Skip to content

Competitive Analysis

Understanding existing solutions as Discovery input — not as a marketing exercise. What the named person uses today instead of nothing, and what they would substitute if our product disappeared. Currently a gap in the corpus.

This is a gap area

The chain has not yet produced a considered discipline for competitive analysis as Discovery input. The framing here is provisional. Filling this is part of the corpus's job.

Owners: PO, Designer Phase it would live in: Before We Build (Volume II)

What the practice would look like

Competitive analysis applied to the moment we're shaping, not to the market in aggregate:

  1. Identify substitutes. "What does Gal do today instead of using our shortcut?" The substitute might be: another product, a manual workaround, a Slack-thread-with-a-colleague, or simply absorbing the friction.
  2. Witness the substitute. Same observation discipline. Sit with the person using the substitute. Time-stamped notes. What does it do well? Where does it fail them?
  3. Map the boundary. "What does the substitute do that we can't easily match? What does it not do that we can?" Honest both directions.
  4. Frame the prediction against the substitute. "Our shortcut saves 32 minutes per session. The current workaround (post-it notes in the grading book) saves them 5 minutes. The differential is 27."

Why this is a gap

The chain's discovery discipline is deep on the person. It is thin on the alternative. A team that observes only its own users may build the right product for the wrong market context — one where a competitor's product already does 80% of the job at half the friction.

The complementary craft, Market & Competitive Awareness, is also a gap. Together they would form the outward-facing leg of discoveryobserving not just the person, but the landscape the person navigates.

What it would NOT be

  • A feature matrix. "We do X, they do Y, we don't do Z." That is sales analysis, not Discovery.
  • An exercise in differentiation. "What makes us unique?" That is positioning, not Discovery.
  • A reason to copy. "They have feature X, so we should too." That is solution-first, the chain's anti-pattern.

The discipline would be the same as observation: witness what exists, in use, before deciding what to build.

200apps · How We Work · NWIRE