GB530 Unit 2 Situation Analysis Example

Roof Age as the Market's Clock: A Unit 2 Situation Analysis for a Thermal Roof Survey Firm

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

GB530: Marketing Management

Unit 2 Situation Analysis

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The firm, its competitors and every figure are composite and illustrative; the regulation, standard and sources cited are real.

The Firm

Scioto Thermal Imaging flies infrared cameras over low-slope roofs after sunset and maps where insulation under the membrane has become wet. A partner roofer cuts small cores at a few marked spots to confirm the readings, following the established practice for locating wet insulation with infrared imaging (ASTM International, 2020). Last year the firm flew 580 surveys across Ohio, Indiana and Kentucky. As the Unit 1 post explained, it is deciding whether to serve building owners rather than roofing contractors.

Exhibit 1: The Environment Scan

Drone regulation. Federal rules allow small drones to fly at night if the pilot has completed updated training and the drone carries anti-collision lighting visible for three statute miles (14 C.F.R. § 107.29, 2024). Night operations, once requiring a waiver, became routine, which lowers the cost of the firm's core service. Implication: an opportunity, but also lower barriers for new competitors.

Insurers. Commercial property insurers have been asking for more evidence of roof condition at renewal, and some have tightened coverage for older roofs. Implication: an opportunity, since owners need documentation that a thermal survey provides.

Roofing labor. A shortage of roofing crews has lengthened waits for repairs and raised prices. Implication: an opportunity for targeted repairs, which use fewer crew hours than replacements, and a threat if owners wait longer to act at all.

Roof age. A large share of the region's warehouse and distribution roofs were installed during the building boom of the early 2020s. Single-ply membranes of that age typically begin to show seam and flashing problems after seven to ten years. Implication: the main opportunity, a wave of roofs entering the age where moisture surveys pay.

Interest rates. Higher borrowing costs have led some owners to defer capital projects, including roof replacements. Implication: mixed, since deferral raises the value of knowing exactly where a roof is failing.

Owner budgets. Portfolio owners plan maintenance budgets annually and prefer recurring services with predictable costs. Implication: an opportunity for an annual program rather than one-time surveys.

How Large the Market Is

A rough count of commercial buildings with large low-slope roofs in the three states gives about 19,400 buildings owned by organizations with more than one property: about 6,300 industrial and logistics buildings, 3,900 school buildings and 9,200 retail and office buildings. If each were surveyed once a year at the firm's current prices, the market would be worth roughly $80 million a year. The firm's revenue last year, about $2.5 million, is a small share of that, which means growth depends on persuading owners to survey regularly rather than on taking work from competitors. Most owners today survey only when a leak appears, so the larger competitor is the habit of doing nothing until water comes through the ceiling.

Exhibit 2: Four Kinds of Competitor

Contractor free inspections. Roofing contractors offer free inspections, often visual walks with a few photos, to generate replacement work. Strength: free. Weakness: owners doubt their independence.

Photo-only drone networks. National networks dispatch local pilots to photograph roofs. Strength: fast and cheap. Weakness: photographs show the surface, not wet insulation underneath.

Facility staff walks. Owners' own staff walk roofs once or twice a year. Strength: no outside cost. Weakness: limited training and no view below the membrane.

Core-cutting consultants. Roofing consultants cut and test many cores across a roof. Strength: strong evidence. Weakness: slow, costly at about six cents a square foot, and damaging to the membrane.

Exhibit 3: SWOT

Strengths: whole-roof moisture evidence at about half a consultant's price; trained night crews; core verification that confirms readings.

Weaknesses: a customer base dominated by contractors; little brand recognition among owners; dependence on weather, since surveys need dry roofs and clear evenings.

Opportunities: aging warehouse roofs; insurer demand for evidence; owners' preference for annual programs; repair-first budgets during a labor shortage.

Threats: easier night-flight rules inviting competitors; photo-only networks adding thermal cameras; owners deferring roof work entirely.

The firm's strongest asset, independent whole-roof evidence, is worth most to the customers it currently serves least.

From SWOT to Paired Strategies

Weihrich (1982) proposed the TOWS matrix, which pairs internal factors with external ones to produce strategies rather than lists.

Strengths with opportunities: offer portfolio owners an annual program that surveys every roof each year, timed for insurer renewals.

Weaknesses with opportunities: build brand recognition among owners through insurer and broker relationships, which reach owners the firm does not yet know.

Strengths with threats: stress core verification and trained analysis, which photo-only networks cannot easily copy even with thermal cameras.

Weaknesses with threats: reduce dependence on contractor work in stages, so that revenue does not collapse before owner demand grows.

What Owners Are Changing

Two changes among owners matter beyond the scan. First, portfolios are consolidating: logistics buildings are increasingly held by large investors who manage dozens of properties through asset managers and prefer to buy services across the whole portfolio. Second, owners are asking for data they can keep. An asset manager who can show a lender or insurer a record of roof condition over several years has a stronger case than one who has only a recent inspection. Both changes favor an annual program with consistent reports across many buildings, and both favor a supplier seen as independent of the firms that profit from repairs and replacements.

Implications

The scan points toward the choice the Unit 1 post proposed. Owners with large portfolios face aging roofs, insurer pressure and scarce labor, and they need evidence they can trust. Kotler and Keller (2016) note that a situation analysis is most useful when it points to where the firm can create superior value, and here that is independent moisture evidence for owners. The next units test whether owners actually buy that way.

Limits

The scan relies on regional estimates of roof age and insurer behavior that should be confirmed with data from owners and brokers. Weather limits the number of survey nights each year, which caps capacity in ways the scan does not quantify. And competitors' plans, especially whether photo-only networks will add thermal capability and trained analysts, are uncertain. The scan should be updated each year, with roof age and insurer requirements checked first, since they drive the opportunity most directly and can change within a single renewal season.

References

ASTM International. (2020). Standard practice for location of wet insulation in roofing systems using infrared imaging (ASTM C1153-10(2020)).

14 C.F.R. § 107.29 (2024). https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/107.29

Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing management (15th ed.). Pearson.

Weihrich, H. (1982). The TOWS matrix: A tool for situational analysis. Long Range Planning, 15(2), 54-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(82)90120-0