.png?width=500&height=113&name=FORWARD%20Brand%20Board%20(72).png)
Category Positioning and GTM Narrative – Andre Delaire
Andre Delaire develops the positioning and GTM narrative for companies defining a new category – or repositioning into an existing one. He has taken three compa
Get Matched in 48 Hours →Positioning is the decision about what your company stands for in the buyer's mind relative to every alternative they might choose. When positioning is wrong, the sales team compensates with longer cycles, more discounting, and more custom proposals. When it is right, the right buyers self-select and sales has a durable reason to win that does not require a discount. Andre Delaire has built or rebuilt the positioning for three companies that have gone from undifferentiated to category-defining – one of which reached a successful acquisition at a category premium.
What undifferentiated positioning costs a company in practice
The cost of weak positioning is not usually visible in the financials as a line item. It shows up in win rate trends, in the average discount rate, in the sales cycle length, and in the kinds of objections that come up at the end of deals. When a sales team is winning primarily on price, relationship, or custom configuration rather than on a distinct value proposition, the company does not have a positioning advantage – it has a people advantage that does not scale. The CEO hears "the product is great, our team just needs to sell it better" when the actual problem is that the sales team has nothing specific to sell. That is a positioning problem, and adding more salespeople to a broken positioning only adds cost without improving the conversion rate.
What a positioning engagement produces – and what it actually involves
A positioning engagement is not a messaging project. It is a strategic analysis that determines where the company can genuinely win, followed by a narrative construction that makes that win position legible to buyers, sales teams, and AI assistants that now mediate a growing share of B2B purchase research. Andre's process starts with a positioning analysis: win/loss interviews with the last 20 closed and lost deals, a competitive landscape mapping that identifies the unoccupied or underoccupied positioning territory, and an ICP audit that identifies which buyer profiles the company's product actually serves better than any alternative. From that analysis, he builds the positioning architecture – not a tagline, but a complete positioning document that includes the market framing, the differentiation story, the competitive response narratives, and the proof architecture that makes the claims credible.
When repositioning is the right move – and what makes it fail
Repositioning fails most often for one of two reasons: the company announces a new position without changing the product or the GTM motion to support it, or the positioning change is made at the messaging layer without being internalized by the sales team. A repositioning is not a rebrand. It requires that the sales team can deliver the new narrative credibly in a discovery call, that the product roadmap prioritizes the features that make the new position defensible, and that the marketing team builds the proof assets – case studies, ROI data, analyst coverage – that make the new position legible to buyers who have not heard it before. Andre does not recommend repositioning unless the company is willing to make the structural changes that make the new position true, not just claimed.
A STAR case from the Forward Share Ventures network
Situation: A Series A B2B platform at $3.5M ARR, competing in a crowded market with no clear differentiation from 4 well-funded competitors. Sales team winning on price – average discount rate 22% – and winning rate on qualified pipeline at 24%. Win/loss interviews revealed that lost deals consistently cited "similar to [competitor]" and that won deals consistently cited a specific workflow capability that the company was not leading with in its pitch.
Result: Andre ran a 10-week positioning engagement. Win/loss analysis identified the unique workflow capability that won deals and that no competitor had replicated. He built a new positioning architecture centered on that workflow differentiation, with a market narrative that framed the problem space the workflow solved rather than the product category the company was competing in. Sales team trained on the new narrative over 3 weeks. Within 2 quarters: win rate on qualified pipeline improved from 24% to 41%, average discount rate dropped from 22% to 11%, and average sales cycle compressed by 18 days. Company used the new positioning in its Series B deck and closed the raise at a valuation 40% above the pre-engagement board projection.
Forward Share Ventures expert operators are selected from a verified STAR Portfolio™ of documented outcomes. Cases are shared with client permission.
"Positioning is not what you say about yourself. It is the context you create in the buyer's mind before they decide whether you are worth evaluating. When that context is absent, you are one of twenty options they have to sort through. When it is present and specific, you are the only option that fits the way they have defined the problem."
