Capability and Intent

Two questions. Can they do this? Will they?

The first is about capability, which is measurable if you're paying attention - headcount, tech stack, what they've shipped adjacent to this, how far it is from their core. The second is harder, because intent is easy to misread and companies lie, including to themselves, about what they're actually willing to commit to. A well-resourced competitor who could build something but won't, because it conflicts with their existing revenue model or because nobody senior enough actually cares yet, is a different threat than one who's already two quarters into it. Treating them the same is how you end up either panicking when you shouldn't or relaxing when you definitely shouldn't.

The capability question has an answer. The intent question has signals, which isn't quite the same thing. What you're actually trying to map is the landscape you'll be operating in twelve months from now, not the one that exists today. And holding both questions at once, capability and intent, is something most prioritisation processes aren't really built to do. They're built around what's knowable and certain, which makes sense on its own, and also misses a lot.

The companies that get this right aren't necessarily smarter. They're staying curious about the answers a lot longer than feels comfortable.