Who analyzes the analysts?
There’s a new blog to discuss analysts - analystanalyst. Immediately I like its tone: thought-provoking, humble, discursive.
Its key purpose is to “analyse the analysts.” You might assume that this was already being done by the AR firms: Lighthouse, Tekrati, Tiger Lily, KnowledgeCapital, SageCircle, and so on. I’m guessing the IIAR has some role in analysing the space too.
So is there a point to the blog? Indeed there is. Firstly it aims to hold to account analysts and their predictions/advice. All of the AR firms and in-house practitioners position analysts as essential. They are all pro-analyst. They all position analysts as key influencers, often generalising influence based on the firm analysts work for rather than their individual influence.
This, I believe, distorts the role and reliability of analysts. As analystanalyst says, “no-one analyses or compares (analysts) or holds them to their word, rather we just keep on paying them the money…”
Do I detect a degree of resentment in this statement? Why do “we just keep on paying them the money…”?
Analystanalyst is an anonymous blog (which is a pity, as this diminishes its credibility) but I’m going to guess that the author works for a vendor. This guess is based on the blog description stating that the author “comes into contact with analysts everyday, and more importantly with people who think what analysts say is gospel.” Most end-users don’t encounter analysts everyday.
So here’s a question: what would happen to your organisation if you didn’t pay the money? What’s the bottom line impact of cancelling your Gartner subscription?
One answer is that you’d lose the deep insight that analysts provide into market dynamics. Many (most?) vendors buy analyst research for market data, for strategic insight and for competitive analysis.
But how many of these firms justify the spend by claiming that analysts are influential on end-users?
So welcome, analystanalyst, whoever you are. You’re asking some tough but important questions.
Its key purpose is to “analyse the analysts.” You might assume that this was already being done by the AR firms: Lighthouse, Tekrati, Tiger Lily, KnowledgeCapital, SageCircle, and so on. I’m guessing the IIAR has some role in analysing the space too.
So is there a point to the blog? Indeed there is. Firstly it aims to hold to account analysts and their predictions/advice. All of the AR firms and in-house practitioners position analysts as essential. They are all pro-analyst. They all position analysts as key influencers, often generalising influence based on the firm analysts work for rather than their individual influence.
This, I believe, distorts the role and reliability of analysts. As analystanalyst says, “no-one analyses or compares (analysts) or holds them to their word, rather we just keep on paying them the money…”
Do I detect a degree of resentment in this statement? Why do “we just keep on paying them the money…”?
Analystanalyst is an anonymous blog (which is a pity, as this diminishes its credibility) but I’m going to guess that the author works for a vendor. This guess is based on the blog description stating that the author “comes into contact with analysts everyday, and more importantly with people who think what analysts say is gospel.” Most end-users don’t encounter analysts everyday.
So here’s a question: what would happen to your organisation if you didn’t pay the money? What’s the bottom line impact of cancelling your Gartner subscription?
One answer is that you’d lose the deep insight that analysts provide into market dynamics. Many (most?) vendors buy analyst research for market data, for strategic insight and for competitive analysis.
But how many of these firms justify the spend by claiming that analysts are influential on end-users?
So welcome, analystanalyst, whoever you are. You’re asking some tough but important questions.
Labels: analystanalyst
posted by Duncan Brown at 10:48 am
4 Comments:
Thanks for picking up on me Duncan! Pleased that you 'get' what I am doing.
I have answered some of your questions here: http://analystanalyst.wordpress.com/2008/05/15/thanks-duncan/
Thanks for flagging this up Duncan it looks to be a thought-provoking blog. Analyzing the analysts is definitely an important topic and the reason that we set up ATA Research so its good to see discussion on what is or isnt useful
I'm disappointed that you are so quick to commend a new anon blogger as a viable source of analysis on the analysts while in the same breath, you discount years of comparative analysis performed by a group of professionals as thoroughly skewed and biased.
So, you think I'm an analyst sockpuppet. That whatever I say is untrustworthy, because I'm inherently biased as "pro analyst."
What is the basis of your opinion about me and the work I've done since starting Tekrati in 2000?
And what sort of standards do you hold yourself to, in identifying a market influencer?
Because in this post, you have certainly identified this anon blogger as the most important -- as well as the most independent -- of any who blog and consult and evaluate the industry analyst community.
Hi Barbara,
I think what I’m trying to say, perhaps in clumsy words, is that we need a bit of balance. I actually think that AR firms such as Tekrati do a good job of educating vendors in how to deal with analysts. It’s just that this analyst focus draws attention away from other sources of influence. I don’t blame the AR firms for this – clearly there is a demand for their services – it’s a fact of where we are.
I don’t think you or any of the AR firms are “untrustworthy.” You are what you say you are – analyst relations. My point is, AR firms have an interest in maintaining the perceived importance of analysts. You could equally argue that I have an interest in disrupting this status quo.
You also mention “comparative analysis” performed by the AR community. It’s useful to compare analyst firms, but how about comparison between other influencer types. What if the most influential person in a market isn’t an analyst?
I doubt whether my comments identify the most important or independent commentator on industry analysts. As I say, it’s a pity that the blog is anonymous as this undermines its credibility. But I haven’t seen much in the way of robust criticism of analysts (other than, maybe, Armageddon) but do point me to such sources.
Whether my initial analysis of the value and contribution of analystanalyst bears scrutiny over time remains to be seen. It won’t be the first time I’ll have eaten my words.
Thanks for the comment.
Post a Comment
<< Home