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 (not so) magic 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 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 moulds 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 →