What’s a Feature Table?
Creating a feature table is a helpful exercise to compare your product against competitors. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to create a feature table:
Identify the key dimensions: Determine the dimensions or features that are important to your market and customers. These could include functionality, performance, price, design, customer support, reliability, integration, and any other relevant factors.
List your competitors: On the top row of the table, list the names of your competitors. Make sure to include both direct and indirect competitors, as well as potential substitute competitors.
Determine the comparison scale: Decide on the scale you want to use for each dimension. For example, you can use a simple scale of “low,” “medium,” and “high” or a numerical scale from 1 to 5.
Assess your product and competitors: Evaluate your product and each competitor’s offering against each dimension. Assign a rating or value based on your assessment. This can be done by conducting research, gathering feedback from users, or analyzing publicly available information about your competitors’ products.
Populate the feature table: Fill in the table by placing the rating or value in the corresponding cell where the competitor and dimension intersect. This will allow you to visualize the comparison between your product and your competitors across multiple dimensions.
Analyze the results: Study the feature table to identify patterns and insights. Look for areas where your product excels or falls short compared to your competitors. This analysis will help you understand your competitive positioning and identify opportunities for improvement or differentiation.
Remember, the feature table is a tool for understanding the competitive landscape and assessing your product’s strengths and weaknesses. It should be regularly updated as market dynamics and competitors evolve. By utilizing feature tables, you can make more informed decisions as a product manager and develop strategies to stay competitive in your market.
Putting Together a Feature Table
Creating a feature table can help you compare your product against competitors. Here’s a simplified step-by-step guide:
Set up your table: Use Google Sheets, Excel, or draw a table on paper. Leave enough space at the top for competitor names and on the side for dimensions/features.
Identify direct competitors: Start with your direct competitors, those most similar to your product. List their names across the top row of the table.
Choose dimensions/features: Determine the dimensions or features that are important to your target customers. Brainstorm and prioritize the factors that differentiate your product from competitors.
Fill in the table: Evaluate each competitor’s product against each dimension/feature. Use a simple rating system like “yes” or “no” or add a brief comment to indicate their performance in each category.
Analyze and interpret the results: Study the feature table to understand your competitive positioning. Identify areas where your product excels or lags behind competitors. Use this analysis to inform product decisions and strategies.
Remember, the feature table is a tool to provide a snapshot of your product’s competitive landscape. Regularly update and refine the table to stay up-to-date with changes in the market and competitors’ offerings. By using this technique, you can gain insights into your product’s strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement.
Practice Building a Feature Table
Some analysis based on the filled-out feature table for GoPro and its direct competitors:
TomTom Bandit: The TomTom Bandit is cheaper than GoPro, but it falls short in aesthetics and weight compared to GoPro. It can shoot in 4K, but the low max FPS of 12 might limit its slow-motion capabilities. It has fewer accessories available.
Veho: The Veho is even cheaper than GoPro, and its aesthetics are similar, but slightly inferior. It has a lighter weight than GoPro. However, it lacks 4K capability and has a lower max FPS. The number of available accessories is limited.
Sony Franklin Delano Roosevelt: This competitor is priced closer to GoPro and has aesthetics comparable to GoPro. It has a slightly higher weight. It matches GoPro in 4K capability and max FPS. The number of accessories is relatively higher.
Based on this comparison, GoPro has a higher price point than some competitors, but it offers 4K capability and a high max FPS. Its aesthetics are considered better than most competitors. However, weight is an area where some competitors outperform GoPro. In terms of accessories, GoPro has a significant advantage.
To maintain its competitive edge, GoPro could focus on improving weight without compromising other features. It could also explore ways to enhance its aesthetics further. Additionally, GoPro could emphasize its 4K capability and extensive accessory ecosystem as key selling points.
Remember, this analysis is based on the provided information, and in reality, a more comprehensive evaluation would involve deeper research, customer feedback, and considering other factors that impact customers’ purchasing decisions.
Analyze Specific Features
Some analysis based on the filled-out feature table for the proposed group discussion feature in Udemy:
Comparing Udemy with its competitors:
Skillshare: Skillshare does have a group discussion feature integrated into its player, allowing users to post and engage in discussions. However, the engagement features are relatively simple, with options for liking and replying. The location of the group discussions is below the fold, requiring users to scroll to access it. Skillshare allows users to post images in discussions.
Coursera: Coursera also offers a group discussion feature integrated into its player. Users can post discussions, and there are additional engagement features like up-voting, following, and replying. However, time markers are not attached to specific lectures, and the location of the discussions is below the fold. Coursera allows users to post images in discussions.
Udacity: Udacity’s group discussion feature is available but not integrated into the player. Users can post discussions in a separate page, and engagement features include replying, bookmarking, linking, and liking. However, time markers are not attached to lectures, and the location of the discussions requires users to click on a separate tab. Udacity allows users to post images in discussions.
Lynda: Lynda does not have a group discussion feature, so it is not included in the analysis.
For Udemy’s implementation of the group discussion feature:
- Udemy allows users to post group discussions and integrates the feature into the player.
- Time markers are not available to tie discussions to specific lectures, but users can reference the lecture in their posts.
- The engagement features in Udemy are limited to liking and replying, but there is a search feature to browse through discussions.
- The location of the group discussions is prominent and takes up a significant portion of the screen, ensuring visibility.
- Udemy allows users to post images in discussions.
Based on this analysis, Udemy has implemented the group discussion feature, but there are areas where it can improve compared to some competitors. Adding time markers to discussions tied to specific lectures could enhance the user experience. Additionally, expanding the engagement features beyond liking and replying could increase user engagement and interaction. Considering the prominent location of the discussions and the ability to post images are positive aspects of Udemy’s implementation.
As a product manager, further evaluation and user feedback could help determine the importance of these improvements and the extent to which Udemy wants to compete in this category.
