The $1.2 Billion Question Nobody’s Asking

Microsoft says 70% of Fortune 500 companies bought Copilot. Salesforce announced $1.2 billion in AI revenue. By any measure, these companies are crushing it.

But here’s what doesn’t make sense: Salesforce’s CEO admitted in October that “the speed of innovation is far exceeding the speed of customer adoption.” Translation: customers are buying but not using. Microsoft’s own data shows strong results in their studies, but customers can’t scale beyond pilot programs.

Companies are purchasing licenses. They’re not deploying the software.

This isn’t an AI problem. It’s a strategy problem that affects everything from software to services to physical products. And it traces back to something most people get completely wrong about how business works.

The problem? Companies are selling nouns when customers need verbs. More precisely, they positioned with labels, framed generically, and delivered vague promises. The result is purchases without deployment. Investment without return.

Let me show you what I mean, why it matters, and how to fix it.

Your Brain Doesn’t Process “Strategy” Like You Think

Here’s something that will change how you see business: your brain processes nouns and verbs through completely different systems.

When you hear a noun like “safety,” your brain instantly accesses stable associations built over the years. This is declarative memory. The part that stores concepts, facts, and semantic knowledge. It’s why when someone says “cars” plus “safety,” many people immediately think “Volvo.” That’s not persuasion. That’s memory architecture.

Now think about verbs. When you hear “improves productivity,” your brain has to do extra work. Verbs activate procedural and working memory; systems that process actions, sequences, and outcomes. These require context to mean anything. How much improvement? Compared to what? Measured how?

Research in cognitive linguistics confirms this: verbs are significantly harder to remember than nouns because their meanings shift based on context. Your brain literally processes them differently.

Here’s why this matters for business:

Concepts (nouns) establish mental territory. Tesla owns “future.” Volvo owns “safety.” Red Bull owns “human performance.” Amazon owns “convenience.” These aren’t taglines. They’re cognitive anchors; stable mental associations that persist for decades.

Actions (verbs) require context and proof. “Identifies at-risk deals earlier,” okay, how much earlier? Verified how? “Produces drafts faster,” how much faster? Quality maintained? “Boosts productivity,” which activities? Measured how?

Without the noun layer (owned concept), your verbs are commodity features. Without the verb layer (measurable actions), your nouns are empty claims.

Most companies perfect one layer while ignoring the other. Then wonder why execution fails.

The Three Operations (That Most Companies Confuse)

Every business operates across three distinct linguistic layers. Most people collapse them into one thing called “marketing” or “strategy.” This is why execution breaks.

Operation 1: Position (The Concept You Own)

This is a noun that becomes synonymous with you in customers’ minds.

Patagonia owns “activism.” Supreme owns “authentic streetwear culture.” Liquid Death owns “irreverent hydration.”

Test this: If you removed your company name, would customers still associate the concept exclusively with you? If someone says “safe cars” and you don’t come to mind, you don’t own safety.

Duration to establish: 5-10 years.
Duration to defend: decades.

The mistake everyone makes: describing what they do instead of owning a concept. “We’re a CRM” is not positioning. That’s a product category. “We own simplicity” could be a position — if you actually own it in customers’ minds.

Operation 2: Frame (How You Articulate Ownership)

This is the language you use to present your position.

Amazon’s “convenience” (the position they own) becomes “Earth’s most customer-centric company” (the frame). Patagonia’s “activism” becomes “We’re in business to save our home planet.” Tesla’s “future” becomes “Accelerating the world’s transition to sustainable energy.”

Notice the pattern? The frame articulates a position that already exists in minds. It doesn’t create the position.

Duration to refine: 3-6 months.

The mistake: companies think framing IS positioning. It’s not. Framing is how you articulate a position you already own. Without the owned concept underneath, you’re just making noise.

Operation 3: Execute (The Outcomes You Deliver)

These are measurable actions that prove your framing and reinforce your positioning.

Gong surfaces deal-risk signals that help teams improve forecast accuracy and win rates. Jasper produces drafts 2-5x faster with 80-90% relevance in initial tests. Intercom’s AI resolves up to 86% of conversations with proper integration.

See the difference? These aren’t vague promises. They’re specific, measurable, and verifiable.

Duration: 90-day validation cycles.

The mistake: promising outcomes without specifying what changes, by how much, verified how.

The integration requirement: All three operations must align. Position without framing is invisible. Nobody knows you own that concept because you never articulate it. Framing without execution is promises without proof. You say you do something, but can’t demonstrate it. Execution without positioning is commodity features. You deliver results, but so does everyone else.

