SWOT Analysis (Evidence-Cited)
Purpose
Build an evidence-cited SWOT of one company — yours or a competitor's — from the public record:
use or gather evidence → four labeled quadrants → crossings → next-step options. Strengths and
weaknesses come from documented capability and customer voice; opportunities and threats from market,
competitor, and macro signals. Every entry carries a source and a label, and the analysis ends with
the S-O and W-T crossings — because a SWOT without "so what" is a parking lot with four sections.
Input
Works best with: the company to analyze, the scope (whole company or one product line/market),
and
the decision this SWOT should support.
Also useful: the perspective — theirs, or yours competing with them — and any research already in
session (a
competitive-research-snapshot
, VoC themes, a
landscape scan,
output): the SWOT then
synthesizes
instead of re-searching.
Input supplied inline with the invocation — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an
appended
line — counts as answers already given. Use it against the question budget;
don't re-ask.
Arriving empty-handed? That works too. The skill opens with at most 3 questions (company + scope,
decision, perspective) and proceeds on labeled assumptions if they go unanswered.
Example invocation: Evidence-cited SWOT on [Competitor A]'s mid-market product line, from our perspective — supports the Q3 positioning refresh. Last month's snapshot is attached.
Key Concepts
- Governing protocol: honors the
contract — question budget of 3, search-plan gate, Fact/Inference/Assumption labels, Just Enough
Mode (max 5 ranked entries per quadrant), stable schema, 4-option Final Step. Disciplines: OSINT +
FININT + HUMINT per
intelligence-collection-disciplines
.
- Quadrant discipline. S and W are internal and current; O and T are external. The most
common SWOT error is an "opportunity" that requires the company to act — that's a strategy, not an
opportunity. Flag it when you catch it; catching it is half the teaching.
- Claimed vs. evidenced advantage. Strengths sourced from the company's own marketing are
claims; strengths corroborated by customer voice, filings, or independent coverage are evidence.
Customer voice weighs heaviest on weaknesses — buyers document weaknesses vendors won't.
- The crossings are the deliverable. S-O names the attack (which strength unlocks which
opportunity); W-T names the exposure (which weakness a threat finds first). SWOT is an input to
moves, not a wall poster.
- Companion, not substitute: reads the
industry's structure; this reads one company's position within it. Run both when the decision
is market entry.
- When NOT to use: internal-only SWOT from private knowledge → run it as a team workshop with
your evidence; the whole competitor set → snapshot first, SWOT the one or two that matter.
- Do-not-invent list: financials, customer wins, market share, product claims, roadmap items.
Application
- Check session for existing evidence (snapshot, VoC themes, landscape scan, company-intel).
Present → synthesize from it; search only gaps and staleness.
- Credit inline context, then ask only the unanswered questions (max 3):
- Which company, and whole-company or one product line?
- What decision should this support?
- From whose perspective — theirs, or yours competing with them?
- If researching fresh, show the 3-bullet search plan — source sweep (filings, reviews, press,
pricing pages, hiring signals), how internal vs. external evidence will be separated, how facts
split from inference. Continue unless revised.
- Emit the schema below exactly.
Output schema (do not reorder)
markdown
# SWOT: [Company / Scope]
**As-of date:** | **Decision supported:** | **Perspective:**
## 1. Strengths (internal, evidenced)
- [Entry] — [evidence: URL, date] — [Fact/Inference]
- [Max 5, ranked by defensibility]
## 2. Weaknesses (internal, evidenced)
- [Entry — customer voice weighs heaviest here] — [URL] — [label]
- [Max 5, ranked by exploitability]
## 3. Opportunities (external)
- [Entry — market/macro signal] — [URL] — [label]
- [Max 5, ranked by fit to their strengths]
## 4. Threats (external)
- [Entry — competitor/regulatory/technology signal] — [URL] — [label]
- [Max 5, ranked by likelihood x damage]
## 5. The Crossings (the "so what")
- **S-O (attack):** [strength that unlocks which opportunity — 1-2 moves, labeled Inference]
- **W-T (exposure):** [weakness a threat will find first — 1-2 risks, labeled Inference]
- **For your decision:** [what this SWOT says about the decision named above, in 2 sentences]
### Assumptions to Validate
- [Assumption 1] / [Assumption 2] / [Assumption 3]
A copy/paste fill-in version of this schema, with quality checks, lives in
.
Final Step (offer exactly 4 options)
- Run the W-T exposure into a battle card or risk plan ()
- SWOT a second company for side-by-side comparison
- Feed the crossings into a positioning statement ()
- Schedule-ready version: which entries should a quarterly re-run watch?
Accept
,
,
,
,
,
, or a custom path.
Examples
The quadrant discipline catching a disguised strategy (fictional):
Draft opportunity: "expand into the compliance-automation segment." Caught and reclassified — that
requires them to act, so it's a candidate strategy, not an opportunity. The underlying
opportunity, restated externally: "compliance-automation demand in their install base is growing —
Fact ([industry survey, URL]) — and no incumbent serves it." Now the S-O crossing can test
whether any documented strength (their services arm, their audit-trail architecture) actually
unlocks it — or whether it's a mirage that flatters the roadmap.
Claimed vs. evidenced, side by side:
- Their site claims "enterprise-grade reliability" — that's a claim, not a strength.
- Strength as evidenced: "publishes a status page with 26 months of >99.95% uptime — Fact
([status page, URL]) — and reliability praise recurs across independent reviews — Fact
([review site, URL])." Ranked #2 by defensibility: verifiable, sustained, hard to copy quickly.
See
for a complete worked SWOT (fictional FSM-software
market, same scenario as the suite's chain examples) that synthesizes from a snapshot and watch
report already in session.
examples/sample-industrial.md
runs the
same quadrant discipline on an industrial evidence diet, including a fortress-move warning in the
S-O crossing.
Common Pitfalls
- The four-box brainstorm. Unsourced entries from a conference room are opinions arranged in
quadrants. Evidence per entry is what separates this SWOT from the one nobody trusts.
- Opportunities that are strategies. "Launch in Europe" is a move; "European demand outpacing
local supply" is an opportunity. If the entry needs the company to act, reclassify it.
- Marketing-sourced strengths. A strengths quadrant built from the company's own website is
their positioning statement wearing your logo. Corroborate or label as claim.
- Skipping the crossings. Four tidy quadrants and no moves. The S-O attack and W-T exposure are
why the analysis exists — the decision-support sentence at the end is the test it must pass.
- Wish-list contamination. Internal hopes ("we'd love better onboarding") placed in W, or
fears in T, without evidence. Every quadrant works the public record; wishes go to the roadmap.
References
- (Workflow) — the governing protocol
intelligence-collection-disciplines
(Component) — the evidence channels behind each quadrant
- (Workflow) — industry structure; run both for market-entry decisions
competitive-research-snapshot
(Workflow) — upstream evidence base
- (Workflow) — the weaknesses quadrant's best source
- (Component) — consumes the crossings
- SWOT framework as standard strategy practice; adapted from
market-intelligence/swot-analysis-prompt.md
in the
https://github.com/deanpeters/product-manager-prompts
repo.