# Market Research Report Validation Checklist

## Research Foundation

### Objectives and Scope

- [ ] Research objectives are clearly stated with specific questions to answer
- [ ] Market boundaries are explicitly defined (product category, geography, segments)
- [ ] Research methodology is documented with data sources and timeframes
- [ ] Limitations and assumptions are transparently acknowledged

### Data Quality

- [ ] All data sources are cited with dates and links where applicable
- [ ] Data is no more than 12 months old for time-sensitive metrics
- [ ] At least 3 independent sources validate key market size claims
- [ ] Source credibility is assessed (primary > industry reports > news articles)
- [ ] Conflicting data points are acknowledged and reconciled

## Market Sizing Analysis

### TAM Calculation

- [ ] At least 2 different calculation methods are used (top-down, bottom-up, or value theory)
- [ ] All assumptions are explicitly stated with rationale
- [ ] Calculation methodology is shown step-by-step
- [ ] Numbers are sanity-checked against industry benchmarks
- [ ] Growth rate projections include supporting evidence

### SAM and SOM

- [ ] SAM constraints are realistic and well-justified (geography, regulations, etc.)
- [ ] SOM includes competitive analysis to support market share assumptions
- [ ] Three scenarios (conservative, realistic, optimistic) are provided
- [ ] Time horizons for market capture are specified (Year 1, 3, 5)
- [ ] Market share percentages align with comparable company benchmarks

## Customer Intelligence

### Segment Analysis

- [ ] At least 3 distinct customer segments are profiled
- [ ] Each segment includes size estimates (number of customers or revenue)
- [ ] Pain points are specific, not generic (e.g., "reduce invoice processing time by 50%" not "save time")
- [ ] Willingness to pay is quantified with evidence
- [ ] Buying process and decision criteria are documented

### Jobs-to-be-Done

- [ ] Functional jobs describe specific tasks customers need to complete
- [ ] Emotional jobs identify feelings and anxieties
- [ ] Social jobs explain perception and status considerations
- [ ] Jobs are validated with customer evidence, not assumptions
- [ ] Priority ranking of jobs is provided

## Competitive Analysis

### Competitor Coverage

- [ ] At least 5 direct competitors are analyzed
- [ ] Indirect competitors and substitutes are identified
- [ ] Each competitor profile includes: company size, funding, target market, pricing
- [ ] Recent developments (last 6 months) are included
- [ ] Competitive advantages and weaknesses are specific, not generic

### Positioning Analysis

- [ ] Market positioning map uses relevant dimensions for the industry
- [ ] White space opportunities are clearly identified
- [ ] Differentiation strategy is supported by competitive gaps
- [ ] Switching costs and barriers are quantified
- [ ] Network effects and moats are assessed

## Industry Analysis

### Porter's Five Forces

- [ ] Each force has a clear rating (Low/Medium/High) with justification
- [ ] Specific examples and evidence support each assessment
- [ ] Industry-specific factors are considered (not generic template)
- [ ] Implications for strategy are drawn from each force
- [ ] Overall industry attractiveness conclusion is provided

### Trends and Dynamics

- [ ] At least 5 major trends are identified with evidence
- [ ] Technology disruptions are assessed for probability and timeline
- [ ] Regulatory changes and their impacts are documented
- [ ] Social/cultural shifts relevant to adoption are included
- [ ] Market maturity stage is identified with supporting indicators

## Strategic Recommendations

### Go-to-Market Strategy

- [ ] Target segment prioritization has clear rationale
- [ ] Positioning statement is specific and differentiated
- [ ] Channel strategy aligns with customer buying behavior
- [ ] Partnership opportunities are identified with specific targets
- [ ] Pricing strategy is justified by willingness-to-pay analysis

### Opportunity Assessment

- [ ] Each opportunity is sized quantitatively
- [ ] Resource requirements are estimated (time, money, people)
- [ ] Success criteria are measurable and time-bound
- [ ] Dependencies and prerequisites are identified
- [ ] Quick wins vs. long-term plays are distinguished

### Risk Analysis

- [ ] All major risk categories are covered (market, competitive, execution, regulatory)
- [ ] Each risk has probability and impact assessment
- [ ] Mitigation strategies are specific and actionable
- [ ] Early warning indicators are defined
- [ ] Contingency plans are outlined for high-impact risks

## Document Quality

### Structure and Flow

- [ ] Executive summary captures all key insights in 1-2 pages
- [ ] Sections follow logical progression from market to strategy
- [ ] No placeholder text remains (all {{variables}} are replaced)
- [ ] Cross-references between sections are accurate
- [ ] Table of contents matches actual sections

### Professional Standards

- [ ] Data visualizations effectively communicate insights
- [ ] Technical terms are defined in glossary
- [ ] Writing is concise and jargon-free
- [ ] Formatting is consistent throughout
- [ ] Document is ready for executive presentation

## Research Completeness

### Coverage Check

- [ ] All workflow steps were completed (none skipped without justification)
- [ ] Optional analyses were considered and included where valuable
- [ ] Web research was conducted for current market intelligence
- [ ] Financial projections align with market size analysis
- [ ] Implementation roadmap provides clear next steps

### Validation

- [ ] Key findings are triangulated across multiple sources
- [ ] Surprising insights are double-checked for accuracy
- [ ] Calculations are verified for mathematical accuracy
- [ ] Conclusions logically follow from the analysis
- [ ] Recommendations are actionable and specific

## Final Quality Assurance

### Ready for Decision-Making

- [ ] Research answers all initial objectives
- [ ] Sufficient detail for investment decisions
- [ ] Clear go/no-go recommendation provided
- [ ] Success metrics are defined
- [ ] Follow-up research needs are identified

### Document Meta

- [ ] Research date is current
- [ ] Confidence levels are indicated for key assertions
- [ ] Next review date is set
- [ ] Distribution list is appropriate
- [ ] Confidentiality classification is marked

---

## Issues Found

### Critical Issues

_List any critical gaps or errors that must be addressed:_

- [ ] Issue 1: [Description]
- [ ] Issue 2: [Description]

### Minor Issues

_List minor improvements that would enhance the report:_

- [ ] Issue 1: [Description]
- [ ] Issue 2: [Description]

### Additional Research Needed

_List areas requiring further investigation:_

- [ ] Topic 1: [Description]
- [ ] Topic 2: [Description]

---

**Validation Complete:** ☐ Yes ☐ No
**Ready for Distribution:** ☐ Yes ☐ No
**Reviewer:** **\*\***\_\_\_\_**\*\***
**Date:** **\*\***\_\_\_\_**\*\***