Archive | IDC

Using a briefing request form to capture information for the sales force

I recently came across another blatant example of an analyst firm misusing the process by which analysts are invited to attend a vendor briefing.

I was looking to set up a briefing with IDC’s Energy Insights. Although the analyst had accepted the briefing, the company still wants me to complete this form. According to the group operations manager: “This is a standard company policy when requesting a briefing with our analysts.”

Now although it’s a pain, I don’t usually have a problem filling in vendor briefing request forms.

For those who aren’t familiar with them, these are normally used to capture information that will help:

  1. the firm ensure that all relevant analysts are aware of the request, and
  2. the analysts decide whether or not to accept a meeting.

But it’s a bit annoying when the analyst firm is using the process to capture information that is obviously more relevant for its sales force than the analysts.

For example, alongside the regular stuff (eg what’s the briefing about, who would it be with, tell us about your company), Energy Insights wants to know:

  • Who is the head of marketing for your company? (Name, title, email, and phone)
  • Who is the head of product marketing for your company? (Name, title, email, and phone)
  • Who is responsible for your company’s strategic planning? (Name, title, email, and phone)
  • Does your company use market research to assist in strategic planning?
  • Does your company currently have any relationships with other market research firms?
  • Would you be interested in learning more about our services in your market area and the benefits of having a relationship with Energy Insights?

Easy enough information to provide – but does an analyst at Energy Insights really need to know this information in order to qualify a meeting? I’d love to know.

Now if it’s for use by the sales force… well, that makes more sense. I can see why an analyst firm thinks it’s a smart idea to capture all this information. Lovely juicy contact data for the new business machine.

But IDC, why not be honest (and obviously honest) about why you want it. Otherwise, this feels a bit slimy and underhand.

Note
I checked the other IDC companies as well:

IDC itself requires a considerable amount of information but you can see that it would all be useful to the analyst team. It’s roughly in line with the information requested by Gartner. Forrester Research (registration required, but it’s free) and Yankee Group.

However, Manufacturing Insights, Financial Insights, Government Insights, Health Industry Insights and Global Retail Insights – well, they all demand the same information as Energy Insights.

Share this...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Pin on Pinterest
Continue Reading

The IIAR Analyst of the Year survey — and the winner is….

image Over the past few months, the IIAR have been running a survey to identify who AR practitioners believe should win the award of ‘analyst of the year’. With over 116 respondents from around the world, the number of firms and individuals that people wanted to recognise was extraordinary (191 different analyst names and 103 separate houses).

For an analyst or their company to have made the top 10 is a truly remarkable achievement and my congratulations go to them. Specifically though a few individuals and companies should be highlighted:

Ray Wang, Principal Analyst with Forrester Research, Inc., is the analyst of the year. Respondents praised his insight, depth of industry knowledge, and independent voice. Runners up for the title were David Mitchell of Ovum and James Governor of RedMonk.

Ray was also named Analyst of the Year for the Americas, while David Mitchell of Ovum was voted the EMEA Analyst of the Year.

Forrester was highly regarded by respondents in all regions, and was voted the Analyst Firm of the Year. It was commended for the strength of its analyst team, the quality of its client services and its ability to spot new trends. Gartner and IDC came second and third, respectively.

Not only have the traditional global analyst firms done well in this year’s survey, but the smaller, boutique consultancies also scored highly. Freeform Dynamics and MWD came in the top five in EMEA with RedMonk in the top three in the Americas, and a number of other firms also received honourable mentions. Respondents liked their honesty, ability to innovate, the quality of their research and use of new media channels.

What came out clearly from the survey was that integrity, independence and market knowledge are the analyst qualities that are most highly valued by AR professionals. It demonstrates very positively how much the IT research industry has matured.

The results below have been split into several segments to reward those whose specialty in niche areas should be recognised.

