• Needs to map the competitive landscape for a product or market
• Wants to conduct a SWOT analysis on their product or a competitor
• Asks to compare features between products or build a comparison matrix
• Needs to define or refine product positioning against competitors
• Wants to create a 2x2 positioning map or perceptual map
• Needs to analyze competitor pricing models or packaging
• Wants to set up ongoing competitor monitoring
• Is preparing a competitive brief for stakeholders, investors, or sales
• Needs to understand Porter's Five Forces for a market or industry

• Internal product roadmap prioritization with no competitive context - use a product-strategy skill instead
• Financial due diligence on acquisition targets - competitive analysis informs but does not replace financial modeling

1. Analyze objectively, not emotionally - Resist the urge to minimize competitor strengths or inflate their weaknesses. An honest assessment, including where competitors are genuinely better, is the only kind that produces useful strategy. Teams that dismiss strong competitors end up blindsided.
2. Focus on jobs-to-be-done, not features - Features are outputs. What matters is which customer jobs competitors are solving, and how well. A competitor with fewer features who solves the core job 10x better is more dangerous than a feature-rich product that solves it mediocrely.
3. Update quarterly - Competitive landscapes shift fast. A snapshot older than 90 days is unreliable for strategy. Build a lightweight monitoring process rather than relying on one-time deep dives, and timestamp every artifact.
4. Differentiate, don't copy - Feature parity is a race to the bottom. When a competitor has a feature you lack, the question is not "should we build it?" but "is this a must-have for our target customer, or for their target customer?" Copy only table-stakes features that block deals; otherwise differentiate.
5. Indirect competitors matter most - The biggest threat often comes from adjacent markets, not head-to-head rivals. The company solving your customer's problem with a different category of product - spreadsheets, services firms, DIY workarounds - is frequently more dangerous than your nearest feature competitor.

• Direct competitors - Same target customer, same job-to-be-done, same category. Customers evaluate you against these explicitly.
• Indirect competitors - Same job-to-be-done, different category or approach. Often invisible on battlecards but responsible for many lost deals.
• Substitutes - Alternative behaviors that eliminate the need for any software solution at all (e.g., spreadsheets, manual processes, outsourced services).
• Potential entrants - Well-resourced companies in adjacent markets with high strategic motivation to enter your space.

references/analysis-frameworks.md

references/analysis-frameworks.md

1. Define the customer and job first - "Our customer is [persona] trying to [job-to-be-done]. They currently solve this with [alternatives]."
2. List all categories - Direct, indirect, substitutes, potential entrants. Aim for 8-15 entries before filtering.
3. Score each on two dimensions - Relevance to your target customer (High / Medium / Low) and strategic importance (must-watch / monitor / low priority).
4. Produce a tiered list - Tier 1 (2-4 must-watch), Tier 2 (4-6 monitor), Tier 3 (track passively).

Market: [name]
Dated: [YYYY-MM-DD]

Tier 1 - Must Watch
- [Competitor]: [One sentence on why they matter]

Tier 2 - Monitor
- [Competitor]: [One sentence]

Tier 3 - Track Passively
- [Competitor]: [One sentence]

Key trends reshaping the landscape:
- [Trend 1]
- [Trend 2]

1. List only features that matter to the buying decision - omit table-stakes that everyone has and no one values distinctively.
2. Use consistent evidence - don't use hands-on testing for yourself and marketing copy for competitors. Use the same source type for each row.
3. Rate with nuance - avoid binary checkmarks. Use: Full / Partial / Roadmap / No.
4. Source and date every cell. A matrix with no timestamps is worse than useless.

Feature Area | Feature         | Your Product | Comp A  | Comp B  | Comp C
-------------|-----------------|--------------|---------|---------|-------
Core         | [Feature 1]     | Full         | Full    | Partial | No
Core         | [Feature 2]     | Full         | Partial | No      | No
Security     | SSO/SAML        | Full         | Full    | No      | Full
Integrations | [Integration 1] | Full         | No      | Full    | No

Key: Full = complete | Partial = limited/incomplete | Roadmap = announced | No = absent
Sources: [Comp A: pricing page + trial, YYYY-MM-DD] ...

1. Capture public data - Pricing page, G2/Capterra reviews, job postings (ACV targets reveal deal size), SEC filings (ARR and customer count reveal ARPU).
2. Classify the model - Flat-rate / per-seat / usage-based / hybrid. Note any freemium, free trial, or open-source component.
3. Reconstruct packaging - What features are in each tier? Hard limits (seats, API calls, storage)?
4. Estimate street vs. list price - SaaS companies typically discount 20-40% off list in enterprise deals. Assume a 25% floor unless you have better signal.
5. Identify pricing as a lever - Are they using low price to land SMB and expand up? Racing to commoditize? Building an enterprise moat via switching costs?

1. Treating marketing copy as ground truth - Competitor website copy describes the best-case version of the product, not the actual user experience. A "full" checkmark on your matrix based only on the competitor's pricing page is likely wrong. Validate capability claims with G2/Capterra reviews, hands-on trials, or win/loss calls before trusting them.
2. SWOT without the SO/ST/WO/WT synthesis - A four-box SWOT with lists of bullet points produces observations, not strategy. The value comes from crossing quadrants: which strength can you deploy against which threat? Which weakness blocks which opportunity? If the SWOT doesn't close with at least four strategic implications, it's an incomplete exercise.
3. Positioning map axes that are correlated - Using "price" and "features" as the two axes of a 2x2 produces a diagonal line with all competitors clustered from bottom-left to top-right - revealing nothing actionable. Choose axes that are orthogonal: dimensions where competitors can and do trade off against each other independently.
4. Feature matrix becoming a scorekeeping exercise - A matrix that sums up "wins" per vendor and declares a winner is used by sales as a trophy, not as strategic input. Feature parity does not predict market outcomes. Use the matrix to identify your unique differentiators and the gaps that are actual deal-blockers, not to declare overall superiority.
5. Snapshot analysis without a refresh process - A competitive brief created for a board deck 6 months ago that gets recirculated without an update is actively harmful: it may show a competitor's weakness that has since been shipped, or miss a new entrant. Every competitive artifact needs a "next review" date and an owner. Mark anything older than 90 days as potentially stale.

references/

• references/analysis-frameworks.md

  - Porter's Five Forces template, full SWOT template with SO/ST/WO/WT grid, and positioning map construction guide with worked examples

On first activation of this skill in a conversation: check which companion skills are installed by running

ls ~/.claude/skills/ ~/.agent/skills/ ~/.agents/skills/ .claude/skills/ .agent/skills/ .agents/skills/ 2>/dev/null

. Compare the results against the

recommended_skills

field in this file's frontmatter. For any that are missing, mention them once and offer to install:

npx skills add AbsolutelySkilled/AbsolutelySkilled --skill <name>

Skip entirely if

recommended_skills

is empty or all companions are already installed.