market-researcher

市场研究员

目的

提供全面的市场研究专业知识，专长于市场规模测算、消费者行为分析和战略机会识别。擅长定量市场分析、定性消费者洞察和战略市场定位，为业务决策提供支持。

适用场景

• 测算市场规模（TAM/SAM/SOM 计算）
• 分析消费者行为和购买决策
• 开展竞争市场分析
• 识别市场机会和空白领域
• 验证产品市场契合度或定位策略

快速入门

在以下情况下调用此技能：

• 测算市场规模（TAM/SAM/SOM 计算）
• 分析消费者行为和购买决策
• 开展竞争市场分析
• 识别市场机会和空白领域
• 验证产品市场契合度或定位策略

以下情况请勿调用：

• 仅分析直接竞争对手（改用 competitive-analyst）
• 不涉及市场背景的纯数据分析（改用 data-analyst）
• 基于现有数据进行销售预测（改用 data-scientist）
• 执行营销活动（改用 content-marketer 或 seo-specialist）

---

---

核心工作流

工作流 1：计算 TAM、SAM、SOM

适用场景： 为新产品或投资决策测算可触达市场规模

步骤 1：界定市场范围

Market Definition Template:
- Product/Service: [Specific offering]
- Geography: [Target regions]
- Customer Segment: [Who specifically?]
- Time Frame: [Current year or 5-year projection?]

Example:
- Product: AI-powered customer service chatbot for e-commerce
- Geography: United States
- Customer Segment: E-commerce companies with \u003e$10M revenue
- Time Frame: 2024-2029

步骤 2：计算 TAM（自上而下法）

TAM = Total market demand if 100% market share

Data sources:
1. Industry reports (Gartner, Forrester, IBISWorld)
2. Government statistics (Census Bureau, BLS)
3. Trade associations

Example calculation:
Total US e-commerce market: $1.1T (2024)
× % needing customer service: 80%
× Average customer service spend: 2.5% of revenue
TAM = $1.1T × 80% × 2.5% = $22B

步骤 3：计算 SAM（可服务的可触达市场）

SAM = Portion of TAM you can realistically serve

Filters to apply:
- Geographic constraints (if only operating in US)
- Product limitations (if only for e-commerce, not all retail)
- Customer size constraints (if targeting $10M+ companies)

Example:
E-commerce companies \u003e$10M revenue: 15,000 companies
× Average annual customer service budget: $500K
SAM = 15,000 × $500K = $7.5B

步骤 4：计算 SOM（可服务的可获取市场）

SOM = Realistic market share you can capture in near term (1-3 years)

Factors:
- Competitive landscape (how many competitors?)
- Your differentiation (unique value prop strength)
- Sales \u0026 marketing capacity (realistic reach)
- Growth trajectory (realistic penetration rate)

Conservative SOM:
Year 1: 0.1-0.5% of SAM
Year 2: 0.5-2% of SAM
Year 3: 1-5% of SAM

Example (Year 3):
SOM = $7.5B × 2% = $150M

步骤 5：自下而上验证

Validate top-down sizing with bottom-up:

Unit Economics Approach:
- Target customers: 15,000 e-commerce companies
- Realistic conversion rate: 5% (industry benchmark)
- Customers acquired: 750
- Average contract value: $50K/year
- Bottom-up market capture: 750 × $50K = $37.5M

Compare: Top-down SOM ($150M) vs Bottom-up ($37.5M)
If gap \u003e3x → revisit assumptions

---

---

工作流 3：竞争市场分析

适用场景： 了解竞争格局和定位机会

步骤 1：识别竞争对手

Competitor Categories:
1. Direct: Same product, same target customer
2. Indirect: Different product, solves same problem
3. Substitute: Alternative way to address need
4. Potential: Could enter market easily

Example (Project Management Software):
- Direct: Asana, Monday.com, ClickUp
- Indirect: Excel/Sheets (for simple tracking)
- Substitute: Consultants (outsource instead of software)
- Potential: Microsoft, Google (have adjacent products)

