# Positioning canvas · [Product or offer] · v[n] · [Date] **Owner:** [PM] and [PMM] **Decision maker:** [Name] **Status:** Thesis / Validated / Under review **Scope:** Single product / Suite or platform / Company / Combination: [which] **Champion persona:** [role, from the buying group] **Review date:** [date or after N qualified deals] **Evidence used:** [win/loss for which period, number of discovery interviews, pilots, usage data, evals] ## 1. Competitive alternatives (what customers would do if we didn't exist) | Alternative | How often it appears in deals (source) | Where it falls short for best-fit customers | |---|---|---| | [Status quo or manual process] | | | | [Competitor or category] | | | | [Do nothing] | | | ## 2. Differentiated capabilities (what we have that the alternatives lack) | Capability | Which alternatives lack it | How we know (evidence) | |---|---|---| | | | | ## 3. Value themes ("so what?" for each capability, grouped into two to four themes) | Value theme | Capabilities that deliver it | Proof we have today | Proof still needed | |---|---|---|---| | | | | | ## 4. Best-fit customers - Characteristics that make a customer care a lot about this value: [size, situation, tech stack, trigger events] - Characteristics that predict a poor fit: [ ] - Example best-fit customers (from won deals): [ ] ## 5. Market category - Style chosen: Head to head / Big fish in a small pond / New category - Category or subsegment: [name] - Why this frame makes our value obvious: [ ] - Budget line and shortlist test: [does the buyer already budget and shortlist for this?] - Styles rejected and why: [ ] ## Optional: relevant trend - Trend: [ ] How it links to present value: [ ] Risk of sounding like hype: [ ] ## Decision - Decided on [date] by [names]. Logged in decision log as [ID].