I used to think Pragmatic Framework was the only way to do product marketing.
I'd spent $2,000 on the certification, learned the boxes, structured my work around them. When someone mentioned Jobs-to-be-Done or CIRCLES or another framework, I'd think: "Pragmatic already covers that."
Then I joined a company where JTBD was the standard. The product team spoke in jobs, not features. Customer research focused on outcomes, not buyer personas. Positioning was built around the job, not the market category.
I tried to force Pragmatic Framework onto their process. It didn't fit.
That's when I learned: Pragmatic is a great framework, but it's not the only framework. And sometimes it's not even the right framework.
Different frameworks solve different problems. Pragmatic excels at organizing the full scope of product marketing work. JTBD excels at understanding customer motivation. CIRCLES excels at structuring product positioning. Other frameworks excel at other things.
The best PMMs don't pick one framework and stick to it forever. They use different frameworks for different situations.
The Four Frameworks I Actually Use
After using Pragmatic for three years and experimenting with other approaches, I've settled on using four frameworks depending on the situation.
Pragmatic Framework works best for organizing PMM work. It's a comprehensive model of product marketing and product management activities organized into five boxes: Market, Focus, Business, Programs, Readiness. I use it when I need to structure a PMM function from scratch, diagnose why GTM motions are failing, build PMM teams and define roles, or create repeatable processes for launches, enablement, and competitive analysis.
What it's not great for: deep customer research where it tells you to do personas but not how, product positioning decisions where it tells you to position but not which positioning to choose, or messaging development where it tells you to create messaging but not how to craft it.
I joined a company with no PMM function once. I printed the Pragmatic Framework and used it to show the CEO which capabilities we were missing. Within a quarter, we'd built buyer persona research for Market, positioning for Focus, and launch infrastructure for Programs. The framework gave us a roadmap.
Jobs-to-be-Done works best for customer research and positioning. It's a framework for understanding why customers "hire" products to accomplish specific jobs in their lives, focusing on customer motivation rather than demographics or features. I use it when I'm positioning a new product, entering a new market, or repositioning after stagnant growth.
What it's not great for: organizing the full scope of PMM work since it's focused on research and positioning, launch planning and execution, or sales enablement and competitive analysis.
We were losing deals to "status quo" once—prospects liked our product but didn't buy. I ran JTBD research and learned customers weren't "hiring" us to solve a pain point—they were "hiring" us to avoid a future risk around compliance issues. We repositioned around risk mitigation instead of efficiency gains. Win rate increased 20%.
CIRCLES Method works best for product positioning. It's a framework for structuring product positioning developed by Lewis Lin. The components are: Comprehend the situation, Identify the customer, Report customer needs, Cut through prioritization, List solutions, Evaluate tradeoffs, Summarize recommendation. I use it when I need to make a strategic positioning decision and get executive buy-in.
What it's not great for: ongoing PMM operations since it's a decision framework not an operational framework, competitive analysis or sales enablement, or launch execution.
We had three potential market segments once: startups, mid-market, and enterprise. CIRCLES forced us to comprehend each segment, identify their needs, prioritize which one we were best positioned to win, and evaluate the tradeoffs. We chose mid-market and built positioning around that decision. The framework helped us explain the choice to executives.
Competitive Positioning using April Dunford's "Obviously Awesome" framework works best for repositioning. The components focus on understanding how customers categorize your product: competitive alternatives customers compare you to, unique capabilities you have that alternatives don't, value those capabilities enable, target customer who cares most about that value, and market category where you win.
What it's not great for: organizing the full PMM function, launch planning and execution, or building PMM processes and infrastructure.
We were positioned as "sales engagement platform" and losing to Outreach and Salesloft. I used Dunford's framework and learned buyers compared us to spreadsheets, not to platforms. We repositioned as "revenue intelligence for mid-market" and changed our competitive set. Win rate improved 25%.
When to Use Which Framework
Different frameworks solve different problems. Here's how I decide which to use.
Use Pragmatic Framework when you're building or scaling a PMM function. Pragmatic shows you the full scope of product marketing work. Use it to define what your team should own, structure roles, and build processes. I used Pragmatic to build my last PMM team with one PMM owning Market and competitive intelligence, another owning Focus and positioning, another owning Programs and launches. The framework gave us structure.
Use Pragmatic when your GTM motion is failing and you don't know why. When something isn't working—launches flopping, sales can't sell, competitive losses increasing—walk through the Pragmatic Framework boxes. Usually the problem is obvious: You skipped the Market box and don't understand buyers, or the Focus box and positioning isn't clear, or the Readiness box and sales isn't enabled.
Use Pragmatic when you're at a company that already uses it. Don't fight it. Use their language. It makes collaboration easier.
