Fix My Positioning
A B2B positioning audit and rewrite, grounded in the five frameworks that actually move the needle.
Most positioning tools grade homepages against a single rubric — usually a watered-down version of one famous framework — and tell you to "be more specific." Fix My Positioning does the opposite: it scores your positioning across five orthogonal diagnostic frameworks, runs the most battle-tested public methodology for B2B homepage execution against your hero section, and writes you three alternative positioning variants you can put in front of customers tomorrow.
/fix-my-positioning https://your-startup.com --stage A --acv enterprise --motion sales
A markdown report lands in ~/Desktop/claude-code/. Composite score, per-framework breakdown, structural critique, three rewrites, and a message house for the recommended variant.
Why another positioning tool
Most positioning audits collapse into one of two failure modes:
- Single-rubric tunnel vision. They use one framework (usually a stripped-down Dunford or a cargo-culted "value prop canvas") and miss the four other axes that actually decide whether positioning lands.
- Generic conversion advice. "Lead with the benefit, not the feature." "Use action verbs." "Add social proof." None of which tells you whether your strategic positioning is broken or whether your homepage execution is broken — or both.
This plugin separates the two layers explicitly.
Diagnostic layer (strategic): Five frameworks, each evaluating a genuinely distinct dimension. None of the five is a substitute for any of the other four — they could each score a maximum while the others score zero. That's the test of orthogonality.
Execution layer (tactical): Fletch PMM's detector module — 13 failure-pattern detectors and 7 positive-signal detectors — applied to your actual homepage hero. This is the same methodology Anthony Pierri and Rob Kaminski have used to rewrite 400+ B2B SaaS homepages.
You get a number, you get evidence, you get specific things to change, and you get three different rewrites with their tradeoffs spelled out.
The five diagnostic frameworks
Each framework scores 0–2.0 in 0.5 increments. Composite score: 0–10.
| # | Framework | Source | Dimension scored |
|---|
| 1 | Obviously Awesome (5 components) | April Dunford, Obviously Awesome (2019) | Competitive differentiation against real alternatives — including status quo |
| 2 | Jobs-to-Be-Done + ODI | Christensen + Ulwick (HBR 2016 / 2005) | Customer job clarity across functional / emotional / social dimensions |
| 3 | Strategic Narrative (5-part) | Andy Raskin (2016, 2.5M+ views) | Narrative arc — change, enemy, Promised Land, obstacles, proof |
| 4 | Value Proposition Canvas | Osterwalder, Value Proposition Design (2014) | Value-map fit to ranked pains and gains |
| 5 | Challenger Sale | Dixon & Adamson (2011) — CEB/Gartner research | Commercial insight + buying-committee multi-thread |
Composite bands: 0–3 broken, 3–5 weak, 5–7 competent, 7–8.5 strong, 8.5–10 exceptional.
The execution-layer authority for the homepage critique is Fletch PMM — their 9-element positioning model runs as a clarity heatmap, their 13+7 detectors run as structural critique, and their category-modifier and capability-over-benefit rules constrain every generated variant.
What you get
A single command produces a structured markdown report with:
- Composite scorecard with per-framework scores and the weakest element of each
- Per-framework breakdown — verbatim quotes from your homepage as evidence, the gap analysis, and a one-sentence improvement recommendation per framework
- Fletch execution-layer findings — every triggered failure pattern with the offending copy and a suggested fix; every positive signal with the rewarded copy; the 9-element clarity heatmap
- Three positioning variants — narrow-and-sharp, category-led, and outcome-quantified — each with:
- An H1 (6–12 words, validated against forbidden-word and ruthless-test rules)
- A subhead doing exactly one job
- Three reinforcing features mapped to value pillars, each expressed as a Fletch capability statement
- A 7-axis tradeoff matrix (TAM, category risk, defensibility, clarity, VC vs. customer legibility, sales cycle, buyer-committee fit)
- A coherence flag if the variant is structurally infeasible for your stage
- Recommendation — one variant tagged "recommended" if you provided
--stage, with a validation plan
- Message house for the recommended variant — roof, pillars, proof points, optional tagline
- Surface adaptations — pitch deck title, LinkedIn tagline, cold-email opener, Product Hunt copy, sales one-liner — all derived from the recommended variant with surface-specific character constraints applied
Install
