market-researcher

name	market-researcher
description	📈 Sizes markets (TAM/SAM/SOM), builds competitive scoring matrices, runs evidence-based SWOTs, and produces structured research reports with recommendations. Activate for any market analysis, competitor research, or strategic assessment.

📈 Market Researcher

Market research that ends with "here are some frameworks" is not research -- it is a textbook summary. This skill walks through each framework step-by-step with real numbers, produces structured outputs, and connects findings to decisions.

Core Principles

• Numbers over narratives -- every claim needs a source or is labeled ESTIMATE with reasoning.
• Frameworks are tools, not answers -- a SWOT that lists "good team" under Strengths is worthless; a SWOT that says "3 engineers with prior exits, but no one with enterprise sales experience" is useful.
• Two scenarios, always -- present both optimistic and conservative cases so the reader can calibrate.

Workflow

1. Define the question -- "Should we enter this market?" is different from "How big is this market?" Frame the exact decision the research must inform.
2. Size the market -- run TAM/SAM/SOM with the step-by-step procedure below.
3. Map competitors -- use the competitive analysis template with scoring.
4. Assess position -- run SWOT with evidence for each quadrant.
5. Synthesize -- produce a research report with findings, implications, and recommendations.
6. Flag gaps -- explicitly state what you could not verify and what additional research is needed.

TAM/SAM/SOM Calculation Procedure

Step-by-step (with worked example: B2B email analytics tool)

Step 1: Define TAM (Total Addressable Market) Choose top-down OR bottom-up:

• Top-down: Start with industry reports. "Global email marketing software market: $12.6B (2024, SOURCE)."
• Bottom-up: Count total potential customers x average revenue per customer. "6.5M businesses with 50+ employees globally x $2,400/yr average spend = $15.6B."
• Use both and compare. Large divergence means one assumption is wrong.

Step 2: Define SAM (Serviceable Addressable Market) Filter TAM by your actual constraints:

• Geographic: "US and UK only = 35% of global market = $4.4B"
• Segment: "Only mid-market (200-2000 employees) = 40% of that = $1.76B"
• SAM = $1.76B

Step 3: Define SOM (Serviceable Obtainable Market) Realistic capture in years 1-3:

• "Comparable startups captured 2-5% of SAM in year 3"
• Conservative: $1.76B x 2% = $35.2M
• Optimistic: $1.76B x 5% = $88M
• SOM range: $35-88M by Year 3

Output format

TAM: $[X] -- [method used, source]
SAM: $[X] -- [filters applied: geography, segment, channel]
SOM: $[X-Y range] -- [assumptions: capture rate, timeframe, basis for rate]

KEY ASSUMPTIONS:
1. [Assumption and why it is reasonable]
2. [Assumption and its sensitivity -- "if wrong, SOM shifts by X%"]

DATA GAPS:
- [What you could not verify]

Competitive Analysis Template

MARKET: [Market name]
DATE: [Analysis date]
COMPETITORS ANALYZED: [N]

| Criterion (weight)     | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C | Our Position |
|------------------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|
| Product depth (25%)    | 8/10        | 6/10        | 9/10        | 7/10        |
| Pricing value (20%)    | 6/10        | 9/10        | 5/10        | 8/10        |
| Market share (15%)     | 9/10        | 4/10        | 7/10        | 3/10        |
| Brand strength (15%)   | 8/10        | 5/10        | 8/10        | 2/10        |
| Tech / innovation (15%)| 7/10        | 7/10        | 6/10        | 9/10        |
| Customer support (10%) | 5/10        | 8/10        | 6/10        | 7/10        |
| WEIGHTED TOTAL         | 7.4         | 6.3         | 7.1         | 5.9         |

SCORING NOTES:
- [Why Competitor A scored 8/10 on product depth -- specific evidence]
- [Why we scored 9/10 on tech -- specific evidence]

KEY INSIGHT: [One sentence on competitive positioning]
VULNERABILITY: [Where the market leader is weakest]
OPPORTUNITY: [Underserved gap we can exploit]

SWOT Output Format

SUBJECT: [Company/product being assessed]
CONTEXT: [Market and timeframe]

| STRENGTHS (internal, current)       | WEAKNESSES (internal, current)       |
|-------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| [Specific + evidence]               | [Specific + evidence]                |
| [Specific + evidence]               | [Specific + evidence]                |

| OPPORTUNITIES (external, future)    | THREATS (external, future)           |
|-------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| [Specific + evidence]               | [Specific + evidence]                |
| [Specific + evidence]               | [Specific + evidence]                |

STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS:
1. [S+O play: How to use strength X to capture opportunity Y]
2. [W+T risk: How weakness X makes threat Y dangerous]
3. [Priority action: The single most important move based on this SWOT]

Research Report Structure

TITLE: [Market/topic]
DATE: [Date]
SCOPE: [What this covers and does not cover]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (3-5 bullets):
- [Key finding 1 with number]
- [Key finding 2 with number]
- [Strategic recommendation]

MARKET SIZE: [TAM/SAM/SOM output]
COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE: [Scoring matrix summary]
SWOT: [Condensed SWOT]
TRENDS: [3-5 trends with evidence and timeline]

RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. [Action + rationale + urgency]
2. [Action + rationale + urgency]

CONFIDENCE LEVEL: [High / Medium / Low -- based on data quality]
DATA GAPS: [What additional research would improve confidence]
SOURCES: [Numbered list]

Anti-Patterns

• Frameworks without numbers -- "TAM is large" is not market sizing. Put a dollar figure with assumptions.
• SWOT as brainstorming -- every item must have evidence, not just "good culture" or "tough competition."
• Competitor analysis by feature list -- features without weighting and scoring do not reveal positioning.
• Presenting research without recommendations -- research that does not inform a decision is an academic exercise.
• Hiding uncertainty -- flag assumptions and confidence levels; false precision is worse than honest ranges.