Find the strategy hidden in competitors’ jobs pages.
A company's jobs page can reveal the future it is preparing for. Have AI read the roles and job descriptions, then connect those hiring choices to a hypothesis about its strategy.
Try it now
Copy the prompt into your AI tool of choice, then answer its questions as they come.
Paste it into any AI chat to start. For most people, this is all you need.
Everything on this page in one paste: the prompt plus the full plan, every step and what to check. Use it for longer moves, to plan ahead, to share with a colleague, or if your AI can't open links.
How it goes
What the AI will do
- Read the selected companies’ job listings and descriptions for clues to their strategic priorities.
- Challenge those hypotheses against alternative explanations and recent public announcements and actions.
What to have ready
- Your company’s identity if the AI cannot establish it from context.
- Any context that helps interpret the findings when you review them.
Where you come in
- Choose one, all, or different companies from the suggested competitors before the hiring research begins.
- Review the hypotheses and correct interpretations that miss relevant context.
What you'll get
A sourced strategic reading of each selected company, with concrete hiring evidence, alternative explanations, confidence, and possible implications for your company.
You're done when
You have a sourced hypothesis about each selected company's strategy, grounded in its job descriptions and checked against recent public actions and announcements.
These are general instructions, not a description of this user's particular AI system, tools, access, or circumstances. Adapt the method to the user's goal and the capabilities you can actually use, while preserving the activity's essential sequence, review points, and intended result. ### Start with the activity and the user's context Read the complete activity and guide the user through it. Use the activity prompt yourself; the user does not need to paste it again. Keep the responsibilities of the user, the AI, and any colleague clear. Begin with what the user has already supplied. Establish the intended result and resolve missing context through focused questions when needed. Work within the activity's stated scope, permissions, required confirmations, and stopping points, including any deliberate order for introducing information. Make progress with the available information and reasonable, clearly identified assumptions where the activity allows them. ### Check the capabilities needed for this work Inspect relevant available tools, connectors, and data. Use small, relevant, non-destructive checks to establish whether necessary access or a capability actually works. Naming a product does not establish access to it. Let this activity determine what needs checking; do not impose a universal preliminary questionnaire or a full system audit. When useful access is missing: - Explain what you cannot reach and how that material would help. - Investigate practical setup, connection, export, or other access alternatives before asking the user to gather material or troubleshoot. - If progress depends on access, request only the specific user action or permission needed to enable it or provide the material another way. Continue useful independent work while awaiting the response. - Offer to walk the user through an export or upload. Welcome files, links, copied text, rough notes, or an interview as supported by your system and the activity, and use the best available route. If the missing access is optional, continue with what is available. ### Ask focused questions and respect the answers Ask questions only when necessary to complete the work well or satisfy the activity's required review points. Build on answers already supplied. Ask one question at a time, or a small group of closely related questions. Wait on work that depends on the answer, and continue useful work that does not. Explain unfamiliar language with examples where helpful. Confirm answers or decisions you supply on the user's behalf before treating them as the user's final answers or decisions. This does not require separate approval of every sourced finding; follow the activity's specific review requirements. ### Keep evidence and independent contributions distinct Distinguish evidence, inference, and missing information. Check your work against the source material. Use independent agents when your system actually supports delegation and independent investigation or review would improve the work: - Give each agent a bounded brief and the context appropriate to its role. - Keep discovery independent until synthesis where the activity requires it. Preserve any requirement for the user or colleagues to contribute before seeing other explanations. - Follow the activity's stated fallback and any required confirmation when independent agents or fresh contexts are unavailable. Preserve reviewer isolation where required; describe shared-context or sequential passes accurately. ### Produce, check, and revise the result Do the substantive investigation and production. Carry the activity through to the most complete, usable result within its scope, rather than ending with a plan or handing the main work back to the user. When missing information does not prevent useful work, proceed with clearly identified assumptions where the activity permits them. Check the result against the activity's completion criteria. At each substantive delivery, state what is complete and any material unfinished work, assumptions, helpful missing information, and remaining uncertainty. Explain how these affect what the user can use, and help the user revise the result. Preserve the activity's stopping point. Do not turn a rehearsal, investigation, or test-design activity into execution that the user has not authorized. Find the strategy hidden in competitors' jobs pages. Do the research yourself and provide sources for your findings. Ask one focused question at a time when you need my input. ### 1. Confirm which companies to investigate. Use available context to identify my company and what it does. Ask if you cannot establish this. Research its real competitors and give me a concise list explaining why each belongs. Ask whether I want one, all, or a different firm investigated, and wait for my selection. ### 2. Find and read the hiring evidence. For each selected company, find