The Four Positioning Approaches: Strategic Options

“Strategy is the art of making choices, of deliberately choosing to be different.” — Michael Porter

The Strategic Nature of Positioning

When Eric Yuan founded Zoom in 2011, the video conferencing market was already crowded with established players—WebEx, GoToMeeting, Skype, and Microsoft’s expanding communications suite. As a former WebEx executive, Yuan understood the space intimately, yet faced a profound strategic question that would determine Zoom’s entire trajectory: How should this newcomer position itself in a mature, competitive landscape?

Yuan could have chosen several paths. He might have created a new category that transcended video conferencing. He could have focused on a specific industry niche. He might have attempted to reposition how people thought about virtual communication entirely.

Instead, Yuan made a deliberate choice that would prove decisive: Zoom would be positioned as the Better Alternative—specifically, as video conferencing that “just works” in contrast to the frustrating complexity of existing solutions. This single strategic decision influenced everything from product development priorities to marketing language to pricing structure. Most crucially, it created a clear, compelling position in customers’ minds that competitors—despite vastly greater resources—struggled to displace.

This scenario illustrates the profound impact of positioning approach selection. The approach you choose doesn’t just determine marketing language; it shapes product development, resource allocation, organisational focus, competitive dynamics, and ultimately, your ability to become the obvious choice in your market.

In previous chapters, we explored how to discover your essence and translate it into a market position through a unifying idea. Now we confront an equally critical question: Which positioning approach will most effectively express that essence and create natural gravitational pull?

The Four Distinct Approaches

Through studying companies that successfully established distinctive positions across diverse sectors, four primary approaches emerge, each with different advantages, requirements, and optimal conditions:

1. Better Alternative Positioning

Definition: Positioning as an improved version of existing solutions within an established category.

When Apple introduced the iPhone, they didn’t create an entirely new category; they positioned it as a fundamentally better alternative to existing smartphones. Their famous tagline “This changes everything” implicitly acknowledged the category while claiming dramatic improvement.

Better Alternative positioning works by accepting the existing market framework while claiming superiority within it. Rather than asking customers to understand a new concept, it leverages existing category understanding while redirecting preference toward your solution.

When Optimal:

Markets with established categories but significant customer frustrations
When your essence naturally expresses through direct improvement
When you have demonstrable superiority in dimensions customers value
When market education costs would be prohibitive for new category creation
When specific competitor limitations create clear contrast opportunities

Advantages:

Immediate relevance by connecting to established needs
Clear competitive frame that customers already understand
Lower market education requirements than new categories
Direct conversion opportunity from dissatisfied customers
Focused product development priorities on specific improvements

Challenges:

Comparison basis can limit perception and potential
Continuous innovation expected to maintain “better” status
Direct competitive response from established players
Potential price sensitivity within established category
May inherit negative category perceptions despite improvements

Example: Fever-Tree’s Better Alternative Positioning

When Fever-Tree entered the premium mixer market, they didn’t attempt to create a new beverage category. Instead, they explicitly positioned as a better alternative to existing tonic waters with their tagline: “If 3/4 of your drink is the mixer, make sure you use the best.”

This Better Alternative approach aligned perfectly with their essence of quality ingredients and craft production. Rather than educating consumers about a new concept, they leveraged existing category understanding while redirecting preference based on quality and ingredient authenticity.

Their positioning influenced everything from product development (natural quinine from the Democratic Republic of Congo versus artificial flavourings) to bottle design (premium glass versus plastic) to distribution strategy (placement alongside premium spirits). The result was a company valued at over £1 billion through a clear, compelling Better Alternative position in a previously commoditised category.

2. Niche Focus Positioning

Definition: Positioning as a specialist in a specific subset of a larger market.

When Rapha entered the cycling apparel market, they didn’t attempt to compete broadly against giants like Nike or Adidas. Instead, they positioned explicitly as premium cycling clothing for serious road cyclists—a specific niche within the broader athletic apparel category.

Niche Focus positioning works by deliberately narrowing scope to create depth rather than breadth. Instead of serving everyone adequately, it serves a specific audience exceptionally well through specialist understanding and tailored solutions.