This is why Microsoft and Salesforce are struggling. They’re brilliant at Operation 2 (framing: “Your AI copilot,” “AI agents that work for you”). They’re weak at Operation 3 (execution: vague promises about productivity without specific, verifiable outcomes). And they’re completely missing Operation 1 (positioning: what concept do they actually own?).

Introduction to the 4-Level Positioning Canvas

Before we go further, you need context for what comes next.

The 4-Level Positioning Canvas is a framework I developed after years of watching companies claim they had “strong positioning” while struggling with differentiation, pricing power, and customer retention. Something wasn’t adding up.

What I discovered: most positioning frameworks collapse multiple distinct operations into one thing called “positioning.” They treat claiming, proving, living, and owning as one and the same. They’re not.

The Canvas separates these into four distinct levels, each with different time horizons, investment requirements, and defensive moats. Each level builds on the previous. You can’t skip steps.

Think of it like building a house:

• Level 1 (Claiming): You draw the blueprints and tell people what you’re building
• Level 2 (Proving): You build the foundation and frame; people can see it’s real
• Level 3 (Living): You finish construction; the house is structurally complete and functional
• Level 4 (Owning): The house becomes a landmark; when people give directions, they reference your house

Most companies never get past Level 1. They have beautiful blueprints (compelling messaging) but no house (concept ownership). Then they wonder why competitors can copy them so easily.

The Canvas shows you where you actually are versus where you think you are. And more importantly, what you need to do to move up levels.

Here’s how it works:

The Four Levels (Where Everything Actually Happens)

Now here’s where this gets practical. Those three operations map to a four-level framework that determines whether you succeed or fail.

Level 1: Claiming It (Saying)

Linguistic operation: Framing

You’re articulating your positioning in language that resonates. You’re creating positioning statements, strategic narratives, and category definitions.

Duration: 3-6 months
Investment: Low (strategic thinking plus messaging)
Barrier to copy: Weak (anyone can copy words)

Examples: “Your AI copilot” (Microsoft), “AI agents that work for you” (Salesforce), “The everything store” (Amazon).

At this level, you’re claiming territory through language. But claiming isn’t owning. This is where most companies stop. They think good messaging equals good strategy.

Level 2: Proving It (Doing)

Linguistic operation: Executing

You’re delivering measurable outcomes that validate your framing. You’re producing metrics, case studies, customer proof, and validated ROI.

Duration: 6-12 months
Investment: Medium ($1M-$10M)
Barrier to copy: Moderate (requires actual work and proof)

Examples: Gong’s deal-risk identification that improves win rates. Jasper’s 2-5x faster drafts. Intercom’s 51-86% conversation resolution.

This is where Microsoft and Salesforce are struggling. Enterprises buy the claim (Level 1) but can’t achieve the proof (Level 2). The software doesn’t deliver what was promised, or the implementation is too complex, or the results are too vague to verify.

Level 3: Living It (Being It Organizationally)

Linguistic operation: Structural transformation

You’re embedding positioning into organizational DNA. This means resource allocation (70% to positioning-critical capabilities), process redesign, and cultural alignment.

Duration: 12-24 months
Investment: High ($10M-$100M+)
Barrier to copy: Hard (expensive and complex)

Examples: Amazon’s fulfillment network for “convenience.” Apple’s vertical integration for “integrated innovation.” Tesla’s Gigafactories for a “sustainable future.”

At this level, your positioning becomes structural. Competitors would have to rebuild their entire operation to match you. This is why Amazon can claim “convenience,” and nobody else can credibly challenge them because they’ve built infrastructure that makes convenience inevitable.

Level 4: Owning It (Being It Perceptually)

Linguistic operation: Concept ownership (the actual noun)

The concept becomes synonymous with you in customers’ minds. You’ve achieved mental monopoly, perceptual inevitability, and category leadership.

Duration: 24-48 months to reach, decades to maintain
Investment: Existential (fundamental business model)
Barrier to copy: Nearly impossible

Examples: Volvo equals safety. Tesla equals future. Red Bull equals human performance.

At this level, you don’t compete in the category. You define it. When someone thinks “safe cars,” they think Volvo. When someone thinks “energy drinks,” many think Red Bull. That’s not marketing. That’s cognitive architecture.

The Revelation (What 99% Get Wrong)

Here’s what took me years to understand, and what transforms how you think about strategy:

What most people call “positioning” is actually framing.

