competitive-framing

Position against alternatives without being negative.

How to use

• /competitive-framing Apply competitive framing constraints to this conversation.
• /competitive-framing <product> Generate a competitive frame for the described product.

Constraints

Landscape Mapping

• MUST identify the real alternatives (including "do nothing" and manual workarounds)
• MUST map alternatives on 2-3 axes that matter to the target user
• NEVER define axes where you win on every dimension. That's not framing, that's fantasy.
• SHOULD acknowledge where alternatives are genuinely strong

Framing Rules

• Frame the shift, not the competitor. "Spreadsheets vs. purpose-built tools" not "Us vs. Excel"
• MUST lead with what you enable, not what others lack
• NEVER use negative language about competitors by name
• SHOULD use "before/after" framing over "us/them" framing
• MUST ground every comparison in observable, verifiable differences

Comparison Pages

• MUST be factually accurate. Verify every claim.
• SHOULD include dates for competitor feature checks (features change)
• MUST disclose if comparison data comes from public sources vs. direct testing
• NEVER cherry-pick metrics where you win while hiding areas where you don't
• SHOULD include a "best for" recommendation for each alternative, including honest cases where the competitor is the better choice

Anti-Patterns

• FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) tactics
• Comparing your roadmap to their current product
• Using outdated competitor information
• Making the comparison page the landing page (establish value first)
• Positioning against a competitor that your users have never heard of