its official careers page and linked recruiting system. Work out how to inspect the listings and full job descriptions using your tools. Try search, department and location filters, and individual postings as needed. Ask for help with a specific access obstacle after trying available routes. State what you can cover if access is partial. - Build an inventory of accessible roles with titles, functions, locations, source links, and the date checked. - Distinguish unique roles from reposts or listings in multiple locations where possible. - Read descriptions across the main hiring clusters, then follow unusual roles and recurring requirements. - Identify the products, customer groups, capabilities, markets, and operating changes these people would work on. - Record supporting excerpts and links. - Do not assume each posting represents one new employee. Pay particular attention to AI roles and AI responsibilities inside otherwise unrelated jobs, such as sales or operations. Examine the actual responsibilities, not just the word AI. Follow other strategic signals when the evidence points elsewhere. Continue until you can explain the main clusters and consequential exceptions, or state what coverage prevents you from establishing. ### 3. Form and challenge a strategy hypothesis. For each company, ask why it would hire this particular combination of people. Connect each proposed strategic move to the hiring evidence. Consider alternatives such as replacement hiring, maintaining existing products, or routine expansion. If historical listings are available, compare them; otherwise describe the current pattern without claiming it is a change. - Search recent company announcements, investor materials, earnings calls, and relevant news for stated priorities and actual moves. - Compare that record with the hiring evidence: what agrees, adds detail, appears in tension, or remains unknown? - Cite original sources where available and distinguish the company's statements from outside reporting and your interpretation. ### 4. Present the strategic reading. For each selected company, explain the strategy you think the combined evidence suggests, the hiring clusters behind it, and the announcements that support or complicate it. Include concrete roles, links, alternative explanations, and confidence in the hypothesis. Explain possible implications for my company without presenting this as a revealed internal plan. If I selected several companies, compare their apparent priorities. Ask for context that would change your reading and revise accordingly. These instructions were written in September 2026 using the frontier models available at the time. You may now have better tools or models, or restrictions that make some tasks harder. Your AI should adapt to the tools and access you actually have and find the best available way to help. Everything here is a starting suggestion for you and your AI, not a proven best practice for every setup. Feel free to rewrite any of it to better meet your needs.
View full AI instructions
Find the strategy hidden in competitors’ jobs pages.
What the AI will do
- Read the selected companies’ job listings and descriptions for clues to their strategic priorities.
- Challenge those hypotheses against alternative explanations and recent public announcements and actions.
What you can provide
- Your company’s identity if the AI cannot establish it from context.
- Any context that helps interpret the findings when you review them.
Where you'll take part
- Choose one, all, or different companies from the suggested competitors before the hiring research begins.
- Review the hypotheses and correct interpretations that miss relevant context.
What you'll get
A sourced strategic reading of each selected company, with concrete hiring evidence, alternative explanations, confidence, and possible implications for your company.
Activity context
A company's jobs page can reveal the future it is preparing for. Have AI read the roles and job descriptions, then connect those hiring choices to a hypothesis about its strategy.
For the user
Paste the prompt below. The AI will identify your company and suggest competitors; you’ll choose one, all of them, or a different firm before the research begins.
When it presents its strategic hypotheses and evidence, you’ll have a chance to add context and correct its interpretation.
Guidance for the AI
These are general instructions, not a description of this user's particular AI system, tools, access, or circumstances. Adapt the method to the user's goal and the capabilities you can actually use, while preserving the activity's essential sequence, review points, and intended result.
Start with the activity and the user's context
Read the complete activity and guide the user through it. Use the activity prompt yourself; the user does not need to paste it again. Keep the responsibilities of the user, the AI, and any colleague clear.
Begin with what the user has already supplied. Establish the intended result and resolve missing context through focused questions when needed. Work within the activity's stated scope, permissions, required confirmations, and stopping points, including any deliberate order for introducing information. Make progress with the available information and reasonable, clearly identified assumptions where the activity allows them.
Check the capabilities needed for this work
Inspect relevant available tools, connectors, and data. Use small, relevant, non-destructive checks to establish whether necessary access or a capability actually works. Naming a product does not establish access to it. Let this activity determine what needs checking; do not impose a universal preliminary questionnaire or a full system audit.
When useful access is missing:
- Explain what you cannot reach and how that material would help.
- Investigate practical setup, connection, export, or other access alternatives before asking the user to gather material or troubleshoot.
- If progress depends on access, request only the specific user action or permission needed to enable it or provide the material another way. Continue useful independent work while awaiting the response.
- Offer to walk the user through an export or upload. Welcome files, links, copied text, rough notes, or an interview as supported by your system and the activity, and use the best available route. If the missing access is optional, continue with what is available.
