[HN Gopher] Competitive Analysis for Engineers
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Competitive Analysis for Engineers
        
       Author : staccatomeasure
       Score  : 57 points
       Date   : 2021-05-03 10:21 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (staysaasy.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (staysaasy.com)
        
       | kingsuper20 wrote:
       | I've been blown away by how little engineers will know about the
       | use of their own company's products, even the one they are
       | working on. It's an area that companies could stand to do more
       | training in.
        
         | alvis wrote:
         | This is what happens when you hire engineers who are not
         | passionate about your product. Training doesn't help if they're
         | not engaged.
        
           | fsociety wrote:
           | While I agree, I think at the same time companies prioritize
           | engineers to work as fast as possible, so no slack time means
           | no time to deeply learn the product.
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | It's a tradeoff of course. The more time engineers spend in
         | customer meetings, the less time they spend on engineering. The
         | other thing I observed when I was more directly involved in
         | such things is that you need to give them a good cross-section
         | because otherwise it becomes "the one customer meeting I was
         | in, they wanted $X so why aren't we doing $X?" See also sales
         | rep discussions.
         | 
         | You can summarize things based on research such as focus groups
         | but it's less concrete than hearing about specific customer
         | situations.
        
       | XiZhao wrote:
       | StaySaasy is my favorite tech blog of 2021. I am glad to see it
       | on HN. I think their posts are a really unique and thoughtful
       | corpus for a gap in thought leadership for scaling B2B
       | engineering / product teams.
        
       | robertlagrant wrote:
       | Don't disagree. Hard bit is knowing how to find that info out!
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | >Hard bit is knowing how to find that info out!
         | 
         | You'd have loved trying it pre-Web :-) I was a product manager
         | in the late 80s/90s and I needed to do competitive analysis for
         | pricing and feature prioritization.
         | 
         | One of our sources of information was an analyst firm that
         | basically collected faxes of product briefs from ourselves and
         | everyone else and then basically charged us large sums of money
         | to send us copies of the product briefs for relevant products
         | because we couldn't ask for them directly.
         | 
         | There was another firm that shipped us basically their own
         | datasheets in a standard format of the products in a space
         | (computer systems), which were often considerably
         | outdated/inaccurate.
         | 
         | I sometimes say if I had to go back to those days, I'd quit in
         | a week as I basically wouldn't have the information to do my
         | job.
        
           | kingsuper20 wrote:
           | >I was a product manager in the late 80s/90s and I needed to
           | do competitive analysis for pricing and feature
           | prioritization.
           | 
           | I've only worked at one company that really went all-out on
           | this. Samples were bought of competitive products, tear-downs
           | and estimates on manufacturing cost, use of ICE-machines
           | (where practical) to understand the underlying software to
           | some extent. All in addition to studying usage, manuals, etc.
           | Mid 1980's.
           | 
           | I think it was really useful, but then they also had a QA
           | department that was a peer to and practically as large as
           | engineering.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | There were some firms like IBM who, I'm told, had massive
             | competitive analysis teams including doing tear-downs, etc.
             | We were actually a fairly large company (Data General) and
             | we still didn't do a lot beyond talking with analysts who
             | had mostly never touched the physical product--and
             | customers of course. This was also a period when people
             | went to events like Comdex and returned with literally a
             | box (or boxes) full of paper.
        
               | kingsuper20 wrote:
               | At least Tracey Kidder wasn't breathing down your neck.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | I joined DG a few years later than that though I knew
               | many people in "the book" including Tom West who I sort
               | of dotted line reported to for a time when NUMA servers
               | were coming out. (For those who don't know what we're
               | talking about, "Soul of a New Machine" is still one of
               | the best books about product development ever written.)
        
           | enos_feedler wrote:
           | Not only do we have the web, we have app stores with public
           | reviews! In addition to easily learning about the
           | competition, we get to learn what their customers think of
           | their own features. Pretty magical!
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | I'm coming at this more from a B2B perspective.
             | 
             | Certainly there were computer mag reviews of products and
             | I'm honestly somewhat split on the transition from "expert"
             | and theoretically unbiased reviews to a much more heavily
             | crowdsourced set of reviewers. Not sure I'd call modern
             | online crowdsourced reviews "magical."
        
               | enos_feedler wrote:
               | Mag reviews are definitely not the same thing as user
               | reviews which are prompted during usage. If anything,
               | expert reviews are useless.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | When magazine reviews were something that was a seriously
               | paid occupation they were often pretty good. The problem
               | today is that they're often essentially algorithmic.
               | Reviews in e.g. the New York Times review of books insert
               | were generally better than random Amazon reviewers
               | (though not always).
        
         | staysaasy wrote:
         | Author's co-writer here - there are a few common ways to get
         | this information from public sources. Public documentation,
         | press releases, analyst reports from places like Gartner or
         | G2crowd, field reports from a sales team in an enterprise
         | business are some examples.
         | 
         | Thanks for reading!
        
       | gautamcgoel wrote:
       | The phrase "competitive analysis" has a well-known meaning in the
       | context of online algorithms.
        
         | sjg007 wrote:
         | It also has a different meaning in business. This blog is
         | tailored to software requirements I think.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-04 23:00 UTC)