When Optimal:

Markets with diverse needs that leaders serve generally but not deeply
When your essence naturally aligns with specialist expertise
When you have distinctive capabilities in specific areas
When resource limitations prevent competing broadly
When identifiable customer segments have unmet specialist needs

Advantages:

Expertise depth impossible for generalists to match
Strong customer alignment through specialist understanding
Reduced direct competition against larger generalists
Word-of-mouth potential within connected niche communities
Premium pricing potential through specialist value

Challenges:

Market size limitations within narrow focus
Growth pressure to expand beyond core expertise
Specialist perception potentially limiting broader opportunities
Category evolution potentially marginalising niche
Resource constraints within limited market segment

Example: ustwo’s Niche Focus Positioning

When ustwo positioned itself in the professional services landscape, it didn’t attempt to compete broadly against digital agencies or management consultancies. Instead, it focused specifically as a “digital product studio” with expertise in creating exceptional digital experiences.

This Niche Focus approach perfectly expressed their essence of product craftsmanship and design excellence. Rather than diluting resources across diverse service offerings, they concentrated on doing one thing exceptionally well—creating digital products that users love.

This positioning influenced everything from their portfolio (showcasing products like Monument Valley) to their hiring (product designers rather than general creatives) to their client selection (organisations serious about digital product quality). The result was a distinctive position against both traditional agencies and larger consultancies despite modest size, with clients ranging from Google to the V&A Museum.

3. New Category Positioning

Definition: Positioning as the creator of an entirely new market category.

When Airbnb emerged, they didn’t position as a better hotel alternative or a niche lodging provider. They created an entirely new category—the home-sharing marketplace that existed between hotels and long-term rentals, with their tagline “Belong Anywhere” signalling something fundamentally different from existing options.

New Category positioning works by transcending existing classification to create a distinctive space you can define and dominate. Rather than competing within established frameworks, it creates a new conceptual territory where you set the rules.

When Optimal:

When your solution transcends existing category boundaries
When your essence naturally breaks convention in significant ways
When existing categories inadequately describe your value proposition
When you have resources for market education and category establishment
When combining multiple categories into something genuinely new

Advantages:

Competitive insulation from existing category players
Thought leadership opportunity through category definition
Potential category dominance as the defining player
Premium pricing potential outside established comparisons
Strategic freedom to establish category parameters

Challenges:

High market education costs to establish new concept
Legitimacy establishment burden as category creator
Extended adoption timeline as category gains acceptance
Category defense requirements as others enter
Potential confusion without established reference points

Example: Monday.com’s New Category Positioning

When Monday.com entered the productivity software market, they faced a crowded landscape of project management tools. Rather than positioning as a better alternative to Asana or Trello, they created an entirely new category: “The Work OS”—a platform for creating any workflow application.

This New Category approach aligned with their essence of flexible, visual work management. Rather than accepting project management tool constraints, they established a new conceptual space they could define and potentially dominate.

This positioning influenced everything from product development (focusing on platform capabilities over specific features) to marketing (educating about the Work OS concept) to sales approach (emphasising flexibility beyond traditional project management). The result was a company valued at over $7.5 billion that established a distinctive territory beyond traditional productivity tool comparisons.

4. Repositioning Approach

Definition: Positioning by shifting perception of competitive alternatives rather than directly promoting your own attributes.

When Oatly entered the plant milk market, they didn’t primarily emphasise their own qualities. Instead, they deliberately repositioned dairy milk with provocative messaging like “It’s like milk, but made for humans”—shifting the perception of the established alternative rather than merely promoting their own benefits.

Repositioning works by changing the lens through which customers view the entire category, making them reconsider assumptions about existing solutions rather than just comparing features. It’s the most indirect approach, focusing on frame change rather than direct promotion.

