expert-positioning

name

expert-positioning

description

Use this skill when auditing, designing, or refactoring website layouts, copywriting posture, inquiry paths, CTA structures, portfolios, case studies, or sales-to-onboarding transitions for professional services, agencies, creators, and high-end brands. Activated when analyzing positioning strategy, revising vendor copy, setting minimum engagements, or diagnosing buyer self-assessments. Examples: "audit my positioning", "WWP copy critique", "expert posture", "qualification gates", "paid diagnostic offer". Do NOT use for general copy editing (use copy-editing) or standard UI styling (use ui-ux).

Expert Positioning — Anti-Gravity OS

Apply the principles of Blair Enns's The Win Without Pitching Manifesto to transform replaceable, vendor-level copy and commodity client interactions into authoritative, practitioner-level positioning.

---

WHEN TO USE THIS

• Positioning Audits: Critiquing brand copy, services pages, or landing pages to locate posture leaks and vendor traps.
• Copy Posture Refactoring: Transforming needy, submissive, or overly enthusiastic copy into peer-professional statements.
• CTA & Conversion Gate Design: Replacing standard lead forms ("Get a free quote", "Free consult") with selective, diagnostic inquiry paths.
• Offer & Portfolio Restructuring: Shaping portfolios around diagnostic reasoning instead of visual galleries, and structuring phased services.

NEVER DO

• No Spec Creative: Never propose custom visual concepts, outlines, or mockups before engagement and payment.
• No Free Diagnosis: Never write custom plans, recommend specific strategies, or analyze client problems for free.
• No Submissive Language: Banish pleading phrases like "I'd love to help," "Thank you for the opportunity," or "We make your vision come alive."
• No Commodity CTAs: Eliminate default "Request a quote," "Free consultation," or "Free strategy session" buttons.
• No Hourly Strategic Pricing: Never price discovery, auditing, or strategic positioning by the hour.
• No Accepting Self-Diagnosis: Never agree to design/build exactly what the client prescribes without first performing an independent diagnosis.

---

1. CORE DOCTRINE: THE ENEMY IS SUBSTITUTABILITY

When the buyer sees many legitimate alternatives, the buyer controls the process. They demand free thinking, compare rates, demand detailed proposals, invite pitches, dictate timelines, and turn expertise into generic labor.

The practitioner escapes this trap through:

1. Narrow Expertise: Staking a narrow claim of focus.
2. Public Claim of Focus: Announcing specialization clearly on the brand surface.
3. Proof that Supports the Claim: Constructing case studies showing judgment and outcome.
4. Conversation instead of Presentation: Replacing pitches with mutual fit assessments.
5. Diagnosis before Prescription: Treating every engagement like a medical diagnosis.
6. Selectivity: Disqualifying poor-fit buyers early.
7. Paid Thinking: Charging for diagnostics and roadmaps.
8. Money Conversations Early: Anchoring minimum investments immediately.

---

2. THE DIAGNOSTIC SEQUENCE

When auditing a brand surface or copy document, analyze these 11 layers in order:

1. Substitute Reduction -> 2. Expertise Claim -> 3. Proof Architecture -> 4. Sales Control ->
5. Diagnostic Process -> 6. No-Free-Thinking Boundary -> 7. Money & Minimum Engagement ->
8. Offer Architecture -> 9. Copy Posture -> 10. Portfolio Authority -> 11. Inquiry Flow

---

3. THE 11 DIAGNOSTIC LAYERS

Layer 1: Substitute Reduction

• Goal: Determine whether the brand looks like one of many or one of few.
• Weak Signals: Full-service language, broad service menus, "for businesses of all sizes," "custom solutions," portfolio grids with no business context.
• Strong Signals: Narrow market or problem claim, clear "who this is for/not for" parameters, repeatable diagnostic language, visible thought leadership.

Layer 2: Expertise Claim

• Goal: Turn vague capability into a focused claim of authority.
• The Claim Formula:

  We help [Specific Buyer] solve [Specific Costly Problem] through [Expert Method] so they can [Controlled Outcome].
  

• Rule: The public claim must be narrower than total capability. The brand may be capable of more, but it must present focused depth to be believable.

