competitive-analysis ยท diff
git:20260303.f77c189 to git:20260303.19bc151
50 added, 56 removed. Audit A to A.
---
name: competitive-analysis
description: >
Conduct a competitive analysis. Use when the user says "competitive analysis",
- "how do competitors handle X", "market landscape", "what does [competitor] do",
- "compare us to X", "positioning analysis", or wants to understand how a product
- or feature compares to alternatives - even if they don't say "competitive analysis".
+ "how do competitors handle X", "market landscape", "blue ocean", "strategy canvas",
+ "what does [competitor] do", "compare us to X", "positioning analysis", "value curve",
+ or wants to understand how a product or feature compares to alternatives
+ - even if they don't explicitly say "competitive analysis".
---
## Overview
- A competitive analysis answers two questions: where are you stronger, and where are you weaker? The output should inform product decisions, not just describe what competitors built.
+ Based on **"Blue Ocean Strategy"** by W. Chan Kim & Renee Mauborgne. Most competitive analysis maps what competitors do and tries to do it better - this is red ocean thinking. Blue Ocean Strategy asks a different question: what can we eliminate, reduce, raise, or create to make competition irrelevant?
## Workflow
### Step 1: Define the scope
- Clarify with the user:
- Is this for a specific feature or the whole product?
- - Who are the known competitors? (direct, indirect, adjacent)
- - What's the decision this analysis will inform?
-
- Scope determines depth. A pricing decision needs different analysis than a roadmap decision.
+ - What decision will this analysis inform?
+ - Who are the direct and indirect competitors?
- ### Step 2: Identify competitors
- Group into:
- - **Direct** - Same user, same problem, similar solution
- - **Indirect** - Same user, same problem, different solution
- - **Adjacent** - Different user or problem, but overlapping features
+ Cap at 5-7 competitors. More dilutes the analysis.
- Cap at 5-7 competitors. More than that dilutes the analysis.
+ ### Step 2: Build the Strategy Canvas
+ Plot competitors on a graph:
+ - **X-axis:** Competing factors (price, speed, features, support, UX, etc.)
+ - **Y-axis:** Offering level (low to high) for each factor
- ### Step 3: Define comparison dimensions
- Choose 5-8 dimensions relevant to the decision. Common ones:
- - Core feature set
- - Pricing model
- - Target user segment
- - Onboarding experience
- - Integration ecosystem
- - Performance / reliability
- - Mobile experience
+ This is the "as-is" state. Where do all competitors cluster? That cluster is the red ocean.
- ### Step 4: Build the comparison matrix
- Present as a table:
+ ### Step 3: Apply the Four Actions Framework
+ For each competing factor, ask:
- | Dimension | [Your Product] | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C |
- |-----------|---------------|--------------|--------------|--------------|
+ | Action | Question | Example |
+ |--------|----------|---------|
+ | **Eliminate** | What do all competitors offer that adds no real value? | Eliminate: complex onboarding wizards |
+ | **Reduce** | What can we offer well below industry standard? | Reduce: feature count, focus on core use case |
+ | **Raise** | What should we raise well above the industry standard? | Raise: response time, documentation quality |
+ | **Create** | What should we offer that no competitor does? | Create: role-based install, skill-context personalization |
- Use: Strong / Partial / Missing / Not applicable
+ ### Step 4: Draw the "to-be" value curve
+ Plot where your product sits after applying the four actions. A differentiated value curve:
+ - Has a different shape than competitors
+ - Focuses on a few factors rather than spreading thin
+ - Has a compelling tagline: "The only X that does Y for Z"
- ### Step 5: Identify gaps and opportunities
- Answer explicitly:
- - Where do competitors consistently outperform you?
- - Where do you consistently outperform them?
- - What do users want that nobody is building?
+ ### Step 5: Identify non-customers
+ Blue Ocean insight: the biggest opportunity is often in people who don't use any competitor today. Who are the non-customers, and why aren't they buying? Three tiers:
+ - **Tier 1:** Soon-to-be non-customers (use reluctantly, would switch)
+ - **Tier 2:** Refusing non-customers (consciously chose alternatives)
+ - **Tier 3:** Unexplored non-customers (never considered this category)
### Step 6: State implications
- End with 2-3 bullet points: "Given this analysis, we should consider..."
-
- Analysis without implications is research, not strategy.
+ "Given this analysis, we should consider..." - 2-3 concrete takeaways. No implications = just research, not strategy.
## Anti-Patterns
- **1. Feature-listing without insight**
- Bad: "Competitor X has a dashboard. Competitor Y has a dashboard. Competitor Z has a dashboard."
- Good: "All major competitors offer dashboards. Our lack of one is a table-stakes gap, not a differentiator opportunity."
+ **1. Red ocean thinking**
+ Bad: "Competitor X has feature Y, so we need feature Y."
+ Good: Apply the four actions. Maybe feature Y should be eliminated or reduced.
- **2. Scope creep**
- Bad: Analyzing 12 competitors across 20 dimensions.
- Good: 5 competitors, 7 dimensions, focused on the decision at hand.
+ **2. Competing on all dimensions**
+ Bad: Value curve that tries to be high on every factor.
+ Good: A focused curve that excels on 2-3 factors and consciously deprioritizes others.
- **3. Static analysis**
- Bad: "Competitor X doesn't have mobile support."
- Good: Note when the data was collected. Competitive landscapes shift. Flag anything likely to change.
+ **3. Ignoring non-customers**
+ Bad: Analysis only covers existing market users.
+ Good: Tier 1/2/3 non-customer analysis often reveals larger opportunities than competing for existing users.
- **4. No implications**
- Bad: Analysis ends with the comparison table.
- Good: Always ends with: "What this means for us is..."
+ **4. No strategy canvas**
+ Bad: Bullet list of what competitors do.
+ Good: Visual strategy canvas that makes the competitive landscape scannable.
## Quality Checklist
- - [ ] Scope is defined (feature vs. product, decision it informs)
- - [ ] Competitors categorized as direct / indirect / adjacent
- - [ ] No more than 7 competitors
- - [ ] Dimensions are relevant to the decision, not generic
- - [ ] Comparison matrix is clear and scannable
- - [ ] Gaps and opportunities are stated explicitly
- - [ ] Analysis ends with implications, not just observations
+ - [ ] Scope defined - feature vs. product, decision it informs
+ - [ ] Strategy canvas built with competing factors on X-axis
+ - [ ] Four Actions Framework applied: eliminate, reduce, raise, create
+ - [ ] "To-be" value curve drawn and differentiated from competitors
+ - [ ] Non-customer tiers considered
+ - [ ] Analysis ends with concrete implications