Know who you're dealing with before deciding where to invest
Almost all of the companies we meet have already conducted a competitor analysis. Once.
Usually in connection with a business plan, a rebranding, or the addition of a partner.
Then the document was left in a folder, and the market took on a life of its own.
Meanwhile, one competitor adjusted its prices, another changed its message, and a third entered the market through a channel that no one else was using at the time.
It’s not a fault: it happens every time analysis is treated as a project rather than a tool.
The relevant question isn’t whether you did it. It’s how old it is.
Anyone who has been working in marketing and communications for long enough has compiled a review of the competition the old-fashioned way: they collected catalogs, price lists, advertising pages, and newspaper clippings, and from that pile, a picture emerged.
The questions were as follows:
Those questions haven’t changed. What has changed is the time when they can be answered.
The retrospective took place once a year and captured what had already happened: a campaign viewed in the fall reflected a decision made in the spring.
Today, those same signs can be recognized as they happen:
The delay between a competitor’s move and the moment you can see it has been reduced from months to days.
This changes what makes sense to buy. An annual report describes a market that has since shifted.
An up-to-date tool tells you where we stand right now, and thus informs your decisions rather than just providing hindsight.
It isn’t useful to everyone at the same time. It’s useful when a decision is based on an assumption about competitors, and that assumption has never been verified.
The process is always the same, and we’re telling you this before we start so you’ll know what happens and when. It’s called FARO by Factory.
Competitive analysis looks at the companies that compete directly with yours: who they are, what they offer, and how they communicate.
Market analysis looks at the market as a whole: whether it is growing or shrinking, what share you hold, and whether you are recognized as a leader.
The first tells you who you’re competing against; the second tells you where the market you’re in is headed.
There comes a point when analysis becomes uncomfortable: when it shows that a smaller competitor is taking over a space you thought was yours.
It’s also the moment when it matters the most, because you still have time to decide whether to hold on to it or let it go.
The choice is yours: our job is to give you the full picture before the market makes the decision for you.
Competitive benchmarking measures performance: it takes a few key indicators—prices, delivery times, and channel presence—and compares them across a selected list of companies, including those outside your industry when they’re the best at it.
Competitive analysis interprets: it brings together offerings, communication, and positioning to reach a conclusion. The first provides comparable figures; the second offers direction.
The cost of a competitive analysis isn’t listed on a price sheet, because two companies with the same revenue may have very different scopes of operation.
These are the factors that determine it, and we’re putting them in writing before we begin.
Regarding timelines: A preliminary, usable map is typically available within four to six weeks of the project’s launch. The impact on decision-making becomes apparent starting with the next planning cycle.
The method remains the same; what changes are the questions people ask, the channels they use, and the timing of their decisions. These are the four areas where we have the most expertise.
It typically takes four to six weeks to produce a usable initial map. The time required depends on the number of competitors and markets included in the scope, which are determined during the first phase.
Fewer than the number that come to mind instinctively. A carefully selected group of six to eight companies says more than twenty chosen for the sake of completeness, because it allows for a close comparison rather than just a list.
A competitive positioning map, profiles of competitors within the scope, a list of the gaps between you and them, and actions ranked by priority. All presented in a format ready for use in an executive meeting.
It starts with who the customer compares you to when making a choice—which is often someone different from you. Substitutes also come into play—that is, alternatives that solve the same problem in a different way.
The stable elements—offering, structure, and distribution—remain consistent for a year. Communication and digital presence change within weeks, so it’s best to keep a close eye on them.
Yes, and often you need more than that. Getting to know people is different from understanding their choices: the actual price they charge, the sales channel they’re trying out, or the customer they’ve just acquired—you don’t find out these things at a trade show.
Tools provide data, and they are the same for everyone. The difference lies in the choice of scope, the interpretation of the data, and the decision that follows: that is where an analysis becomes useful rather than merely voluminous.
It depends on the number of competitors and markets, the level of detail required regarding prices, and whether this is a one-time snapshot or an ongoing observation. The factors are listed above, and the scope is defined before we begin.
Who do you think are your three main competitors?
Give us those three names: during our first conversation, we’ll tell you if it really is them—and what’s missing from the picture.
From there, you can tell within half an hour whether a test is needed right away or can wait.
