Friday, 10 March 2006

Analysts can be annoying when their written words contradict what they tell vendors in meetings

Sometimes analysts annoy vendors by praising the vendor during a face-to-face briefing – or a paid on-site consulting day – but then criticizing the vendor or its products in published research. Rather than trying to please the vendor while in person, it would be much better to be honest at all times.

What appears to be a related issue but is actually quite different is when the analysts tell the vendors’ customers or prospect something that goes against published research. Sometimes it's because a US analyst is advising a European customer or it often happens that a consultant who has no clue advises end-users. Another cause of this phenomenon is when the analyst is applying the research to the end-user client’s specific situation, which might be different from the assumptions that underlie the published research. For this situation, vendors have to be careful to peel the onion and understand what is actually causing the apparent contradiction between verbal and written research.

1 comment:

alan pelz-sharpe said...

Often in my experience its just inexperience on the analyst behalf. The reality as we all know is that the bulk of analysts today have little real experience outside of college, a couple of years in an IT shop (if that) and the closeted world of industry analysis.

The older more experienced analysts enjoy the frank the discussion between analyst and vendor (sometimes enjoy it a bit too much), but a lot of analyst today simply don't have the skills to counter or deal with a slick product/marketing or sales person.

So they go along with everything, leave smiling then sting the vendor in writing.

I found untangalling these situations very difficult, and in some cases trust was permanently this situation sympathy is all with the vendor.