When experts ask, “How is your product uniquely the best at delivering something valuable to a well-defined market?” that’s brilliant framing. But it assumes you already own something.

When people define positioning as “what a product does and who it’s for,” that’s framing.

When you answer, “What is it? Who’s it for? How’s it different?” that’s framing.

All valuable. All necessary. But none of it is positioning.

Real positioning is concept ownership. It’s the noun your brand owns in customers’ minds. It’s the mental territory you occupy that competitors can’t credibly claim.

Think about it this way:

• Framing is how you describe yourself
• Positioning is what customers think when they’re not talking to you

Framing you control. Positioning you earn.

This distinction explains everything. It’s why companies with clear “positioning statements” still feel undifferentiated. It’s why businesses with compelling “value propositions” struggle to retain customers. It’s why organizations invest millions in “brand positioning” without changing market perception.

They’re perfecting framing while ignoring positioning.

This is where April Dunford and I diverge

Because we disagree on something fundamental, what “positioning” actually means.

Where April is absolutely right:

Her framework for articulating positioning is brilliant. She asks: How is your product uniquely best at delivering value to a well-defined market? This forces clarity on three critical questions:

• What is it?
• Who is it for?
• Why is it different/better?

This is incredibly valuable work. Companies that can’t answer these questions clearly will struggle regardless of anything else they do. Her methodology helps teams get concrete about their market, their differentiation, and their value.

She’s teaching how to frame effectively. And framing matters enormously.

Where we diverge:

April treats this articulation process as “positioning.”
I treat it as “framing.”

In her framework, positioning is something you do; an exercise in defining and articulating how you want to be perceived. You workshop it. You test different angles. You refine the language until it’s clear and compelling.

In my framework, positioning is something you earn; a concept you own in customers’ minds, built through sustained proof over time. You can’t workshop your way into it. You have to build it systematically through consistent action.

Think about Volvo. They don’t position themselves as “the safe car company” through clever messaging. They own “safety” as a concept because they’ve spent 70 years proving it through engineering choices, product decisions, and structural commitments. The three-point seatbelt they invented and gave away freely. The side-impact protection system. The decades of safety innovation.

When someone thinks “safe cars,” many people immediately think “Volvo.” That’s not because of good framing. That’s because of concept ownership built through sustained proof.

Here’s the practical difference:

April’s framework helps you articulate what you want to stand for. My framework helps you understand what you actually own in customers’ minds and how to build that ownership if you don’t.

Her approach: “We position ourselves as the easiest project management tool for remote teams.”

My approach: “Do customers associate ‘simplicity’ exclusively with us? If not, we don’t own it yet. What proof would build that association over time?”

Both are necessary. But they’re different operations.

April is teaching Level 1 excellence (how to claim and articulate your position clearly). I’m teaching and practicing Levels 1-4 integration (how to move from claiming through proving and living to actually owning).

Why this distinction matters:

Companies following April’s framework can develop clear, compelling positioning statements and still struggle with differentiation because they’ve perfected articulation (framing) without establishing ownership (positioning).

They can answer “What is it? Who’s it for? Why is it different?” beautifully. But remove their company name, and customers don’t associate any unique concept with them. They’ve framed without positioning.

This isn’t April’s fault. Her methodology works exactly as designed — it creates clarity in how you articulate yourself. That’s valuable. Essential, even.

But it doesn’t create concept ownership. That requires a different type of work over a different time horizon with different measures of success.

The integration:

Here’s how the frameworks fit together:

1. First, select a concept you want to own (Strategic decision. Requires years of commitment)
2. Then, use April’s framework to articulate that concept clearly (Tactical execution. Requires weeks/months of refinement)
3. Then, deliver measurable proof that validates your claim (Operational execution. Requires 90-day cycles)
4. Then, embed it structurally so it becomes organizationally inevitable (Transformation. Requires 12-24 months)

April’s framework is Step 2. It’s crucial. But it assumes Step 1 is already done. Most companies skip Step 1 entirely and wonder why Step 2 doesn’t create lasting advantage.

So when I say “what most people call positioning is actually framing,” I’m not dismissing the value of that work. I’m clarifying what it actually accomplishes and what it doesn’t.

Framing makes you clear. Positioning makes you inevitable.

Both matter. But they’re different things, requiring different approaches, operating on different timelines, creating different types of advantage.

April teaches framing brilliance. I’m showing you how framing fits into a larger system of concept ownership. You need both.

Why This Makes Strategic Sense (The Deeper Logic)

Let’s go deeper into why this hierarchy matters.