Ask focused questions and respect the answers
Ask questions only when necessary to complete the work well or satisfy the activity's required review points. Build on answers already supplied. Ask one question at a time, or a small group of closely related questions. Wait on work that depends on the answer, and continue useful work that does not. Explain unfamiliar language with examples where helpful.
Confirm answers or decisions you supply on the user's behalf before treating them as the user's final answers or decisions. This does not require separate approval of every sourced finding; follow the activity's specific review requirements.
Keep evidence and independent contributions distinct
Distinguish evidence, inference, and missing information. Check your work against the source material.
Use independent agents when your system actually supports delegation and independent investigation or review would improve the work:
- Give each agent a bounded brief and the context appropriate to its role.
- Keep discovery independent until synthesis where the activity requires it. Preserve any requirement for the user or colleagues to contribute before seeing other explanations.
- Follow the activity's stated fallback and any required confirmation when independent agents or fresh contexts are unavailable. Preserve reviewer isolation where required; describe shared-context or sequential passes accurately.
Produce, check, and revise the result
Do the substantive investigation and production. Carry the activity through to the most complete, usable result within its scope, rather than ending with a plan or handing the main work back to the user. When missing information does not prevent useful work, proceed with clearly identified assumptions where the activity permits them.
Check the result against the activity's completion criteria. At each substantive delivery, state what is complete and any material unfinished work, assumptions, helpful missing information, and remaining uncertainty. Explain how these affect what the user can use, and help the user revise the result.
Preserve the activity's stopping point. Do not turn a rehearsal, investigation, or test-design activity into execution that the user has not authorized.
Your AI prompt
Find the strategy hidden in competitors' jobs pages. Do the research yourself and provide sources for your findings. Ask one focused question at a time when you need my input.
1. Confirm which companies to investigate.
Use available context to identify my company and what it does. Ask if you cannot establish this. Research its real competitors and give me a concise list explaining why each belongs. Ask whether I want one, all, or a different firm investigated, and wait for my selection.
2. Find and read the hiring evidence.
For each selected company, find its official careers page and linked recruiting system. Work out how to inspect the listings and full job descriptions using your tools. Try search, department and location filters, and individual postings as needed. Ask for help with a specific access obstacle after trying available routes. State what you can cover if access is partial.
- Build an inventory of accessible roles with titles, functions, locations, source links, and the date checked.
- Distinguish unique roles from reposts or listings in multiple locations where possible.
- Read descriptions across the main hiring clusters, then follow unusual roles and recurring requirements.
- Identify the products, customer groups, capabilities, markets, and operating changes these people would work on.
- Record supporting excerpts and links.
- Do not assume each posting represents one new employee.
Pay particular attention to AI roles and AI responsibilities inside otherwise unrelated jobs, such as sales or operations. Examine the actual responsibilities, not just the word AI. Follow other strategic signals when the evidence points elsewhere. Continue until you can explain the main clusters and consequential exceptions, or state what coverage prevents you from establishing.
3. Form and challenge a strategy hypothesis.
For each company, ask why it would hire this particular combination of people. Connect each proposed strategic move to the hiring evidence. Consider alternatives such as replacement hiring, maintaining existing products, or routine expansion. If historical listings are available, compare them; otherwise describe the current pattern without claiming it is a change.
- Search recent company announcements, investor materials, earnings calls, and relevant news for stated priorities and actual moves.
- Compare that record with the hiring evidence: what agrees, adds detail, appears in tension, or remains unknown?
- Cite original sources where available and distinguish the company's statements from outside reporting and your interpretation.
4. Present the strategic reading.
For each selected company, explain the strategy you think the combined evidence suggests, the hiring clusters behind it, and the announcements that support or complicate it. Include concrete roles, links, alternative explanations, and confidence in the hypothesis. Explain possible implications for my company without presenting this as a revealed internal plan. If I selected several companies, compare their apparent priorities. Ask for context that would change your reading and revise accordingly.
Done when
You have a sourced hypothesis about each selected company's strategy, grounded in its job descriptions and checked against recent public actions and announcements.
These instructions were written in September 2026 using the frontier models available at the time. You may now have better tools or models, or restrictions that make some tasks harder. Your AI should adapt to the tools and access you actually have and find the best available way to help. Everything here is a starting suggestion for you and your AI, not a proven best practice for every setup. Feel free to rewrite any of it to better meet your needs.
These instructions were written in September 2026 using the frontier models available at the time. You may now have better tools or models, or restrictions that make some tasks harder. Your AI should adapt to the tools and access you actually have and find the best available way to help. Everything here is a starting suggestion for you and your AI, not a proven best practice for every setup. Feel free to rewrite any of it to better meet your needs.