Archive | Gartner Magic Quadrant

Gartner Magic Quadrant

[GUEST POST] IIAR Webinar: ‘Tis the season for Gartner Methodologies

Gartner IIAR logosOn September 7th, the CCgroup AR team joined IIAR’s latest webinar on Gartner methodologies with by David Black (LinkedIn), MVP Methodologies & Content Engagement at Gartner and moderated by Ludovic Leforestier (@lludovicLinkedIn), from the IIAR Board.

David spoke about the firm’s research methodology behind reports such as Magic Quadrants and Critical Capabilities.

The AR community has always been tuned in to Gartner’s research calendars, with “Every season is Magic Quadrant season” being the mantra shared by many. As such, many AR professionals were keen to learn more from David. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

IIAR Webinar: Gartner Research Methodologies including the Magic Quadrant

Join David Black (LinkedIn), Gartner‘s Managing Vice President for Methodologies and Customer Engagement for an interactive conversation on the industry’s most famous and talked about research methodology -the Gartner Magic Quadrant.

Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

The IIAR Tragic Quadrant for 2017

Two years ago, in 2015, we produced the first IIAR Tragic Quadrant. It was met with much enthusiasm and comment, thus we have decided to repeat the exercise once again this year. Below we present the Tragic Quadrant for 2017. The Tragic Quadrant is compiled from data collected as part of the 2016 IIAR Analyst of the Year Survey, where, annually, we invite analyst relations professionals to rate individual industry analyst and the firms they work for. This year more than 100 different individual organisations responded to our survey. We were interested to see if we could do further analysis on the data that was collected.

In producing the Tragic Quadrant what we sought to do was to rank analyst firms according to three criteria. We chose these criteria because this is what the IIAR survey asks respondents to assess:

  • Impact: The Y axis depicts the ‘Impact’ of the industry analyst firm on the purchase decision. This also relates to their perceived credibility and capability to provide an objective opinion.
  • Relevance: The X axis marks their ‘Relevance’ for the purchase decision. This means their capability to cover the market and their specific geographical allocation. It also includes public recognition of their presence in the market (e.g. as an expert).
  • Interaction: The size of the bubble is ‘Interaction’. This relates to issues of communication (e.g. how easy is it to get to them and to talk to them).

Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Constellation and the curse of the quadrant

At the beginning, the intent was pure.Gartner Real Quadrant

Industry analysts, more specifically the buy-side “prescribers” exist to help technology buyers (often referred to as end-users) select the best vendors and providers. They gather insights through public and private sources such as (semi-)private vendor briefings and conversations (inquiries) with their end-user subscribers. Some analysts take hundreds of briefings and inquiries in a year, allowing them to gather unique insights on the market segments they cover. This accumulated knowledge allow them to monetise this information asymmetry as reports, consulting sessions, speaking engagements, etc.

Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Do you need to pay Gartner to be in the Magic Quadrant?

It’s been interesting reading some of the recent posts and comments on Linkedin about Gartner and its supposed lack of independence.

I’ve been an AR professional for 15 years now and work for a variety of technology and telecoms companies (large and small). Some have Gartner contracts, some don’t.

I have never seen or heard of any evidence that says you can buy your way gartner-empty-magic-quadranton to a Magic Quadrant. Nor does the amount of money you spend influence where you appear on the MQ.

My personal experience supports that. I’ve had clients who spend a lot of money with Gartner fail to be included on an MQ (or be included but not where they wanted to be). I’ve had clients who spend no money with Gartner be included on an MQ – and in good positions. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Who’s really shaping the digital future?

Professor Neil Pollock (Linkedin, @neilpollock) looks at the role industry analysts play in creating today’s markets and asks: Who is shaping this dynamic digital world?…

Neil Pollock IIAR

The words digital economy conjure images of young, tech-savvy entrepreneurs breaking molds in a world where technology is disruptive. But could the reality be much more mundane and mercantile? Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

The IIAR “Tragic Quadrant”

Last year, as part of the 2014 IIAR Analyst of The Year Survey, we invited analyst relations professionals to rate their favourite industry analyst individuals and the firms they worked for. More than 60 individual organisations responded to our survey. We were interested to see if we could do further analysis on the data that was collected.

When we set out to do the IIAR Analyst of the Year (with Helen Chantry), we always had envisioned doing a Magic Quadrant of analyst firms. This year the survey provided us with further information which we have been able to breakdown and analyse to provide a more detailed understanding of how analyst relations professionals perceive the relevance, impact and reachability of industry analyst firms. We are not claiming that this is an exhaustive study. Rather it simply opens a new (slightly cheeky – hence the notion of “Tragic Quadrant”) window onto the analyst landscape, where we attempt to rank industry analyst firms by impact, relevance and ease to do business with. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

[GUEST POST] Analysts’ Dirty Little Secrets

The Gartner Godfather, illustration from the 1972 movie for a blog post by Jonathon Gordon / EMI on Gartner on the IIAR websiteNetScout is crying foul against Gartner. The NetScout lawsuit against Gartner has raised the ‘pay-for-play’ specter once again. Whether this is a case of a vendor just peeved at their spot on the GMQ or they have a legitimate grievance, I am not in a position to judge Whether NetScout will be successful with their legal foray is for the lawyers and judges to say.