A full copy of all the results can be downloaded here

  Analyst of the Year 1   Analyst Firm of the Year
1 Ray Wang, Forrester 1 1 Forrester
2 David Mitchell, Ovum 1 2 Gartner
3 James Governor, RedMonk 1 3 IDC
4 Ed Thompson, Gartner 1 4 RedMonk
5 Michael Cote, RedMonk 1 5 AMR
6 Jeffrey Hammond, Forrester 1 6 Freeform Dynamics
7 Dale Vile, Freeform Dynamics 1 7 Ovum
8 Bola Rotibi, Ovum (now MWD) 1 8 MWD
9 Massimo Pezzini, Gartner 1 9 Enterprise Strategy Group
10 Brian Babineau, ESG 1 10 CCS Insight

EMEA Focus:

  EMEA
Analyst of the Year
1 1 EMEA
Analyst Firm of the Year
1 David Mitchell, Ovum   1 Gartner
2 Dale Vile, Freeform Dynamics   2 Forrester
3 Ed Thompson, Gartner   3 Ovum
4 Philip Dawson, Gartner   4 Freeform Dynamics
5 Neil Rickard, Gartner   5 MWD

US Focus:

  US
Analyst of the Year
    US
Analyst Firm of the Year
1 Ray Wang, Forrester   1 Forrester
2 David Mitchell, Ovum   2 Gartner
3 Michael Cote, RedMonk   3 RedMonk
4 Jeffrey Hammond, Forrester   4 Enterprise Strategy Group
5 James Governor, RedMonk   5 AMR

Communications & networking Focus:

  Comms & Networking
Analyst of the Year
    Comms & Networking
Analyst Firm of the Year
1 Neil Rickard, Gartner   1 Forrester
2 Ben Wood, CCS Insight   2 Gartner
3 Nick Jones, Gartner   3 Ovum
4 Zeus Kerravala, Yankee Group   4 IDC
5 Danille Levitas, IDC   5 Yankee Group

Software Focus:

  Software
Analyst of the Year
    Software
Analyst Firm of the Year
1 Ray Wang, Forrester   1 Forrester
2 David Mitchell, Ovum   2 Gartner
3 Ed Thompson, Gartner   3 AMR
4 Jeffrey Hammond, Forrester   4 RedMonk
5 Michael Cote, RedMonk   5 MWD

Services Focus:

  Services
Analyst of the Year
    Services
Analyst Firm of the Year
1 Pascal Matzke, Forrester   1 Forrester
2 Stephanie Moore, Forrester   2 Gartner
3 Paul Roehrig, Forrester   3 IDC
4 Michael von Uechtritz, Gartner   4 Ovum
5 Dane Anderson, Gartner   5 NelsonHall

Importance vs. Relevance: Analyst Firm of the Year:

  Most Relevant
Analyst Firm of the Year
1   Most Important
Analyst Firm of the Year
1 Forrester   1 Gartner
2 IDC   2 Forrester
3 Freeform Dynamics   3 IDC
4 Burton   4 Ovum
5 RedMonk   5 AMR
6 AMR   6 Redmonk
7 Ovum   7 Enterprise Strategy Group
8 MWD   8 Freeform Dynamics
9 451 Group   9 Current Analysis
10 Gartner   10 TowerGroup

EMEA:

  Most Relevant
Analyst Firm of the Year
1   Most Important
Analyst Firm of the Year
1 Gartner   1 Gartner
2 Freeform Dynamics   2 Forrester
3 Forrester   3 Ovum
4 Ovum   4 IDC
5 MWD   5 Freeform Dynamics

US:

  Most Relevant
Analyst Firm of the Year
1   Most Important
Analyst Firm of the Year
1 Forrester   1 Forrester
2 Burton   2 Gartner
3 IDC   3 IDC
4 Ovum   4 RedMonk
5 RedMonk   5 AMR

Commenting on his award, Ray Wang said:

I’m very pleased to receive this distinction. AR professionals represent the critical link between an analyst’s perception and the company’s reality. Because the AR profession is not only a science but also an art, good AR professionals build the relationships from a position of trust which drive the foundation for all interactions. I’m thankful to have worked with so many true professionals.

