Executive Competitive Threat Brief

A focused threat brief on a single competitor for the exec team — their momentum, where they're winning against you, and the strategic response.

Executive - Threat brief

A single-competitor threat brief — sized honestly, with the strategic response

1
Threat brief
Evidence, not alarm
Grafana surging in SMB/self-serve.
Weak on enterprise support - our wedge.
ElementRead
MomentumSurging (HG adoption)
Gaining inSMB / self-serve
Their gapEnterprise support
Why it lands
A rising competitor triggers panic or denial. This brief sizes the threat honestly — Grafana is surging, but in SMB/self-serve where their support gap shows in reviews — so leadership responds by defending enterprise, not by chasing a segment that isn't their fight.

Overview

Produce an executive threat brief on a single competitor: their demand momentum (category intent), the segments where their adopting-account base is growing, their review-driven strengths and weaknesses, and a recommended strategic response — so leadership decides how to respond to a rising competitor with evidence.

Use cases

  • Respond to threats with evidence, not panic

    A competitor's buzz triggers overreaction. A brief that sizes the threat from real adoption data — and locates exactly where they're gaining — calibrates the response.

  • Find the counter in their weaknesses

    Review data exposes where the rising competitor is weak. Pairing that with your genuine strengths gives leadership a response grounded in a real wedge, not a feature-war reflex.

View workflow prompt
# Executive Competitive Threat Brief

## Parameters

- `{{competitor}}` *(required)* — The competitor to brief on. Example: `Grafana`
- `{{category}}` *(required)* — The category. Example: `observability`
- `{{our_strengths}}` *(optional)* — Our genuine strengths, for the response framing. Example: `enterprise support, managed offering`

## Purpose
Produce an exec threat brief on {{competitor}} in the {{category}}: their momentum, the segments where they're gaining, their strengths and weaknesses from reviews — and a strategic response leveraging {{our_strengths}} — so leadership responds to the threat with evidence, not alarm.

## Process
1. **Momentum** — `intent_category` for the {{category}} to size how many companies are evaluating {{competitor}} (demand momentum is the available threat proxy; HG has no per-vendor adoption time-series, so do NOT query the competitor's own domain for "installed base").
2. **Where they're gaining** — `search_companies` (identity only: `companyId`, `companyName`, `domain`) to find the accounts that run {{competitor}}'s product, then enrich those accounts via `company_firmographic` (pass `companyId` as `hg_id`, or `domain`) to segment the contested ground by size band and geography. Confirm the install with `company_technographic` where it matters.
3. **Strengths + weaknesses** — `get_product_reviews` for what buyers praise and complain about — the basis of both their threat and our counter.
4. **Response** — recommend a strategic response that leans on {{our_strengths}} and their review-evidenced weaknesses.
5. **Brief** — exec-grade: the threat sized honestly, the contested ground, the response, and what to watch.

## Output Format
Markdown with:
- `# Executive Threat Brief — {{competitor}}`
- `## Threat Assessment` (momentum, cited)
- `## Contested Ground` (where they're gaining)
- `## Their Strengths + Weaknesses` (review-based)
- `## Strategic Response` (leveraging our strengths + their gaps)
- `## Citations`

## Quality Checklist
- Threat momentum cites `intent_category` demand volume (NOT vendor self-install data)
- Contested ground cites `search_companies` + `company_firmographic`/`company_technographic` (the competitor's customer base, segmented by size/geo)
- The threat is sized honestly — not overstated to alarm, not dismissed
- Response leans on genuine strengths and review-evidenced competitor gaps