Layer 3: Proof Architecture

• Goal: Build enough authority proof that the practitioner does not need to audition or pitch.
• The Six Proof Types:
  1. Focus Proof: Work and messaging cluster around a specific niche or problem.
  2. Writing Proof: Publishing ideas that educate and provoke thought rather than persuade.
  3. Diagnostic Proof: Demonstrating that work starts with analysis, not execution.
  4. Process Proof: A formal methodology proving outcomes are not random.
  5. Outcome Proof: Case studies showing commercial movement, not just visual outputs.
  6. Selectivity Proof: Visible standards, fit criteria, and the willingness to say no.

Layer 4: Sales Control

• Goal: Replace auditioning with mutual evaluation.
• Practitioner vs. Performer Dynamics:

  Performer (Commodity)	Practitioner (Expert)
  Presents to win approval / pitches	Converses to determine fit and alignment
  Accepts the buyer's evaluation process	Protects and enforces their own process
  Gives options and asks what the client likes	Recommends a single strategy based on data
  Writes proposals to persuade	Documents agreements already reached orally
  Gives thinking away to prove ability	Proves ability through diagnostic questions

Layer 5: Diagnostic Process

• Goal: Stop accepting the buyer's self-diagnosis as absolute truth.
• The Engagement Model: Diagnose -> Prescribe -> Apply -> Reapply
• Diagnostic Response Rule: When a client says: "We need a new website/logo," the practitioner responds: "That may be right. Before we recommend a prescription, we need to understand what is causing the current problem."

Layer 6: No-Free-Thinking Boundary

• Goal: Protect the firm's most valuable asset: expert strategy.
• Rule: It is acceptable to gather preliminary info to assess fit. It is never acceptable to diagnose, prescribe, concept, or write a plan before engagement and deposit.
• Policy Language: "It is our policy not to begin solving client problems before we are engaged and paid."

Layer 7: Money & Minimum Engagement

• Goal: Use financial boundaries to filter fits and project premium value.
• Rules: State the Minimum Level of Engagement (MLE) early. Require upfront deposits (1/3 to 1/2 of project, or 100% of diagnostic phase). Talk about budget support before writing proposals. Discount only after all other objections are resolved, and label it as a "one-time adjustment."

Layer 8: Offer Architecture

• Goal: Turn generic service work into controlled expert products.
• Diagnostic Offer (The MRI): A low-risk, paid, high-value first phase (e.g., Audits, Roadmaps, Blueprints) where the problem is diagnosed before executing the build.

Layer 9: Copy Posture (The Phrasing Dictionary)

• Goal: Ensure all written copy reads like peer-professional authority.
• Tone Shift Dictionary:

  Dimension	Kill (Vendor / Performer)	Use (Expert / Practitioner)
  Call to Action	"Request a free quote" / "Free consultation"	"Book a diagnostic session" / "Apply to work together"
  Introductory Pitch	"I'd love to help you build your dream website..."	"I work with companies to solve [costly problem]..."
  Budget Boundary	"What is your budget? We can make it work."	"Engagements start at $X. Let's see if the business case supports this investment."
  Execution Dictates	"Tell us what you want, and we'll build it."	"The strategy requires [direction] because [reason]..."
  Pricing Objections	"I can lower my price to win this deal."	"If we adjust the scope to X, the fee becomes Y. Otherwise, my MLE is Z."
  Qualification	"No project is too small, we work with everyone."	"We work exclusively with businesses meeting [X criteria]."
  Pleading/Hype	"We are passionate about design!!!"	"Our diagnostic process ensures predictable outcomes."

Layer 10: Portfolio Authority

• Goal: Make the portfolio prove strategic judgment rather than auditioning taste.
• Case Study Flow: Client Situation $\rightarrow$ Costly Problem $\rightarrow$ Initial Assumption $\rightarrow$ Independent Diagnosis $\rightarrow$ Strategic Decision $\rightarrow$ Application $\rightarrow$ Commercial Outcome.