David Mitchell, ranked first in EMEA commented:

Analyst relations professionals are playing an increasingly important and influential role in the ICT (Information Communication Technology) industry, both when working directly for companies and when working as third party advisors to those customers. As such, it’s a great honour to be recognised by the IIAR.

One of the interesting results from the survey is the distinction made between relevant and important analyst firms. From my perspective it appears that people made the recognised tier 1’s (Gartner, Forrester, IDC) as the most important as they realise that these companies have a strong impact on sales due to their customer base and research viability. However, relevant firms did not necessarily map on to these same firms and the ones ranked most highly tended to have a greater focus on bespoke advice (largely gained through inquiry time).

When we run this survey next year we would be delighted to hear suggestions regarding how this can be improved. For your benefit I have listed below a brief summary of the methodology used.

Methodology

1) Entrants:

This survey was open to anyone who works in analyst relations in any country, either in-house or at an agency/consultancy. In order for someone’s entry to be validated, they had to submit their email address and company name to verify they not an impostor trying to distort the results. This personal information will not be distributed or used beyond sending copies of the results to all participant. The survey was open for specific period of time and IP addresses were taken to ensure that someone could not vote twice.

2) Questions:

The survey specifically focused on an individual’s perception of the analyst world in 2007. All questions were free text to ensure that results could not be biased by presenting a pre-made list of companies or analysts. The result of this was extraordinary with 191 different analyst names being submitted as ‘analyst of the year’ and 103 different firms listed for the ‘analyst house of the year’.

3) Segmentation:

Respondents were asked to specify their submissions based upon geography (US, EMEA, AsiaPac, Global) and segment (Software, Hardware, Services, Communications and Networking). Based upon these criteria further analysis could be made of the results to identify specific regional or segment champions.

If you have any questions or comments about this survey please contact either myself or Hannah Kirkman

Share this...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Pin on Pinterest
Continue Reading

Around Rüdiger Spies from IDC in 9 Questions

R SpiesThe IIAR has started a series of email interviews, where analysts from around the world are presented. We have talked to Rüdiger Spies from IDC . Thanks again fo him for the time he spent to give us some insight about IDC and the industry.

 

 

1. What are your coverage areas?

A) It’s pretty broad – basically Enterprise Applications (ERP, CRM, SCM, DW / BI, etc.) combined with architectures (SOA), integration technologies and related applications (i.e., BPM, workflow, mashups, social computing). As enterprises tend more and more to establish a common platform as their backbone system, integration among the different pieces becomes more weight than pure point to point approaches technologies. Seamless integration and cross system, cross dependent and cross enterprise workflows become paramount to success in multi-enterprise business networks.

B) A second focus area is intellectual property (i.e. patents, trademarks, IP portfolios, licensing). I am working with the patent law firm DHS in Munich, Germany and focus on the high-tech industry.

 

2. What are your opinions of the IT Analysis Marketplace and where do you see it going?

The market has matured and will continue to do so. A number of niche and boutique firms have grown under the price umbrella of the three big players. Computer technologies will continue to need advice at management level, however required skill levels and visible engagement of solid analysts will continue to increase. Lightweight analysis is in many instances already available on the internet. I think also the
requirement to think across technologies, across vendors and across subject area will increase.

 

3. What’s your typical day like?

Well, in the morning I get up, have my tea and start to work. That might be in Munich, Paris, London or in Boston or wherever our services are required.

 

4. Now, c’mon, tell me an AR horror story?

The day before the official analyst conference started the vendor had organized some outdoor activities. Unfortunately, two of my colleagues got seriously hurt during the outdoor activities. That was not a good
start to the conference.

 

5. How do you position your firm? What is your business model?

We are global IT and related industries market and trend watchers with the longest successful track record in the IT analyst market.

 

6. What is your research methodology, in 255 characters or less?

The research is going into many dimensions. There are ongoing market development studies that are based on a globally integrated model.
There are region or country specific studies and there are studies that are developed as part of special interest groups. All quantitative results and qualitative trends are based on primary industry research. In the vertical industries we rely on a team of experienced industry professionals. Overall the approach is structured and consistent – the best results combining a top down and a bottom up approach.

