Turn research into a useful summary
Compare competitors, suppliers, or a market using information you can trace to sources. This course is in development.
Original course title & technical overview
Research and Summary Briefs. Competitor snapshots, market summaries and vendor comparisons a decision-maker can act on: a sharp question, sources you can defend, a scoring table, a two-page brief with a recommendation, delivered in 48 hours.
A new word? Look it up in plain English →
2026 EDITIONWhat you can offer
Compare competitors, suppliers, or a market using information you can trace to sources. This course is in development.
Detailed deliverables
A research brief on one decision: a competitor snapshot (5–8 competitors on 8–10 criteria), a market summary (size, trends, who buys, what is changing, with sources), or a vendor comparison (3–6 options scored against the client’s must-haves with a recommendation). Two pages plus an appendix sheet, every claim sourced.
Tools (free plans have limits): Perplexity (free, sourced answers) or Claude/ChatGPT with search, Google Sheets for the scoring matrix, Google Docs for the brief, Primary sources: company sites, pricing pages, filings, reviews (G2, Capterra, Google), government statistics, A citation style you keep consistent
You will make
- A research question with the decision it serves, the criteria that matter and what is out of scope
- A source plan and a source log with links, dates and reliability notes
- A scoring matrix (competitors or vendors × criteria) with evidence per cell
- A two-page brief: answer first, evidence, caveats, recommendation, next steps
- An appendix sheet and a delivery note that states what was not confirmed
Inside this course
4 lessons · 4 AI instruction templates · 4 worked examples · 3 exam versions · final practice projectLesson 1 is open as a free preview, ready-to-use AI instructions included. Sign up free to unlock the rest and try AI instructions in the practice area.
- 1🔒 Sign inWhat you will learn · 2 min
- 2🔒 Sign inSet up your tools · 10 min
- 3Preview freeResearch that helps starts from a decision: who decides what, by when, with which criteria. The 15-minute intake that turns “look into CRMs” into a question you can answer.
- 4🔒 Sign inSources you can defend · 45 minA source hierarchy, how to use AI search without trusting it, the source log with dates and reliability notes, and the rule that every number is opened at its origin.
- 5🔒 Sign inThe scoring matrix · 40 minOptions against criteria with a score, a note and a source in every cell, weighted totals, a sensitivity check, and the discipline that keeps scores honest.
- 6🔒 Sign inWrite the two-page brief and deliver · 35 minAnswer first, evidence that earns it, caveats in their own section, a recommendation with next steps, numbered sources, and the delivery note. Plus the weekly research retainer.
- 7🔒 Sign inCertification exam · 20 min10 questions · 80% to pass · three versions, a retake is never the same test.
- 8🔒 Sign inFinal project: A CRM vendor comparison for Bell Mechanical Services · 75 minA CRM vendor comparison for Bell Mechanical Services: graded on 5 criteria, pass at 15/20.
- 9🔒 Sign inCheck your work · 15 min
- 10🔒 Sign inFeedback and certificate · 5 min
- 11🔒 Sign inPublish your service · 20 min
Final practice project: A CRM vendor comparison for Bell Mechanical Services
A practice assignment from Bell Mechanical Services (HVAC and plumbing contractor (42 technicians, 3 branches)). You will see the scoring guide (rubric) before you start.
| What we check | What earns the full 4 points |
|---|---|
| Brief followed | Answers the Q1 CRM decision under Marcus’s constraints; includes Follow Up Boss, HubSpot, Pipedrive and at least one more; all deliverables present |
| Source rigor | Every number traces to an opened primary or strong source with a date; weak sources used only as leads; disagreements shown |
| Matrix honesty | Scales defined before scoring, blanks not faked, must-have failures handled, sensitivity reported |
| Brief craft | Answer in three lines, evidence in weight order, plain English, real caveats, actionable next steps |
| Usefulness | A manager could book the demos and run the trial from this brief without asking a question |
Honest expectations. AI search will give you a confident, wrong market size in seconds. The service is the verification: every number traced to a primary source you opened, every claim dated, and a plain statement of what you could not confirm. A brief that says “unknown” in three places is worth more than one that is 100% confident and 20% invented.