Positioning statement template

The template

Copy this block into a doc. It holds the statement and two parts of the output of our positioning-statement method, the one the Positioning statement tool on this site runs. In our method, the reasoning trail is what keeps the statement defensible six months later. The full output also holds the ranked alternatives, the attributes, the proof status and the open questions.

## Positioning statement

For      <the target customer>
who      <the situation or pressure they are in>
<Product> is a <market category>
that     <the value it delivers>
Unlike   <the top competitive alternative, named>
<Product> <the differentiated thing, traced to a unique attribute>

## Reasoning trail

| Choice           | What we picked | Runner-up | Why the runner-up lost |
|------------------|----------------|-----------|------------------------|
| Top alternative  |                |           |                        |
| Lead attribute   |                |           |                        |
| Lead value       |                |           |                        |
| Who cares a lot  |                |           |                        |
| Category         |                |           |                        |

## What we deliberately do not claim
- <claim refused, and why>

How to fill each slot

Our method has nine steps. Steps 2 to 6 follow the five parts April Dunford sets out in Obviously Awesome (2019); her books page lists "five component pieces" (aprildunford.com/books, read 2026-10-14). The wording here is ours. Steps 1, 7, 8 and 9 are our own additions. The For, Who, Unlike sentence shape comes from Geoffrey Moore's Crossing the Chasm (1991).

1. Load the context and name the seat. Read your current positioning, the live site and the alternatives' public claims, and date every source. Name one buyer seat, such as a care coordinator. A category of buyer is not a reader.
2. Fill Unlike first. List what buyers do today, from evidence such as a buyer quote or a lost deal. Add doing nothing, and a person with a spreadsheet. Rank them; the top one goes in the Unlike line. An alternative with no evidence is labelled ASSUMED and cannot be ranked first.
3. Fill the difference. Write what is true of you and not of the top alternative. Keep it only if an outsider could confirm it by looking, trying or reading. "Better UX" fails that test.
4. Fill "that". Turn the attribute into the value a buyer gets, one line per attribute. If no buyer would notice the value, the method deletes the attribute as trivia. Two attributes with the same value merge into one line.
5. Fill For and who. Describe the buyer who cares most about that value by their situation, their constraint and what is on fire. Write characteristics, not demographics. If this buyer differs from your current target, flag it as a decision for a person.
6. Fill "is a". Name the category that tells a buyer what to compare you to. Test it: list what a buyer would then assume about price, buying process and who signs. If those assumptions are wrong, the category is wrong.
7. Sort the proof. Split every claim into proven now, not yet proven, and required before you can claim it. Name the artifact that would prove each open claim, and who owns it.
8. Assemble it and write the trail. Put the six lines together. For each of the five choices, record the runner-up and why it lost. Then list what you deliberately do not claim.
9. Hand back the open questions. Strategic choices, like a new audience or a new category, go to a person as questions with the trade-off stated. The statement does not settle them quietly.

Worked sample: Airtable's homepage

"Teams, workflows, agents — one space"

"Other tools let you build with agents. Airtable lets you build with your whole team (agents included)."

Read on 2026-10-14. Source: Airtable homepage

That is the H1, with its line break, and the line under it. The em dash is the page's own. Airtable served at least three different hero versions across our fetches that day, so you may see other words, such as "All your teams, all their workflows—connected in one workspace". This is the version we fetched both raw and in a browser.

Further down the same version, a tab labelled "Run on shared data" says:

"All your teams and their agents build on the same records. Change one thing, everyone sees it."

Read on 2026-10-14. Source: Airtable homepage

What the copy does well. The subhead already makes the Unlike move. It sets Airtable against something and says what changes: the whole team builds, not only agents. In the method's terms, "the same records" is the kind of attribute an outsider could check by trying the product. The hero button reads "Start building for free". The site menu names a category too: it calls Airtable "a next-gen app-building platform".

What is missing, against the template. "Other tools" is plural and unnamed. The method's quality bar says the Unlike line names one specific alternative, so this line cannot go into the template as written. The hero tabs switch between teams such as Operations, Marketing and Sales. That is several buyers, rather than the one who cares most (step 5). In our reading, "one space" is a frame, but it does not tell a buyer what to compare it to (step 6). In our view, the menu's "app-building platform" does that better.

The fix, as a filled-in statement. Each slot uses the page's words or stays a question. We do not know what Airtable's buyers use today, so we do not guess.

For       [the one team that cares most: needs evidence]
who       [the situation or pressure they are in: needs evidence]
Airtable  is an app-building platform
that      lets the whole team, agents included, build on the same records
Unlike    [the one tool these buyers use today, named: needs evidence]
Airtable  [the difference: check "the same records" is not true of that tool]

The page fills two lines and gives a candidate for a third. In our view, the Unlike slot decides the rest. Until it names one tool, nobody can check whether "the same records" is a difference or a feature every rival shares.

Common mistakes

• Writing "competitors" in the Unlike line. The quality bar bans plural, unnamed rivals. Name the one alternative you ranked first.
• Ranking a guess first. An alternative with no evidence line is labelled ASSUMED. It can stay on the list, but never at the top.
• A difference nobody can check. If an outsider could not confirm it by looking, trying or reading, drop it and find another.
• A "that" line full of features. "Has an API" is an attribute. Write what the buyer gets from it.
• Demographics in the For line. "Mid-market SaaS companies" says who exists. The method asks for the situation that makes a buyer care.
• Shipping the six lines alone. In our view, a statement with no reasoning trail cannot be defended when someone asks why. Fill the trail and the "do not claim" list too.

Questions people ask

Can you show me a positioning statement template to fill out?

Yes. Copy the block under "The template" above. Fill it in step order, not top to bottom: Unlike first, then the difference, then "that", then For and who, then "is a". Each slot has its own test in the steps above. Leave a slot as a visible question when you lack the evidence. In our view, a bracket that says "needs evidence" is more useful than a confident guess.

What are real company positioning statement examples?

In our view, few companies publish their full statement, so most public "examples" are written by someone outside the company. The two homepages we have filled in for these guides, Airtable's above and Stripe's in our value proposition guide, fill two or three of the six lines. Read a hero against the template and mark which slots it fills. Our guide to what a positioning statement is covers each part in more depth.

Sources

• Obviously Awesome, April Dunford, 2019 (book)
• April Dunford, Books, https://www.aprildunford.com/books, read 2026-10-14
• Crossing the Chasm, Geoffrey A. Moore, 1991 (book)
• Airtable homepage, https://www.airtable.com/, read 2026-10-14
• Perplexity follow-up suggestions on "what is a positioning statement", read 2026-10-13
• Our positioning-statement method skill and the Positioning statement tool on this site (ours, read 2026-10-14)