codexkit-competitor-intelligence

name	codexkit-competitor-intelligence
description	Build competitive intelligence briefs following the CI cycle — Plan, Collect, Analyze, Disseminate. Profile competitors, create feature comparison matrices, analyze pricing, build positioning maps, and identify win/loss patterns. Use when preparing for product launches, sales enablement, or strategic reviews.
version	1.0.0
category	knowledge

Competitive Intelligence Analyst

When to Use

• When launching a new product and need to understand competitive landscape
• When sales teams need competitive battle cards
• During quarterly strategic reviews
• When a new competitor enters the market

Procedure

Step 1 — Define Intelligence Requirements

1. Which competitors to profile? (direct, indirect, emerging)
2. Which dimensions to analyze? (product, pricing, positioning, market share, funding)
3. What decisions will this intelligence inform?
4. Audience: sales, product, executive, board?

Step 2 — Competitor Profiles

For each competitor, build a profile:

• Company overview (size, funding, geography)
• Product/service offering
• Target customer and ICP
• Pricing model and known price points
• Go-to-market strategy
• Key strengths and weaknesses
• Recent moves (launches, hires, partnerships, funding)

Step 3 — Comparison Matrix

Feature	Us	Competitor A	Competitor B	Competitor C
Feature 1	✅	✅	❌	✅
Feature 2	✅	❌	✅	❌
Pricing	$$$	$$	$$$$	$

Step 4 — Positioning Map

Plot competitors on a 2×2 perceptual map using two key dimensions:

• X-axis: e.g., Price (Low → High)
• Y-axis: e.g., Capability (Basic → Enterprise)

Step 5 — Win/Loss Analysis

Scenario	We Won	We Lost	Pattern
vs Competitor A	60%	40%	We win on features, lose on price
vs Competitor B	45%	55%	They win on brand, we win on support

Step 6 — Counter-Strategies

For each competitor, define:

• How to position against them
• Key talking points for sales
• Features/capabilities to highlight
• Objection handling for their strengths

Inputs

Input	Required	Format
Competitor list	Yes	Names and categories
Dimensions to track	Yes	List of comparison areas
Internal product data	Yes	Features, pricing, positioning
Win/loss data	Recommended	Deal outcomes by competitor

Output

## Competitive Intelligence Brief — [Market] — [Period]

### Competitor Profiles
[Summary per competitor]

### Feature Comparison Matrix
[Table with feature-by-feature comparison]

### Positioning Map

          Enterprise │         Competitor B
                     │    ★ US
                     │
          ───────────┼────────────────────
                     │    Competitor C
          Basic      │ Competitor A
                     └──Low Price──High Price──

### Win/Loss Summary
[Table with win rates and patterns]

### Battle Cards
[Per-competitor: positioning, talking points, counter-strategies]

### Early Warning Signals
1. Competitor A raised Series C — expect aggressive expansion
2. Competitor B hired ex-Google VP Product — product pivot likely

Definition of Done

• All identified competitors profiled
• Feature comparison matrix complete
• Positioning map with clear dimensions
• Win/loss patterns analyzed (if data available)
• Counter-strategies defined per competitor
• Early warning signals identified

Examples

Prompt

Build a competitive intelligence brief for our project management SaaS.
Direct competitors: Monday.com, Asana, ClickUp.
Indirect: Notion, Linear.
Compare on: features, pricing, target market, integrations.
Include battle cards for sales team.

Quality Criteria

• All claims reference specific frameworks, standards, or quantifiable data
• Content matches the stated audience's expertise level
• Recommendations are actionable — each includes a concrete next step
• No unsupported assertions or generic filler language

Verification (4C)

Check	Question
Correctness	Do referenced frameworks and standards match their official definitions?
Completeness	Are all key concepts covered without significant gaps for the stated audience?
Context-fit	Would this be useful for someone new to this domain, or is it too advanced/too basic?
Consequence	If a stakeholder acted on this immediately, what could they misinterpret?

Edge Cases

• Conflicting frameworks — State which framework takes precedence and why. Document the trade-off explicitly.
• Rapidly changing domain — Note information currency date. Flag sections likely to need updates.
• Audience has mixed expertise levels — Provide a glossary and mark advanced sections as optional.

Changelog

• v1.0.0 — Initial release