Creating the Competition
Position disruptive products at the intersection of an established market alternative and an inno...
Creating the Competition solves a fundamental problem for disruptive products: pragmatist buyers cannot evaluate what they cannot categorize. If no competitive frame exists, pragmatists default to inaction because they have no basis for comparison and no budget to redirect.
The technique constructs a two-dimensional frame using two reference competitors. The market alternative is an established vendor that currently owns the budget -- validating a real, funded market exists. The product alternative is another company using similar disruptive technology in a different market -- validating the technological approach works. You position at the intersection: market credibility and budget legitimacy of the market alternative with the innovation of the product alternative.
This framework addresses the pragmatist's two deepest concerns simultaneously: 'Is this a real category?' (answered by market alternative) and 'Does this approach work?' (answered by product alternative). Without both reference points, pragmatists cannot construct the mental model needed for a buying decision.
- {"title":"Pragmatists Need Competitive Context","description":"Unlike visionaries who embrace the novel, pragmatists require a competitive frame. They need to know what spending this replaces and what alternatives exist. Without context, they will not evaluate or purchase."}
- {"title":"Market Alternative Validates the Budget","description":"Naming the established solution you displace demonstrates a funded line item exists. The pragmatist redirects an existing budget rather than creating a new one."}
- {"title":"Product Alternative Validates the Approach","description":"Pointing to another company using similar disruption in a different market provides evidence the underlying technology works, reducing perceived technical risk."}
- {"title":"You Win at the Intersection","description":"Your positioning claims the best of both worlds: market validity and budget access of the established category combined with innovation and efficiency of the disruptive approach."}
- Identify Your Market AlternativeDetermine who currently gets the budget your product will claim. What does your target customer spend money on to address the problem you solve?Pro tipMust be something the target customer recognizes and currently pays for. If they do not spend money on this problem, you have a harder positioning challenge.
- Identify Your Product AlternativeFind another company using similar disruptive technology in a different market. Their success validates your approach without being a direct competitor.Pro tipMust be well-known enough that your target customer has heard of and respects it. An unknown product alternative provides no leverage.
- Define Your Intersection PositionArticulate how you combine strengths of both: market legitimacy of the market alternative with technological innovation of the product alternative.WarningDo not position as 'better than both.' Position as occupying the valuable intersection neither covers.
- Validate with Target SegmentTest this framing with pragmatist buyers. Confirm they recognize both reference competitors and that the intersection position helps them understand and evaluate your product.Pro tipIf pragmatists do not recognize either anchor, choose different ones. Both must be familiar to work.
Box used SharePoint as market alternative (enterprise content management budgets) and Dropbox as product alternative (cloud file sharing works). Position at intersection: enterprise content management with consumer-grade cloud simplicity. Pragmatist IT buyers got a clear category, budget source, and differentiator.
WorkDay used Oracle/PeopleSoft as market alternative (enterprise HR/finance budgets) and Salesforce as product alternative (enterprise SaaS works at scale). Intersection: enterprise-class HR and finance via modern cloud. CFOs and CHROs understood immediately.
Segway had no clear market alternative (what budget does a personal transporter replace?) and no product alternative (what validated the approach?). Without either anchor, pragmatists could not categorize, evaluate, or justify purchasing. Technology excited visionaries but failed to achieve mainstream adoption.
Moore developed this technique because the most common positioning failure at the chasm was not poor differentiation but absent categorization. Companies positioned disruptive products as 'entirely new' -- delighting visionaries but paralyzing pragmatists who need to understand what shelf a product sits on before comparing alternatives.
The two-competitor framework emerged from analyzing how successful chasm crossers intuitively positioned themselves. Companies like Box, WorkDay, and Salesforce all used the same pattern: anchoring to an established incumbent while differentiating through association with a proven disruptive technology. Moore codified this into a systematic approach.