Assess a category, then move.
Five sections, sequential where they need to be, modular where they don't. Define the boundary. Import your competitor profiles. Map the set. Read the trajectory. Interrogate white space honestly. Synthesize a POV.
Each assessment is a self-contained file — backup, share, restore. Competitor profiles imported here are snapshotted into the assessment; re-import to refresh.
Setup & boundary.
Use case framing, category boundary, and the three concentric rings — direct competitive set, adjacency, disruption watch.
Why this assessment?
The shape of the synthesis depends on this. The same competitive data yields a different POV for an entry decision than for a repositioning decision.
Define the category.
The single most consequential analytical move. Industry-defined boundaries are organizational artifacts; consumer substitution patterns are the actual competitive reality. Define by the job, not the trade publication.
Concentric competitive context.
Three rings, each with a different analytical treatment. Direct is mapped precisely. Adjacent is tracked at low resolution. Disruption-watch isn't competitors at all — it's the categories of unknown threat where the next GLP-1 will land.
Direct ring
Where you compete head-to-head. Mapped in depth. Specific competitors get added in Section 02; this is the framing.
Adjacent ring
Categories that compete for the same occasion, wallet, or mindshare. Lower-resolution analysis — you're tracking that they're there, not profiling each one.
Disruption watch
Forces outside the category that could reshape demand. Name the type, not the specific example — "pharmacological appetite modulators" would have caught GLP-1 a year before the food industry felt it; "Ozempic" wouldn't have.
Competitive map.
Import competitor profiles, then build one or more matrix maps to expose clusters and gaps. Different axes reveal different structure.
Competitors in the competitive set
Each competitor is a card carrying structured intelligence plus attached references (research framework JSONs, completed-profile text, notes). Add cards manually, or import a Competitor Profile JSON to start one with the framework already attached.
Matrix maps
A single 2×2 is a strategic claim disguised as a chart. Add as many matrices as the analysis warrants — different axes reveal different structure. Drag dots to position each competitor.
Next: a co-pilot that reads attached completed-profile content and proposes structured attributes for each competitor — so matrix placement isn't a manual read of every doc every time.
Trajectory & disruption.
Where the category is, where it's heading, and what could change the slope. Snapshot is descriptive; vector is strategic.
Where the category is today.
Descriptive. The numbers and structure of the category at this moment. Provenance matters — claims without sources are noise.
Where it's heading.
Strategic. Snapshot is past and present; vector is the future. What's the directional read, what would change the slope, what to watch.
Slope-changers
What would change the trajectory? Specific events, decisions, or shifts that would reset the read.
Leading indicators
Signals worth watching. Things that move before the category does — they tell you whether the vector is real or a story.
Disruption signals — developed.
The signals you named in Section 01's disruption watch. Develop each here with current strength, evidence, and what it implies. To add or remove signals, go back to Section 01.
White-space interrogation.
Empty quadrants on a matrix are easy. Real opportunities require answers to two questions: why is it open, and can we actually go there.
Empty quadrants are easy. Real opportunities are harder.
For every candidate white-space, force two answers: why is it open (market-side) and can we execute (company-side). The verdict isn't auto-derived — it's a strategic claim you make once the questions are answered honestly.
Synthesis & POV.
Category truths, opportunity hypotheses, watch list. POV sized for the use case named in Section 01.
Sharp, defensible propositions about the category.
Each truth is a claim the strategist would defend in a room. Plural — most categories have 3–7 truths worth surfacing. Optional evidence refs let you point to where each claim is grounded.
Testable bets, not assertions.
Each hypothesis has three pieces: the bet itself, the actions it implies if true, and the tests that would validate or kill it. Strong hypotheses can be wrong — they make claims sharp enough to be falsified.
What to monitor going forward.
Emerging brands, signals, or developments worth tracking after the assessment closes. Each entry names what to watch, why it matters, and what it would signal if it moves.
The narrative output.
POV is the sharp written read on the category — sized to the use case named in Section 01. Implications translates the POV into action: what this means for the brand, the strategy, the next decisions.