| name | positioning |
| description | Guide founders and teams through a structured positioning statement exercise. Combines competitive research, strategic questioning, and team alignment to produce a sharp, honest positioning statement. Use when a company needs to define who they are, what they offer, and why anyone should care. |
Positioning Skill
Structured positioning statement exercise for startups and teams. Combines deep competitive research with forced-choice strategic questions to produce an honest, compressed positioning statement.
Designed for accelerator portfolio companies, internal use, or any team that can't answer "why us?" in one sentence.
Philosophy
Most positioning exercises produce corporate fluff because they skip the hard questions. This skill forces honesty by:
- Researching competitors BEFORE asking questions (so you can't hide from reality)
- Making every question a forced choice (no "all of the above")
- Requiring the team to write independently, then collide answers
- Compressing the final output to under 30 words
The output is not marketing copy. It's a strategic alignment tool.
Workflow
PHASE 1: Context gathering
Action: Use AskUserQuestion to collect basic info.
Questions:
1. "What does the company do? (2-3 sentences, plain language)"
- Free text
2. "Who is the target customer today?"
- Free text
3. "What stage? What's the team size?"
- Options: [Pre-seed solo/duo, Pre-seed with team (3-8), Seed, Series A+]
4. "Is there an existing website, pitch deck, or memo I should read?"
- Free text (URLs or file paths)
If the user provides a file path or URL: Read it. Extract product description, claimed differentiators, current messaging, pricing, and team.
If this is for a portfolio company (user specifies): Check ~/CybosVault/private/deals/<slug>/ for existing research.
PHASE 2: Competitive research
Action: Launch 2 parallel research agents.
Agent 1: Direct competitors
subagent_type: market-researcher
prompt: |
Research the competitive landscape for: [company description from Phase 1].
Find:
1. The 3-5 closest competitors (same customer, same problem)
2. For each: one-liner positioning, pricing, key differentiator, weakness
3. What do ALL of them say? (common claims = table stakes, not differentiators)
4. What does NONE of them say? (potential white space)
Output as a markdown table + 3 bullet summary.
Agent 2: Adjacent/aspirational competitors
subagent_type: company-researcher
prompt: |
Research companies adjacent to: [company description from Phase 1].
Find:
1. 2-3 companies solving a related problem for the same customer
2. 2-3 companies solving the same problem for a different customer
3. Any company that this team might secretly aspire to be (the "we're like X but for Y" reference)
For each: one-liner, why they matter as context.
After agents return: Present findings to user as a compact summary. Ask:
AskUserQuestion:
- "Anything missing or wrong in this competitive picture?"
Options: [Looks right, Let me add/correct]
- "Which competitor do founders most often compare you to?"
Free text
PHASE 3: The four questions
Action: Present the four positioning questions using AskUserQuestion. Each question is informed by the competitive research.
IMPORTANT: Frame questions using SPECIFIC competitor names and findings from Phase 2. Do not use generic placeholders.
Q1: The founder/customer test
header: "The customer test"
question: |
Your ideal customer is evaluating you against [TOP COMPETITOR 1] and [TOP COMPETITOR 2].
They can only pick one. Why do they pick you?
Rules:
- Don't say "price" or "we're cheaper"
- Don't say "better technology" without specifics
- Don't say "customer service" (everyone says this)
options:
- [Generate 3-4 options based on research findings, each representing a distinct strategic direction]
- "Something else (write your own)"
Q2: The honest gap
header: "The honest gap"
question: |
What is the single biggest reason your ideal customer says NO today?
Be specific. Not "we're early stage" — that's a cop-out.
options:
- [Generate 3-4 options based on competitive weaknesses found in research]
- "Something else (write your own)"
Q3: The core bet
header: "The core bet"
question: |
You can only invest in ONE of these directions for the next 6 months.
Which one?
options:
- [Generate 3-4 options based on the white space found in research,
each with a 1-sentence description of what it means concretely]
- "Something else (write your own)"
Q4: Market scope
header: "Market scope"
question: |
Which market are you actually in? Pick the one that defines your roadmap.
options:
- [Generate 3-4 market definitions from narrow to broad,
based on the company's product and competitive research.
Example: "Smart contract security for Solidity only" vs
"AI code security for all languages" vs
"Critical infrastructure verification"]
PHASE 4: Team collection
Action: After the user answers all four questions, generate the team exercise.
Output a clean markdown block that the user can copy-paste to their team:
# Positioning Exercise — [Company Name]
Answer each question independently. Don't discuss with teammates first.
Spend max 10 minutes total. Gut reactions > polished answers.
## 1. The customer test
[Customized question with competitor names from research]
## 2. The honest gap
[Customized question]
## 3. The core bet
[Customized question with forced-choice options]
## 4. Market scope
[Customized question with scope options]
## 5. Positioning statement
Fill in, keep under 30 words:
We help [WHO] achieve [WHAT] through [HOW], unlike [ALTERNATIVE].
---
Return all answers to [user name] by [user specifies deadline].
Then ask:
AskUserQuestion:
- "Send this to your team and paste all their replies here when you have them.
How many people will respond?"
Free text
PHASE 5: Synthesis
Action: When user pastes team replies, analyze them.
Analysis structure:
- Alignment map — Where does everyone agree? (These are real. Use them.)
- Contradiction map — Where do people disagree? (These are the strategic decisions that need to be made.)
- Surprise findings — Anything one person said that nobody else did but is clearly right.
- Gap analysis — Questions nobody answered well (signals the team hasn't thought this through).
Present this analysis, then ask:
AskUserQuestion:
- "For each contradiction, which direction do you want to go?"
[Present each contradiction as a forced binary choice]
PHASE 6: Final positioning statement
Action: Generate the combined positioning statement.
Output format:
# [Company Name] — Positioning Statement
## The customer test
[2-3 sentences. Lead with the answer. No fluff.]
## The honest gap
[1-2 sentences. Brutally honest.]
## The core bet
[2-3 sentences. What you're building, what exists today vs. planned.]
## Market scope
[1 sentence. The market you chose and what it excludes.]
## Positioning statement
[Under 30 words. Fill in the template:]
We help [WHO] achieve [WHAT] through [HOW], unlike [ALTERNATIVE].
Quality rules for final output:
- No sentence over 20 words
- No adjectives that can't be verified (remove "innovative", "cutting-edge", "world-class", "unique")
- Every claim must be either (a) already true or (b) explicitly marked as a bet
- If something is aspirational, say "By [date], we plan to..." — not "We are..."
- Total length: under 200 words for all sections combined
Save to: Ask user where to save. Suggest ~/CybosVault/private/deals/<slug>/positioning.md for portfolio companies or a path the user specifies.
PHASE 7: Iteration (optional)
If user wants to iterate, use AskUserQuestion to identify which section needs work. Re-run only that section's question with tighter constraints.
Anti-patterns to avoid
- Don't generate positioning without research. The competitive context is what makes questions sharp.
- Don't let the user skip the team exercise. Solo positioning statements are echo chambers.
- Don't use marketing language. If it sounds like it belongs on a SaaS landing page, rewrite it.
- Don't accept "all of the above" answers. Force choices. The pain of choosing IS the exercise.
- Don't make the final statement longer than 30 words. Compression is clarity.
