Obviously Awesome

Note: This skill is independent analysis and commentary, not a reproduction of the original text. It synthesizes the book's core ideas with modern startup practice, surfaces where frameworks are outdated or incomplete, and integrates perspectives from adjacent disciplines. For the full argument and context, read the original book.

Obviously Awesome

"Positioning is the act of deliberately defining how you are the best at something that a defined market cares a lot about." - April Dunford (2019)

When to Use

Investigate positioning when ANY of these is true:

Dunford does not give a strict numerical threshold - one strong sign is enough to warrant a positioning audit.

The Core Insight

You probably have a positioning problem, not a marketing problem.

When prospects don't understand your product, it's not because you haven't said it loud enough. It's because the CONTEXT they're using to evaluate you is wrong.

Joshua Bell experiment: World-class violinist played 45 min in a DC subway in 2007. 1,070 people walked past. Earned $32.17. Two days earlier: sold-out Boston Symphony Hall at $100/seat. Same person, same skill. Different context = different perceived value.

Cake → Muffin: Sometimes the same product needs a different category. Almost no physical difference between cake and muffin. Big contextual difference.

The 5+1 Components

Positioning is built from 5 components, plus 1 optional layer:

Critical: Dependency chain. Get the order wrong and the whole thing collapses.

Alternatives → Attributes → Value → Target Market → Category → (Trends)

Why traditional "For X who Y, our product is a Z that does W unlike V" template fails: assumes you already know category and competitors. For novel products, those are exactly what you're trying to figure out.

Detailed component definitions: see frameworks.md.

The 10-Step Process (High Level)

Step-by-step detail with team formation, baggage handling, value-theme clustering, segmentation: see frameworks.md.

The Circular Dependency (Why Step 1 Matters)

You can't position for your target market until you know who loves you. You can't know who loves you without selling first. You can't sell without some positioning.

Break the cycle: Cast wide early ("fishing-net analogy"). Don't position narrowly until you have signal from real users. Then narrow to best-fit.

If you don't have happy customers yet → you don't have positioning yet, you have hypotheses. Use Mom Test for problem validation FIRST. Don't position what you haven't built.

The Three Positioning Styles (Step 8 - The Core Step)

Market category is the context customers use to evaluate you. Three styles:

Style 1: Head to Head (Existing Category)

Compete in an existing category by being better at one specific dimension.

When to use: Established category exists, you have a clear advantage on something customers care about, you can be top-3. When NOT: Category leader is too entrenched, your advantage isn't category-level important.

Style 2: Big Fish, Small Pond (Subsegment)

Find a subsegment where YOUR strengths are most valuable.

When to use: A subset of customers has needs the leader doesn't address well, your strengths align, the subsegment is big enough.

This is often the best fit for startups - you can't out-spend the leader on the broad category, but you can dominate a slice.

Example: Janna Systems failing at "CRM for everyone." Repositioned as "CRM for investment banks": $2M → $70M revenue → $1.7B Siebel acquisition.

Style 3: Create a New Game (New Category)

Define a new category you can lead.

When to use: Existing categories don't fit, you can clearly explain the new category in customer terms, you have resources to educate the market (expensive). When NOT (most cases): You think your product is "unique" (everyone thinks that), no budget to educate, existing categories work "well enough."

Example: Eloqua coined "marketing automation": $12M → $96M → $870M Oracle acquisition.

Mark Organ (Eloqua founder) found that successful category creation comes from deeply understanding a narrow set of extreme early customers, not from executives brainstorming acronyms at offsites. The category emerges from observed behavior, not invented positioning.

When both a new market boundary AND new evaluation criteria are needed, consider creating a new category. With only one needed, stay within existing category structure. Treat as a heuristic.

Decision Tree

Does an existing category fit?
├─ YES → Are you the leader or can become one?
│        ├─ YES → HEAD TO HEAD
│        └─ NO → Is there a subsegment where you'd be leader?
│                ├─ YES → BIG FISH, SMALL POND ← often the answer
│                └─ NO → Reconsider product, or move to Style 3
└─ NO → Can you afford to educate the market?
         ├─ YES → CREATE NEW GAME (rare and risky)
         └─ NO → Force-fit Style 1 or 2

Failure Examples

• Bic for Her - Tried to create "pens for women." Pens are pens. Customers ridiculed. Failed.
• "Sharing economy for pets" / "Uber for cats" - Trend layered on product without share-economy mechanics. Disaster.
• Long Island Iced Tea → Long Blockchain - Renamed for crypto trend. Got delisted from Nasdaq.

Big Fish / Small Pond Illustrative Example: "Coke for Dogs"

Dunford's hypothetical: take Coke and reposition for the pet-treat subsegment ("tastes like bones"). Different competitors, different value, different category - same product. Sometimes a subsegment IS available; you just have to look creatively.

Wattpad case (often omitted): repositioned a writing-platform product after finding a subset of users using it differently. See cases.md.

Decision Trees

Do I have a positioning problem?

Are any of these true?
├─ Confused prospects (compare you to wrong things)
├─ Long sales cycles (always explaining)
├─ High churn (buyers don't get expected value)
├─ Price pressure (can't command premium)
└─ If multiple signs apply → likely positioning problem