# Competitor mention handling Human Guide

## What This Is For
Provides expert guidance for guidance for building competitor mention handling for sales bots. It gives the agent a clearer input/output frame for competitive research: what context to ask for, what decisions to make, and what usable artifact to return.

Use this as a human-readable version of the Competitor mention handling agent skill. It is meant for marketers, operators, founders, and other non-coders who want the workflow without reading agent-specific implementation instructions.

## When To Use This
- Use this when you need a repeatable process for competitor mention handling.
- Use this when the task needs judgment, examples, constraints, or a clear output format rather than a one-off prompt.
- Use this when you want to hand an AI assistant enough context to produce a usable marketing artifact.

## When Not To Use This
- Do not use this when you only need a quick factual answer.
- Do not use this when the work depends on private data you cannot share with the assistant.
- Do not use this as a replacement for legal, compliance, financial, or medical review.

## What You Need Before Starting
- The goal or business outcome you want.
- The audience, customer segment, or market context.
- Any source material the assistant should respect, such as notes, briefs, examples, URLs, or brand guidance.
- Constraints such as tone, length, channel, deadline, region, or approval requirements.
- A clear definition of what a good final answer should look like.

## Step-By-Step Workflow
1. State the job clearly: "Use the Competitor mention handling guide to help me with..."
2. Add context: audience, goal, offer, channel, source material, and constraints.
3. Ask the assistant to identify missing inputs before producing the final output.
4. Have the assistant follow the skill-specific guidance below.
5. Review the result against the final checklist and ask for revisions where needed.

## Skill-Specific Guidance
- Frame the work around competitor mention handling and ask for the context needed to do it well.
- Turn vague preferences into explicit choices before drafting the final output.
- Ask for a concrete deliverable, not just general advice.

## Decision Points And Nuance
The original skill emphasizes: Types of Competitor Mentions, Information Seeking, Already Using Competitor, Price Comparison, Loyalty Signal, Negative Mention, Response Framework, The PACE Method, Example Application, Handling Specific Scenarios.

Use these questions to steer the work:
- What is the intended audience or buyer?
- What source material must be preserved?
- What should the assistant optimize for: clarity, persuasion, accuracy, speed, creativity, or conversion?
- What examples represent the desired quality bar?
- What should the assistant avoid?

## Common Mistakes
- P - Pause (don't react defensively)
- P: (Don't immediately defend)
- A: "Integration coverage is definitely important."
- most important to you. Are you more focused on [Use Case A],
- important for what you're trying to do?"
- important to you and how we compare."

## Copy-And-Paste Prompt
```text
Use the Competitor mention handling human guide.

My goal:
[Describe the business outcome]

Audience:
[Describe who this is for]

Context and source material:
[Paste notes, examples, links, or existing copy]

Constraints:
[Tone, length, channel, timeline, must-include items, must-avoid items]

Before producing the final output, ask me for any missing information that would materially improve the result.
```

## Final Checklist
- [ ] The output matches the original goal.
- [ ] The audience and context are reflected in the answer.
- [ ] Important constraints and source material were preserved.
- [ ] The assistant made the relevant decisions explicit.
- [ ] The final artifact is ready to use, review, or hand to the next person.

## Source
This guide was generated from the louisblythe/salesskills skill entry for `competitor-mention-handling`.

## Source Skill Notes
These notes preserve the nuance from the original skill. Use them as supporting reference when the workflow above feels too generic.

# Competitor Mention Handling

You are an expert in building competitor mention handling for sales bots. Your goal is to help developers create systems that respond professionally and effectively when prospects bring up alternatives.

## Types of Competitor Mentions

### Information Seeking
```
"How do you compare to [Competitor]?"
"What's different from [Competitor]?"
"I've heard of [Competitor]—how are you different?"

Intent: Genuine curiosity, research phase
Response: Educational, factual comparison
```

### Already Using Competitor
```
"We currently use [Competitor]"
"We've been on [Competitor] for 2 years"
"We just signed with [Competitor]"

Intent: Testing if switch is worth it
Response: Understand satisfaction, find gaps
```

### Price Comparison
```
"[Competitor] is cheaper"
"We can get [Competitor] for half the price"
"Why should we pay more than [Competitor]?"

Intent: Leverage for discount or justify choice
Response: Value differentiation, not price match
```

### Loyalty Signal
```
"We love [Competitor]"
"[Competitor] has been great for us"
"Not sure we want to switch from [Competitor]"

Intent: Signaling low interest
Response: Respect their choice, find specific gaps
```

### Negative Mention
```
"We're looking because [Competitor] doesn't..."
"Frustrated with [Competitor]'s support"
"[Competitor] keeps having outages"

Intent: Ready to switch, validating you're better
Response: Acknowledge pain, show how you're different
```

## Response Framework

### The PACE Method
```
P - Pause (don't react defensively)
A - Acknowledge (validate their perspective)
C - Clarify (understand context)
E - Educate (share differentiation)
```

### Example Application
```
Prospect: "[Competitor] seems to have better integrations"

P: (Don't immediately defend)

A: "Integration coverage is definitely important."

C: "Which integrations are most critical for your workflow?"

E: [Based on their answer, address specifically]
   "We actually have deep integration with [X] that goes
   beyond what [Competitor] offers—let me explain..."
```