Use Jobs-to-be-Done when you're positioning a new product or entering a new market. JTBD helps you understand why customers buy beyond surface-level pain points. Use it to find differentiated positioning angles. I used JTBD when launching a new product category. The research revealed customers were "hiring" the product for a job we hadn't considered. We positioned around that job and saw 40% faster adoption than expected.
Use JTBD when win/loss data shows you're losing to "status quo." If prospects like your product but don't buy, JTBD research reveals what's preventing them from taking action. Usually it's not that your product isn't good enough—it's that the job isn't urgent enough.
Use JTBD when your positioning feels generic and doesn't differentiate. JTBD forces you to understand customer motivation deeply. This often reveals positioning angles competitors miss.
Use CIRCLES when you need to make a strategic positioning decision. Should you target startups or enterprises? Focus on one use case or multiple? Position as a platform or a point solution? CIRCLES forces you to evaluate tradeoffs systematically and document your reasoning.
Use CIRCLES when you need executive buy-in for a positioning change. Executives want to know: Why this positioning? What are the alternatives? What are the tradeoffs? CIRCLES gives you a structure for presenting positioning decisions that executives can evaluate and approve.
Use Competitive Positioning from Dunford when your current positioning isn't working. If marketing runs campaigns and they don't convert, or sales demos and prospects don't buy, your positioning is wrong. Dunford's framework forces you to understand how buyers actually categorize your product versus how you think they should.
Use Dunford when you're losing competitive deals and don't know why. The framework starts with: What alternatives are buyers considering? Often, you'll learn they're not comparing you to who you think. I thought we competed against enterprise platforms once. Buyers were comparing us to Excel. Different competitive set means different positioning means different win rate.
How to Combine Frameworks
The best PMMs don't use one framework exclusively. They combine frameworks based on the situation.
When positioning a new product, I use multiple frameworks in sequence. Week 1-2, I use JTBD for research by interviewing 15-20 customers about jobs-to-be-done, understanding why they hired your product category, and identifying underserved jobs.
Week 3, I use Dunford's Competitive Positioning by mapping competitive alternatives buyers consider, identifying unique capabilities and value, and defining target customer and market category.
Week 4, I use CIRCLES for decision-making by evaluating positioning options, presenting tradeoffs to executives, and getting buy-in on positioning direction.
Ongoing, I use Pragmatic Framework for execution by using the Focus box to develop messaging, the Programs box to plan launch, and the Readiness box to enable sales.
The frameworks complement each other. JTBD and Dunford help you develop positioning. CIRCLES helps you make decisions. Pragmatic helps you execute.
The Framework Trap to Avoid
The biggest mistake PMMs make: treating frameworks as religion.
They pick one framework—Pragmatic, JTBD, CIRCLES—and force every situation into that framework even when it doesn't fit.
I worked with a PMM who only used JTBD. Great for positioning research. Terrible for organizing a launch, building sales enablement, or structuring a PMM team.
She kept trying to force JTBD into situations where it wasn't useful. Launches were chaotic because she didn't have a systematic launch framework. Sales wasn't enabled because she focused on jobs research instead of enablement tools.
What works: Use the framework that solves the problem you have.
If you're organizing a PMM function, use Pragmatic. If you're positioning a product, use JTBD or Dunford. If you're making strategic decisions, use CIRCLES. Don't force one framework into every situation.
When Frameworks Don't Matter
Here's the uncomfortable truth: Most PMM work isn't about frameworks. It's about execution.
You can learn every framework—Pragmatic, JTBD, CIRCLES, Dunford, and a dozen others. But if you can't execute, frameworks won't help.
Frameworks don't write compelling positioning, build great sales decks, run successful launches, or enable sales effectively. You do.
Frameworks help you structure your thinking, diagnose problems, make systematic decisions, and avoid common mistakes. Use frameworks as tools, not crutches. Learn them, apply them, but don't let them replace judgment, creativity, and execution.
The Bottom Line on Frameworks
Pragmatic Framework is great for organizing PMM work, building teams, and diagnosing GTM problems. Use it when you need structure and process.
Jobs-to-be-Done is great for customer research and finding differentiated positioning. Use it when you need to understand buyer motivation.
CIRCLES is great for making strategic positioning decisions. Use it when you need to evaluate tradeoffs and get executive buy-in.
Competitive Positioning from Dunford is great for repositioning products and competitive differentiation. Use it when current positioning isn't working.
Don't pick one. Use all of them. Different frameworks solve different problems. The best PMMs have a toolkit of frameworks and use the right one for the situation.
Learn the frameworks. Use them when they help. Ignore them when they don't. Execute regardless.
That's how you get good at product marketing—not by memorizing frameworks, but by using them to ship better GTM strategies, launches, and enablement.
The framework doesn't matter as much as what you do with it.