Re: Competitor comparisons

Subject: Re: Competitor comparisons
From: Bruce Byfield <bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 18:18:34 -0800

Steve Hudson wrote:

I call this exercise feature analysis. I use a table with a column for each
product and a description column to the left of those. If the product has
that feature, I tick its box on that row. After completing the exercise one
sorts by the number of ticks in the row to show the overall support offered
to each feature by the market.

Steve's post reminds me that a distinction needs to be made between external and internal competitor comparisons.

An external competitor comparison is a marketing exercise. It usually takes a form of a table of the sort Steve describes (although I don't know whether he had only external CCs in mind or not), and is found in ads or on the back of boxes. Since space is limited in these locales, external CCs are usually very limited. Usually, only about six points can be mentioned. Since external CCs are so limited, in many cases, they are also misleading, since companies naturally want to make a comparison which make their products seem more desirable, so these six points won't necessarily be the ones that customers most want to know about.

If they are clever, any external CC will have perhaps one feature in which the competitor outclasses the company making the comparison, two to three neutral points of comparisons, and the rest in favor of the company making the comparison. Moreover, since they're public documents, they should also include sources; if the sources are web sites, then the date on which the information was gathered should be given (and a screen shot be taken, just in case legal challenges need to be met).

(On the whole, I don't like external CCs. Too often, they skirt the edge of honesty and are the kind of exercise that gives marketing a bad name.)

An internal CC may also use tables, but often includes more text and is more complete, partly because space isn't an issue, and partly because, being solely fo rthe company's use, a higher degree of honesty is possible (unless of course, it's being used for internal politics). However, at least as I do them, an internal CC also has more analysis, answering such questions as: should the company follow the lead of a competitor and add a feature? Should it answer a need met by a competitor's feature in some other way? What are the possible development priorities

In short, an internal CC is generally more exhaustive and complete. It's far more like doing an academic essay than external CC.




--
Bruce Byfield 604.421.7177 bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com

"Taking nothing but his Daddy's old bonegrip knife,
He's tr+aded just a little for the wayward life,
Work hard, never want a hand,
So says the Rose of England."
-Nick Lowe, "Rose of England






^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Be a published author! iUniverse gives you: a high-quality paperback, a
custom cover design, and distribution to 25,00 retailers. Join our almost
10,000 published authors today. http://www.iuniverse.com/media/techwr

Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.



References:
RE: Competitor comparisons: From: Steve Hudson

Previous by Author: Re: Strange Interview Practices?
Next by Author: Re: Professional references online?
Previous by Thread: RE: Competitor comparisons
Next by Thread: Re: Competitor comparisons


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads