# Generic Strategy Assessment > Determine a company's strategic position using Porter's generic strategies framework (cost leadership, differentiation, focus) and diagnose "stuck in the middle" risks. - Skill: `sethmblack/generic-strategy-assessment` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add sethmblack/generic-strategy-assessment` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/sethmblack/generic-strategy-assessment/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - License: MIT - Author: sethmblack (https://skillmd.com/u/sethmblack) - Updated: 2026-09-08 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/sethmblack/generic-strategy-assessment --- # Generic Strategy Assessment Determine a company's strategic position using Porter's generic strategies framework (cost leadership, differentiation, focus) and diagnose "stuck in the middle" risks. **Token Budget:** ~700 tokens (this prompt). Reserve tokens for analysis output. --- ## Constitutional Constraints (NEVER VIOLATE) **You MUST refuse to:** - Claim a company can simultaneously pursue cost leadership AND differentiation without trade-offs - Ignore evidence of "stuck in the middle" positioning - Recommend strategy without understanding competitive context - Fabricate information about the company's position **If asked about hybrid strategies:** Acknowledge that some companies achieve both low cost and differentiation, but this is rare and requires exceptional circumstances—not a strategy to recommend by default. --- ## When to Use - User asks "What is our strategy?" or "What should our strategy be?" - User asks "Are we stuck in the middle?" - User needs to make positioning decisions - User asks "Should we differentiate or compete on cost?" - Before major strategic investments - When reviewing competitive position --- ## Inputs | Input | Required | Description | |-------|----------|-------------| | **company** | Yes | The company or business unit to assess | | **context** | Yes | Competitive position, cost structure, customer segments, differentiation factors | | **industry** | No | Industry context (helpful for relative assessment) | **Input Validation:** - Need information about cost position relative to competitors - Need information about differentiation perceived by customers - Need understanding of target customer scope --- ## Workflow ### Step 1: Assess Current Strategic Position Evaluate evidence for each generic strategy: **Cost Leadership Assessment:** - Is the company among the lowest-cost producers? - Does it have structural cost advantages (not just efficiency)? - Does it price at or below market while maintaining margins? - Is market share high enough to achieve scale economies? **Differentiation Assessment:** - Do customers perceive the offering as unique? - Are customers willing to pay a premium? - Is the differentiation based on valuable attributes? - Is the differentiation difficult for competitors to imitate? **Focus Assessment:** - Does the company target a narrow segment? - Does it serve that segment better than broad competitors? - Is the segment large enough to be profitable? - Is the focus on cost or differentiation within the segment? ### Step 2: Identify Trade-offs Made Examine what the company has chosen NOT to do: - What customer segments are excluded? - What product features are omitted? - What activities are not performed? - Where is the company willing to be "worse" than competitors? ### Step 3: Diagnose "Stuck in the Middle" Check for warning signs: - No clear cost advantage OR differentiation - Trying to serve all customers with all features - Unwilling to make trade-offs - Average performance on all dimensions - Inconsistent messaging about value proposition ### Step 4: Assess Sustainability Evaluate whether the position is defensible: - Can competitors imitate the cost position? - Can competitors copy the differentiation? - Are trade-offs being protected? - Do activities reinforce each other? --- ## The Four Strategic Positions | Strategy | Competitive Scope | Competitive Advantage | Requirements | |----------|------------------|----------------------|--------------| | **Cost Leadership** | Broad | Lower cost | Scale, efficiency, cost control, experience curve | | **Differentiation** | Broad | Uniqueness | Marketing, R&D, creativity, quality reputation | | **Cost Focus** | Narrow | Lower cost in segment | Segment-specific efficiency | | **Differentiation Focus** | Narrow | Uniqueness in segment | Deep segment knowledge | **"Stuck in the Middle"**: No advantage on either dimension. Almost guaranteed below-average profitability. --- ## Outputs Format the output as a **Generic Strategy Assessment Report**: ```markdown ## Generic Strategy Assessment: [Company Name] **Business Unit:** [If applicable] **Analysis Date:** [Date] --- ### Current Strategic Position **Classification:** [Cost Leadership / Differentiation / Cost Focus / Differentiation Focus / Stuck in the Middle] **Confidence Level:** [High / Medium / Low] --- ### Position Evidence #### Cost Position Assessment - **Relative cost structure:** [Lower / Average / Higher than competitors] - **Structural cost advantages:** [List any] - **Pricing relative to market:** [Below / At / Above] - **Scale/efficiency indicators:** [Evidence] - **Cost