nickcrew/claude-cortex

market-researcher

Use this skill when sizing a market, analyzing competitors, designing customer surveys, segmenting audiences, or synthesizing research into market insights.

First seen Apr 13, 2026

Installation

$ npx skills add nickcrew/claude-cortex --skill market-researcher

Summary

  • Use this skill when sizing a market, analyzing competitors, designing customer surveys, segmenting audiences, or synthesizing research into market insights.
  • Trigger phrases: ''size the market for'', ''analyze our competitors'', ''who is our target customer'', ''design a survey to understand'', ''TAM/SAM/SOM for''.
  • Not for building financial models, writing pitch decks, or conducting UX usability research.

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from nickcrew/claude-cortex · top by installs.

npx skills add nickcrew/claude-cortex

Browse all from nickcrew/claude-cortex

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Repository health

Stars 38
License LICENSE
Default branch main
Open issues 3
Status Active

Skill metadata

Parsed from SKILL.md frontmatter.

Version1.0.0
LicenseMIT

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 13,126 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 433 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 35 installs

SKILL.md

Market Researcher

Overview

This skill guides structured market research—from estimating market size using TAM/SAM/SOM through primary and secondary research design, customer segmentation, survey construction, and competitive landscape analysis. It turns ambiguous market questions into defensible, data-backed conclusions that inform strategic decisions about where to play and how to win.

When to Use

  • Sizing a new market opportunity before investing in product development
  • Analyzing competitor strengths, weaknesses, and positioning
  • Designing a customer survey to understand needs or validate assumptions
  • Segmenting a customer base to find the most valuable groups
  • Preparing market analysis for a pitch deck, board presentation, or strategic plan
  • Understanding why customers choose or leave a product

When NOT to Use

  • Conducting usability testing or user interviews about product UX (use ux-researcher skill)
  • Building detailed financial models or revenue projections (use a finance skill)
  • Writing the full pitch deck (use pitch-deck-writer skill)
  • Real-time social media monitoring or sentiment analysis

Quick Reference

Research Task Method Time Required
Market sizing TAM/SAM/SOM (top-down + bottom-up) 2–8 hours
Competitor analysis Framework + web research 4–12 hours
Customer needs 8–12 in-depth interviews 2–3 weeks
Hypothesis validation Survey (n=200+) 1–2 weeks
Customer segmentation Survey + cluster analysis 2–4 weeks
Positioning map Perception survey or desk research 1–3 days
Secondary research Reports, databases, news 2–8 hours

Instructions

Step 1: Define the Research Question

Before gathering data, write a single crisp research question:

  • "What is the addressable market for AI-powered legal contract review in the US?"
  • "Why do users cancel within 30 days of signing up for our product?"
  • "How does our product compare to competitors on features and pricing?"

Then list 3–5 sub-questions that, if answered, would answer the main question.

Step 2: Market Sizing — TAM / SAM / SOM

Definitions:

  • TAM (Total Addressable Market): Total revenue available if you captured 100% of the market
  • SAM (Serviceable Addressable Market): The portion you can realistically target given your business model, geography, and product
  • SOM (Serviceable Obtainable Market): What you can realistically capture in 3–5 years

Two approaches to triangulate:

Top-Down (use industry reports):

TAM: Find total industry revenue from analyst reports (Gartner, IDC, Statista)
     Example: "Global legal tech market: $29B (2024)" → TAM = $29B

SAM: Apply your segment filters
     "AI-specific legal tech, US only, mid-to-large law firms" = 15% of global market
     SAM = $29B × 15% = $4.4B

SOM: Apply your achievable market share
     "Realistic 3% capture in 5 years" → SOM = $4.4B × 3% = $132M

Bottom-Up (use unit economics):

# Count the buyers × their spend

Target customers: US law firms with 50+ attorneys = 8,000 firms
Average annual contract value (ACV): $25,000
Total SAM = 8,000 × $25,000 = $200M/year

SOM: Win 500 firms in 5 years → 500 × $25,000 = $12.5M ARR

Best practice: Use both approaches; if they're within 2× of each other, your estimate is credible. If they diverge more, investigate why.

Data sources for market sizing:

  • Gartner, Forrester, IDC, Grand View Research (paid)
  • Statista, IBISWorld (paid, often available via library)
  • Census Bureau, BLS, SEC filings (free)
  • LinkedIn Sales Navigator (estimate company counts)
  • Crunchbase, PitchBook (funding and revenue signals)
  • Job posting counts (proxy for company growth in a segment)

Step 3: Primary vs Secondary Research

Secondary research (desk research — start here):

  • Industry analyst reports (Gartner Magic Quadrant, Forrester Wave)
  • Competitor websites, pricing pages, job postings, press releases
  • App store reviews of competitor products
  • Reddit, Twitter, G2, Capterra, Trustpilot — customer voice
  • Government databases (Census, USPTO, SEC EDGAR)
  • Academic papers, conference proceedings

Primary research (you collect — for validation and nuance):

Method Best For Sample Size
In-depth interviews Deep understanding of motivations 8–15
Online surveys Quantifying preferences, segmentation 200–1,000+
Focus groups Concept testing, early ideation 2 groups of 6–8
Observational/ethnography Understanding actual behavior 5–10 sessions
A/B tests Validating specific hypotheses 1,000+ per variant

Step 4: Survey Design

A good survey:

  1. Takes < 10 minutes (15 questions max)
  2. Asks one thing per question
  3. Progresses from general to specific
  4. Uses consistent rating scales (always 1–5 or always 1–7; never mix)
  5. Ends with demographics and open-ended "anything else?"

Question type guide:

  • Multiple choice (single): When answers are mutually exclusive ("Which best describes your role?")
  • Multiple choice (multi-select): "Which of these tools do you use?" (check all that apply)
  • Likert 1–5: Agreement, satisfaction, frequency
  • Ranking: "Rank these features from most to least important" (max 5 items)
  • NPS (0–10): "How likely are you to recommend us?"
  • Open-ended: "What is the biggest challenge you face with X?" (use sparingly, 1–2 max)

Sample survey structure:

Section 1: Screener (1–2 questions to qualify respondents)
Section 2: Current behavior and pain (3–4 questions)
Section 3: Product/solution fit (3–4 questions)
Section 4: Competitive usage and preferences (2–3 questions)
Section 5: Willingness to pay / pricing (1–2 questions)
Section 6: Demographics (2–3 questions)

Step 5: Customer Segmentation

Segment your market on dimensions that predict purchase behavior:

B2B segmentation dimensions:

  • Company size (employees, revenue)
  • Industry vertical
  • Geography
  • Tech stack / sophistication
  • Buying process (self-serve vs sales-led)
  • Use case (primary job to be done)

B2C segmentation dimensions:

  • Demographics (age, income, education)
  • Psychographics (values, lifestyle, attitudes)
  • Behavioral (usage frequency, purchase history, NPS)
  • Geography

Segmentation output template:

Segment Size Description Primary Need Channel ACV
Enterprise Legal 2,000 firms 500+ attorneys, dedicated IT Compliance automation Sales-led $80K
Mid-Market Legal 6,000 firms 50–500 attorneys, cost-sensitive Time savings PLG + inside sales $20K
Solo/Small Firm 50,000 firms <50 attorneys, price-sensitive Affordable AI assistance Self-serve $2K

Step 6: Competitive Landscape Analysis

Analyze 5–8 direct and indirect competitors across:

Feature matrix:

Feature Your Product Competitor A Competitor B Competitor C
Feature 1
Feature 2
Pricing $X/mo $Y/mo $Z/mo $W/mo
Target segment Mid-market Enterprise SMB Mid-market

Positioning map (2×2 matrix with two dimensions):

  • X-axis: Price (budget → premium)
  • Y-axis: Ease of use (complex → simple)
  • Plot each competitor as a dot; find whitespace = your opportunity

SWOT analysis per competitor:

  • S: What do they do best? (customer reviews, investor narratives)
  • W: Where do they fall short? (negative reviews, high churn signals)
  • O: What market trends help them?
  • T: What could hurt them (you, regulation, substitutes)?

Examples

Example 1: Size the US Online Education Market

Research question: What is the market size for AI-powered corporate learning platforms in the US?

Top-down approach:

Global corporate e-learning market (2024): $50B (Grand View Research)
US share: ~35% → $17.5B US market
AI-enhanced segment: ~20% of corporate e-learning → $3.5B SAM
Target: Mid-to-large enterprises (1,000+ employees) = 40% of market → $1.4B

Realistic 4-year market capture at 2% = $28M ARR

Bottom-up approach:

US companies with 1,000+ employees: ~19,000 (BLS data)
Estimated 25% currently buying L&D platforms: 4,750 companies
Average L&D platform spend: $80K/year
Total SAM: 4,750 × $80K = $380M (conservative; AI premium not modeled)
SOM at 1.5% capture: ~70 companies → $5.6M ARR in Year 3

Synthesis: Top-down gives $28M, bottom-up gives $5.6M—roughly a 5× gap. Investigation reveals the top-down estimate includes training content production budgets, not just platform software. Adjusting the top-down scope brings both estimates to $15–25M TAM for a standalone AI platform. Credible SOM: $5–10M ARR by Year 4.


Example 2: Analyze Competitor Positioning for a Project Management Tool

Research question: How does our new project management tool compare to Asana, Monday.com, and Linear?

Research methods used: Competitor websites, G2/Capterra reviews (top 50 for each), App Store reviews, job postings (signal for engineering investment), pricing pages.

Findings summary:

Dimension Our Tool Asana Monday.com Linear
Target user Developer teams Marketing/ops Any team Engineers
Core strength GitHub integration Workflow automation Customization Speed & simplicity
Pricing (team plan) $12/user/mo $13.49/user/mo $12/user/mo $8/user/mo
Key complaint (G2) "Missing Gantt view" "Too complex" "Expensive at scale" "Too dev-focused"
AI features ✅ native ⚠️ limited ⚠️ limited

Positioning gap identified: No competitor strongly serves mixed teams (engineering + product + design) with deep GitHub integration + non-developer accessibility. This is the whitespace.

Recommendation: Position as "the project management tool for product teams that ship software"—bridging engineering (GitHub) and business stakeholders (no-code views, status reports).

Best Practices

  • Triangulate market size with two methods (top-down + bottom-up) and explain any large gaps
  • Primary research validates secondary research; never rely on one source alone
  • For surveys, pilot test with 5 people before full launch; fix confusing questions
  • When analyzing competitors, focus on customer reviews for weaknesses—competitor websites only show strengths
  • Segment by behavior, not just demographics; two people with the same age can have very different buying behavior
  • Make assumptions explicit: "We assume 15% of the market is addressable given our current integrations"
  • Research findings should lead to a recommendation, not just a data dump

Common Mistakes

  • Reporting TAM as the investment opportunity (it's not; SOM is)
  • Conflating total industry spending with the addressable software market
  • Survey bias: leading questions, or surveying only existing happy customers
  • Treating competitor feature lists at face value without talking to their customers
  • Doing only secondary research for important decisions (desk research has survivorship bias)
  • Forgetting to validate willingness to pay—a large market of people who won't pay is worthless
  • Confusing market size with market demand (a market can be large but already saturated)

Tips & Tricks

  • G2 and Capterra reviews are gold mines—read the 3-star reviews for honest trade-offs
  • LinkedIn company search filters (industry + size) let you count companies in a segment for free
  • App store reviews sorted by "most recent, 1–2 stars" shows a competitor's current problems
  • The "jobs to be done" (JTBD) framework is the best mental model for understanding why customers buy
  • Always ask survey respondents "why?" after a rating—open text explains the number
  • Job postings reveal where competitors are investing: 10 new ML engineer listings signals an AI product push

Related Skills

  • [competitor-analyst](../../business/competitor-analyst/SKILL.md)
  • [pitch-deck-writer](../../business/pitch-deck-writer/SKILL.md)
  • [ux-researcher](../../business/ux-researcher/SKILL.md)
  • [business-analyst](../../business/business-analyst/SKILL.md)