Positioning
Framework.
A practitioner-written reference on positioning frameworks for B2B SaaS: April Dunford's 5-step method, how it differs from brand-positioning frameworks, and how to adapt it for developer-first products.
By Daria Dovzhikova · Updated May 2026
TL;DR
- A positioning framework is the structured way to answer what your product is, who it's for, what it competes with, and why it wins — so every page and sales call tells one story.
- The default for B2B SaaS is April Dunford's 5-step method: competitive alternatives, unique attributes, value, best-fit customers, market category — shown here against Moore, Lean Canvas, and Jobs-to-be-Done.
- For developer-first products, adapt step one to name open-source projects and homegrown internal tools as real alternatives, and use concrete technical specifics instead of vague claims.
What a positioning framework is for
A positioning framework is the structured way to answer four questions: what is our product, who is it for, what does it compete with, and why do we win. The output is a positioning statement and a sales narrative that the whole company can repeat consistently. Without one, every sales call, every landing page, and every product launch tells a slightly different story, and prospects can't form a clear picture.
The most-cited modern framework is April Dunford's 5-step method from Obviously Awesome (2019), which has become the default reference for B2B SaaS positioning. It moves the conversation away from feature lists and toward the customer's mental model: what alternatives are they comparing against, what attributes uniquely matter, what value those attributes produce, who values that most, and which category to compete in.
For developer-first products specifically, Dunford's framework is the right starting point but needs one adaptation: in step 1 (competitive alternatives), explicitly list open-source projects and homegrown internal tools alongside commercial competitors. Most B2B SaaS positioning exercises skip these and produce positioning that's technically correct but irrelevant to how developers actually evaluate.
April Dunford's 5-step framework
The version that's become the default for B2B SaaS. Each step produces a specific input to the positioning statement.
Competitive alternatives
List the alternatives a buyer would compare against, including the option of doing nothing. For developer-first products, alternatives are often (a) a commercial competitor, (b) an open-source project, (c) a homegrown internal tool, and (d) status quo. Each alternative anchors the buyer's expectations differently.
Unique attributes
List the features and capabilities of your product the alternatives don't have. Be specific: 'fast' is not an attribute. 'P50 query latency under 50ms at 100M rows' is. Most products have 10-30 real unique attributes; you only need 3-5 to anchor positioning.
Value those attributes enable
Translate each attribute into the customer-facing value it produces. Example: P50 latency 50ms → engineers can run interactive queries instead of waiting for batch jobs → daily exploratory analysis becomes viable. Skip the attribute that doesn't translate; it's not part of your positioning.
Best-fit customers
Identify the customers who care most about the value identified in step 3. Define them in narrow terms: company size, vertical, tech stack, role of champion. The narrower the better; positioning that tries to serve everyone serves no one. This step feeds directly into your ideal customer profile.
Market category
Pick the category you want to compete in. Categories anchor buyer expectations: 'analytics platform' triggers comparison with Looker, Mode, and Snowflake. 'AI observability' triggers comparison with Datadog and Sentry. Sometimes the right move is to define a new category; usually it's smarter to enter an established one as a credible alternative.
Four positioning frameworks, side by side
Dunford is the default for B2B SaaS, but it's not the only framework worth knowing. Moore's Crossing the Chasmis the right tool for category creation. Lean Canvas works pre-PMF when the business model itself is still a hypothesis. Jobs-to-be-Done is strongest when the buyer's underlying motivation isn't obvious. Six axes that surface where each one earns its keep — and where it breaks.
| Axis | Dunford | Moore (Chasm) | Lean Canvas | Jobs-to-be-Done |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best for | B2B SaaS, DevTools, post-PMF teams sharpening a positioning that's drifted | Enterprise tech bridging early-adopter to early-majority, category creation | Pre-PMF founders pressure-testing the business model end-to-end on one page | Consumer + B2B teams uncovering the underlying buyer motivation behind switching behavior |
| Primary input | Customer interviews, competitive alternatives, unique attributes the product actually has | Market segmentation, target segment + whole-product gap analysis | Founder hypotheses across 9 business-model blocks (problem, segment, UVP, channels, etc.) | Switch interviews — what triggered a buyer to fire the old solution and hire the new one |
| Output artifact | Positioning statement + sales narrative the whole company aligns on | Beachhead market definition + whole-product map | 1-page business model canvas, replaces the traditional business plan | Job statement + forces diagram (push, pull, anxieties, habits) |
| Time to first draft | 1-3 days of focused work, plus 2-3 weeks of validation | 2-4 weeks for segmentation + whole-product analysis | 20 minutes for the first pass; weeks of iteration to validate | 1-3 weeks for the interview sprint, then days for synthesis |
| Where it fails | Pre-PMF companies without enough customer signal to identify alternatives and attributes | Founders who can't pick a beachhead because it feels like leaving deals on the table | Treated as a one-time artifact instead of a living hypothesis tracker | Teams that confuse the job with a feature request; the job is the underlying motivation, not the literal task |
| Signature exercise | 5-step run: alternatives → unique attributes → value → best-fit customers → category | Target customer characterization (TCC) + bowling-pin segment sequencing | Fill the 9 blocks in a specific order: problem → segment → UVP → solution → channels → metrics → revenue → cost → unfair advantage | Switch interview: walk a customer through their last purchase decision in detail |
Axes synthesized from April Dunford's Obviously Awesome (2019), Geoffrey Moore's Crossing the Chasm (1991), Ash Maurya's Lean Canvas, and the Jobs-to-be-Done methodology associated with Clayton Christensen and Bob Moesta.
