The Fletch positioning framework for B2B software companies

"The big mistake we see is companies never actually choose to position," Rob said. "And so they end up with six different narratives. They're operating in six different market spaces with six different sets of competitors. The differentiation gets all squishy and they start summarizing and then we lose all clarity." [Ep1, 20:30]

The mechanism is predictable. Early in the company's life, different narratives reach different buyers and some convert. The team concludes multiple framings work and keeps all of them. Over time:

• The sales deck says one thing
• The homepage says another
• The product UI implies a third
• The founder's LinkedIn posts suggest a fourth

Each is technically defensible. None is specific enough to create the market recognition that makes positioning a competitive advantage.

The choice is uncomfortable because choosing means excluding. Choosing "we are the X for Y" implies you are not the X for Z - even if you could serve Z. That exclusion feels like lost revenue. It is actually the thing that makes the included buyer trust the claim.

The first lens in the Fletch framework is a category diagnostic. B2B technology products can usually fit into multiple existing categories. The diagnostic asks how well the product fits each one and what the competitive landscape looks like inside it.

"What categories do you fit into today? They often can fit into multiple buckets. The first thing we're doing is sort of this test of like how well do you fit into existing categories. Because that is basically a spotlight of where existing demand exists." [Ep1, 18:00]

Variables Fletch evaluates for each category:

• Does the product fit the core job the category addresses?
• Is there meaningful differentiation from existing players?
• How strong are the existing players?
• How fragmented or mature is the market?
• Is there white space for a new entrant to win?

The output of this lens is a map of category options with an honest assessment of the competitive dynamics in each. Not a recommendation - a set of options with their tradeoffs laid out.

The second lens activates when the product does not fit neatly into existing categories - either because it covers only part of the jobs the nearest category addresses, or because it is doing something genuinely novel.

"Especially since we work with startups, often they're building something very new and novel. And so we run that category diagnostic to then be like, hmm, what you're doing really doesn't fit neatly into these categories, or the one that it does, like you're only covering part of the jobs that are associated to that category. And what this really means is like they're basically building towards a new category." [Ep1, 19:00]

New category positioning risks Rob names explicitly:

• No pre-built demand
• No existing constraints telling buyers what to expect
• No recognition of the category name or what it is for

These risks become the content of the positioning work - not obstacles to avoid but tradeoffs to navigate deliberately.

The harder path: new category positioning requires educating the market on the category before positioning the product within it. That is a longer, more expensive path to recognition. Founders need to understand this before choosing it.

The Fletch workshop does not arrive with a recommendation. It arrives with a map.

"The very first conversation in our workshop process when we sit down with these founders, we've already done that prep work. And so we're sort of sitting there, kind of with this map, and we go, all right. You could go into this category and here's what the argument's gonna look like and here's what's gonna suck about that and here's what's gonna be hard, and here's likely what the go to market needs to be." [Ep1, 20:00]

Each positioning option gets:

• The argument - what the positioning claim looks like
• The competitive set - who you are competing against
• The go-to-market implications - what channel and motion the positioning requires
• The hard parts - what is genuinely difficult about executing this positioning

Why the map before the choice matters: "Once you see the angles, it's not easy, but it makes it easier to make the choice. The big mistake we see is companies never actually choose to position." [Ep1, 20:40]

One of the uncomfortable outputs of the Fletch process is that it surfaces competitive knowledge gaps that make a positioning decision premature.

"Sometimes a positioning exercise will actually surface all these gaps of your knowledge of like, I don't know if we're better. I've never actually spoken to someone in that industry. And you're like, well, are you ready to actually make a positioning decision or are you still in that experimental learning phase? And sometimes that's a hard truth for some of the especially early stage founders." [Ep1, 22:00]

The implication: positioning work is also a research protocol. The gaps it reveals are research tasks that need to be completed before the positioning decision is made.

A founding team that discovers it has never spoken to a buyer in the category it is considering positioning toward has a research task - not a positioning task. Do the research. Then make the choice.

The Fletch positioning framework is a prerequisite for a Weroast design sprint - not a concurrent workstream.

If the founding team has not chosen a positioning strategy - if multiple narratives are still active, if the ICP is described differently by different people, if the category decision has not been made - the sprint will surface that indecision in every design round.

The prerequisite checklist for a sprint maps directly to Fletch:

• One ICP the whole team describes consistently
• One category positioning strategy that the team has chosen
• A hero claim the team agrees on
• Competitive knowledge sufficient to make honest best-for and not-best-for claims

Read website redesign prerequisites for the full checklist. Watch Youroast Ep1 with Rob Kaminski for Rob's workshop approach to getting there.

Run the team survey before anything else. Ask everyone who will give feedback on your next sprint: what does the product do, who is it for, what problem does it solve? Separately, no discussion first. If you get different answers, the positioning exercise is the next investment - not the design sprint.

Read the companion articles:

• Why one ICP outperforms multiple segments for B2B software companies - the ICP focus argument in full
• Three litmus tests to check your B2B software positioning - the team survey and two other tests
• Fix positioning before you redesign - the full framework before any design spend

Watch the full episode: Youroast Ep1 with Rob Kaminski.