Competitive Analysis
Scope
Covers
- Mapping competitive alternatives (status quo, workarounds, analog/non-consumption, direct + indirect competitors)
- Building a competitor landscape grounded in customer decision criteria
- Turning analysis into actionable artifacts: positioning hypotheses, win themes, battlecards, and a monitoring plan
When to use
- “Do a competitive analysis / competitor landscape for our product.”
- “Why are we losing deals to?”
- “What are the real alternatives if we didn’t exist?”
- “Help us differentiate and position vs competitors.”
- “Create sales battlecards and win/loss takeaways.”
When NOT to use
- You need market sizing / TAM/SAM/SOM as the primary output (different workflow).
- You don’t know the target customer, core use case, or the decision this analysis should support (use
problem-definitionfirst). - You only need a quick list of competitors (no synthesis, no artifacts).
- You’re seeking confidential or non-public competitor information (do not attempt).
- You need to write positioning copy, messaging frameworks, or landing page text (use
positioning-messagingafter this skill provides differentiation hypotheses). - You need to set or change your pricing model based on competitive data (use
pricing-strategy; feed it the comparison matrix from this skill). - You’re evaluating a specific technology vendor for adoption (use
evaluating-new-technology).
Inputs
Minimum required
- Product + target customer segment + core use case (what job is being done)
- The decision to support (e.g., positioning, sales enablement, roadmap bets, pricing, market entry)
- 3–10 known competitors/alternatives (or “unknown—please map them”)
- Any available evidence (links, win/loss notes, call transcripts, customer quotes, pricing pages, reviews)
- Constraints: geography, ICP, price band, compliance/regulation (if relevant), time box
Missing-info strategy
- Ask up to 5 questions from references/INTAKE.md.
- If answers aren’t available, proceed with explicit assumptions and label unknowns. Provide 2–3 plausible alternative scopes (narrow vs broad).
Outputs (deliverables)
Produce a Competitive Analysis Pack in Markdown (in-chat; or as files if requested):
- Context snapshot (decision, ICP, use case, constraints, time box)
- Competitive alternatives map (direct/indirect/status quo/workarounds/analog)
- Competitor landscape table (top 5–10) with evidence links + confidence
- Customer decision criteria + comparison matrix (customer POV)
- Differentiation & positioning hypotheses (why win, why lose, proof points)
- Win themes + loss risks (objections, landmines, traps)
- Battlecards (3–5 priority competitors)
- Monitoring plan (signals, cadence, owners, update triggers)
- Risks / Open questions / Next steps (always included)
Templates: references/TEMPLATES.md
Workflow (8 steps)
1) Intake + decision framing
- Inputs: User context; references/INTAKE.md.
- Actions: Confirm the decision, ICP, use case, geography, and time box. Define what “good” looks like (who will use this and for what).
- Outputs: Context snapshot.
- Checks: A stakeholder can answer: “What decision will this analysis change?”
2) Map competitive alternatives (not just logos)
- Inputs: Use case + customer job.
- Actions: List what customers do *instead*: status quo, internal build, manual workaround, analog tools, agencies/outsourcing, and direct/indirect competitors. Identify the “true competitor” for the deal.
- Outputs: Competitive alternatives map + short notes per alternative.
- Checks: At least 1–2 non-obvious alternatives appear (workarounds / analog / non-consumption).
3) Select the focus set + collect evidence (time-boxed)
- Inputs: Alternatives map; available sources.
- Actions: Pick 5–10 focus alternatives (by frequency/impact). Gather publicly available facts (positioning, features, pricing, distribution, target ICP) and internal learnings (win/loss, sales notes). Track confidence and unknowns.
- Outputs: Evidence log + initial landscape table.
- Checks: Each competitor row has at least 2 evidence points (link/quote/data) or is explicitly labeled “low confidence”.
4) Build the comparison from the customer’s perspective
- Inputs: Focus set + evidence.