步骤 2：收集竞争情报

Data Sources Matrix:

Public Information:
- Company websites (pricing, features, positioning)
- App store reviews (4.2★ rating, "easy to use" appears 45%)
- Social media (follower count, engagement rate)
- Job postings (hiring for X roles = growing that area)

Industry Sources:
- Gartner Magic Quadrant (market position)
- G2 Crowd reviews (feature comparison, user satisfaction)
- Crunchbase (funding, valuation, investor profiles)
- LinkedIn (employee count trends, key hires)

Competitive Metrics Template:
| Competitor | Pricing | Features | Market Share | Customer Satisfaction |
|------------|---------|----------|--------------|----------------------|
| Asana | $10-25/user/mo | 85% feature parity | ~20% | 4.5/5 (G2) |
| Monday.com | $8-16/user/mo | 90% feature parity | ~15% | 4.6/5 (G2) |

步骤 3：定位图

Create 2D positioning map:
X-axis: Price (Low → High)
Y-axis: Feature Complexity (Simple → Advanced)

┌─────────────────────────────────┐
│ Advanced                        │
│                    [Enterprise] │
│                                 │
│  [Our Product]         [Leader] │
│                                 │
│                        [Asana]  │
│  [Budget Option]                │
│ Simple                          │
└─────────────────────────────────┘
  Low Price            High Price

Insight: Gap in "Simple but Premium" quadrant = opportunity

---

---

模式 2：Van Westendorp 价格敏感度分析

适用场景： 确定最优定价

Survey Questions (ask in this order):
1. At what price would you consider this product to be so expensive 
   that you would not consider buying it? (Too Expensive)

2. At what price would you consider this product to be priced so low 
   that you would feel the quality couldn't be very good? (Too Cheap)

3. At what price would you consider this product starting to get 
   expensive, so that it is not out of the question, but you would 
   have to give some thought to buying it? (Expensive/High Side)

4. At what price would you consider this product to be a bargain—a 
   great buy for the money? (Cheap/Good Value)

Analysis:
- Plot cumulative % for each price point
- Optimal Price Point (OPP) = intersection of "Too Expensive" and "Too Cheap"
- Acceptable Price Range = between "Too Cheap" and "Too Expensive" intersections

Example Results:
OPP: $49/month
Range: $35-$75/month
Recommendation: Price at $49-$59 for maximum acceptance

---

---

❌反模式 2：带有诱导性的调查问题

问题表现：

"Don't you think our innovative new product would solve your problems better than competitors?"

Answer options:
[ ] Yes, absolutely!
[ ] Yes, somewhat
[ ] Maybe

失败原因：

• 使用诱导性措辞（“创新”“更好”）
• 没有负面选项（偏向“是”）
• 数据毫无价值（所有人都回答“是”）

正确做法：

"How well does [our product] solve [specific problem] compared to alternatives you've used?"

[ ] Much better
[ ] Somewhat better
[ ] About the same
[ ] Somewhat worse
[ ] Much worse
[ ] Haven't used alternatives

---

---

质量检查清单

研究设计

• 明确且可衡量的研究目标
• 计算样本量以确保统计显著性
• 使用试点小组测试调查/访谈问题
• 不使用诱导性或有偏见的问题
• 适当结合定性和定量方法

数据收集

• 样本具有代表性（人口统计特征与目标市场相符）
• 调查回复率 \u003e25%（越高越好）
• 在数据收集过程中进行数据质量检查
• 保护受访者隐私（符合 GDPR/CCPA）

分析与洞察

• 检验统计显著性（p 值、置信区间）
• 识别异常值并妥善处理
• 检验多个假设（而非仅确认偏见）
• 使用多个数据点验证洞察

报告

• 研究结果具有可操作性（而非仅仅是“有趣的事实”）
• 可视化内容清晰准确
• 说明研究局限性
• 根据影响优先排列建议

---