c-level-advisor/skills/competitive-intel/SKILL.md
Systematic competitor tracking that feeds CMO positioning, CRO battlecards, and CPO roadmap decisions. Use when analyzing competitors, building sales battlecards, tracking market moves, positioning against alternatives, or when user mentions competitive intelligence, competitive analysis, competitor research, battlecards, win/loss, or market positioning.
npx skillsauth add alirezarezvani/claude-skills competitive-intelInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Systematic competitor tracking. Not obsession — intelligence that drives real decisions.
competitive intelligence, competitor analysis, battlecard, win/loss analysis, competitive positioning, competitive tracking, market intelligence, competitor research, SWOT, competitive map, feature gap analysis, competitive strategy
/ci:landscape — Map your competitive space (direct, indirect, future)
/ci:battlecard [name] — Build a sales battlecard for a specific competitor
/ci:winloss — Analyze recent wins and losses by reason
/ci:update [name] — Track what a competitor did recently
/ci:map — Build competitive positioning map
Direct competitors: Same ICP, same problem, comparable solution, similar price point. Indirect competitors: Same budget, different solution (including "do nothing" and "build in-house"). Future competitors: Well-funded startups in adjacent space; large incumbents with stated roadmap overlap.
The 2x2 Threat Matrix:
| | Same ICP | Different ICP | |---|---|---| | Same problem | Direct threat | Adjacent (watch) | | Different problem | Displacement risk | Ignore for now |
Update this quarterly. Who's moved quadrants?
Track these 8 dimensions per competitor:
| Dimension | Sources | Cadence | |-----------|---------|---------| | Product moves | Changelog, G2/Capterra reviews, Twitter/LinkedIn | Monthly | | Pricing changes | Pricing page, sales call intel, customer feedback | Triggered | | Funding | Crunchbase, TechCrunch, LinkedIn | Triggered | | Hiring signals | LinkedIn job postings, Indeed | Monthly | | Partnerships | Press releases, co-marketing | Triggered | | Customer wins | Case studies, review sites, LinkedIn | Monthly | | Customer losses | Win/loss interviews, churned accounts | Ongoing | | Messaging shifts | Homepage, ads (Facebook/Google Ad Library) | Quarterly |
SWOT per Competitor:
Competitive Positioning Map (2 axis): Choose axes that matter for your buyers:
Feature Gap Analysis: | Feature | You | Competitor A | Competitor B | Gap status | |---------|-----|-------------|-------------|------------| | [Feature] | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | Your advantage | | [Feature] | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | Gap — roadmap? | | [Feature] | ✅ | ❌ | ❌ | Moat | | [Feature] | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | Competitor B only |
For Sales (CRO): Battlecards — one page per competitor, designed for pre-call prep.
See templates/battlecard-template.md
For Marketing (CMO): Positioning update — message shifts, new differentiators, claims to stop or start making.
For Product (CPO): Feature gap summary — what customers ask for that we don't have, what competitors ship, what to reprioritize.
For CEO/Board: Monthly competitive summary — 1-page: who moved, what it means, recommended responses.
Monthly (scheduled):
Triggered (event-based):
Quarterly:
This is the highest-signal competitive data you have. Most companies do it too rarely.
When to interview:
Who conducts it:
Question structure:
Aggregate findings monthly:
Signs you're over-tracking competitors:
Signs you're under-tracking:
The right posture:
| Audience | Format | Cadence | Owner | |----------|--------|---------|-------| | AEs + SDRs | Updated battlecards in CRM | Monthly + triggered | CRO | | Product | Feature gap analysis | Quarterly | CPO | | Marketing | Positioning brief | Quarterly | CMO | | Leadership | 1-page competitive summary | Monthly | CEO/COO | | Board | Competitive landscape slide | Quarterly | CEO |
One source of truth: All competitive intel lives in one place (Notion, Confluence, Salesforce). Avoid Slack-only distribution — it disappears.
| Signal | What it means | |--------|---------------| | Competitor's win rate >50% in your core segment | Fundamental positioning problem, not sales problem | | Same objection from 5+ deals: "competitor has X" | Feature gap that's real, not just optics | | Competitor hired 10 engineers in your domain | Major product investment incoming | | Competitor raised >$20M and targets your ICP | 12-month runway for them to compete hard | | Prospects evaluate you to justify competitor decision | You're the "check box" — fix perception or segment |
| Intelligence Type | Feeds To | Output Format | |------------------|----------|---------------| | Product moves | CPO | Roadmap input, feature gap analysis | | Pricing changes | CRO, CFO | Pricing response recommendations | | Funding rounds | CEO, CFO | Strategic positioning update | | Hiring signals | CHRO, CTO | Talent market intelligence | | Customer wins/losses | CRO, CMO | Battlecard updates, positioning shifts | | Marketing campaigns | CMO | Counter-positioning, channel intelligence |
references/ci-playbook.md — OSINT sources, win/loss framework, positioning map constructiontemplates/battlecard-template.md — sales battlecard templatetools
Code review automation for TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Go, Swift, Kotlin, C#, .NET, Java, C, C++, Rust, Ruby, PHP, and Dart/Flutter. Analyzes PRs for complexity and risk, checks code quality for SOLID violations and code smells, generates review reports. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, identifying issues, generating review checklists.
tools
Use when planning, funding, scoping, or synthesizing enterprise research across workstreams — clinical study design, R&D program finance, market sizing/surveys, or product/user research. Triggers on "design this clinical study", "what sample size", "R&D budget", "burn rate", "capitalize or expense", "TAM SAM SOM", "market sizing", "survey design", "segment the market", "plan user interviews", "usability test", "synthesize research insights". Forks context to route to one of four Research-Operations sub-skills (clinical-research, research-finance, market-research, product-research) and returns a digest. Distinct from ra-qm-team (regulatory submission), finance (corporate close/valuation), research/grants (funding discovery), product-team (persona/journey/live experiments), and marketing-skill (campaign analytics).
development
Use when managing the money for an internal R&D program or portfolio — building a multi-period program budget with the F&A (indirect) split, tracking burn rate and runway against value-inflection milestones, or routing R&D cost items to a capitalize-vs-expense determination. Every budget output surfaces its assumptions block; capitalize-vs-expense is decision-support only and routes to a named finance owner — it never books an entry or decides accounting treatment. Distinct from finance/financial-analysis (corporate DCF, close, valuation) and research/grants (funding discovery — this manages money already won).
development
Use when planning and synthesizing product/user research as a method-and-repository discipline — selecting the right method for the goal (generative interviews vs usability test vs concept test vs validation), computing method-based saturation/sample size with an explicit confidence level, or synthesizing coded observations into insights while flagging single-source anecdotes. Never fabricates user insight; an insight requires recurrence across independent participants. Distinct from product-team/ux-researcher-designer (persona/journey artifacts), product-discovery (discovery-sprint planning), and experiment-designer (live A/B) — this is the research-ops method + insight-repository layer.