Most positioning frameworks start with the wrong question. They ask: “How should we position ourselves?” That assumes positioning is something you do; a marketing exercise, a messaging framework, a communication strategy.

But that’s backwards. Positioning isn’t something you do to customers. It’s something that exists in customers’ minds, built through consistent proof over time.

Here’s the progression that actually works:

First, you select a concept to own. This is a strategic decision, not a marketing one. You’re choosing mental territory based on relevance (does the audience care?), differentiation (can you credibly claim this when competitors can’t?), defensibility (can you sustain ownership as you grow?), and alignment (does this match your actual capabilities?).

Volvo selected “safety” in the 1950s. Not because focus groups told them to. Because they made a strategic bet that safety would matter more over time, and they could build structural advantages around it.

Second, you frame that ownership. Now you articulate the concept in language that resonates. You answer: What is it? (in relation to your positioning). Who’s it for? (those who value your concept). Why is it different? (because you own X concept).

This is where April Dunford’s work is brilliant. But notice the order: you frame an owned concept, not the other way around.

Third, you execute for proof. You specify what changes, by how much, verified how. You use this format: “[Action] [measured outcome] [timeframe] [verification method].”

Not “improves productivity.” Instead: “Reduces project completion time by 32%, verified through customer time-tracking data over 90 days.”

The five-question test:

1. What specific action does this enable?
2. What baseline are we comparing against?
3. What’s our measured improvement?
4. How will customers verify this?
5. What’s the timeline to value?

Can’t answer all five? Not ready to ship.

Fourth, you live it organizationally. You allocate 70% of the budget to positioning-critical capabilities. You structure the organization to reinforce positioning. You hire people who embody the concept. You incentivize behaviour that strengthens the position. You filter every decision through the question: “Does this prove our position?”

Amazon’s one-click ordering, Prime delivery, AWS infrastructure, all proving “convenience.” Apple’s chip design, retail stores, OS integration, all proving “integrated innovation.” Tesla’s Supercharger network, over-the-air updates, direct sales, all proving “future.”

This is why positioning is strategy, not marketing. It determines resource allocation, organizational design, and operational priorities. Marketing just articulates what already exists.

The Practical Application (How to Actually Do This)

Enough theory. Here’s how you apply this.

Step 1: Audit where you are right now

Question 1: Do you have a position?

Remove your company name. What concept do customers associate with you alone?

If the answer is a product category (“CRM,” “analytics platform”) — no positioning.

If the answer is a competitor comparison (“like Salesforce but easier”) — no positioning.

If the answer is an adjective (“innovative,” “trusted,” “fast”) — no positioning.

If the answer is a noun that’s uniquely yours (“safety,” “simplicity,” “future”) —you have positioning.

Question 2: Is your framing clear?

Can you articulate what you are, who it’s for, and why it’s different in one sentence? Does that articulation stem from an owned concept or just describe your product?

If it describes features, that’s framing without foundation. If it stems from a concept you own, that’s framing aligned with positioning.

Question 3: Can you execute?

Name three specific KPIs you move, with baseline versus your performance, verified by customers within 90 days.

If you can’t name specific metrics, no execution proof. If metrics are vague (“boosts productivity”), it is weak execution. If metrics are specific, verified, and tied to timeframes, it is strong execution.

Question 4: Do you live it?

Does your organizational structure, resource allocation, and decision-making all reinforce your position?

If positioning is a marketing exercise, you’re not living it. If positioning shapes some decisions, you’re partially living it. If positioning determines 70%+ of resource allocation, you’re living it.

Step 2: Diagnose your scenario

Scenario A: No positioning, good framing, unclear execution

This is where most “well-positioned” (as per the ‘experts’) companies actually are. You have compelling messaging, but no concept ownership.

Fix: Pause all framing work for 30 days. Map mental territory; what concepts are owned, contested, vacant? Select one concept and get leadership commitment. Rebuild framing to articulate that ownership. Define execution metrics that prove the position.

Timeline: 6-12 months
Risk: High (requires strategic pivot)

Scenario B: Good positioning, weak framing, weak execution

This is visionary founders without operational discipline. You know what you want to own, but can’t articulate it or deliver it consistently.

Fix: Your positioning is right. Protect it fiercely. Hire for articulation (someone who can frame your vision). Hire for execution (someone who can operationalize it). Create integration rituals that filter every decision through positioning.

Timeline: 12-18 months
Risk: High (requires admitting you can’t do everything)

Scenario C: All four levels are strong

You’re Amazon, Tesla, or Stripe. Congratulations.

