Positioning Statement Skill — Clarify Product Positioning Using the Geoffrey Moore Framework

Skill Overview

positioning-statement is a skill based on the positioning framework from Geoffrey Moore’s Crossing the Chasm. Using a fill-in-the-blank template combining a “value proposition + differentiation statement,” it helps you clarify who your product serves, what unmet need it addresses, what category it belongs to, what outcomes it delivers, and how it differs from competitors. You can complete an initial positioning statement aligned across your team in approximately 10–15 minutes.

Use Cases

1. Defining the market positioning of a new product for the first time: After launching a product or undergoing a major transformation, you need to articulate for the first time exactly “who we serve and what problem we solve,” avoiding vague positioning that claims to “serve everyone.”
2. Sharpening positioning against specific competitors: Your existing positioning sounds vague or like “positioning theater,” and you need to refine differentiation against two specific competitors (or alternatives such as Excel).
3. Aligning product strategy across the team: Founders, product, marketing, and sales have inconsistent views on “who we serve, what we solve, and why we’re different,” and need a unified statement to guide communications and decision-making.

Core Features

1. Moore template–based drafting: Fill in the structure step by step: “For [target customer] / that need [unmet need] / [product name] is a [category] / that [benefit] / Unlike [competitor] / provides [differentiation].” The skill drafts only from the information you provide, asks about what is missing, and does not repeat questions you have already answered.
2. Section-by-section quality checks: Review the specificity of the target customer (can you describe this person to a recruiter?), clarity of the need, choice of category, and outcome orientation (what the user “gets” rather than what the product “has”), while exposing assumptions that do not hold up.
3. Five-question stress test and anti-pattern detection: Pressure-test the positioning with five questions: Can customers recognize themselves? Is the need supported by evidence? Does the category help or constrain the positioning? Can the differentiation be proven? Can it guide feature decisions? The skill also identifies common pitfalls—for example, creating a straw man out of “outdated legacy systems,” treating a list of features as benefits, or using differentiation that cannot be verified.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between a positioning statement, a tagline, and an elevator pitch?

A positioning statement is not a marketing slogan. A tagline aims to be memorable (such as “Just Do It”), while an elevator pitch aims to be delivered in 30 seconds. A positioning statement is a strategic clarification tool that forces you to make choices about your target customer, their needs, and your differentiation. It is written for internal teams to align strategy and guide PRDs and go-to-market materials, rather than being used directly in customer-facing campaigns.

What information should I prepare before using this skill?

You only need two things at minimum: the product and the target customer (you can include them directly after the skill name when invoking it—for example, “Write a positioning statement for a product that provides feature flags to platform leaders at engineering organizations with more than 200 employees”). If you already know the unmet need, category, primary competitors, or other details, you can provide those as well. The skill will ask targeted follow-up questions about anything missing rather than making you start from scratch.

How can I tell whether the positioning statement is effective?

The skill includes a stress test: Read the “target customer” sentence aloud and see whether a real customer can recognize themselves in it. The need should be supported by interviews or data. Differentiation should be falsifiable—for example, “10× faster than a certain competitor when querying datasets under 1 TB” is more defensible than “revolutionary AI.” Finally, check whether it can answer decision-making questions such as “Should we build this feature?” If the answer to any question is “no” or “not convincingly,” revise the positioning.