positioning

name	positioning
description	Use when the user wants to position our product, write our value proposition, draft a positioning statement, decide how do we frame this vs competitors, or define messaging pillars. Crafts a positioning statement, value proposition, and proof-backed messaging using April Dunford's method and the value proposition canvas.
tier	guided
time	60-90 min
inputs	alternatives customers weigh, and your unique attributes
outputs	strategy/positioning.md

Positioning

Positioning is the deliberate choice of the context you want your product judged in — the frame that makes its value obvious to the people who care most. This skill follows April Dunford's approach (Obviously Awesome): you don't invent positioning, you uncover it by reasoning from real competitive alternatives to what only you do, to the value that creates, to who values it most, to the market category that makes it all click. It pairs that with a value proposition canvas (customer jobs/pains/gains mapped to your pain relievers and gain creators) so the messaging is grounded, not aspirational.

Grounded in: Obviously Awesome — April Dunford: position from competitive alternatives → unique attributes → value → best-fit customer → market frame. Go deeper (The Product Channel): Master the Art of Product Sense

When to use this

• Launching a product, feature, or category and need a sharp frame of reference
• Sales/marketing keep describing the product differently — no shared story
• You're losing to "do nothing" or to a competitor you're actually better than
• Rewriting a homepage, pitch, or one-liner that lists features instead of value
• Repositioning after a pivot, new segment, or crowded market

The positioning components (Dunford)

1. Competitive alternatives — what customers would use instead if you didn't exist (including doing nothing or a manual workaround).
2. Unique attributes — the features/capabilities you have that the alternatives don't.
3. Value — what those attributes actually enable for the customer (the benefit, not the feature).
4. Best-fit customers — the buyers who care a lot about that value, so they buy quickly and stay.
5. Market category / frame of reference — the context you place the product in so the value is immediately obvious.

Before you start (gather these)

• The product — what it does, concretely
• The best-fit customer — who gets the most value, fastest (not "everyone")
• The real alternatives — what they use today, including manual workarounds and "nothing"
• What's genuinely unique — capabilities the alternatives lack (be honest)
• Proof — metrics, customer quotes, mechanisms that back each claim

If any of these is thin — especially uniqueness or proof — ask the user rather than invent differentiation. Fabricated uniqueness produces positioning that collapses on contact with a real buyer.

Process

1. List the true alternatives. What does the best-fit customer actually do today? Include the status quo / "do nothing." This is the baseline you're being compared against.
2. Identify unique attributes. For each alternative, note what you have that it doesn't. Keep only attributes that are real and demonstrable.
3. Translate attributes → value. For each unique attribute, ask "so what does that let the customer do / avoid / gain?" Stop at the benefit the customer would pay for.
4. Name the best-fit customer who values it most. Which segment has characteristics that make them care intensely about this value? Describe them specifically.
5. Choose the market frame of reference. Pick the category/context that makes your value obvious to that customer. The right frame can make a strength visible that a different frame hides.
6. Draft the artifacts. Write the positioning statement, the value proposition (jobs → pains relieved → gains created), and 3 messaging pillars — each pillar a claim paired with a concrete proof point.

Output template

REASONING (work the 5 Dunford components before the artifacts)
1. Competitive alternatives: [what they'd use instead, incl. "do nothing"]
2. Unique attributes:        [what you have that the alternatives don't]
3. Value:                    [what those attributes enable for the customer]
4. Best-fit customers:       [who cares most about that value, specifically]
5. Frame of reference:       [the category/context that makes the value obvious]

FRAME OF REFERENCE (chosen vs rejected, and why)
Chosen:    [the category/context you're placing the product in]
Rejected:  [the frame(s) you considered and dropped]
Why:       [why the chosen frame makes a strength visible that the rejected one hides]

POSITIONING STATEMENT
For [best-fit customer] who [need/struggle],
[product] is a [market category]
that [key value / what it enables].
Unlike [primary alternative], we [core differentiation].
(If the best-fit-customer and value clauses run long, split this into two
sentences rather than forcing one unwieldy line — clarity beats a single line.)

VALUE PROPOSITION
Customer jobs:        [what they're trying to get done]
Pains relieved:       [the frustrations/costs you remove]
Gains created:        [the outcomes/upside you add]

MESSAGING PILLARS
(Tag weak or unverified proof inline, e.g. [flag: pre-GA], [flag: self-reported],
[flag: single customer], [flag: projected] — never present it as settled evidence.)
1. [Claim] — Proof: [metric / mechanism / customer evidence] [flag: ... if weak]
2. [Claim] — Proof: [metric / mechanism / customer evidence] [flag: ... if weak]
3. [Claim] — Proof: [metric / mechanism / customer evidence] [flag: ... if weak]

WHO IT'S NOT FOR
[segments to explicitly de-prioritize, and why]

Avoid (anti-patterns)

• Feature lists masquerading as value — "has X, Y, Z" instead of what X, Y, Z let the customer do
• Differentiation no one cares about — true but irrelevant, or relevant but untrue
• Positioning for everyone — no best-fit customer means no sharp frame and weak messaging
• Claims with no proof — every pillar needs evidence, or it's just a slogan
• Wrong frame of reference — competing in a category where your strengths read as table stakes

Tips

• Start from the alternative, not the product — value only exists relative to what they'd use instead.
• "Do nothing" is almost always the real competitor; name it.
• A good best-fit customer is exclusionary on purpose — if it excludes no one, it's too broad.
• The frame of reference does the heavy lifting; test two and see which makes the value self-evident.
• If a pillar can't be paired with proof, it's a hypothesis — flag it, don't ship it.