Orchestrate a complete competitive analysis across six steps, from landscape to strategic direction. Use when you need the full picture, not a single scan or card.

Competitive Analysis Process Purpose Orchestrate rigorous, repeatable competitive analysis across six analytical steps , producing four actionable output types (battle cards, comparison matrices, positioning counter moves, threat assessments). This is the umbrella: each step names its purpose, its frameworks, and the skill that does the work — the way discovery process orchestrates the discovery skills. Run all six for a strategy cycle; run one when a specific question walks in the door. The steps build on each other, but the sequence bends to the decision. Input Works best with: the market or competitor set in scope, and the decision this analysis supports — a roadmap bet, a positioning refresh, a market entry, deal defense. The decision determines which steps get depth and which get a pass. Also useful: any existing intelligence — a prior landscape scan, snapshots, battle cards, or company intel output — so steps consume rather than repeat it. Input supplied inline with the invocation — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended ARGUMENTS: line — counts as answers already given. Use it; don't re ask. Arriving empty handed? That works too. The workflow opens by asking what decision is on the table and what you already know, then recommends which steps to run and in what order. Example invocation: Run the competitive analysis process on the mid market payroll space — decision: whether we defend down market or push up. We have last quarter's landscape scan. Key Concepts Six steps, four outputs. The steps are analytical lenses; the outputs (battle cards, comparison matrices, positioning moves, threat assessments) are what sales, execs, and roadmap owners actually consume. A step that doesn't feed an output is a detour. Steps delegate; this skill orchestrates. Each step below names the skill that does the work. This file holds the sequence, the frameworks, and the decision points — not the research mechanics. Evidence discipline throughout. Every step honors the [ autonomous investigation ](../autonomous investigation/SKILL.md) protocol (Fact/Inference/Assumption labels, real URLs, confidence stacking), drawing signals from the channels in [ intelligence collection disciplines ](../intelligence collection disciplines/SKILL.md). Named frameworks, cited. Each step stands on published strategy work — Porter's Five Forces, the Kano model, Jobs to be Done, the Business Model Canvas, Ries & Trout positioning, Hamel & Prahalad strategic intent. The frameworks are defined where used; agents shouldn't assume prior knowledge. Present ≠ future. Steps 1 5 read where competitors are ; Step 6 reads where they're going — and it's the step most teams skip, which is why they're perpetually surprised. Application Step 0 — Scope. Confirm the decision, the competitor set (or run [ market landscape scan ](../market landscape scan/SKILL.md) to find it), and which steps matter. Offer the six steps as a numbered menu; recommend a subset when the decision doesn't need all six. Step 1: Overview of the Competitive Landscape Who's in the game, where, and how they operate — market saturation, fragmentation, disruptive entrants. Frameworks: Porter's Five Forces (industry structure); strategic group mapping (clustering competitors by GTM model, innovation pattern, or regional depth); market fragmentation indexing. Run: [ market landscape scan ](../market landscape scan/SKILL.md) — segments, player map, dynamics, whitespace with the dead zone test. Decision point: which 2 4 players deserve depth? Everything downstream narrows to them. Step 2: Comparisons at the Product Level Beyond feature lists: value delivery, architecture, interoperability, lifecycle maturity. Frameworks: Kano model (which features delight vs. merely satisfy); Geoffrey Moore's Whole Product model (core product vs. the ring of services and integrations deals actually hinge on); JTBD based capability maps (compare by customer job, not by feature name). Run: [ competitive research snapshot ](../competitive research snapshot/SKILL.md) on the selected players — its comparison matrix is this step's artifact. Watch for: feature parity theater. A capability map by job to be done exposes what a feature checklist hides: two "identical" features serving different jobs badly. Step 3: Ability to Fulfill Customer Needs How well they serve real customers — outcomes, support quality, ecosystem benefits — not tech specs. Frameworks: Outcome Driven Innovation (score against customer defined outcomes); Value Proposition Canvas (their promise vs. the jobs/pains/gains that matter). Run: [ voice of customer miner ](../voice of customer miner/SKILL.md) across the sources your buyer reads — need themes, quoted verbatims, competitor weak points, and switching triggers, each with a source bias note. Watch for: vendor authored "reviews" and case studies. Independent complaint clusters are the signal; curated success stories are marketing. Step 4: Compilation of Business Information The financial, organizational, and market baseline: structure, revenue streams, growth levers, channels. Frameworks: Business Model Canvas (how the whole machine fits together); revenue stream breakdown; sales channel profiling (direct vs. OEM vs. VAR vs. platform). Run: [ company intel ](../company intel/SKILL.md) per deep dive competitor — its eleven section output (financials, offers, org signals) is this step's artifact; FININT sources per intelligence collection disciplines do the heavy lifting. Watch for: press release accounting. Filings and earnings calls outrank announcements — companies lie less where lying is a felony. Step 5: Perception and Relative Positioning How buyers perceive you versus them — in promise, emotion, and mental association, not