However, the latest outcry against Gartner should ring warning bells for the mega-analyst firm and others too. The fact that ‘pay-for-play’ has once again raised its ugly head is symptomatic of the lack of regulation and transparency in the Industry Analyst Business.

The lawsuit calls for ‘structural reforms’ similar to those imposed on the financial system in order to ‘remove the conflicts of interest and unfair and deceptive business practices’. Incidentally, this is a topic that has been discussed on this blog before. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Wrap-up: Netscout vs. Gartner re. Magic Quadrant positioning

Gartner Magic Quadrant: Pay to be here!Two Three interesting takes on Netscout suing Gartner for not putting them in the leaders quadrant:

16/9/16 update: 

See also this 2009 post by Jonny Bentwood: Is shooting on the referee productive?

Bottom line:

  • The Gartner methodology is quite solid nowadays, however the firm is still expressing an opinion by the choices it makes on inclusion criteria and weightings for instance.

 

Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

[GUEST POST] #Visionaries, #Disruptors and Complete Lunatics

Recently, I have been taking an interest in the Gartner Magic Quadrant, trying to understand how helpful the model is and what role it plays. I looked at a bunch of these industry super models and one thing in particular caught my eye, or rather something that didn’t appear to be there. That something was a little dot in the far bottom right hand corner of the bottom right hand quadrant, the one Gartner calls ‘Visionaries’.

If you want a quick verification without doing all the hard work, just Google Gartner magic quadrant and take look at the image tag. Low and behold, you should get something like this and the pattern will become clear … Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Is there Really Magic in the MQ?

IIAR Webinar Report – On the 16th April, Beth Torrie (LinkedIn, Twitter) hosted a book chat with Richard Stiennon (LinkedIn, Twitter), author of Up and To The Right. While it wasn’t as fun as a class at the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, attendees did get an insider view of the magic in the famous Gartner MQ process. As a former Gartner Analyst and Analyst Relations Executive, Richard shared an overview of his perspective on AR and a summary of his book. He considers the book a memoir and “a kiss and tell” about his experiences as with specifics about the famous Gartner Magic Quadrant and insights to better understand the many intricacies behind it. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

IIAR Webinar – Gartner Magic Quadrant Enhancements 2013

Save the Day and Register Now for this “Not-to-Miss” Webinar.

Gartner has recently announced that an enhanced version of the Magic Quadrant will be released on 29 July. So what’s driving this change, what is it, and what does it mean to you as an AR professional?

The IIAR ia delighted to host a webinar to preview the new version of the Gartner Magic Quadrant on Tuesday, 23rd July 2013 at 4:00pm BST/11:00am EST. The session will be given by Julie Thomas (MVP, Research Content Strategy), David Black (VP, Content Architecture & Methodology) and Theresa Ryan (Director, Research Content Strategy), all from Gartner Research and hosted by Ludovic Leforestier from the IIAR Board (LinkedIn, @bearingpointar, @lludovic). Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Examining The New Gartner Interactive Magic Quadrant

Gartner has recently announced that an enhanced version of the Magic Quadrant will be released  on 29 July. So what’s driving this change, what is it, and what does it mean to you as an AR professional?

Here comes MQ 2.0
The Gartner MQ has not really changed its physical appearance since its original introduction. The famous two-by-two matrix and dots started life on paper and were effectively shifted onto the web with no real change. Over the years, the MQ has been industrialized at the back end with a structured measurement methodology. The front end moved from a static, locked-in-PDF view to a mildly interactive view several years ago, where users could mouse-over a position to read vendor specific strengths and challenges. The degree of interactivity however is about to increase dramatically.

So what’s driving this minor revolution? Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

[Guest Post] Why IT Vendors Should Take Industry Analysts (More) Seriously

By: Dr Neil Pollock, University of Edinburgh Business School

After several years’ research on industry analysts and IT Research firms there are some interesting conclusions to be reached on how industry analyst firms are exerting influence on IT vendors and their product markets. This is just a snapshot of some of Dr. Pollock’s findings.

1. Industry Analysts Stifle Novelty

The first point shows how industry analysts are one of the new ‘institutions of information technology’ with the cognitive authority to shape technological fields. One common way they do this is through proposing names and definitions for emerging technological trends, an activity with positive and negative consequences. We saw, for instance, how this could stifle innovation. IT vendors offering new kinds of products were penalised if their technologies did not conform to standard product definitions. We observed how one seemingly novel solution belonging to a newcomer received a critical review, which led to its rejection from a major procurement contest, effectively calling into question the robustness of its solution. The suggestion here is that industry analysts can help but also hinder innovation. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

[GUEST POST] Big Dogs don’t yap: the secret ingredient for MQ success

Blog courtesy of: Simon Levin (IIAR Board Member)

What is it that makes the difference when it comes to making the step up into the Leaders section of Gartner’s Magic Quadrant? Ever wondered what companies who gain recognition as Leaders have in common? Having seen four of our MQ Tune-Up clients gain Leaders status for the first time last quarter, I thought it might be interesting to go looking for some common themes or attributes.

