets the company think of changing the volunteers generally engaged by teacher and student who need to develop their experiences. It is a good way to change their brand image by focusing on the quantity of the customers and not the quality.

A big opportunity with membership, only 8% of avenues are membership, we have to develop this part to have more income. Threats Among the different threats we can say that the fact that certain corporations work only with Earthward in order to improve their image could have a significant impact because it means either rejecting the opportunity, or figuring out some way to improve the engagement and the nature of the work. The voluntarism had received criticisms during 2005, because it was accused of being money-making that profiting from tourists wanted “guilt” free holidays, and not for helping target communities.