battlecard-builder v1.1.0A

Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/8a2cecd3dbdf3a6d.

---
name: battlecard-builder
description: >-
  Create competitive battlecards — FIA Framework (Fact → Impact → Act), Why We
  Win/Why We Lose, objection handling cards per competitor, pricing comparisons,
  and quick-dismiss summaries. Use when building competitive intelligence, preparing
  for competitive deals, or creating sales enablement materials. Triggers on:
  "battlecard", "competitive battlecard", "competitor comparison", "Why We Win",
  "objection handling card", "competitor intel", or any competitive enablement.
license: MIT
compatibility: Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Hermes, Windsurf, OpenCode, Gemini CLI, Copilot, Zed, VS Code, Goose
metadata:
  version: "1.1.0"
  author: LeadMagic
  category: design
  tags: [battlecards, competitive, sales-enablement, objection-handling]
  related_skills: [competitive-intel, objection-handling, sales-enablement, pitch-deck-builder]
  frameworks: [Klue FIA Framework, Klue COMP-ACT Framework, Force Management Command of the Message Differentiator Mapping, Todd Caponi Transparency Sale]
---

# Battlecard Builder

## Overview

A battlecard is a concise competitive document that gives reps exactly what to
say in competitive situations. Not a feature comparison table — a talk track
with proof points. The FIA Framework (Fact → Impact → Act) from Klue structures
every card so reps can use it during a live call, not just study it beforehand.

A rep should be able to glance at a battlecard for 10 seconds before or during
a call and know exactly what to say.

## When to Use

- "Build a battlecard against [competitor]"
- "Create competitive battlecards for our team"
- "Prepare for a deal where [competitor] is involved"
- "What do we say when a prospect mentions [competitor]?"
- "Build an objection handling card"
- "Create a quick-dismiss card for [competitor]"

## Authoritative Foundations

- **Klue FIA Framework** — Fact → Impact → Act. The industry standard for
  battlecard structure. Fact: the competitive insight. Impact: why it matters.
  Act: what the rep says or does.
- **Klue COMP-ACT Framework** — extended framework for deeper competitive intel.
- **Force Management Command of the Message** — Defensible Differentiators.
  Battlecards should map to the VMF's differentiator framework.

## Step-by-Step Process

### Phase 1: Card Type Selection

Build a complete battlecard set per competitor:

| Card Type | Purpose | Use Case |
|---|---|---|
| **Why We Win** | Key competitive advantages with talk tracks | When rep knows competitor is in the deal |
| **Why We Lose** | Where they win, how to counter | When deal is trending toward competitor |
| **Objection Handling** | Competitor-specific objections with responses | When prospect raises specific competitor claims |
| **Pricing Card** | Pricing comparison with value positioning | When price is the objection |
| **Quick Dismiss** | One-card summary | When competitor comes up briefly |
| **Landmines to Lay** | Questions that expose competitor weaknesses | Pre-emptive positioning |
| **Approach to Market** | How competitor sells vs how you sell | Strategic positioning |

### Phase 2: FIA Structure

Every card follows:

**Fact** — The competitive insight. What is objectively true.
"This competitor requires 3-6 months of professional services to implement."

**Impact** — Why it matters to the deal. So what?
"That means 3-6 months before the customer sees any value. They're paying for
the software AND the services before anything works."

**Act** — What the rep says or does. The talk track.
"Ask: 'What's your timeline to first value? Most implementations of [competitor]
take 3-6 months. Our customers typically see value in week one. Is that
difference material to your evaluation?'"

### Phase 3: Per-Competitor Package

For each major competitor, produce:

1. **Why We Win** (3-5 cards) — your strongest advantages
2. **Why We Lose** (2-3 cards) — honest about where they win, with counters
3. **Objection Handling** (5-10 objections) — FIA structure per objection
4. **Pricing Card** — transparent comparison
5. **Quick Dismiss** — one-page summary for fast reference

### Phase 4: Talk Track Principles

- No feature wars. "They have X, we have Y" loses to "they approach the problem
  this way, we approach it this way — here's why ours produces better outcomes."
- Proof beats claims. Every talk track includes a specific proof point.
- Acknowledge before countering. "They're good at X. Where customers tell us
  they struggle is Y."
- Don't trash the competitor. It makes you look small. Acknowledge their
  strengths honestly, then differentiate.

## Output Format

```
# Battlecard: [Your Product] vs [Competitor]

## Quick Facts
- Their positioning: [how they describe themselves]
- Pricing: [model and tiers]
- Target customer: [who they sell to]
- Strengths: [honest assessment]
- Weaknesses: [where they fall short]

## Why We Win
### Card 1: [Advantage Area]
**Fact:** [competitive insight]
**Impact:** [why it matters]
**Act:** [talk track or question]

## Why We Lose
### Card 1: [Their Strength Area]
**Fact:** [where they are strong]
**Impact:** [why they win here]
**Counter:** [how to neutralize]

## Objection Handling
### "[Common objection]"
**Acknowledge:** [validate the concern]
**Explore:** [question to understand deeper]
**Redirect:** [reframe with insight + proof]

## Pricing Comparison
| Dimension | Us | Them |
|---|---|---|
| Entry price | $X/mo | $Y/mo |
| What's included | [list] | [list] |
| Hidden costs | None | [implementation, add-ons] |

## Quick Dismiss
**When prospect mentions [competitor]:** [one-sentence response]
**Follow-up:** [one question that shifts the conversation]
```

## Quality Check

- [ ] Complete set per competitor (Why We Win, Why We Lose, Objections, Pricing, Quick Dismiss)
- [ ] Every card has FIA structure
- [ ] Talk tracks are conversation-ready, not feature comparison tables
- [ ] Proof points are specific and verifiable
- [ ] Acknowledges competitor strengths honestly
- [ ] Pricing comparison is accurate and current
- [ ] Rep can use any card within 10 seconds of glancing at it
- [ ] Updated within last 90 days

## Common Pitfalls

1. **Feature comparison instead of talk tracks.** A table of features is a
   reference doc. A battlecard is a conversation tool. Write talk tracks.

2. **No proof points.** "We're better at X" without evidence loses to
   competitors who have it. Every claim gets a proof point.

3. **Trashing the competitor.** "They're terrible" makes you look defensive.
   Acknowledge strengths, differentiate on outcomes.

4. **Stale pricing.** A battlecard with 6-month-old pricing is worse than
   no battlecard. Reps lose credibility instantly.

5. **Too long.** Reps cannot read a 3-page document during a call. One card
   per topic, scannable in 10 seconds.

6. **One card for all competitors.** Different competitors attack from different
   angles. A battlecard for Salesforce looks different from one for a startup.

## Execution Artifacts

This skill includes lightweight artifacts the agent can load on demand:

- `references/framework-notes.md` — named frameworks, citation anchors, and operating assumptions
- `templates/output-template.md` — copy-paste deliverable structure for the user
- `scripts/check-output.py` — local checklist validator for required sections

Use the artifacts when the user asks for an implementation-ready deliverable, a repeatable workflow, or a quality check rather than generic advice.

## Related Skills

- **competitive-intel**: Research to populate battlecards
- **objection-handling**: Objection taxonomy and response frameworks
- **sales-enablement**: Complete enablement package
- **pitch-deck-builder**: Decks that reference battlecard positioning