Fix: Enter adjacent categories using the same positioning. Deepen execution to make the position structurally inevitable. Build next-gen capabilities competitors can’t match. Defend your mental territory aggressively.

Timeline: 24-48 months
Risk: Complacency or overextension

Step 3: Build your positioning (if you don’t have one)

Select your concept using these criteria:

• Relevance: Does the audience care deeply about this concept?
• Differentiation: Can you credibly claim this when competitors can’t?
• Defensibility: Can you sustain ownership as you grow?
• Alignment: Does this match your actual capabilities?

Don’t select based on market research. Select based on strategic conviction. Volvo didn’t choose safety because customers asked for it. They chose it because they believed safety would matter more over time, and they could build advantages around it.

Step 4: Frame your ownership (Level 1)

Once you own a concept, articulate it clearly:

Answer: What is it? (in relation to your positioning). Who’s it for? (those who value your concept). Why is it different? (because you own X concept).

Example: Position = “Simplicity.” Frame = “CRM that works like your brain, not a database.” Target = “Sales teams drowning in complex enterprise software.”

Notice how the frame articulates the positioning without claiming multiple things at once. It’s focused. Specific. Defensible.

Step 5: Execute for proof (Level 2)

Specify what changes, by how much, verified how.

Format: “[Action] [measured outcome] [timeframe] [verification method]”

Examples:

• “30-minute setup with 90% user adoption in first month versus 30% industry average”
• “Surfaces deal risks with warnings that help teams improve forecast accuracy within 90 days”
• “Reduces project completion time by 32%, verified through customer time-tracking data”

The litmus test: if you can’t pass the five-question test, you’re not ready. Don’t launch vague promises. Build proof first.

Step 6: Live it organizationally (Level 3)

Align your entire operation:

Resource allocation: 70% of the budget to positioning-critical capabilities, 20% to supporting operations, 10% to experiments that could deepen positioning.

Organizational design: Structure reinforces positioning. Hiring profiles favour people who embody the concept. Incentives reward behaviour that strengthens the position.

Process design: Every decision filtered through “Does this prove our position?” Systems make positioning-aligned behaviour easier than alternatives. Measurement tracks positioning strength, not just revenue.

This is where most companies fail. They treat positioning as a marketing initiative instead of an operational reality. They keep resource allocation unchanged. They don’t restructure. They don’t change hiring. They just make new slides. That’s why their positioning doesn’t stick.

Why This Matters More Than You Think

Here’s what I’ve learned from working with hundreds of companies: the ones that succeed long-term understand this linguistic-cognitive hierarchy. The ones that struggle don’t.

The struggling companies have smart people, good products, and strong execution. But they’re optimizing the wrong layer. They’re perfecting framing (Level 1) without establishing positioning (Level 4). They’re promising execution (Level 2) without delivering proof. They’re ignoring organizational alignment (Level 3) entirely.

Then they wonder why:

• Customers buy but don’t deploy
• Pricing pressure increases
• Differentiation erodes
• Growth stalls
• Competition intensifies

It’s because they never owned mental territory in the first place.

Think about Microsoft and Salesforce. They’re not failing because of bad technology. They’re struggling because they positioned with labels (“AI copilot,” “AI agents”), framed generically (promises about productivity), and delivered vague execution (no specific, verifiable outcomes).

Enterprises buy because the framing sounds good. But they can’t deploy because the execution isn’t proven. And they can’t achieve results because the positioning was never real.

This pattern repeats across industries:

SaaS companies with great value propositions but no concept ownership. Professional services firms with compelling case studies but unclear positioning. Product companies with strong features but a commodity perception.

All symptoms of the same problem: confusing framing with positioning, and execution with proof.

The Counter-Intuitive Truth

Here’s what makes this difficult: good framing can succeed for years without real positioning. You can have compelling messaging, grow revenue, attract investors, and still not own mental territory.

This is why so many companies plateau. They succeed through good framing and adequate execution (Levels 1 and 2), but never establish positioning (Level 4) or organizational alignment (Level 3).

Then market dynamics shift. Competition intensifies. Customers have more options. Suddenly, good framing isn’t enough. And the company realizes they never owned anything.

The reality: you can’t skip levels. You can’t go from Level 1 (claiming through framing) to Level 4 (owning the concept) without going through Level 2 (proving through execution) and Level 3 (living it organizationally).

Each level builds on the previous. Each requires different time horizons, investments, and capabilities. Each creates different defensive moats.

