• Twitter
  • LinkedIn
(503) 212-0687 | hello@cascadeinsights.com
Cascade Insights
  • Market Research Services
    • B2B Customer Experience Research
      • Buyer Personas
      • Buyer’s Journey Research
      • Key Buying Criteria Research
      • Jobs-To-Be-Done Research
      • User Personas
      • Customer Satisfaction Research
    • B2B Product/Service Research
      • Market Opportunity Research
      • Concept Testing
      • Go-To-Market Research
    • B2B Marketing Enablement Research
      • Data-Driven Marketing Research
      • Message Testing
      • Brand Research
      • Thought Leadership Services
      • Partner Enablement
    • B2B Sales Enablement Research
      • Competitive Landscape Analysis
      • Win-Loss Research
      • Churn Analysis
      • Channel Research
  • Marketing Services
    • Marketing Strategy
    • Messaging
    • Content Marketing
    • Sales Enablement
  • Insights and Perspectives
    • B2B Market Research Blog
    • B2B Marketing Blog
    • B2B Resources
  • About Us
    • Our Story
    • Our Clients
    • Client Testimonials
    • Careers
    • Ethics Policy
    • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Us
  • Search
  • Menu Menu

Tag Archive for: competitive intelligence

The “Competitive Intel” Episode 4 Transcript – Analysis of Competing Hypothesis and the Battle of Ideas

February 13, 2012/in Blog Posts /by Sean Campbell
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share by Mail

Making Intelligence Smarter: Analysis of Competing Hypotheses

A portion of competitive intelligence work is simply gathering source information. However that information’s value depends in part on how well analysts can develop defensible conclusions from hypotheses that are often at odds with each other. Borrowing from public sector intelligence practice, the analysis of competing hypotheses (ACH) framework tests different interpretations by plotting hypotheses against evidence using a two-dimensional matrix.

Populating the Horizontal Axis: Hypotheses

The first step of the ACH approach is to gather hypotheses about a potential future event, business situation, or competitor move, and create a column in the matrix for each hypothesis. Potential entries for this horizontal axis could come from sources such as brainstorming sessions, blog-based commentary, social media, interviews with subject matter experts, and many other common intelligence sources.

There is often a hierarchical structure to the hypotheses. “Windows 8 will rapidly achieve large market share” could be a top-level hypothesis, with sub-hypotheses such as “small businesses will be slow to adopt Windows 8” and “Windows 8 will accelerate upgrades from Windows XP.”.

Populating the Vertical Axis: Evidence

Companies weighing their responses to events must consider multiple hypotheses. Following the example above, a software company deciding what resources to apply to supporting Windows 8 will want to have an understanding of the likely adoption of the new OS within its customer base. To support that understanding, pieces of evidence are populated along the horizontal axis of the matrix, so that the impact of each can be considered against the hypotheses.

Pieces of evidence to be used for ACH can come from any source used in competitive intelligence research, including open source intelligence (such as job postings or resumes from LinkedIn), first-party interviews, and industry events. General marketing materials such as feature lists or price points are also valuable.

Gleaning Insight from Intersection Points within the Matrix

Once the matrix is populated, analysis should proceed in a structured manner.. Each intersection in the matrix is first identified as “consistent,” inconsistent,” or “not applicable,” based on the support (or lack of support) by a specific piece of evidence for a given hypothesis. The next step is to tally a score for each hypothesis, based on the number of pieces of evidence that support it, minus the number that contradict it. Potential conclusions can then be ranked on that basis; note that, in some cases, a single piece of inconsistent evidence can disqualify a hypothesis from further consideration.

Using ACH can provide the ability to empirically establish the validity of multiple hypotheses, where there would otherwise be a tangled, contradictory mass of opinions.

By Sean Campbell
By Scott Swigart

The “Competitive Intel” Episode 3 Transcript – Every Day OSINT — LinkedIn, Slideshare, and Quora

February 6, 2012/in Blog Posts /by Sean Campbell
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share by Mail

Open source intelligence can make you more effective every day, in a wide variety of tasks—not just competitive intelligence. Sales, marketing, planning, and executive roles benefit from a sharper understanding of what others are doing in the industry, and effective use of free information from your web browser is a key approach. We use a lot of specialized tools for niche tasks, but here’s a few that we use every day.