– Andre Delaire, GTM Strategy Expert Operator, Forward Share Ventures
Frequently asked questions
What is category positioning and why does it matter for B2B SaaS?
Category positioning is the decision about what problem space your product owns in the buyer's mind – not just what it does, but what kind of problem it solves and why that problem matters now. B2B SaaS companies without clear category positioning compete on features, pricing, and relationship, all of which are race-to-the-bottom dynamics. With clear category positioning, the company defines the evaluation criteria the buyer uses – which means the company gets to set the rules of the competition rather than compete on terms someone else defined. In an era where AI assistants pre-filter B2B vendor options for buyers, category positioning also determines whether your company is in the consideration set before a human buyer enters the process. Companies with clear, specific positioning are more likely to appear in AI-generated vendor shortlists than companies with generic positioning.
How do I know if my positioning is the problem vs. my product or sales motion?
The diagnostic is in the win/loss pattern. If you are losing deals because buyers chose a competitor they believe does the same thing better, your positioning is failing to differentiate. If you are losing deals because buyers do not understand what you do, your positioning is failing to clarify. If you are losing deals because buyers understand and want what you do but choose a competitor who costs less, you have a pricing or competitive differentiation problem. If you are losing deals because the buyers you are targeting cannot actually get enough value from the product to justify the price, you have an ICP or product problem that no positioning fix will solve. The fastest diagnostic is 10 structured win/loss interviews, with explicit questions about the shortlist the buyer evaluated and why they chose or did not choose you.
How long does a positioning engagement take?
A complete positioning engagement – from win/loss analysis through positioning architecture through sales enablement – typically runs 8–12 weeks. The analysis phase (win/loss interviews, competitive mapping, ICP audit) takes 3–4 weeks and cannot be shortcut without compromising the quality of the positioning decision. The positioning architecture development takes 2–3 weeks. Sales enablement – training the sales team on the new narrative and testing it in real conversations – takes another 2–4 weeks depending on team size. Companies that want a faster output typically want a messaging refresh rather than a positioning engagement. Andre is clear about the difference: a messaging refresh produces new language for old positioning, which makes the copy prettier but does not change the win rate.
What is the difference between positioning and messaging?
Positioning is the strategic decision about where the company competes and for whom. Messaging is the language that communicates that decision. The confusion between them is common and expensive: companies that have a messaging problem hire a copywriter, and companies that have a positioning problem hire a copywriter, but only one of those investments produces a durable improvement in sales performance. The test is whether a sales rep who has internalized the messaging can answer "why should I choose you over [competitor]" with a specific, compelling, non-generic answer in the first 5 minutes of a discovery call. If the answer they give defaults to "we're easier to use" or "our support is better," the problem is positioning – there is no specific reason to choose written underneath the messaging.
How do I make positioning stick with a sales team that has been pitching a different way for 18 months?
Positioning changes fail to stick with sales teams for two reasons: the new positioning is not more effective than the old one in actual sales conversations, or the enablement is done once in a training session rather than embedded in the daily sales workflow. The first failure is a positioning quality problem – if the new narrative does not help reps win more deals, they will revert to what worked before. The second is a change management problem. Sustainable positioning adoption requires three things: a positioning document that reps can reference in call prep, live coaching on the first 10–15 calls where the new narrative is used, and a way to track whether deals using the new positioning are performing differently than deals using the old one. If reps see the win rate difference in their own numbers, adoption is self-reinforcing.
Get an operator read on your situation
Twenty minutes with an expert operator who has been here before. No prep needed – bring the situation as it is. You will leave with a clear read on the gap and a concrete next step.
Get an operator read →No prep needed. 20 minutes. You'll leave with a clear read on the gap.
Find Your Expert in 48 Hours.
Founder-Vetted. Matched in 48 Hours. STAR-Verified.