1. Define the presentation’s decision question
First, write down what decision the presentation needs to help with: reviewing a content approach, evaluating communication with a community, or planning a new content experiment, for example. The decision question helps you choose which observations to include. The steps below are not a required standard; they are practical suggestions for keeping the scope clear and the comparison easy to understand.
In a brief scope note, specify your own brand, the competitors to review, the platforms, the target audience, and the observation period. Don’t choose competitors solely because they are in the same industry; also consider whether they address a similar user need or compete for a similar share of attention. Show direct competitors separately from indirect examples reviewed for inspiration.
2. Record accounts and observations
For each competitor, record which accounts and platforms you reviewed, the dates covered by your observation, and why you selected the account. Where possible, use comparable periods and shared criteria. If the scopes differ, explain how; don’t present different kinds of observations as directly equivalent.
For post examples, note the platform, date, and source link. If you use screenshots, explain what they show and when they were captured. These are workflow suggestions; they do not require you to use a particular application, account type, or platform feature. Before using data or a measurement method, check what is available for your account and access level on that platform.
The repository summary of Delilah’s presentation at Belmont reports that surveys, interviews, competitor analysis, and SWOT/situation analysis were used to inform a communication plan. However, the same page also notes that the presentation document is not yet accessible. The summary therefore does not verify the details or results of the work; it is an example of possible methods, not a required research formula. Repository summary of Delilah’s presentation
3. Choose criteria that fit the decision question
Select a small number of criteria related to the decision question. For example, you could take notes on content topics and formats, message consistency, and interactions observable on the posts reviewed. Explain what each criterion means. If platforms or accounts provide different indicators, don’t compare them as if they were the same without checking their definitions.
Don’t assume you have access to internal performance data: check what information is available for the account you use and in the relevant platform view. Don’t estimate values you cannot access. Don’t present the number of likes or comments visible on a public post as evidence of reach, sales, or user satisfaction. State where the data came from and what its limitations are.
4. Separate observation, interpretation, and recommendation
“Posts with usage explanations were observed during the period reviewed” is an observation. “The brand prioritizes usage explanations” is an interpretation drawn from that observation. “We could consider a similar content experiment” is a recommendation. Present these three levels separately; don’t give the impression that a firm conclusion has been drawn from a limited number of examples.
The summary of Belmont’s Kahoot! social media audit reports that communication strategies, content, and engagement approaches across different platforms were reviewed, and that findings and recommendations were presented. This is an example of a presentation analyzing social media content and communication. Don’t generalize the assessments in the summary into a proven success formula for every brand. Summary of the Kahoot! social media audit
5. Structure the presentation
Start with the decision question and scope; then explain competitor selection, methodology, and limitations. In the following slides, present comparative findings, opportunities, and recommended next steps. Using one main message per slide can help prevent numerous examples from overshadowing the main takeaway. Consider placing detailed observation records in an appendix rather than the main presentation.
An article published by Penn Career Services about Seadrop Skincare describes how an intern reviewed competitors’ social media presence, prepared competitor analysis presentations, and later contributed to social media content work. This is an account of a specific experience; on its own, it does not prove the impact or general results of a particular method. Penn Career Services article
6. Hypothetical example: a small care brand
The Ada Care brand and scenario below are entirely hypothetical; they contain no data taken from real accounts. Ada Care wants to evaluate its content approach on Instagram and TikTok. The team sets an observation period and lists two direct competitors and one indirect example to review for inspiration, with reasons for each selection. The aim is to discuss which approaches could be tested in the next content plan.
The opening slides explain the decision question, accounts reviewed, date range, and methodology. The comparison slides report an observation from the examples reviewed: one competitor featured usage explanations, while the other featured product stories. Each example is accompanied by the platform, date, and source. This observation alone does not show why the competitors achieved their results or which content approach was more successful.
The next slide explains the limitations of the comparison: If specific performance data is not available, no conclusions can be drawn about it; visible comments are not presented as if they represented all users. The recommendation is for Ada Care to consider testing the two content approaches in line with its own goals and to review results from its own account separately. This is not a guarantee of success, but a next step clearly linked to the finding.
7. Explain limitations and potential issues
If competitors differ in scale: Don’t interpret a single indicator, such as follower count, as a ranking of success. State the difference in scale and assess content observations separately.
If data is missing in one area: Don’t fill the gap with an estimate. State that the data is unavailable; consider limiting the comparison to areas with shared observations.
If a recommendation is disconnected from a finding: Show the observation behind the recommendation alongside the uncertainty. If an image, date, or account detail seems questionable, check the source again.
8. Final checklist and frequently asked questions
- Are the decision question, competitor selection, and criteria related to one another?
- Are the accounts, platforms, and observation period clearly stated?
- Are sources shown for important claims, and are observations, interpretations, and recommendations separated?
- Are missing data and the limitations of the comparison stated?
- Are recommendations connected to the findings, and is the next step clear?
- Have account names, images, links, and spelling been checked?
How many competitors should I review?
Rather than setting a fixed number, select enough accounts to make a useful comparison for your decision. If you can’t review each one within a similar scope, narrow the list or explain how the scopes differ.
Can I analyze competitors without access to their private performance data?
You can review the content and observations available to you. Keep in mind that access may vary by platform, account, and the view you use; don’t estimate data you can’t access, and state the limits of your scope.
For more detail on related steps, see Competitor analysis presentation: comparison criteria and example and Presenting data analysis results.
← Back to blog
