Use PESTEL to read competitor moves through political, economic, social, tech, environmental, and legal signals.
This is a working analyst brief. Sources go in. Patterns, risks, and decisions come out.
You are a market strategy analyst.
Run a PESTEL analysis from competitor evidence and identify which external forces may matter for our next move.
My company:
{{my_company}}
Competitor:
{{competitor}}
Market:
{{market}}
Sources:
{{sources}}
Return:
1. PESTEL table with evidence and confidence.
2. Competitor moves that may connect to each factor.
3. Factors with no evidence yet.
4. Risks of overreading the signal.
5. Questions to verify next.
6. Strategic implications for our company.
Rules:
- Use only the sources I provide.
- Do not invent metrics, spend, conversion rates, private pricing, customers, or intent.
- Mark unsupported claims as [UNVERIFIED].
- Separate observation, interpretation, and recommendation.
Advanced AI technique settings:
- Source-grounded context pack: Build a source table first with source, date checked, claim, confidence, and business meaning. Use only that table for the final recommendations.
- Source notebook workflow: If the source set is large, create a source notebook first. Ask only questions answerable from that notebook, export the source-backed claims, and paste those claims into the final prompt.
- Evidence rubric: Score each important finding by evidence strength, relevance, business impact, and reversibility before recommending an action.
- Counterfactual options: Give at least one alternative interpretation and one reason the main recommendation could be wrong.
- Structured output contract: Return the main output as tables or labeled sections with fixed columns: finding, evidence, confidence, risk, action, and verification needed.
- Cross-model or second-pass review: Run the output through a separate verifier pass, or compare it with an independent model or reviewer, then keep only findings supported by the source pack.Copy the prompt. Fill the variables. Then check the output for real.
These are selected for this specific competitor research job. Use the prompt-ready instruction when it helps, and skip it when the condition does not fit.
Use when: Use when the answer depends on competitor pages, screenshots, ads, pricing, SEO exports, or reviews.
Prompt move: Build a source table first with source, date checked, claim, confidence, and business meaning. Use only that table for the final recommendations.
Skip when: Skip only for brainstorming with no factual claims.
Use when: Use when you have a stable pack of competitor pages, PDFs, call notes, screenshots, exports, or long research notes.
Prompt move: If the source set is large, create a source notebook first. Ask only questions answerable from that notebook, export the source-backed claims, and paste those claims into the final prompt.
Skip when: Skip when you only have one or two short sources.
Use when: Use when recommendations could change strategy, positioning, pricing, ads, or product priorities.
Prompt move: Score each important finding by evidence strength, relevance, business impact, and reversibility before recommending an action.
Skip when: Skip for prompts that only organize notes without recommending action.
Use when: Use when the output recommends positioning, offer, creative, content, or product moves.
Prompt move: Give at least one alternative interpretation and one reason the main recommendation could be wrong.
Skip when: Skip for factual extraction or source verification.
Use when: Use when the output must be compared, reviewed, or turned into tasks.
Prompt move: Return the main output as tables or labeled sections with fixed columns: finding, evidence, confidence, risk, action, and verification needed.
Skip when: Skip when the desired output is narrative copy.
Use when: Use for high-stakes reports, pricing decisions, client deliverables, or public claims.
Prompt move: Run the output through a separate verifier pass, or compare it with an independent model or reviewer, then keep only findings supported by the source pack.
Skip when: Skip for fast internal drafts.
| Variable | Meaning | Type | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
{{my_company}} | Your company, product, or brand | string | Northstar CRM |
{{competitor}} | The competitor you want to analyze | string | Acme CRM |
{{market}} | The category or market context | string | B2B CRM for agencies |
{{sources}} | URLs, screenshots, notes, exports, or pasted copy | list | Homepage URL, pricing URL, ad screenshots |
The output below is fictional. It shows the shape you are looking for, not a real competitor result.
my_company = PayTrack
competitor = InvoiceWing
market = invoice automation
sources = pricing change notes, homepage copy, regulation note, ad screenshotsFictional example output:
Legal factor: possible compliance push, medium confidence.
Evidence: competitor added audit-log copy and finance approval workflow.
Do not conclude: that regulation caused the change. Verify with product release notes or public announcements.It stops PESTEL from becoming a vague classroom exercise.
It marks factors with no evidence.
It connects external forces to concrete competitor moves.
Paste the page copy, ad screenshots, pricing table, SEO notes, or transcript first.
Use it as a source-backed brief: keep strong evidence, downgrade weak evidence, and decide what deserves action.
Ask for observations, risks, and next actions tied to the evidence.
Every factual claim has a source or is marked as unverified.
Pricing, dates, and product claims were checked on the original source.
The output separates observation from interpretation.
The output gives actions you can reject, edit, or test.
Nothing is treated as final just because an AI tool wrote it.
Paste competitor changes with dates.
Mark factors with no evidence.
Convert the strongest factor into a monitoring question.