How to use the Competitor Positioning Map Generator.
Choose comparison axes that reflect a buying decision. Explain each placement with supplied evidence rather than scoring unfamiliar competitors from intuition.
Make the workflow fit your task.
Choose two dimensions that influence the customer's buying decision and define how each will be measured. Place competitors only where supplied evidence supports both dimensions, leaving uncertain positions visibly unresolved.
- What you provide
- Supplied competitors and comparison criteria.
- What you get
- Positioning matrix with evidence for placements.
See the input and the result.
Illustrative input and output · a teaching example, not a live WebAct run
Example input
Use supplied 1–5 scores: setup effort, where 1 is low; customization, where 5 is high. Product A: 1,2. Product B: 4,5. Product C: setup unknown, customization 3.
Completed example
Map axes: horizontal = setup effort; vertical = customization. A: (1,2), low setup effort and limited customization. B: (4,5), higher setup effort and more customization. C: not fully placed; customization 3, setup evidence missing. Interpretation: A and B offer different trade-offs. C needs setup evidence before a comparable position can be assigned.
Load this input into the prompt, then copy it to WebAct to try the task. Your result may differ from the illustration.
Decisions and troubleshooting.
Can subjective dimensions be used on a positioning map?
Yes, if the scoring method and evidence are explicit. A subjective axis should not be presented as an objective market measurement.
Why does the map place our product in the best corner by default?
Recheck the axes and apply the same criteria to every product. The map should reveal trade-offs rather than manufacture an advantage.
Try it with your own source.
Replace the example with your material in the task prompt. Keep the requirements you need, then copy the task into WebAct.
Customize and copy the task ↑