Product positioning vs brand positioning
The two main schools of positioning theory differ on scope, output, and timeline. Both are valid; they answer different questions.
| Axis | Dunford (Product Positioning) | Moore (Brand Positioning) |
|---|---|---|
| Origin | April Dunford, 'Obviously Awesome' (2019) | Geoffrey Moore, 'Crossing the Chasm' (1991) |
| Focus | Product positioning for B2B SaaS, output is positioning statement + sales narrative | Brand positioning for consumer + enterprise, output is brand pyramid + identity |
| Time to build | 1-3 days for a 1-product company; 1-2 weeks for multi-product | 6-12 weeks for full brand exercise |
| Best for | Founders, PMM teams, sales-led B2B SaaS, developer-first products | CMOs, agencies, consumer brands, established enterprises |
| Cost (DIY vs consulting) | Free book + DIY; $25K-$75K with practitioner | $50K-$250K agency engagement |
Adapting the framework for developer-first products
The default Dunford framework was built for B2B SaaS sold through demos and decks. Developer-first products evaluate differently, so three adjustments matter:
- Open source as a first-class competitive alternative. Most B2B SaaS positioning exercises only list commercial competitors. For developer-first products, an open-source project (Prometheus vs Datadog, OpenTelemetry vs commercial APM, Postgres vs Snowflake) is often the actual alternative buyers compare against. Position against the OSS option explicitly, not implicitly.
- Homegrown internal tools as competition. Engineering teams routinely build internal versions of commercial tools. "We could build this in two sprints" is the real objection, even when it's wrong. Address it in step 1 by acknowledging the homegrown option and the maintenance cost it actually carries.
- Technical specifics as differentiators, not marketing claims. In step 2 (unique attributes), avoid vague capability claims that developers will discount. "Fast" gets ignored; "P50 query latency under 50ms at 100M rows on a 4-vCPU instance" gets evaluated. Specificity buys credibility.
See developer-first product marketing for the broader practitioner reference and go-to-market strategy for the surrounding GTM motion.
By the numbers
Positioning that fails developer scrutiny dies. Two data points that frame the track record behind the methodology this page builds on — positioning as a discipline with decades of practice behind it, not an opinion.
Years of B2B positioning practice behind April Dunford's methodology — the most-cited modern positioning framework and the structure most of this page's approach reverse-engineers to. Positioning is a discipline with a track record, not an opinion.
April Dunford · 2026→Copies of Obviously Awesome sold, per April Dunford's own count — the practitioner book this framework is built on. If your positioning doc cites a methodology, it should at least cite the one that became the default vocabulary inside operator circles.
April Dunford — Obviously Awesome · 2024→Each figure links to the primary source. If a number moves in a subsequent annual report, this page gets updated.
FAQ
What is a positioning framework?
A positioning framework is a structured method for defining what your product is, who it's for, what it competes with, and why it wins. The most widely-used framework in B2B SaaS is April Dunford's 5-step method: competitive alternatives → unique attributes → value → best-fit customers → market category. The output is a positioning statement and a sales narrative that the whole company aligns on.
What's the difference between a positioning framework and a positioning statement?
A positioning framework is the methodology; a positioning statement is the artifact it produces. The statement is the one-paragraph distillation: 'For [target customer] who [need], [product] is the [category] that [unique value]. Unlike [alternatives], we [differentiator].' The framework is the work you do to get to a statement that's actually true and actually distinctive.
Which positioning framework should I use?
For B2B SaaS, default to April Dunford's framework from Obviously Awesome. It's the most-cited practitioner reference and produces actionable output in days. For consumer brands, Geoffrey Moore's Crossing the Chasm and the brand-pyramid frameworks from agencies like Wolff Olins are better fits. For developer-first products specifically, use Dunford's framework but weight 'competitive alternatives' to explicitly include open-source projects and homegrown tools, which most B2B SaaS positioning exercises miss.
How long does it take to build a positioning framework?
For a single-product company with clear customer signal, the framework can be built in 1-3 days of focused work plus 2-3 weeks of validation through customer interviews and sales conversations. Multi-product or pre-product-market-fit companies need 2-4 weeks of build + ongoing iteration. The mistake most teams make is treating it as a one-time event; positioning evolves with the product and the market, so quarterly revisits are standard.
Who should own positioning at a B2B SaaS company?
Product marketing owns the build. Founders own the sign-off; positioning is a strategic decision, not a marketing tactic. Sales validates against actual prospect conversations. Customer success validates against retained customer feedback. Product engineering builds against the positioning over time. The most common dysfunction is treating positioning as marketing's solo responsibility; it requires cross-functional buy-in to be operational.
Can you do positioning without an external consultant?
Yes. April Dunford's book Obviously Awesome is the most complete DIY guide and is enough for many founders. The reason teams hire outside help is usually time compression (a consultant runs the framework in days vs founder-led DIY taking months) or pattern matching (a consultant who has run the framework on 20 similar companies catches mistakes a founder hasn't seen yet). For early-stage founders with strong product instincts and direct customer access, DIY works. For Series A+ teams with ambiguous positioning that's been stuck for months, an outside lens is usually the unblocker.
Need help running yours?
Positioning is in every engagement.
GTM Clarity ($5,000–$8,000) runs the full Dunford framework over 2-4 weeks, including customer interviews and the master messaging doc. See services or take the diagnostic.
Take the diagnosticReady when you are.
Discovery calls are 20 minutes. First one's on me.