Choose a narrow buying or positioning question, collect comparable official pages, and record facts separately from interpretations. Finish with a decision memo that names the unresolved questions rather than declaring an unsupported winner.
In this guide
What should the competitor matrix look like?
Birch and Cedar are invented training vendors; these rows are not current market research. Replace B1 and C1 with dated captures and direct URLs when doing real work. A blank field means the evidence pack has not established the answer. Do not turn it into a negative capability claim or rank a vendor before checking the combined requirement.
| Practice vendor / source | Observed statement | Requirement gap | Next action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Birch / captured feature page B1 | Shared calendars mentioned | Two-staff support and deposits together not established | Ask about combined requirement and plan |
| Cedar / captured plan page C1 | Deposits listed on a named plan | Shared calendars on that same plan unconfirmed | Check exact plan and staff count |
| Buying requirement | Two staff calendars plus booking deposits | No candidate established by these snippets alone | Request written plan confirmation |
Which requirement are you comparing?
Write who will use the comparison and what they need to decide. Choosing a booking tool for a two-person studio needs different evidence from deciding how to describe your own service. List the must-have requirements before selecting competitors so the matrix does not become a collection of whatever is easiest to find.
For an occasional decision, a spreadsheet and browser may be enough. GPT Researcher can assist with gathering a broader source set in your own environment, but the published report still needs claim-level review. Keep marketing statements, current plan terms, and your interpretation in separate fields.
- Create columns for competitor, requirement, observed statement, source URL, checked date, applicable plan or region, and open question.
- Open the relevant official product and terms pages. Capture enough surrounding context to preserve qualifiers such as optional, limited to a plan, or available in selected regions.
- Use a distinct row for each claim. If a price depends on billing term or user count, retain those conditions with the observation.
- Mark a feature as unresolved when the checked sources do not establish it. Ask the vendor a specific question instead of turning a missing mention into a negative fact.
- Review the rows against the same requirements, then prepare a short memo explaining which observations matter to the original decision.
When is a shortlist justified?
Save the matrix with the memo. When someone challenges a conclusion, you should be able to open the exact source and explain the condition that affects it. Revisit important terms before a purchase or a published comparison.
- An observation refers to the correct vendor, plan, region, and checked date.
- A statement copied across sources has been traced back to its original publisher.
- Unresolved requirements remain visible beside the shortlist.
- The recommendation follows the stated requirements rather than the length of each vendor's marketing page.
Ask for a memo grounded in the matrix
TASK: Prepare a competitor decision memo. DECISION AND READER: [state] REQUIREMENTS: [must-have and optional] CHECKED MATRIX: [rows with source, date, plan/region, observation] Separate observed facts, interpretations, and unanswered questions. Compare the same requirement across candidates. Preserve billing and eligibility conditions. Use unresolved when evidence is missing. Return a brief shortlist rationale, reasons each candidate might fail the requirements, and the next question to verify. Attach the source row ID to every factual statement.
Keep the research useful after the first decision
Check citations before publishing the brief, and track a small set of sources if the decision will recur. A dated change log is easier to maintain than rebuilding an undated comparison from memory.