And as it turned out, the exercise was well worth the effort, because it highlighted one key factor I’d never consciously identified before.

We’re calling it the Big Dog syndrome, and it’s all about looking the part, acting like a Leader right from the start, and, above all, believing that that top right quadrant is your rightful home.

There’s more about this idea on The Skills Connection’s blog but the essence of it is blindingly simple. For a company to be perceived as a Leader, it has to have a leaderly air about it. It has to radiate conviction, as well as competence. It needs to put its case across well, but without the yapping, snapping desperation that marks out those that try too hard. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

[GUEST POST] Timing is everything

There’s no penalty for jumping the gun

On your marks. Get Set. Go. When the starting gun goes off, there is always going to be a rush of adrenalin, a surge of excitement, and a striving to get up to speed and do your best.

But when the starting gun goes off in relation to a Gartner Magic Quadrant (MQ) assessment of your company, in many ways it is already too late.

Magic Quadrants generally appear once a year. For the companies who are on the receiving end, they can be make or break factors, with a huge influence on business prospects for the year ahead.

For the analysts involved, they are important pieces of work, but they have to be fitted in alongside research reports, client inquiries and meetings, events and presentations, custom engagements, webinars, blogs, and a host of other commitments. Leaving all the rest of an analyst’s annual workload aside, producing a Magic Quadrant means identifying and investigating multiple companies that will appear in the final diagram. On top of this, the analyst has to give due consideration to all the peripheral candidates that need to be evaluated before decisions can be taken about whether or not they should be included.

The wonder is not that so many MQ assessments leave so many vendors feeling disappointed, but that so many MQs win general acceptance as being pretty fair, diligent, and useful assessments of the state of play in particular markets.

To read the full article click here.

Extract courtesy of Simon Levin, MD (Europe) – The Skills Connection

Continue Reading

Gartner publishes MQ FAQ

The Gartner Ombudswoman has just blogged >link< about a new frequently asked questions document on the Gartner Magic Quadrant. Overall it’s really useful and contains many points that AR pros should know.

For instance, did you know the analysts had to raise a business case for every new MQ? This is meant to limit their numbers (there’s been in the past some MQ’s ranking very few vendors for instance) and ensure consistency, but as a potentially it can contribute curb the number of local magic quadrant (i.e. EMEA MQ’s for instance) -so watch this space.

I’ve also added a comment on Marketscopes, what do you think?

Other posts on the subject:

Continue Reading

Gartner details the MQ process

Magic Quadrant ChartFollowing some debate on Quora ( How much does it cost to be included in Gartner Magic Quadrant?,  do make sure you check Nancy Erskine’s answer), Lydia Leong from Gartner did publish a very useful blog post on The process of a Magic Quadrant.

Gartner’s MQ continues to be the source of much debate, mostly since it pits vendors against each others some are bound to be disappointed (a MQ with all vendors in the leaders quadrant won’t probably be of much use to IT buyers).
Gartner has overhauled the process in the last 5 years and made it quite robust now, though the weightings and ratings are still not publicised (a key difference with Forrester’s wave and IDC’s Decision matrixShort List).

No one asked for my opinions, so here they are:

  • it’s better to be in than not, even if in the niche quadrant
  • an MQ is better than a Marketscope (I don’t like rating vendors against a linear scale because it implies you should choose the one to the right)
  • an MQ is still only 2 dimensions (hear below Gideon Gartner on this point)
  • allocate enough time, about 100-120 man hours per MQ on the vendor side
  • make sure you manage your constituents expectations and get their support
  • IIAR members should read @edgyurko’s Best Practice Paper (link below)

Does this help? What is your experience? Do you have any tips?

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7zzl1RM02U]

Related posts:

 

13/1/11 edit: corrected the “IDC MQ” name after Vuk’s comment (below).

Continue Reading

Downfall: Gartner MQ and learnings

Late last week I resurrected a common meme around Hitler’s downfall video but this time applied it to analyst relations.

In the original post, I simply let the parody of the video speak for itself but after reviewing the many comments on the blog and on twitter, I have noticed that quite a few people are commenting about what they can learn from this. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading

Is shooting on the referee productive?

Contentious conversation 1 – integrity of analysts and the future of AR

Bribery illustration in a blog post by Jonny Bentwood for the IIAR website

Blog by Tom Bittman from Gartner: A Rant – My Integrity as an Analyst

Summary: Gartner analyst angry that he has to justify his integrity

My view: Edelman trust barometer consistently shows that over the past few years analysts are the most trusted

Key comments: Vinnie Mirchandani questioning whether Gartner’s reliance on large vendor subscriptions means that their reports are truly representative Continue Reading →

Continue Reading