LinkedIn

LinkedIn offers a wealth of open source intelligence. In many companies, especially tech companies, the majority of employees have LinkedIn profiles. The company pages are also a wealth of information. The site also provides very robust search, making it an excellent first stop for information on a company, market segment, or other topic of interest.

The breadth of coverage on LinkedIn makes semi-statistical data gathering, as well. This factor is enormously helpful for topics such as: where employees are physically located, hiring trends, and the specific size of organizations within the company, such as sales compared to the company as a whole (or yours). In fact, we have even reverse-engineered competitors’ customer lists using public data available on LinkedIn.

SlideShare

Slightly less well-known but also extraordinarily useful, SlideShare.net bills itself as aspiring to be “the YouTube of PowerPoint.” This enormous repository of slide presentations gives you access to information carefully collated and assembled by presenters for ease of understanding.

Whereas a company’s Web site might provide meager insight, SlideShare tends to have information from sales presentations, technical sessions, and even invitation-only events that would otherwise not be available to you in any form. Often, you can even find analyses done by external consultants that provide a perspective that those inside the company wouldn’t provide.

Quora

Often dismissed in competitive intelligence but growing richer every day, social Q&A sites like Quora are an excellent source to monitor conversations about topics of interest. We saw a comparison of social sites recently—Twitter: “I ate a donut;” Facebook: “I like donuts;” LinkedIn: “I have experience with donuts.” If that’s the case, Quora might answer “How profitable is a typical donut store?”.

The conversational format at Quora also leads to situations where people post information defending themselves, their product, or their company. That kind of interaction is gold for a bystander collecting intelligence. Synthesizing and filtering that information is a direct route to insights you wouldn’t expect.

By Sean Campbell
By Scott Swigart

The “Competitive Intel” Episode 2 Transcript – Ethics Applied

January 29, 2012/in Blog Posts /by Sean Campbell
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share by Mail

Questions of ethics are always a point of interest in competitive intelligence (CI), and workshops on this topic are a staple of industry conferences. Guidelines such as the Strategic and Competitive Intelligence Professionals (SCIP) Code of Ethics are a great start, as are legal or ethical guidelines established by your company or customers. Our discussion here adds to that type of formal policy with discussion that can help CI professionals establish their own ethical foundations.

Scenario: Avoiding the Temptation of Identity Games

Most of us have at least considered whether we would get an advantage by hiding our true intent when we are gathering competitive intelligence. Whether as simple as turning a conference badge backward or as complex as inventing an elaborate cover story, not disclosing who you are violates a core ethical requirement. It’s worth mentioning that the same is true online, and creating fake social networking profiles for the purpose of collecting CI is out of bounds.

Note that these ethical considerations are binding even if you know for certain that competitors are being unethical toward you. The tendency to do otherwise follows from the “business is war” mentality, but we should all recognize that even in war, participants are subject to rules of engagement such as the Geneva Convention.

Scenario: Overhearing Sensitive Information

Imagine that the person next to you on an airplane is talking on their cell phone about sensitive information that could benefit you or your client. They may be talking about flaws in their product, for example, or challenges they are having in selling. What do you do? In this case, we would not feel ethically bound to stop them from disclosing the information.

That person has an obligation to protect the sensitive information, and this situation represents a failure on their part to fulfill their responsibility, rather than an ethical breach on your part. This sort of failure to keep information private is no different, from an ethical point of view, than inadvertently disclosing information in job postings or LinkedIn profiles, which are typically considered “in bounds” for CI research.

Scenario: Identifying Limits on Full Disclosure

Consider being on a call conducting research for a client, when your research subject asks you who the research is for. While you clearly must identify yourself, it is a different question altogether whether you are ethically bound to disclose the identity of your client (which could also be a violation of the client’s privacy).

The way to handle this conundrum is to avoid it altogether by being forthright up front about the fact that you are not a potential customer, for example, when you are talking to a sales professional. If you identify yourself as a CI professional but say, “I can’t tell you whom I am calling for,” you have done your ethical duty. That practice can also play a key role in avoiding the appearance of impropriety, which is vital to protecting your reputation, which benefits you in the long run.

By Sean Campbell
By Scott Swigart

The “Competitive Intel” Episode 1 Transcript – CES and Trade Show Intelligence

January 24, 2012/in Blog Posts /by Sean Campbell
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share by Mail

Industry events are outstanding opportunities for gathering information from competitors, customers, partners, and distributors. There’s a gold mine there for the taking, in terms of how to develop and position your products and services in the marketplace. Still, that same hyper-focused nature of these events means you need a well organized approach to take full advantage of the opportunity.