Layer 11: Inquiry Flow

• Goal: Prevent the website inquiry forms from inviting commodity vendor requests.
• Diagnostic Inquiry Form Fields:
  • "What changed in the business that makes this project urgent now?"
  • "What is currently not working that you need to resolve?"
  • "What are the business goals/outcomes of this initiative?"
  • "What level of investment supports the business case for this project?"

---

4. THE SCORESYSTEM

Score the audited brand on a 0 to 5 scale across the 15 categories below:

• 0 = Absent | 1 = Weak | 2 = Partially Present | 3 = Underused | 4 = Strong | 5 = Excellent.

Categories:

1. Substitute Reduction
2. Expertise Claim
3. Focus Proof
4. Thought Leadership
5. Diagnostic Process
6. Sales Control
7. No-Free-Thinking Boundary
8. Selectivity
9. Money Conversation
10. Minimum Engagement
11. Pricing Power
12. Offer Architecture
13. Copy Posture
14. Portfolio Authority
15. Inquiry Flow

Interpretation:

• 0-25: Vendor Posture Dominates (Order-taker / Commodity)
• 26-45: Vague Expert Signals (Weak sales control)
• 46-60: Usable Authority System (Needs proof & boundary repairs)
• 61-75: Elite Practitioner Posture (Win Without Pitching ready)

---

5. OUTPUT SHAPE (contexts/positioning-audit.md)

Outputs generated under this skill must conform to this template:

# WWP Authority Diagnostic: [Client/Brand Name]

## 1. Executive Summary
- **Current Posture:** [Vendor / Vague Specialist / Expert]
- **Main Posture Leak:** [e.g., Free consultations, full-service capability page]
- **Highest Leverage Correction:** [e.g., Repackage discovery into a Paid Diagnostic, rewrite CTAs]

## 2. Posture Scorecard
- **Total Score:** [X/75]
- **Rating:** [Vendor Posture / Usable Authority / Elite Practitioner]
- **Individual Scores:**
  * Substitute Reduction: [0-5]
  * Expertise Claim: [0-5]
  * Proof Architecture: [0-5]
  * Diagnostic Process: [0-5]
  * Sales Control: [0-5]
  * No-Free-Thinking Boundary: [0-5]
  * Money Conversation: [0-5]
  * Offer Architecture: [0-5]
  * Copy Posture: [0-5]
  * Portfolio Authority: [0-5]
  * Inquiry Flow: [0-5]

## 3. Layer Audit & Recommendations
*For each layer scored under 4, provide concrete recommendations:*
- **Layer [N]: [Name]**
  - *Identified Trap:* [Specific copy snippet or structure]
  - *Action Plan:* [How to fix it to match practitioner posture]

## 4. Copy & CTA Refactoring (Before/After)
- **Primary Hero Claim:**
  - *Before:* "[Old needy claim]"
  - *After:* "[New specialist authority claim]"
- **Primary CTA & Inquiry Flow:**
  - *Before:* "[Old free quote/consult CTA]"
  - *After:* "[New diagnostic application CTA]"
- **Copy Snippet Refactors:**
  | Original Performer Copy | Refactored Practitioner Copy | Posture Shift |
  | :--- | :--- | :--- |
  | "...[old copy]..." | "...[new copy]..." | [Explanation] |

## 5. Implementation Roadmap
1. [Step 1]
2. [Step 2]
3. [Step 3]

---

6. Recommended Skill Sequence

1. Positioning Claim Builder
2. Substitutability Scorecard
3. Vendor Trap Copy Audit
4. Sales Control / Diagnostic Process Audit
5. Portfolio Authority Audit
6. Money And Minimum Engagement Filter
7. Diagnostic Offer Builder
8. Expert Posture Rewrite
9. Inquiry Flow / CTA Control Audit
10. Final WWP Scorecard

---

7. NON-NEGOTIABLE CHECKLIST

• All needy or submissive language is purged and replaced with peer-professional phrasing.
• CTAs are transitioned from free pitches (proposals/consultations) to diagnostic gates (applications/audits).
• A clear qualification filter or price anchor is integrated.
• No creative options are pitched on the page; copy emphasizes discovery and process control.
• Output conforms exactly to the structured OUTPUT SHAPE.