When Optimal:

When alternative framing would fundamentally advantage your solution
When your essence naturally challenges conventional thinking
When established alternatives have vulnerability to perspective shifts
When you have credibility to support reframing argument
When status quo assumptions limit your perceived value

Advantages:

Indirect competition avoiding feature-by-feature comparison
Perception leverage creating disproportionate impact
Status quo disruption through perspective shifting
Narrative power through story rather than specification
Potential category redefinition around your strengths

Challenges:

High credibility requirements to challenge established views
Potential resistance to fundamental reframing
Substantial evidence needs to support new perspective
Defensive response from repositioned alternatives
Consistent messaging requirements across touchpoints

Example: Patagonia’s Repositioning Approach

When Patagonia evolved their outdoor apparel positioning, they increasingly focused not on competing directly with other outdoor brands but on repositioning consumption itself. Their provocative “Don’t Buy This Jacket” Black Friday campaign wasn’t about promoting their products but about changing how customers viewed consumption habits generally.

This Repositioning approach expressed their environmental activism essence perfectly. Rather than claiming to make better jackets than competitors, they questioned whether customers needed another jacket at all—shifting the framework from product comparison to consumption impact.

This positioning influenced everything from product development (focusing on durability and repairability) to marketing (environmental education) to operations (Worn Wear repair programme). The result was a multi-billion-dollar brand with cult-like customer loyalty that turned potential weakness (higher prices, limited fashion cycles) into strength through fundamental repositioning of the category itself.

The Selection Framework: Choosing Your Optimal Approach

With four distinct approaches available, how do you determine which will most effectively express your essence and create market advantage? The Positioning Approach Selection Framework provides a systematic methodology based on five key dimensions:

1. Essence Compatibility Assessment

The first and most crucial dimension evaluates how naturally each positioning approach expresses your fundamental essence:

Key Questions:

Which approach most naturally expresses your irreducible core purpose?
Where does your authentic differentiation already exist?
Which approach aligns with your origin story and founding motivation?
How does your unifying idea translate through each approach?
Which approach feels most authentic to your organisational identity?

Example Application: ThoughtWorks’ essence of technical excellence combined with social purpose naturally expressed through Better Alternative positioning against traditional IT consultancies. Their genuine technical capabilities and social values created authentic differentiation that would have been diluted through other approaches.

2. Capability Requirement Alignment

The second dimension evaluates your operational readiness to execute each approach effectively:

Key Questions:

What capabilities does each positioning approach demand?
Where do your operational strengths naturally align?
What resource requirements exist for each approach?
Which approach leverages your existing evidence base?
Where are your implementation gaps for each option?

Example Application: When HubSpot evaluated positioning approaches, they recognised their substantial educational content creation capabilities aligned perfectly with the New Category requirements for “Inbound Marketing.” Their ability to produce thought leadership content made category creation viable despite being a startup.

3. Market Receptivity Analysis

The third dimension assesses how different positioning approaches would resonate in your specific market context:

Key Questions:

What is the maturity level of your category?
How satisfied are customers with existing solutions?
What level of education would different approaches require?
How crowded is the competitive landscape in each position?
What unmet needs or frustrations exist that align with each approach?

Example Application: When Zoom evaluated the video conferencing market, they identified significant user frustration with existing solutions despite category maturity. This context made Better Alternative positioning highly receptive despite the crowded competitive landscape, as the “works better” position addressed a genuine pain point.

4. Competitive Dynamics Evaluation

The fourth dimension examines how each positioning approach affects your relationship with competitors:

Key Questions:

How will existing players respond to each positioning approach?
Which approach creates the most defensible competitive position?
Where are competitors most vulnerable to each approach?
How might competitive reactions affect positioning sustainability?
Which approach creates the clearest separation from alternatives?

Example Application: When Brewdog entered the beer market, they recognised that large breweries would struggle to respond effectively to their “beer for punks” repositioning approach. The corporate nature of competitors made it nearly impossible for them to credibly adopt similar anti-establishment positioning, creating sustainable differentiation.

5. Risk Profile Assessment

The final dimension evaluates the specific risks associated with each positioning approach:

Key Questions:

What implementation challenges exist for each approach?
How quickly will each approach generate market traction?
What financial implications come with each positioning strategy?
Where might each approach limit future flexibility?
What happens if the selected approach fails to resonate?

Example Application: When TransferWise (now Wise) evaluated positioning approaches, they identified that Better Alternative positioning offered lower implementation risk than creating a new financial category, which would require substantial market education. Their focus on being transparently better than banks balanced opportunity with practical execution reality.