 

7. Tell us about one good AR practice you’ve experienced or one good AR event you’ve attended.

Good events respect the time constraints of analysts and care about travel convenience. Don’t choose strange locations. And the best AR people should work in a similar manner as analyst do. This way vendors are able to coordinate AR work on a global level.

8. What are your offerings and key deliverables?

 

In a nutshell – on one hand everything vendors need to know to make future oriented strategy decisions … and on the other hand everything required to tactically address specific markets. End users get the best insight into trends and mid to longer term developments in the industry that is influencing their ability to operate

9. Do you have any hobbies or favourite restaurants / food that you’d like to share with us?

 

Analysts are in many instances social people, however they still care about their privacy.

Share this...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Pin on Pinterest
Continue Reading

IDG to merge IDC with Gartner?

We have heard today (from three sources) that IDG, the parent of IDC, intends to buy Silver Lake Partners’ share in Gartner and the holdings of CEO Eugene Hall. As part of the deal Neil Bradford, former head of Forrester Americas, and Anthony Parslow, until recently head of Datamonitor, will replace Gene Hall as co-CEOs. Bradford will direct the US business; Parslow (who serves on IDG’s board) will head Gartner’s troubled operations outside the Americas. This is obviously news that will shape the industry – you have seen it first here!

Generally speaking, this isn’t a surprise.

– Silver Lake was, for a long time, the largest shareholder in Gartner. As the firm’s stock price rose it aimed to cash in its gains. Despite a large share buy-back by Gartner, the value of the shares has now fallen. Silver Lake is looking for opportunities to exit. IDG will pay a 7% premium over the current Gartner stock price.

– IDG has a strategic orientation towards expanding its share of the analyst industry. It narrowly lost out to Gartner in bidding for META Group. It sees the possibility for a roll-up spanning different price points across the value chain. IDC’s end-user Insights businesses could gain from the custom-consulting and mid-market work that Gartner cannot do economically. The businesses could also benefit from common base data, as the Datamonitor companies do.

– Gene Hall has revolutionised Gartner, and taken it to a new level. It’s a good time for him to cash in and move on.

However, we are skeptical of claims that IDG will merge IDC and Gartner. There are two strong brands with different positions. The main opportunity in the closer co-operation is for IDG’s non-IDC services to reuse and promote Gartner research, and to use IDG’s events business to rebuild Gartner’s now-sold vision events business.

To see a copy of IDG’s statement, please click here:
http://tinyurl.com/2q9j9y

Share this...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Pin on Pinterest
Continue Reading

IIAR members feel Forrester rise, Bloor falls

Horizontal is external influence (external of the vendors). The vertical percentage is the nett of (percentage of respondents who think the firm is rising in influence - those who think it's falling).

At Thursday’s IIAR forum in London I presented results from a recent survey of vendor-side Analyst Relations managers. It asked how influential they rated certain analyst firms as being, and then whether they are rising of falling in influence.

Credit for the survey belongs to Jonny Bentwood and the others on the IIAR’s survey working party, who selected the firms listed.

The chart above shows the results, after the ‘falling’ percentage’ (for each analyst firm, the percentage of IIAR members surveyed who felt that its influence had fallen) has been subtracted from the rising percentage (thanks to Ludovic for working out how to embed the chart in this post).

For those in the know, the results are not too surprising: Forrester is the big riser, with IDC, Ovum and Yankee all doing well. The big losers are no surprise either: Bloor, Frost and Butler.

But what interests me is the trend line: generally, AR managers fell that the smaller and less influential firms are falling in influence, while the larger firms are generally rising in influence.

This really reinforces my opinion about the smaller analyst firms that trade on free research and internet profile. While their research is certainly worth reading, some vendors’ inflated expectations of 2006 now seem to be turning into sober judgement about where the real influence is building up.

Share this...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Pin on Pinterest
Continue Reading