Making Your Approach Smooth and Steady

There’s a lot happening at industry trade shows, all at once, and there’s a limited amount of time. Being methodical is the key to transforming that frenzy of activity into a bonanza of insight:

  • Unimpeachable ethics: Be frank and truthful about who you are and why you’re there. In our years of experience, we have found that people manning booths are eager to share information, and they appreciate it when those who approach them are honest and well-informed.
  • Thorough planning: Know what you’re doing before you arrive. Ahead of time, you should establish questions that you want to have answered, and by whom. That plan needs to be updated at least nightly during the event, since new information will keep coming in.
  • Smart approach: Choose the right time to walk up to the booth. Watch for an opportunity when you’re not part of a crowd, especially when traffic is light such as early in the morning, during lunch, or at the end of the day. To polish your delivery, practice at a booth or two less important to your goals.

Engaging with the People at the Booth

Your first goal in gathering intelligence is to get the people working at booths talking, and starting with a simple question, such as “what are you demonstrating?” can be the best way to break the ice.

Focusing on getting them to talk in their own sphere of expertise can also let you know more about the person you’re talking to, in terms of their role, how technical they are, etc. If you see that you need to talk to someone in a different role, you can guide the conversation in that direction, which opens more doors to the information you need.

Taking Full Advantage of Resources

A lot of information is available on the expo floor, but keynotes and break-out sessions are also vital, since that’s where companies make announcements and detail their technology. Have questions ready and gather contact information so you can follow up later.

When doing trade show intelligence, you should send out updates every night, and at the end of the event. Those shouldn’t be simply summary and reportage but need to include real analysis and insights to transform copious raw intelligence into targeted business insight.

By Sean Campbell
By Scott Swigart

Page 6 of 6«‹456

GET IN TOUCH

hello@cascadeinsights.com

(503) 212-0687

WHAT WE DO

Market Research Services
Marketing Services
Subscribeto RSS Feed

Blog Categories

  • B2B Buyer Persona Research
  • B2B Channel Market Research
  • B2B Churn Analysis
  • B2B Competitive Landscape Analysis
  • B2B Customer Experience Research
  • B2B Customer Journey Mapping
  • B2B Go-To-Market Research
  • B2B Market Opportunity Research
  • B2B Market Research Blog
  • B2B Market Segmentation Research
  • B2B Marketing Blog
    • Uncategorized
  • B2B Messaging
  • B2B New Product Launch Research
  • B2B Thought Leadership
  • B2B Usability Testing
  • Brand Research
  • Concept Testing
  • Content Marketing
  • Customer Satisfaction Research
  • Data-Driven Marketing Research
  • Jobs-To-Be-Done
  • Key Buying Criteria
  • Marketing Enablement
  • Marketing Strategy
  • Message Testing Research
  • Partner Enablement
  • Product/Service Research
  • Sales Enablement Marketing
  • Sales Enablement Research
  • User Personas
  • Videos
  • Win/Loss Analysis

Written by

Sean Campbell
Sean Campbell

Connect With Us

503.212.0687

hello@cascadeinsights.com

  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

B2B Market Research

  • Customer Experience Research
  • — Buyer Persona Research
  • — Buyer's Journey Research
  • — Key Buying Criteria Research
  • — Jobs-To-Be-Done Research
  • — User Personas
  • — Customer Satisfaction Research

  • B2B Product/Service Research
  • — Market Opportunity Research
  • — Concept Testing
  • — Go-To-Market Research

  • Marketing Enablement Research
  • — B2B Data-Driven Marketing Research
  • — Message Testing
  • — Brand Research
  • — Thought Leadership
  • — Partner Enablement

  • Sales Enablement Research
  • — Competitive Landscape Analysis
  • — Win Loss Analysis
  • — Churn Analysis
  • — Channel Research

B2B Marketing

  • — B2B Marketing Strategy
  • — B2B Messaging Services
  • — B2B Content Marketing
  • — B2B Sales Enablement

About Us

  • — Our Story
  • — Our Clients
  • — Client Testimonials
  • — Careers
  • — Ethics Policy
  • — Privacy Policy

Blogs

  • — B2B Market Research Blog
  • — B2B Marketing Blog
  • — Cascade Insights Blog
Cascade Insights is proud to be a member of the Inc. 5000.
Scroll to top