Warning signals
- Prospects repeatedly ask what the company actually does
- Different team members describe the offer differently
- Price becomes the dominant comparison
- Content attracts attention but not qualified inquiries
- The homepage could plausibly belong to several competitors
Self-audit questions
- Can a qualified buyer identify themselves within ten seconds?
- Is the problem described in the buyer’s language?
- Can the business state one differentiated promise without unsupported superlatives?
- Is there credible evidence for the promise?
- What deliberately sits outside the position?
The 30/60/90 repair sequence
Days 1–30 · Establish truth
- Interview recent buyers, lost prospects and customer-facing staff
- Document the three most expensive customer problems
- Choose the highest-value audience and buying situation
- Write a one-sentence position: audience, problem, outcome and mechanism
Days 31–60 · Repair the mechanism
- Rebuild the homepage promise path around the position
- Align sales language, profiles and proposals
- Create three proof assets tied to the primary claim
- Remove competing messages that dilute recognition
Days 61–90 · Prove and operationalize
- Test the position through qualified conversations
- Measure message comprehension and inquiry quality
- Codify the approved message architecture
- Set a quarterly evidence and positioning review
Measures that matter
- Qualified inquiry rate
- Message comprehension
- Proposal-to-close rate
- Price-objection frequency
Decision gate
Do not add volume until the mechanism is becoming more reliable.
At day 90, continue only what has a named owner, a visible measure and evidence that the constraint is weakening.
Work through the constraint