Case Study: Zoom’s Positioning Approach Selection

To illustrate how this framework applies in practice, let’s examine Zoom’s positioning approach selection in detail:

Background

Founded in 2011 by Eric Yuan, former VP of Engineering at Cisco WebEx
Entered crowded video conferencing market with established players
Started with modest funding compared to competitors
Built on Yuan’s essence of frustration with existing solutions’ complexity

Positioning Challenge

Zoom faced a crowded market with powerful incumbents including WebEx, GoToMeeting, and Microsoft. They needed a positioning approach that would create a distinctive identity despite late entry and smaller resources.

Approach Selection Process

Zoom systematically evaluated all four positioning approaches:

New Category Assessment:

Essence Compatibility: Moderate alignment with simplification essence
Capability Requirements: Limited resources for market education
Market Receptivity: Established video conferencing understanding
Competitive Dynamics: Category creation vulnerable to incumbent adoption
Risk Profile: Extended timeline to establish new category concept

Niche Focus Assessment:

Essence Compatibility: Limited alignment with universal simplicity essence
Capability Requirements: Strong alignment with focused technical execution
Market Receptivity: Potential specific verticals but limited growth
Competitive Dynamics: Vulnerable to incumbent vertical expansion
Risk Profile: Market size limitations potentially constraining growth

Repositioning Assessment:

Essence Compatibility: Some alignment with questioning complexity
Capability Requirements: Limited evidence base for radical reframing
Market Receptivity: Significant resistance to fundamental paradigm shift
Competitive Dynamics: Strong defensive response from established players
Risk Profile: High execution challenges for startup credibility

Better Alternative Assessment:

Essence Compatibility: Perfect alignment with simplification essence
Capability Requirements: Strong technical capability for reliability focus
Market Receptivity: Significant frustration with existing solutions
Competitive Dynamics: Clear differentiation opportunity versus complexity
Risk Profile: Immediate relevance with established need

Selected Approach: Better Alternative

Based on this systematic evaluation, Zoom selected Better Alternative positioning, explicitly positioning as video conferencing that “just works” in contrast to the complexity and unreliability of existing solutions.

Implementation Strategy

Zoom implemented this positioning approach through several key elements:

Core Promise Articulation: “Video communications that actually work” clearly positioned against competitor limitations
Specific Improvement Focus: Rather than claiming general superiority, Zoom focused on specific differentiation:
- Reliability: Consistent performance regardless of conditions
- Simplicity: One-click meeting joins without complex setup
- Consistency: Same experience across all devices
- Accessibility: Free tier with generous limitations
Operational Alignment: Product development priorities ruthlessly focused on reliability and simplicity over feature expansion
Evidence Development: Created proof of performance superiority through direct experience rather than technical claims
Go-to-Market Strategy: Free tier created viral adoption through superior experience demonstration

Results

This Better Alternative positioning approach helped Zoom:

Grow from startup to category leader despite late market entry
Create distinctive identity in crowded competitive landscape
Achieve exceptional NPS scores compared to established alternatives
Drive viral adoption through satisfied user recommendation
Position for explosive growth during pandemic-driven remote work transition

The Zoom example demonstrates how systematic positioning approach selection creates alignment between essence, capabilities, market context, and commercial opportunity. Their Better Alternative positioning wasn’t just marketing language but a fundamental strategic choice that influenced every aspect of their business.

Implementation Requirements

Each positioning approach demands specific implementation elements to translate strategy into operational reality:

Better Alternative Implementation Requirements

Essential Elements:

Comparative Evidence Development: Substantiation of specific superiority claims through demonstrable proof, not just assertions
Differentiation Focus: Ruthless prioritisation of resources toward areas of genuine advantage rather than comprehensive improvement
Comparison Basis Management: Careful selection and consistent communication of the specific comparison points that advantage your position
Experience Confirmation: Direct demonstration opportunities that allow customers to verify “better” claims through experience, not just marketing
Continuous Improvement System: Ongoing enhancement of key differentiation areas to maintain “better” status against competitive response

Example: Pipedrive’s Better Alternative positioning against Salesforce required focused evidence of their pipeline management superiority, consistent comparison basis around salespeople’s daily workflow, and continuous improvement of their core sales process management capabilities.