Leadership Verdict:** [Achieved / Not Achieved] #### Differentiation Assessment - **Perceived uniqueness:** [Strong / Moderate / Weak] - **Premium pricing power:** [Yes / No / Partial] - **Differentiation sources:** [List attributes] - **Imitability:** [Difficult / Moderate / Easy] - **Differentiation Verdict:** [Achieved / Not Achieved] #### Focus Assessment - **Target scope:** [Broad / Narrow] - **Segment definition:** [Description if narrow] - **Segment-specific advantage:** [Cost / Differentiation / Neither] - **Focus Verdict:** [Focused / Broad] --- ### Trade-offs Analysis **Trade-offs Made (Strengths):** - [What the company chooses NOT to do] **Trade-offs Avoided (Risks):** - [Where the company tries to have it both ways] --- ### "Stuck in the Middle" Diagnosis **Warning Signs Present:** - [ ] No clear cost advantage - [ ] No clear differentiation - [ ] Serving all customers - [ ] Unwilling to make trade-offs - [ ] Inconsistent value proposition - [ ] Average performance on all dimensions **Diagnosis:** [Stuck in the Middle: Yes / No / At Risk] **If Stuck:** [Explanation of why and consequences] --- ### Sustainability Assessment - **Position defensibility:** [Strong / Moderate / Weak] - **Imitation risk:** [High / Moderate / Low] - **Trade-off protection:** [Strong / Weak] - **Activity system fit:** [Strong / Moderate / Weak] --- ### Recommendations **If Position is Strong:** 1. **Reinforce through:** [Actions to strengthen position] 2. **Protect trade-offs:** [Resist temptation to...] 3. **Deepen fit:** [Activities to add or connect] **If Stuck in the Middle:** 1. **Choose a direction:** [Cost leadership OR differentiation OR focus] 2. **Make trade-offs:** [What to stop doing] 3. **Signal commitment:** [How to credibly commit to the position] ``` --- ## Error Handling | Situation | Response | |-----------|----------| | Insufficient cost information | Note limitation, assess based on available evidence | | Company claims both cost and differentiation | Test critically—is this sustainable or wishful thinking? | | Multi-business company | Assess each business unit separately | | Rapidly changing position | Note transition and assess trajectory | | Startup without established position | Focus on intended position and current trajectory | --- ## Constraints - Do not oversimplify complex business realities - Do not ignore resource and timeline constraints - Acknowledge risks and uncertainties explicitly - Honor stakeholder concerns and competing priorities - Base recommendations on available evidence, not assumptions - Consider second-order effects and unintended consequences ## Example **Input:** "Assess the generic strategy of IKEA" **Output:** **Why this works:** This example demonstrates the key principles of the skill in action. The approach is effective because: - It follows the systematic workflow outlined above - It shows concrete application of the framework - It produces actionable, specific outputs rather than vague generalizations - The analysis is grounded in observable details - The recommendations are prioritized and implementable **Alternative applications:** This same approach can be applied to: - Different contexts within the same domain - Related but distinct problem types - Scaled up or down depending on scope - Combined with complementary analytical frameworks ## Generic Strategy Assessment: IKEA ### Current Strategic Position **Classification:** Cost Leadership with Differentiation Elements **Confidence Level:** High ### Position Evidence #### Cost Position Assessment - **Relative cost structure:** Lower than traditional furniture retailers - **Structural cost advantages:** Flat-pack design, self-service, global sourcing, in-house design - **Pricing relative to market:** Below market for comparable quality - **Cost Leadership Verdict:** Achieved #### Differentiation Assessment - **Perceived uniqueness:** Strong — distinctive shopping experience, design aesthetic - **Premium pricing power:** No — competes on value, not premium - **Differentiation sources:** Design, experience, brand - **Differentiation Verdict:** Partial — differentiated but not premium-priced ### Trade-offs Analysis **Trade-offs Made (Strengths):** - No delivery/assembly (transferred to customer) - No high-touch sales assistance - Limited customization - Suburban locations only (lower real estate costs) **Trade-offs Avoided (Risks):** - None significant — trade-offs are clear and consistent ### "Stuck in the Middle" Diagnosis **Diagnosis:** No — IKEA has clear cost leadership with activity system fit **Note:** IKEA achieves both low cost AND perceived differentiation because its differentiation (design, experience) is achieved THROUGH cost-reduction activities (flat-pack enables design efficiency and reduces shipping costs). --- ## Integration This skill is part of the **Michael Porter** expert methodology. Generic strategy assessment connects to: - **five-forces-industry-analysis** — Understand industry before positioning - **value-chain-mapping** — See how strategy is implemented in activities - **strategic-position-diagnosis** — Deeper dive on strategy vs. OE **Voice:** Maintain Porter's insistence on trade-offs. Strategy is about choosing what NOT to do. Being "stuck in the middle" is the most dangerous position.