Overview:

This session is a practical, workflow-driven walkthrough of how to use Claude to conduct competitor research and synthesize industry trends built for professionals who need clear, defensible insight on a regular basis but don't have the bandwidth for a full research function.

Rather than presenting a list of loosely related tips, the session follows the natural arc of a real research task: gathering and organizing raw material, structuring a request that produces a genuinely useful output, refining that output for accuracy and tone, and packaging the result into something a decision-maker can act on immediately.

Attendees will see how a well-built prompt can pull structure out of unstructured material turning a stack of articles, reports, or notes into an organized competitive snapshot, a trend summary grouped by theme, or a comparison table that highlights what's actually different between two approaches. The session pays particular attention to the habits that separate a shallow, generic AI output from one that reflects real strategic thinking: being specific about scope, specifying the format the output needs to take, and asking for the "so what" rather than settling for a plain restatement of source material.

A recurring thread throughout the session is judgment. Claude is treated throughout as a capable collaborator, not an oracle attendees are shown how to sanity-check outputs, how to catch when a summary has drifted from what the source material actually said, and how to layer their own expertise on top of what the tool produces rather than treating the first draft as final. This isn't a session about replacing analytical thinking; it's about removing the friction that keeps busy professionals from doing that thinking as often, and as well, as they'd like to.

The session closes by connecting this specific use case to a broader pattern: once someone understands how to direct Claude to synthesize and structure information well for competitive research, that same underlying skill transfers cleanly to market sizing, meeting prep, internal reporting, and dozens of other recurring research-adjacent tasks. The session is designed to leave attendees with not just a technique, but a mental model for what "good research prompting" looks like one they can keep using long after the session ends.

Why should you Attend: Right now, somewhere in your organization, a competitor is shipping a new feature, repositioning their pricing, or making a hire that signals a strategic pivot and there is a real chance nobody on your side notices until a customer, a board member, or a journalist mentions it first. That's the quiet risk sitting underneath "we'll get to competitive research eventually": by the time "eventually" arrives, the window to respond thoughtfully has often already closed.

There's also a personal cost to the current way most people handle this. The professional tasked with "keeping an eye on the market" often ends up doing it in stolen pockets of time a lunch break, a Sunday evening, the last twenty minutes before a meeting they're underprepared for. It's draining work precisely because it's unstructured: no clear starting point, no clear stopping point, and no confidence that what got covered was actually the important part. Many attendees will recognize the particular exhaustion of skimming fifteen tabs and still walking into a meeting unsure if they missed the one thing that mattered.

There's also a quieter professional risk worth naming directly: in most organizations, whoever brings the clearest read on "what's happening out there" earns a disproportionate amount of credibility in the room. Struggling to produce that or producing something thin and reactive instead of sharp and timely has a real cost to how a person's judgment gets perceived, even when the underlying effort was there.

This session is built to close that gap. It is designed to leave attendees with a concrete, repeatable method for using Claude to move from scattered raw material to a clear, decision-ready summary without needing a research team, a subscription to five different intelligence platforms, or a weekend to spare. It reframes competitive and industry research from an occasional fire drill into a habit that fits into an already-busy week, and it does so by building genuine skill in how to direct an AI tool with precision a skill that compounds well beyond this one use case. The intent is for attendees to walk away with a specific, immediately usable technique they hadn't considered before, rather than a vague sense of "AI is powerful" they already knew.

Areas Covered in the Session:

• How to frame a research request so Claude produces a structured, decision-ready output rather than a generic summary
• Turning a pile of raw material articles, reports, notes into an organized competitive snapshot
• Building trend summaries that are grouped by theme rather than presented as a flat list of headlines
• Structuring side-by-side comparisons that highlight meaningful differences rather than surface-level facts
• Techniques for specifying tone, format, and length so the output fits directly into a report, email, or slide
• How to sanity-check an AI-generated summary against source material before it goes to a decision-maker
• Refining an initial output through follow-up prompts rather than starting over from scratch
• Building a repeatable weekly or monthly research habit instead of relying on one-off research sprints
• Recognizing where personal judgment and industry expertise still need to layer on top of the output

• Marketing Managers and Directors
• Business Analysts and Strategy Analysts
• Product Managers
• Competitive Intelligence Professionals
• Sales Enablement and Sales Leadership
• Management Consultants
• Business Development Managers
• Entrepreneurs and Small Business Owners
• Executive Assistants supporting strategic planning