Niche Focus Implementation Requirements

Essential Elements:

Specialist Capability Development: Continuous deepening of expertise in focused area to maintain specialist advantage
Tailored Solution Creation: Products and services specifically designed for niche requirements rather than general-purpose adaptation
Community Engagement: Deep participation in specialist community beyond transactional relationships
Focused Channel Strategy: Presence in specific channels where specialist audience naturally gathers rather than broad marketing
Language Adoption: Use of specialist terminology and frameworks that demonstrate genuine community membership

Example: Rapha’s Niche Focus positioning required deep cycling community engagement, products designed specifically for serious road cyclists, content reflecting authentic cycling culture, and distribution through specialist cycling channels rather than general sports retailers.

New Category Implementation Requirements

Essential Elements:

Category Definition: Clear articulation of what the new category is and how it differs from existing classifications
Educational Content: Substantial resources for market education about the new category concept and value
Analyst/Influencer Strategy: Systematic engagement with those who shape market understanding and classification
Proof of Category Validity: Evidence demonstrating why a new category is necessary rather than just a feature enhancement
Patience Capital: Financial and organisational commitment to longer adoption timeline than other approaches

Example: HubSpot’s New Category creation of “Inbound Marketing” required comprehensive educational content explaining the methodology, engagement with marketing analysts to validate the category, evidence of paradigm shift through research reports, and patient capital for extended category establishment.

Repositioning Implementation Requirements

Essential Elements:

Frame Shift Evidence: Compelling proof supporting the alternative perspective on existing solutions or categories
Consistent Narrative: Unified storytelling across all touchpoints that reinforces the repositioning perspective
Credibility Establishment: Authority-building to support legitimacy of challenging established perspectives
Operational Alignment: Business practices that authentically demonstrate the alternative perspective
Defensive Preparation: Readiness for incumbent response to perspective challenging

Example: Oatly’s Repositioning of dairy milk required systematic evidence about environmental impact, consistent provocative messaging across all packaging and marketing, credibility building around sustainability claims, and operational practices that authentically demonstrated their alternative perspective.

The Positioning Approach Selection Tool

To apply this framework to your own business, the Positioning Approach Selection Tool provides a systematic methodology for evaluating which approach best aligns with your essence and context:

1. Essence Expression Evaluation

For each positioning approach, assess:

Essence Alignment (1-10): How naturally does this approach express your essence?
Unifying Idea Fit (1-10): How well does this approach support your unifying concept?
Authentic Differentiation (1-10): How genuinely distinctive would this approach be?
Organisational Values (1-10): How well does this approach reflect your core values?

2. Market Context Assessment

For each positioning approach, evaluate:

Customer Receptivity (1-10): How well would customers understand this approach?
Competitive Distinction (1-10): How clearly would this separate you from alternatives?
Need Alignment (1-10): How effectively does this address market needs?
Education Requirements (1-10): How much market education would this require? (reverse score)

3. Implementation Capability Analysis

For each positioning approach, assess:

Resource Readiness (1-10): Do you have resources to execute this approach?
Team Expertise (1-10): Does your team have skills to implement this approach?
Evidence Base (1-10): Do you have proof points to support this approach?
Operational Alignment (1-10): Does your operation already support this approach?

4. Risk Profile Consideration

For each positioning approach, evaluate:

Execution Challenges (1-10): How difficult would implementation be? (reverse score)
Timeline Expectations (1-10): How quickly would this approach gain traction?
Competitive Response (1-10): How vulnerable is this approach to competitive reaction? (reverse score)
Financial Implications (1-10): How sustainable is this approach financially?