capability. Frameworks: Ries & Trout positioning theory (the battle is for the buyer's mind); perceptual mapping (price vs. value perception plots; find the uncontested space); Blue Ocean strategy canvas. Run: contrast their stated positioning (Step 2 snapshots) against customer language (Step 3 review mining); draft or revise with [ positioning statement ](../positioning statement/SKILL.md). Watch for: the promise delivery gap — where a competitor's marketing writes checks their reviews say they don't cash. That gap is a positioning counter move waiting to be claimed. Step 6: Competitors' Strategic Direction Where they're going, not where they are — the step that lets you preempt instead of react. Frameworks: Hamel & Prahalad's strategic intent (read the ambition behind the moves); the Innovation Ambition Matrix (core/adjacent/transformational mix of their bets). Run: the forward looking disciplines in [ intelligence collection disciplines ](../intelligence collection disciplines/SKILL.md) — TECHINT (patent clusters, trademark filings, preprints), HUMINT (hiring surges, leadership moves), FININT (earnings language, M&A themes), MASINT (supply chain, facility buildout) — fused via the confidence stacking rule. [ competitive intel watch ](../competitive intel watch/SKILL.md) keeps this step running on a cadence after the initial pass. Watch for: single signal panic. One patent is exploration; a cluster plus a hiring surge plus a subdomain cert is a committed bet. Stack before you brief. Step 7: Produce the Outputs Close by building what the audience consumes — offer as a numbered menu: 1. Battle cards for the field — [ battle card builder ](../battle card builder/SKILL.md) 2. Executive comparison matrix — from Step 2's snapshot 3. Positioning counter moves — from Step 5's gap analysis 4. Threat assessment brief — Step 6's fused signals, with confidence levels and recommended responses Then set the maintenance cadence: [ competitive intel watch ](../competitive intel watch/SKILL.md) on the schedule the artifact mapping in intelligence collection disciplines prescribes (weekly SIGINT layer for cards, quarterly deep passes for direction). A copy/paste engagement tracker for all seven steps lives in [ template.md ](template.md). Examples Scoping to the decision (fictional): the decision is deal defense against one rival in enterprise deals. The right subset is Steps 2, 3, and 5 on that one competitor, straight into a battle card — Steps 1, 4, and 6 add days, not win rate. The orchestrator's value is permission to skip : "Based on your decision, I recommend Steps 2→3→5 only. Run the full six? 1. Yes, deal defense scope (2, 3, 5 → battle card) 2. Add Step 6 — they've been acquiring lately and I want the direction read 3. Full six step pass 4. Something else" Step 6 catching what Steps 1 5 missed: the present state read shows a competitor stable and mid pack. The direction pass finds a patent cluster in a new classification, four platform engineer postings, and an earnings call where the CFO declined to break out R&D — three disciplines, one story: a platform pivot in progress. The threat assessment brief re ranks them from "monitor" to "act," a quarter before their announcement would have forced a reactive scramble. See [ examples/sample.md ](examples/sample.md) for a complete worked engagement (fictional FSM software market) showing the orchestration decisions — scoping menu, recorded skips, and step to step compounding — with links into the delegated skills' own worked artifacts. [ examples/sample industrial.md ](examples/sample industrial.md) shows the umbrella bending — steps merged, one run out of order, cadence slowed — with each call's reasoning stated. Common Pitfalls Running all six on autopilot. The steps are a menu, not a mandate. Scope to the decision or the analysis ships after the decision got made without it. Skipping Step 6. Present state analysis ages the moment it ships; direction analysis is what buys you a quarter of lead time. Teams that skip it are perpetually surprised on launch day. Framework name dropping. Citing Five Forces without rating the forces, or Kano without classifying a single feature. A framework earns its mention by producing a judgment. Analysis without outputs. Six beautiful steps and no battle card, no matrix, no brief. Step 7 isn't optional — research is only done when it names the artifact it changes. One time heroics. A grand annual analysis that's stale by month three. The process ends by installing the watch cadence, or it didn't end — it just stopped. References [ market landscape scan ](../market landscape scan/SKILL.md) (Workflow) — Step 1 [ competitive research snapshot ](../competitive research snapshot/SKILL.md) (Workflow) — Step 2 [ voice of customer miner ](../voice of customer miner/SKILL.md) (Workflow) — Step 3 [ company intel ](../company intel/SKILL.md) (Workflow) — Step 4 [ positioning statement ](../positioning statement/SKILL.md) (Component) — Step 5 [ competitive intel watch ](../competitive intel watch/SKILL.md) (Workflow) — Step 6 cadence + maintenance [ battle card builder ](../battle card builder/SKILL.md) (Workflow) — Step 7 output [ intelligence collection disciplines ](../intelligence collection disciplines/SKILL.md) (Component) — signal channels throughout [ autonomous investigation ](../autonomous investigation/SKILL.md) (Workflow) — evidence discipline throughout External frameworks: Porter, How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy (HBR, 1979); Kano, attractive quality theory; Moore, Crossing the Chasm (Whole Product); Ulwick, Outcome Driven Innovation; Osterwalder & Pigneur, Business Model Generation ; Ries & Trout, Positioning ; Hamel & Prahalad, Competing for the Future (HBR, 1994); Nagji & Tuff, Managing Your Innovation Portfolio (HBR, 2012) Adapted from practitioner experience running struct

competitive-analysis-process