porter-five-forces
Skill6 starsChanged 4 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Use when assessing industry attractiveness, competitive pressure, pricing power, or strategic positioning. Use when applying the Porter Five Forces consulting method and when a user asks for Porter Five Forces, method execution, structured diagnosis, or action planning.
In this repository57 other files it gives its agents.
- 5w1h-analysisSkill
- abductive-reasoningSkill
- account-planSkill
- affinity-diagramSkill
- assumption-inventorySkill
- balanced-scorecardSkill
- break-even-analysisSkill
- business-model-canvasSkill
- change-event-timelineSkill
- change-impact-analysisSkill
- communications-planSkill
- competitive-positioningSkill
- constraint-analysisSkill
- cost-benefit-analysisSkill
- critical-uncertaintiesSkill
- customer-segmentationSkill
- customer-success-health-scoreSkill
- deal-strategy-mapSkill
- decision-matrixSkill
- deductive-reasoningSkill
- effort-impact-matrixSkill
- empathy-mapSkill
- evidence-mapSkill
- fifteen-percent-solutionsSkill
- first-principles-thinkingSkill
- fishbone-diagramSkill
- five-whys-root-causeSkill
- force-field-analysisSkill
- go-to-market-diagnosisSkill
- hypothesis-treeSkill
- inductive-reasoningSkill
- issue-treeSkill
- jobs-to-be-doneSkill
- kano-modelSkill
- mece-frameworkSkill
- metrics-treeSkill
- mind-map-analysisSkill
- min-specsSkill
- north-star-metricSkill
- pestel-analysisSkill
- power-interest-gridSkill
- pre-mortemSkill
- pricing-strategy-checkSkill
- raci-matrixSkill
- rice-scoringSkill
- risk-matrixSkill
- scenario-planningSkill
- service-blueprintSkill
- signal-vs-noise-filterSkill
- stakeholder-power-mapSkill
- swot-analysisSkill
- systems-thinkingSkill
- user-journey-mappingSkill
- validation-planSkill
- weighted-scorecardSkill
- win-loss-reviewSkill
- wsjf-prioritizationSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 9
Use this skill to run Porter Five Forces as a practical consulting method, not as a generic framework explanation.
- Very specific: line 26
If an input is missing, do not block automatically.
- Distinctive: line 30
Do not use when the industry boundary is unclear or when the task is to compare individual competitors and features.
- Distinctive: line 86
Keep wording professional and plain enough that a smart non-specialist can use the output directly.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Porter Five Forces
Use this skill to run Porter Five Forces as a practical consulting method, not as a generic framework explanation.
Method Notes
- Analyze the industry or market structure, not one company in isolation.
- Cover rivalry, entrants, substitutes, buyer power, and supplier power.
Required Inputs
Collect or infer these inputs before execution:
- industry or market
- competitors
- customers
- suppliers
- substitutes
If an input is missing, do not block automatically. Mark it as missing, state the assumption used, and add a validation action.
When Not To Use
Do not use when the industry boundary is unclear or when the task is to compare individual competitors and features. Five Forces examines industry economics and bargaining structure, not company execution.
Adjacent Methods
pestel-analysis: macro external forces.competitive-positioning: buyer-facing differentiation and proof.
Step-by-Step Execution
| Step | Required input | How to execute | Output |
| Define industry boundary | Industry, geography, segment, value chain position. | State the market level being analyzed and exclude unrelated markets. | Industry boundary. |
| Analyze five forces | Competitors, buyers, suppliers, entrants, substitutes. | Assess rivalry, buyer power, supplier power, new entrants, and substitutes. | Five-forces evidence table. |
| Rate force strength | Evidence table. | Rate each force high/medium/low with evidence and trend direction. | Force strength profile. |
| Identify profit pressure | Force profile, economics, margins, switching costs. | Explain which forces capture value away from the business. | Industry attractiveness diagnosis. |
| Choose strategic response | Diagnosis and company constraints. | Recommend positioning, differentiation, partnership, pricing, channel, or moat actions. | Competitive strategy implications. |
Output Template
### 1. Industry Boundary
Market:
Geography:
Customer:
Time horizon:
### 2. Five Forces
| Force | Strength | Evidence | Profit mechanism | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | |
### 3. Structural Pressure
Most important pressure:
Attractive niche / position:
Uncertainty:
### 4. Strategic Responses
| Response | Force addressed | Feasibility | Risk | Validation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | |
### Evidence And Next Decision
- Confirmed facts:
- Assumptions:
- Missing evidence:
- Next action, owner, and timing:
- Expected signal and decision threshold:Quality Gate
- Produce the method-specific outputs for Industry Boundary, Five Forces, Structural Pressure; do not substitute a generic framework summary.
- Tie every material score, causal claim, or stakeholder judgment to evidence or label it as an assumption.
- Include at least one disconfirming check, sensitivity, alternative explanation, or failure condition appropriate to the method.
- Convert the result into a named action or decision with an owner or stakeholder, timing, and observable signal.
- State missing inputs and the smallest validation action instead of inventing precision.
- Keep wording professional and plain enough that a smart non-specialist can use the output directly.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