- Actions: Define 6–10 customer decision criteria (JTBD outcomes, constraints, trust, time-to-value, switching cost, price, ecosystem fit). Compare alternatives on criteria and surface “why they win”.
- Outputs: Decision criteria list + comparison matrix.
- Checks: Criteria are framed as customer outcomes/risks (not internal feature checklists).
5) Derive differentiation + positioning hypotheses
- Inputs: Matrix + wins/losses.
- Actions: Write 2–3 positioning hypotheses: (a) who we’re for, (b) the value we deliver, (c) why we’re different vs the true alternative, (d) proof points, (e) tradeoffs/non-goals.
- Outputs: Differentiation & positioning section.
- Checks: Each hypothesis names the competitive alternative it’s positioning against.
6) Translate into win themes + battlecards
- Inputs: Positioning hypotheses + competitor notes.
- Actions: Create 3–5 win themes and 3–5 loss risks. Produce battlecards for priority competitors (how to win, landmines, objection handling, traps to avoid).
- Outputs: Win/loss section + battlecards.
- Checks: Battlecards contain do/don’t talk tracks and are usable in a live sales call.
7) Recommend actions (product, messaging, GTM)
- Inputs: Findings.
- Actions: Propose 5–10 actions: product bets, messaging changes, pricing/packaging, distribution, partnerships, and “stop doing” items. Tie each action to a win theme or loss risk.
- Outputs: Recommendations list with rationale and owners (if known).
- Checks: Each recommendation is specific enough to execute next week/month.
8) Monitoring + quality gate + finalize
- Inputs: Draft pack.
- Actions: Define monitoring signals, cadence, and update triggers. Run references/CHECKLISTS.md and score with references/RUBRIC.md. Add Risks/Open questions/Next steps.
- Outputs: Final Competitive Analysis Pack.
- Checks: Pack is shareable as-is; assumptions and confidence levels are explicit.
Quality gate (required)
- Use references/CHECKLISTS.md and references/RUBRIC.md.
- Always include: Risks, Open questions, Next steps.
Examples
Example 1 (B2B SaaS): “We keep losing deals to Competitor X. Build a competitive alternatives map and a battlecard for X.” Expected: alternatives map (incl. status quo), decision criteria, X battlecard, win themes/loss risks, and a monitoring plan.
Example 2 (Consumer subscription): “We’re repositioning for a new segment. Analyze alternatives and propose 2 positioning hypotheses.” Expected: comparison matrix by customer criteria and two clear positioning options with proof points and tradeoffs.
Boundary example 1: “List every competitor in our industry worldwide.” Response: narrow scope (ICP, geography, category) and propose a focused set + monitoring plan; otherwise output becomes a low-signal directory of logos.
Boundary example 2: “Write our positioning statement and messaging framework based on how we differ from competitors.” Response: redirect to positioning-messaging. Offer to first run competitive analysis to produce differentiation hypotheses and proof points, then hand those off to the positioning/messaging skill.
Anti-patterns (common failure modes)
- Logo wall without synthesis -- Listing 20+ competitors with surface-level feature comparisons but no analysis of why customers actually choose them. The value is in customer decision criteria and win/loss patterns, not in the length of the competitor list.
- Feature-checklist framing -- Comparing competitors on internal feature names instead of customer outcomes and decision criteria. A customer does not choose based on “has SSO” but on “how quickly can I get my team onboarded securely.”
- Ignoring the status quo -- Treating only named software products as competitors while ignoring that the biggest “competitor” is often the customer's existing spreadsheet, manual process, or decision to do nothing.
- Stale snapshot bias -- Producing analysis as a one-time document with no monitoring plan or update triggers. Competitive landscapes shift; the pack must include signals to watch and a cadence for refresh.
- Confidential data fishing -- Attempting to include proprietary pricing, internal roadmaps, or NDA-covered information about competitors. All evidence must be from publicly available or user-provided sources with confidence labels.