This is why positioning is strategy, not marketing. It’s a multi-year commitment that shapes everything from resource allocation to organizational design to operational priorities.

You can’t delegate it to marketing. You can’t outsource it to an agency. You can’t workshop it in a day. You have to build it systematically, over time, with discipline.

The Linguistic Architecture That Changes Everything

Let’s return to where we started: nouns versus verbs.

Your brain processes them differently. This isn’t a metaphor. It’s cognitive architecture. Nouns activate declarative memory; stable, long-term, conceptual. Verbs activate procedural and working memory; contextual, action-oriented, variable.

This means:

Nouns establish mental territory. When you own a concept (noun), competitors are relegated to derivative positions. Once Volvo owns “safety,” others can only claim to be “safe too” or “safer than,” inherently weaker positions that acknowledge Volvo’s leadership.

Verbs prove and articulate it. Actions (verbs) demonstrate your ownership and help you communicate it. But without the noun layer underneath, verbs are just features. Commodity capabilities anyone can match.

The companies that win understand this hierarchy:

1. First, own a concept (noun) through sustained proof over time
2. Second, articulate that ownership (framing verb) in clear language
3. Third, prove it with measurable outcomes (execution verb) that validate the framing
4. Fourth, embed it structurally (organizational verb) so it becomes inevitable

Skip the first step, and everything else becomes harder. You’re competing on execution alone, with no positioning advantage. You’re fighting over features and price because you don’t own mental territory.

Do the first step well, and everything else compounds. Your execution proves your position. Your framing articulates what you own. Your organization reinforces it structurally. Competitors can’t copy what you’ve built into customers’ minds over the years.

What To Do Tomorrow

Here’s your action plan:

Tomorrow: Audit your positioning. Remove your company name. What concept do customers associate with you alone? If the answer is vague or you’re not sure, you have a positioning problem, not an execution problem.

This week: Map mental territory. What concepts are owned in your category? What’s contested? What’s vacant? Where could you credibly establish ownership?

This month: Get leadership alignment. Positioning is not a marketing decision. It’s a strategic commitment that determines resource allocation. If leadership won’t commit, don’t bother with framing or execution.

This quarter: Rebuild your framing to articulate actual ownership. Stop describing features. Start articulating the concept you own (or want to own). Make it specific, defensible, memorable.

This year: Align execution with positioning. Define specific KPIs you’ll move. Specify baselines, improvements, verification methods, and timelines. Build proof systematically.

Next year: Restructure organizationally. Allocate 70% of resources to positioning-critical capabilities. Change hiring profiles. Adjust incentives. Filter decisions through positioning.

This isn’t fast. It’s not supposed to be. Positioning is a strategic advantage built over time. Quick wins don’t create mental ownership. Sustained proof does.

Finally

The reason 67% of large organizations fail at execution isn’t because of poor processes or inadequate tools. It’s because they’re trying to execute without positioning. They’re proving things without owning concepts. They’re perfecting verbs without establishing nouns.

You can’t execute your way into positioning. You have to position first, then execute to prove it.

This is why Microsoft and Salesforce face adoption friction despite massive distribution, why enterprises buy licenses but can’t deploy software, and why investment doesn’t equal return.

They perfected Level 1 (articulation) while ignoring Level 4 (concept ownership) and stumbling at Level 2 (measurable proof). They framed without positioning. They promised without proving. They optimized words without owning mental territory.

The rest of us make the same mistake. We perfect value propositions (framing) without claiming concepts (positioning). We describe capabilities (features) without specifying outcomes (execution). We articulate ourselves beautifully without owning anything.

The four-level hierarchy isn’t optional:

• Level 4: Position = Own a concept in minds (the noun) — Years to establish, measured by mental availability and pricing power
• Level 1: Frame = Articulate that ownership (saying verb) — Months to refine, measured by message clarity
• Level 2: Execute = Prove it with outcomes (doing verb) — 90-day cycles, measured by KPIs and ROI
• Level 3: Live = Embed it structurally (being verb) — 12-24 months, measured by resource alignment

Skip Level 4? Your framing is noise without foundation. Skip Level 1? Your positioning stays invisible. Skip Level 2? Your framing is promises without proof. Skip Level 3? Your execution can’t scale.

The companies winning aren’t smarter. They understand the linguistic architecture of how humans process concepts (nouns) versus actions (verbs), and how both must align from strategy through execution.

Nouns establish mental territory. Verbs prove and articulate it. Confuse them, and everything breaks.

Position with nouns. Frame and execute with verbs. In that order.

Everything else is decoration on a house you don’t own.