5. Approach Selection Recommendation

Calculate total scores for each approach
Consider balance between essence expression and practical implementation
Identify preliminary approach recommendation
Develop hybrid approach if scores are close in multiple areas

Example Application: FinTech Startup

Consider a fintech startup that has developed a more transparent international money transfer service. Applying the selection tool:

Better Alternative Scoring:

Essence Expression: 36/40 (strong alignment with transparency essence)
Market Context: 34/40 (clear customer frustration with traditional opacity)
Implementation Capability: 31/40 (strong evidence of fee comparison)
Risk Profile: 28/40 (vulnerable to incumbent response but quick traction)
Total: 129/160

Niche Focus Scoring:

Essence Expression: 25/40 (partial alignment with specific user segment)
Market Context: 29/40 (certain segments highly receptive but limited)
Implementation Capability: 32/40 (strong capability in focused segment)
Risk Profile: 26/40 (market size limitations but defensible position)
Total: 112/160

New Category Scoring:

Essence Expression: 24/40 (modest alignment with category creation)
Market Context: 21/40 (significant education requirements)
Implementation Capability: 19/40 (limited resources for category establishment)
Risk Profile: 18/40 (extended timeline and high execution challenges)
Total: 82/160

Repositioning Scoring:

Essence Expression: 30/40 (good alignment with challenging status quo)
Market Context: 25/40 (moderate receptivity to reframing banking)
Implementation Capability: 22/40 (limited evidence base for radical reframing)
Risk Profile: 20/40 (high execution challenges for startup credibility)
Total: 97/160

Recommendation: With the highest overall score, Better Alternative positioning aligns best with the startup’s essence, market context, and implementation capabilities. They should position explicitly as a more transparent alternative to traditional money transfer services, focusing evidence development on direct fee comparison and customer experience improvement.

Combining Approaches: The Hybrid Potential

While we’ve presented these as distinct approaches, many successful companies combine elements of multiple positioning strategies as they evolve:

Example: Stripe’s Positioning Evolution

Stripe initially employed Better Alternative positioning, focusing on developer-friendly implementation versus complex payment processors. As they established market presence, they incorporated New Category elements by defining the broader “payments infrastructure” concept beyond mere processing.

This hybrid approach allowed them to first establish clear differentiation through Better Alternative positioning with their “seven lines of code” focus, then expand their conceptual territory through New Category elements as they gained market traction.

Example: TransferWise/Wise Evolution

TransferWise (now Wise) began with clear Better Alternative positioning, focusing on transparency and lower fees versus traditional banks. As they established this position, they incorporated Repositioning elements by challenging the fundamental concept of international money movement and banking borders.

This combination allowed them to first establish practical differentiation through concrete fee comparison, then broaden their conceptual territory by challenging underlying assumptions about how money should move globally.

The key to successful hybrid approaches is sequencing—establishing clear initial positioning through one primary approach, then thoughtfully incorporating complementary elements as market presence strengthens. Starting with multiple approaches simultaneously often creates confusion rather than reinforcement.

Positioning Approach and Brand Building

Your positioning approach selection significantly influences how your brand develops over time:

Better Alternative and Brand: Better Alternative positioning typically creates brands defined by specific superiority claims. The challenge is evolving beyond comparison as you establish market position. Zoom’s brand journey required progressive evolution from “better video conferencing” to broader communications platform as they established leadership.

Niche Focus and Brand: Niche Focus positioning creates brands with deep community connection and specialist identity. The challenge is expanding beyond initial niche without losing distinctive expertise. Rapha’s brand had to carefully balance growth beyond core cycling enthusiasts while maintaining authentic cycling credibility.

New Category and Brand: New Category positioning creates brands that become synonymous with the categories they define. The challenge is maintaining category leadership as others enter the space you created. HubSpot’s brand became intrinsically connected to inbound marketing while needing to evolve as the category matured and competitors adopted similar language.

Repositioning and Brand: Repositioning creates brands defined by perspective and point of view. The challenge is maintaining distinctive voice as your approach gains broader acceptance. Oatly’s brand had to evolve beyond pure provocation as plant milk became mainstream while maintaining their distinctive attitude.

Understanding these brand evolution implications helps you select a positioning approach that creates sustainable distinctiveness beyond initial market entry.

Conclusion: From Approach to Execution

Selecting your positioning approach is a fundamental strategic choice that shapes everything from product development to marketing language to organisational focus. The best approach isn’t determined by abstract preference but by systematic alignment between your essence, capabilities, market context, and competitive landscape.

