Examine competitors to find gaps, not to imitate.

Many businesses instinctively analyze their competitors: they open the homepage of a few familiar names, see what they are doing well, and then try to do something similar or slightly better. This approach is not entirely wrong, but it often leads to a very common result: you start to look increasingly like your competitors, making it harder for customers to distinguish between you. Analyzing competitors is valuable when the goal is to find a gap, not just to find a place in a crowded market.

Define competitors from the customer's perspective, not your own.

The first and most common mistake is defining competitors too narrowly. You may think competitors are companies providing similar services, but customers do not see it that way. According to April Dunford's approach, the right starting point is to ask: What would customers do if you weren't there? The answer often includes three groups: one is using direct competitors, two is using alternative solutions from different categories, and three is figuring it out themselves or doing nothing at all.

The third group, which refers to how clients manage on their own, is often completely overlooked. If a significant portion of your clients are currently doing things themselves instead of hiring someone, then 'doing it yourself' is a real competitive option. Understanding how they do it themselves, what they sacrifice, and why they haven't switched to hiring services will reveal more positioning gaps than any analysis of direct competitors.

How much analysis is sufficient?

Based on Sinh Vũ's internal practical experience, closely examining about 5 to 10 competitors is usually enough to see the overall competitive landscape and identify gaps. This is a rule of thumb, not an industry standard.

Expand the list beyond 10 only when the industry is fragmented into multiple groups serving different customer segments, and each group has its own distinct positioning statement. In that case, you need to cover each group adequately, not just the total number of names on the list.

Three angles to see the gaps

Once you have identified the correct list of competitors, there are three perspectives to consider simultaneously:

• Positioning they declare: They say who they are, who they serve, what they excel at? Read the homepage, headline, service description. This is the first layer.
• Common points across the industry: According to Kevin Lane Keller, these are points of parity, meaning things that the entire industry has and emphasizes. When many competitors use terms like "creative," "professional," and "partnership," it clearly indicates that this area is saturated and no longer creates differentiation.
• Unoccupied space: This is the point of difference, meaning the area where there are no or very few competitors. This is where you should plant your flag.

Kim and Mauborgne in Blue Ocean Strategy note that significant growth often comes from uncontested spaces, not from directly confronting strong competitors in their areas of strength. Properly analyzing competitors is a tool to find that space.

Most common mistakes

• Only read the competitor's homepage and then conclude. The homepage is what they want to convey, not what customers truly think. You need to look at reviews, comments, and actual customer feedback about them on other touchpoints.
• Examine to find strengths and then imitate. The result is that you blend into the crowd instead of standing out. Each time you follow a competitor, you narrow the gap in differentiation.
• Ignore how customers manage on their own. This is often the biggest competitive choice in many service industries, but it is rarely included on the map.

The viewpoint of Sinh Vũ

In the S1 process, Sinh Vũ spends weeks 2 to 3 creating a competitive map with about 5 to 10 competitors. Sinh Vũ examines two main axes: the positioning they claim and the points the entire industry is saying similarly. From there, the gaps become apparent.

When you and your competitors use the same words to describe yourselves, customers have no reason to choose you over them, unless you are cheaper or more familiar. That is not the position you want to be in.

Sinh Vũ, practice perspective

Sinh Vũ defines competitors from the customer's perspective, not the business's perspective. The question always starts with: what options are customers considering, including the option of not hiring anyone. The gaps identified from this viewpoint are often more specific and sustainable than those found when only looking directly at competitors.