A Better Alternative approach creates immediate relevance but requires demonstrable superiority. A Niche Focus approach creates deep connection but may limit market size. A New Category approach creates definitional leadership but demands substantial education investment. A Repositioning approach creates conceptual advantage but requires credibility to challenge established perspectives.

The framework and tools provided in this chapter help you make this choice systematically rather than intuitively, ensuring your positioning approach creates the strongest foundation for becoming the obvious choice in your market.

As we move forward to explore competitive alternatives, unique attributes, and value translation in subsequent chapters, keep your positioning approach at the centre of these considerations—it’s the strategic lens through which all other positioning elements gain coherence and impact.

Eric Yuan’s deliberate selection of Better Alternative positioning for Zoom wasn’t just one of many equivalent options—it was the specific approach that best expressed their essence, leveraged their capabilities, addressed market frustrations, and created sustainable differentiation despite limited resources. The result wasn’t just a successful product but a gravitational position that made Zoom the obvious choice for millions of users worldwide.

Your positioning approach selection holds the same transformative potential. Choose wisely.

The Positioning Approach Selection Worksheet

1. Essence Expression Evaluation

For each positioning approach, score (1-10):

Better Alternative

Essence Alignment: _______
Unifying Idea Fit: _______
Authentic Differentiation: _______
Organisational Values: _______
Total: _______/40

Niche Focus

Essence Alignment: _______
Unifying Idea Fit: _______
Authentic Differentiation: _______
Organisational Values: _______
Total: _______/40

New Category

Essence Alignment: _______
Unifying Idea Fit: _______
Authentic Differentiation: _______
Organisational Values: _______
Total: _______/40

Repositioning

Essence Alignment: _______
Unifying Idea Fit: _______
Authentic Differentiation: _______
Organisational Values: _______
Total: _______/40

2. Market Context Assessment

For each positioning approach, score (1-10):

Better Alternative

Customer Receptivity: _______
Competitive Distinction: _______
Need Alignment: _______
Education Requirements (reverse): _______
Total: _______/40

Niche Focus

Customer Receptivity: _______
Competitive Distinction: _______
Need Alignment: _______
Education Requirements (reverse): _______
Total: _______/40

New Category

Customer Receptivity: _______
Competitive Distinction: _______
Need Alignment: _______
Education Requirements (reverse): _______
Total: _______/40

Repositioning

Customer Receptivity: _______
Competitive Distinction: _______
Need Alignment: _______
Education Requirements (reverse): _______
Total: _______/40

3. Implementation Capability Analysis

For each positioning approach, score (1-10):

Better Alternative

Resource Readiness: _______
Team Expertise: _______
Evidence Base: _______
Operational Alignment: _______
Total: _______/40

Niche Focus

Resource Readiness: _______
Team Expertise: _______
Evidence Base: _______
Operational Alignment: _______
Total: _______/40

New Category

Resource Readiness: _______
Team Expertise: _______
Evidence Base: _______
Operational Alignment: _______
Total: _______/40

Repositioning

Resource Readiness: _______
Team Expertise: _______
Evidence Base: _______
Operational Alignment: _______
Total: _______/40

4. Risk Profile Consideration

For each positioning approach, score (1-10):

Better Alternative

Execution Challenges (reverse): _______
Timeline Expectations: _______
Competitive Response (reverse): _______
Financial Implications: _______
Total: _______/40

Niche Focus

Execution Challenges (reverse): _______
Timeline Expectations: _______
Competitive Response (reverse): _______
Financial Implications: _______
Total: _______/40

New Category

Execution Challenges (reverse): _______
Timeline Expectations: _______
Competitive Response (reverse): _______
Financial Implications: _______
Total: _______/40

Repositioning

Execution Challenges (reverse): _______
Timeline Expectations: _______
Competitive Response (reverse): _______
Financial Implications: _______
Total: _______/40

5. Final Evaluation

Total Scores

Better Alternative: _______/160
Niche Focus: _______/160
New Category: _______/160
Repositioning: _______/160

Recommended Approach: _______________________________

Key Implementation Requirements: