Captors and hostages?

There's a great discussion here about whether ARmadgeddon is pro-Gartner. Which is quite surprising given some of our comments on the Gene's strategy to deliberately extract more money from IT vendors for less value (read this or that). For instance, we specifically warned vendors and AR mangers against some potential perverse aspects of the role-based research which seeems to us just a repackaging.

However, it is nevertheless true than most AR managers put Borg analysts in their Tier I list -sometimes more because of their appartenance to the Firm than their true value. Tier II and III analysts (and bloggers) such as Vinnie or James argue that they deliver more value and should receive their fair share of attention.

Should research be priced according to freshness?

Anyone having wandered in a supermarket will have noticed a suspect crowd frantically scarmonging for a bargain in their "almost passed the sell by date" corner.

This allows supermarkets to clear out inventory before it starts smelling really bad.

The value of research also diminishes with its freshness, so why not price it the same way?

Gartner seem to already function this way:

Old and irrelevant predictions cost $95,
http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?ref=g_search&id=300882
http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?ref=g_search&id=299534

New and irrelevant ones are priced $195.
http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?ref=g_search&id=500929

Hype is dearer though, at $495!
http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?id=496001

The telco Egghead is on the line for you

Ovum just promoted ex. IDC, Yankee (and Logica) Chris Lews to head up their Telco team:
Ovum appoints Chris Lewis as SVP of Telecoms Research

ARmadgeddon's take: as the telco market has returned to a healthy growth, this looks like a sign of renewed focus for Ovum on this market, after the RHK acquisition two years ago. It remain to be seen however how this will play in the Datamonibores galaxy.

Spam - Eggheads for sale

It's not every day one receives funny spam messages... Not sure whether this is a coded message announcing a mass exodus for the Ovumites?

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "vanessem11@peoplepc.com" <vanessem11@peoplepc.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 3:53:33 AM
Subject: want to sell my ovums


i am either trying to sell or donate my ovum to my mother who needs them or needs the money for the process.. if you could help me please let me know... if not sorry for this message..


Vanessa

AR 101 Series: It pays to play with PR

Sally in Getting Ink (via ARcade) reminds AR pros that we can help our PR colleagues by providing them with analyst names to educate those journos: Things you might like to know (3).

How does it work in practice then?

1. Crawl before you walk
Firstly, this assumes that you have done your homework and know what research area your analysts cover. More importantly, you should know what they have published and have a good idea of what their opinion is on your company and the topic. AR should always be one step ahead of PR and some key analysts should be pre-briefed under NDA.

2. Which analyst?
Ideally a mix of Tier 1's and independent analysts should be pre-briefed. Tier 1's because they advise customers and therefore should a aware of your company's roadmap and strategy. Selected independent analysts should be briefed before, because they are an excellent sounding board and a great manner to get your spokesperson perfectly rehearsed before she/he talks to the Borg. Plus, independent analysts crave for air time and will make themselves available for journos more so than a Tier 1 about to catch a flight to Frankfurt, Boston or San Francisco.
Make sure you don't use always the same ones and that the analysts you put forwards are credible (i.e. they must have some knowledge and opinions, so that rules our Frost & Sullivan, Datamonitor, some IDC folks, etc...)

3. Which deliverables?
There are a few ways to help your PR colleague, depending on your bandwidth (of if you fancy him/her). All should be free (except villains), some require permission.

• Provide names of analysts willing to comment. Easy but make sure you call the analyst and that he/she is available for comments.
• Provide a quote for the press pack. Brief the analyst and ask for a quote by email (best to avoid mis-representation). Doctoring the quote is a no-no but you did not even think about doing this.
• Provide a quote into the press release. This requires authorisation: figure out what the analyst FIRM position is, ask for the quote, submit the release with the quote for approval (IDC, Gartner, AMR, Forrester have a formal process, it's also good practice with the others). Make sure you run the release with legal (your PR colleagues should take care of this). For IDC, you need to work out which market number will support your claim and quote the source. In the footnotes, direct the journos to the analyst firm's press office.

4. Create the news

You can also commission a survey or a report to a firm and create a complete press release around it. This requires months, not days, but can generate significant coverage. Make sure you know who's paying upfront...

4. Beware

Don't be eaten alive by the PR vampires: they have a tendency to suck your time and make you work in reactive mode only.

Related posts:

• Is PR a dwarf planet?
• Pay to play, the PR way
• Selling the value of AR
• Note to PR agencies: stop spamming analysts! (and just everyone else)
• AR 101: Analysts and press quotes
• Frost demands cash for press release
• Talking heads
• Gartner's Copyright and Quote Policy: it's just stupid
• AR 101 series: Analyst vs. press (Analyst Insight)

What's that over the hill, is it a blogger?

Hardly a surprise but Jonny has it official now: Redmonk are kings of the analyst bloggers.

The larger firms are quite low down the list, with the Borg coming at the 41st place but Jupiter and Forrester are quite well represented. It looks like the blogs are the de facto platform for open source research. Is it the birth of a new kind of influence?

Why doesn't everyone do open source?

Jonny is wondering why not all firms are switching an open source model:
In praise of open source analysis [Technobabble]

The answer is simple: it takes more time to make money (check this IDC report). Which is an issue if you have to bear costs associated with producing the research -like interviewing customers or channel partners, paying spreasheet jockeys junior analysts, not to forget a decent (or indecent for some Borg Prima Donnas), etc...
Open source on the other hand is both sustainable and convenient if you're an independent analyst doing business mostly with IT vendors: Redmonk, MWD, FreeformDynamics and others seem to be doing well after all...

See our comments on Jonny's post.

AR Classics: Priming the Analysts With Targeted Messages

This article by Bill Hopkins appeared in the Software Marketing Journal in 1998, just after he had joined KCG from Smart Technologies, a developer of Web-based applications. Before Smart, Hopkins launched and served as research director for the Gartner Group's marketing knowledge and technology service.

In you walk, a software vendor with a hot new product, four days into a two-week, five-city product launch press and analyst tour. In your battered Targus bag resides the collateral you have sweated over for the last six months, with the new company mantra, ink still drying, plastered across the front. You have a color notebook with The Demo carefully loaded and primed. Despite the fact that you have the hopes, dreams, and aspirations of an entire company on your shoulders, you are relaxed and confident. This presentation will be a breeze because you know it will strike a chord with the analyst you
are meeting, and more likely than not, that person will be receptive to your new product.
Magic? Not really; it's just a matter of doing your homework.

Using analyst input on product development and launches is one of the most powerful
tools marketers have at their disposal. Business software is unique in the high-tech
marketplace in the number, power, and influence of industry analysts. They know the
market at large and what the competition is doing. They set the direction of the existing
market and mandate the creation of new ones. And, because potential customers and the
press look to analysts for validation of new products, analysts can make or break a
launch.

The hard part is figuring out how to build a relationship with them. Most analyst firms
exist to inform potential purchasers of technology about its strengths and weaknesses, not
to help vendors with their marketing efforts. Even if a nonclient vendor can get in the
door, the analyst has no obligation to provide information or answer a single question.
Still, by approaching the right analysts in the right manner, with proper positioning and
meticulous preparation, marketers can get the input they need to ensure a well-received
product launch.

Finding a Sympathetic Ear
The first step is targeting the analysts that are most likely to be interested in your new
company or offering. The larger the analyst firm, the more likely it will have multiple
analysts covering the same broad markets. In particular, integrated or cross-functional
products are far more likely to span across multiple analysts, and in some cases, multiple
services, than those that fit neatly in a particular niche. Most enterprise applications, by
definition, have their own processes, structure, and rules that are unlikely to align with
most analyst firms' product categories. To find the right analyst or firm, focus on whether
their research and presentations are relevant to your message and positioning and, at least
for starters, go after the ones that will take less evangelizing and education to support
what you're doing. And if your company isn't new, find out which analysts have covered
it in the past and what they've had to say.

In most cases, the time to start this process is before or during the product development
stage. While many software companies wait until launch time or just before, it's
impossible to build a successful product without knowing what constitutes success for
that product category. Most analysts have published their criteria for a successful product
in the market areas they cover. If they have not, ask them; they will usually be forthright
in giving their assessment of what constitutes a winning product. Some product managers
use analysts as almost an extension of their staff, involving them from day one on
virtually all aspects of their product's development.

While many marketers position their products as new or part of a new category, use
caution in taking this approach. Unless you have truly happened upon a miracle, the new
product or category is probably a niche, offshoot, or branch of an existing one. Make sure
that the initial contacts and briefings position the product or category by highlighting
where it is similar and complementary to ones that already exist. Better yet, couch the
new ideas or products within the context of the analysts' current research. Analysts can
help build critical mass for a new category, not only by adopting it as their own, but by
allowing it to exist within the framework of a market they have already defined. A new
category is successful only when the rest of the marketplace--including analysts, the
press, competitors, partners, and user organizations--has adopted it.

Develop a value proposition that is tailored to each analyst you plan to see. Despite the
time and resources it involves, it's perfectly conceivable to have a separate and distinct
value proposition and presentation that fits the issues of every analyst you have targeted.
The worst thing a marketer can do is deliver the exact same presentation to each analyst.
The chances of coming up with a "least common denominator" story that will make sense
to each analyst are practically zero.

The Pitch
Determining how much time and effort to expend on getting analyst feedback before the
launch depends on how unique the product is and whether it satisfies a new target market.
If it is a completely new product or in a new category, analyst input should be a top
priority.

If the launch is for an upgrade or version release, such feedback is somewhat less
important. Any analyst presentations should focus on the additions and changes that are
truly newsworthy and not just enhancements for current users, unless the modifications
address an issue that the analyst community considers a huge problem and wants to see
fixed. If the release doesn't contain such significant modifications, it may be best to
instead dedicate resources to educating the installed base at launch time.

That said, don't wait until the launch to conduct analyst briefings. One or two months
prior to launch is time to revisit the analysts who were involved in the development
process. First, this is an opportunity to present the fruits of the company's labor and gain
valuable insights on how well its marketing is working. Most analysts will be more than
happy to give constructive criticism not only of the product, but also of the marketer's
presentation and delivery. Second, if you have an established relationship with an analyst,
or if he or she has covered you in the past, the analyst may actually feel blindsided if not
given a prelaunch preview.

The prelaunch presentation should be as short and succinct as possible. The best ones
contain fewer than 10 slides and very little hype. Don't spend more than two minutes or
two slides of a presentation on the marketplace. Even if you think your market is new or
you are defining it, resist the urge to make it the focus of your presentation. Most analysts
probably know the particulars better than you do.

Orient the presentation toward clearly stating the business case for the product first, then
explaining the technology that makes it possible. Stick with a brief overview of the
company that includes size; number of employees by function; and financial stats such as
revenue, profits, and future plans. Follow with an explanation of the value proposition
and provide a brief product and architecture overview. Wrap it up with compelling case
studies and always include beta customer references.

The goal is to engage the analysts and entice them to ask questions about the company
and product. Be aware that vendors are seldom allowed to get past the third or fourth
page of their presentations before an analyst has them off on a tangent. Don't stray too
far. Most analysts will respect marketers who politely answer their divergent questions
and then hurry back to the main point. And don't blatantly disagree without conceding
their point first. A simple "That's true, but..." works far better than "No, that's not the
way we see it."

Going Public
At the time of the launch, when most vendors conduct the traditional briefing tour, be
sure to include all of the analysts involved in the prelaunch phase as well as any others
that cover the product area. Now is the perfect time to invite analysts you've worked with
to include other analysts from their firm that they think may be interested. For a general
briefing, the more analysts present, the better.

Unlike the prelaunch presentation, general briefings should be standardized and fixed. In
this phase of the launch, consistency is paramount: each analyst being briefed should be
getting the same message. Always include as many stories as possible from customers
and beta users. Most analysts will question the validity of a product launch if the vendor
doesn't or can't talk about somebody who is actually using the product.

Be prepared to give a short, concise demonstration that highlights and showcases new
features and competitive advantages of the product with a compelling business metaphor.

But do not bring it out of the bag unless invited. Most analysts--and members of the
press, for that matter--really have no interest in seeing a product demo, especially if the
vendor has done a good job outlining why their clients or readers would care about it.

Follow-up is probably the most overlooked part of the briefing process. Most marketers
get too busy in the months following a launch to check whether the message stuck. But
after spending countless hours and thousands of dollars in preparing analysts and the
press for a launch--anywhere from $10,000 for a very small one to $100,000 for a
category launch--it makes sense to follow up on a regular basis. Postlaunch contact
provides an opportunity to reinforce main points, present additional success stories and
case studies, and share the results of the launch, quantitatively if possible. A successful
follow-up program should ideally lead right into the next product cycle. Always
remember, what you are sustaining is a long-term relationship, not just a product
launch.

Sidebar: Paying the Piper: Why, When, and Which Firm to Retain

Sooner or later, the question arises. Should we retain one or more of the analyst firms,
and if so, which one? Vendors come up with all kinds of reasons to become or not
become a customer of one of the analyst firms. Most of their fears boil down to one
simple misconception: "If I don't become a customer, there is no chance they will write
about us."

Plenty of vendors who do not purchase subscriptions get more than adequate coverage
by the analysts. Conversely, purchasing a subscription is no guarantee of exposure.
Becoming a customer opens up more opportunity to engage the analyst and gain
exposure, but I have personally felt the sting of spending $20,000 to retain one of these
firms and then sitting by for the entire year, waiting for the research to flow.

The top tier of analyst firms-- AMR, Forrester Research, the Gartner Group, and the
Meta Group--generally write about topics based on inquiry volume on the subject,
market importance, exposure to the topic, and gut feel. Note that with the exception of
inquiry volume, these criteria are qualitative, not quantitative.

A subscription to one of the top-tier analyst firms has two practical benefits. The first is
timely, regular, and accurate research on the market and competitors. The second is the
license to engage analysts in two-way communication. Not only do they have to listen to
what clients have to say, but clients have the contractual right to ask them questions as
well. The number and scope of the questions is usually regulated by contract, but almost
all have some form of inquiry built in. For nonclient vendors, analysts are only obligated
to sit and listen--provided that those vendors pass their tests for topic relevance. Analysts
are under no obligation to pass along information or spend much time answering
questions.

When choosing a firm to work with, remember that though their influence may arguably
be similar, their methodologies and modus operandi vary greatly. When initiating full
coverage of a new vendor, the Gartner Group, for example, will typically produce two
notes of two pages each. The first is a company note detailing the overall organization;
business model; sales, service and support capabilities; and prognosis on future growth,
strengths, and weaknesses. The second is a product note that outlines the physical
makeup of the product, its architecture and how it works, strengths and weaknesses, and
recommendations about what types of organizations (if any) should consider purchasing
it.

Other firms such as Forrester or Meta usually speak about specific organizations within
the context of a broader market piece or "technology watch." Depending on the nature of
your product and what you are trying to accomplish, one method may be more in line
with your goals than another.

The bottom line on retaining an analyst firm: Retain it for its research, for establishing a
dialogue, and for ensuring a more successful product launch by having better intelligence
on the market and competitors--not because you think it will influence their mentioning
or writing about your company or products.

Sampling issues

When peddling their wares to analysts, vendors are often opposed an apparently unbeatable argument: the number of inquiries from users. We have seen Borg analysts using it in different ways, one being the small number of customer calls equates a slow of market acceptance.

There is apparently no come back -it's the A-bomb: Gartner is right because it has insight from its end-user client base.

However, this is somewhat simplistic and AR professionals should challenge analysts to explore the following avenues:

• Customers can be calling for a number of reasons but more often than not when they have an issue. No problems, no calls. This means RAS analysts don't tend to hear from satisfied customers and may thus develop a tendency to paint a picture darker than reality.
• The issues customers are calling about may be different than the analyst's assumptions, for instance they may be confused rather than not buying at all.
• Finally Gartner's users customer base may be very different from a given vendor -they are less represented in SME's and Southern Europe for instance.

The Borg recedes in Oz and turns into high-tech sausage factory

Duncan indicates here that Gartner is shutting down its consulting division in Asia Pacific.

This is after all little surprise, given the lack of focus (and understanding) shown by the Borg has shown for consulting (see links below). Consulting is lower margins and less repeatable than RAS (Research and Advisory Services) which can be produced once and sold many times. However, consulting was the fastest growing P&L item at META Group... Gartner's recent strategy is all about milking customers by increasing repeat business (hence the focus on customer satisfaction to drive up renewals) and creating "silo products" to sell the same research to users having different roles within a same corporate client. Call that milking or turning analysts into sausage factory workers.

What is odd is this quote found in one of the articles linked by good old Dunc:
"A Gartner Australia spokesperson said the closure of the consulting division was based on the company's lack of resources in a market littered by hundreds of competitors, including; Accenture, and IBM Global Services." (from Axe falls on Gartner's consulting division, Computerworld)

It is curious indeed to see what business they think they are in.


Links:

• Sweepstake opens: when will Gartner Consulting go?
• Gartner rediscovers price benchmarking
• Does size implies relevance?
• Gartner ≠ Consulting ?
• Gartner as a consulting business?
• Revealed: why Gartner took over META!!!

Will Informa compete with Gartner, or IDC?

The AR grapevine is red hot today. As ARcade explains in this post, Informa has bought Datamonitor for $1 billion. Dominic says the new firm will be larger than Forrester, but smaller than Gartner and IDC.

If, like me, you're not familiar with Informa, that's probably because its an English firm that's big in telecoms and media. It seems to be a research and events business with little - if any - advisory, consulting and community services. It's like the IDC business model, but on Yankee Group's beat.

Giving the timing of the deal, most of the comment on the purchase has been made in the UK, by technobabble, Analyst Equity and the Financial Times.

We're getting a lot of email in from readers to give us their take -- please join the crowd and tell us what you think. At first glance, it's not clear to our readers that the deal is mainly, or even partly, driven by the need to challenge Gartner. Datamonitor and Informa are both broader than technology, and Informa will mainly be interested in ways it can get some quick wins by extending into non-tech market segments.

Brought together, the tech and telecoms businesses now inside the Informa group look more like a competitor to IDC than to any other firm.

Let us know what you think. As always, email comments will be kept confidential.

Tony Friscia moves into analyst relations?

Jigsaw, the online business directory, now lists AMR Research founder Tony Friscia as working at Knowledge Capital Group.

He's busy. Yesterday Tony was elected onto the override study committee for the Brookline school system, which educates his girls. We think he could so the same job for KCG, but would he be comfortable west of the Hudson?

Analysts need to demonstrate their smarts and relevance to the right vendor community, by Carter Lusher

Carter has made a series of of comments on one of our posts. We think they deserve higher profile so, without his permission, we are posting each of them as a post in order to separate the themes and promote more discussion.

Most analysts assume that everybody knows how smart and influential they are. Sorry, but that is dead wrong. Then the analyst gets angry, stamps his or her foot and yells about how smart and influential they are. Wrong again. Merely saying you are smart and influential proves nothing. Just like a vendor saying that it is the leader in a market means nothing unless they have something to prove that statement.

BTW, Gartner analysts fall into this trap as well. Just because they work at Gartner does not mean that AR, MI, CI or executive will believe that every Gartner analyst is smart and relevant.

Analysts, from single practitioners to the largest firms, need to develop appropriate proof points to demonstrate their smarts and relevance.

Roles of the Analyst – Market/Sales Influencers, Decision Support, Smart Advisors, Sales Support, by Cartner Lusher

Carter has made a series of of comments on one of our posts. We think they deserve higher profile so, without his permission, we are posting each of them as a post in order to separate the themes and promote more discussion.

A common misunderstanding that I deal with is that many boutique firms and single practitioners do not know that there are multiple communities with my company that interact with the analysts for different reasons. These analysts often assume that AR handles all the roles and get angry because they assume that because AR won’t brief them, then they cannot sell their services to that vendor. Wrong. The analyst is simply talking to the wrong vendor employee. While the communities different from one vendor to another, here is a high level description that works in many circumstances:

Analyst relations (AR) – Educates analysts who influence sales deals on the vendor’s capabilities so the analysts can appropriate position the vendor to IT managers with budgets.

Market intelligence (MI) – Buys syndicated market research and commissions primary research projects for decision support purposes. Often MI is mainly interested in market share numbers.

Executives – Execs will often have contracts with smart people whose opinion they respect to use as a sounding board. Sometimes these are analysts/consultants who were formerly at large firms and then left. Just because they left their prior firm does not mean the analyst got dumb, but often their market influence drops dramatically so they are not relevant to AR, but that does not mean that an executive does not appreciate the advice.

Competitive Intelligence (CI) – Group that provides information to the sales force about the competitors’ products and assists with request for proposal responses.

Bottom line is that the analyst needs to understand how each vendor is set up and then target the appropriate community. Merely yelling at AR because they won’t buy your services might be a waste of time if MI is the one who owns the budget.

Tiering versus Ranking, by Carter Lusher

Carter has made a series of of comments on one of our posts. We think they deserve higher profile so, without his permission, we are posting each of them as a post in order to separate the themes and promote more discussion.

Because there is no generally accepted definition of what “tier” means in the context of the analyst industry, let me offer some points to get the discussion started.

An analyst list is ranked based on relevance to what the vendor is trying to accomplish and tiered based on AR resources.

“Trying to Accomplish” – Hopefully the AR group is aligned with the vendor’s corporate strategy and marketing goals, which will in part indicate which analysts are relevant. When the corporate strategy or marketing goals change, then this impacts which analysts are relevant.

“Ranking” – Can be based on all or in part on how directly the analyst covers a market or topic, size of client base, overlap of the analyst’s client base with the vendor’s customer or prospect bases, visibility in the press or new media, public events she speaks at, demonstrated impact on sales deals and so on. Ranking criteria are subject to change over time.

“Tiered based on AR resources” – This is the tricky one and often not addressed. Not every vendor has sufficiently invested in AR staff to handle all analysts that want attention. As a consequence, the AR team has to focus on those analysts that they have the resources to provide appropriate support to. If one spreads the peanut butter too thin, then nothing is accomplished. This is no different than segmenting the customer base to provide dedicated sales teams to strategic accounts, while others customers share the same sales rep and yet other customers are supported by a telesales call center. There are only so many resources to spread around.

Example: In market A, there are 50 analysts that truly cover the market. The vendor’s AR team has ranked the analysts 1 through 50 based on the relevance of the analysts. Because the AR team consists of a single individual, the number of tier 1 analysts is 10. The vendor decides to hire another AR professional – doubling the team – leading to a doubling of tier 1 analysts. It is not that analysts 11 to 20 on the list suddenly got smarter or more influential, but that the vendor now how more resources to reach out to more analysts.

- - -
Because most blogging software is really not set up to handle threads within a series of comments on a single post, I am putting “Topic” categories at the top of my comments as kludge. Perhaps ARmadgeddon can break some of these out as separate posts to make it easier to have a thread.

BTW, I am not hiding behind “Anonymous” and if anybody wishes to get in touch with me to debate this offline, I am more than happy to take your phone call. BTW, I expect to get flamed by “Anonymous,” so be it.

Which are the first-tier global analyst firms?

It's great to start the week with a laugh, especially after spring break, so thanks to the reader who sent us a link to http://www.canalys.com/pr/2007/p2007041.htm.

In that piece of startling modesty, Canalys (who?) announced that it is "recognized as a first-tier global analyst firm." With revenues of $5.6m, almost exactly Gartner's spending on office plants, we think the first-tier firms have nothing to fear. Canalys has revenue of $200K per analyst/consultant, so it is still a little short of Gartner's $880K.

AR 101 Series: John Lyotier on scheduling analyst briefings

John Lyotier, marketing manager at Marqui, wrote this post on its blog back in 2005.
We like it so much, we thought we'd give it a wider audience. Thanks John!
==============================================================

For the last week or so I've been busily making arrangements for Marqui to speak with industry analysts from a number of well known groups, such as AMR Research, Gartner, IDC, etc. Now, many companies are under the impression that the only way to get any attention from such firms is to pay them.

This is absolutely incorrect.

Granted, it may be easier to get multiple meetings if you are a paying client (it's part of the service after all), but all of the reputable firms will take at least 1-2 briefings without charging a dime -- in fact, most of them accept briefings on a yearly basis from non-paying companies.

The exact process varies depending on the firm but typically companies will be asked to submit some basic information via e-mail or an online form. This usually includes:

• A brief company overview, including employee headcount, headquarters address, etc.
• The objective for the meeting (e.g., is it for a general introduction or perhaps a product update)
• A list of company representatives planning to attend the meeting
• The names of the analyst(s) you'd prefer to meet with (NOTE: the process will move much faster if you have researched and correctly identified 1-2 relevant analysts. Most groups post analyst bios and a list of recent reports on their web sites so it shouldn't be too difficult to find this information.)
• A few dates and times for a meeting

The process takes anywhere from 48 hours to 2-3 weeks so I'd highly recommend starting a month in advance if you are trying to arrange briefings around a major corporate or product launch.

In terms of how to get things started with some of the biggies:

• For Gartner, send an e-mail to vendor.briefings@gartner.com. Within 24 hours, you'll receive a briefing request form to complete and send back.
• For AMR Research, click here and fill out the form.
• For Forrester, click here and fill out the form.
• For IDC, click here and fill out the form (NOTE: The form varies depending on whether or not your company has briefed IDC in the last 12 months, so be sure to follow the directions.)

If you've worked with a particular group before or have a PR agency (or analyst relations firm) that has, you might be able to bypass all of the forms by sending an e-mail directly to the appropriate analyst. However, given how many e-mails and briefing requests these folks receive it might actually be faster to go through the formal process.

AR Classics: Analyst Upheaval: What to Do About It

Four years ago, former Giga vice-president Gay Slesinger wrote this guidance about how to deal with analyst depatures. Since Gay wrote this she shuttered her business iMarket Strategies. We'd love to know what happened to her.

=====

"Are you there? Please be there," Analyst Relations pros must think every time they contact the key industry analysts in their segment.

No wonder, given the upheaval in the IT industry over the past three years. The IT analysis firms suffered as well, with declining revenues and customer bases, leading to acquisitions, layoffs and closures.

Not helping the fear of here-today-gone-tomorrow was Gartner's December 5 announcement that it is laying off 200 workers, or 5 percent of its 3,800-person global work force.

Many analysts, including senior and "star" analysts, have left their firms proactively or due to layoffs, often forming small boutique firms that focus on a technology or a vertical industry, or going solo as analyst relations consultants or subject matter experts. This trend contributes to a significant rise in the number of ex-analysts and firms in the market.

According to Norma LaRosa, CEO of the Kensington Group, Inc., there are approximately 20,000 IT analysts worldwide. Kensington tracks 450 firms, more than double the number just two years ago.

The good news for vendors is that there is much more expertise available for a variety of prices, although the bad news lies in determining which analysts to focus on for Analyst Relations.

The key is influence. Some analysts who exit major firms continue to be influential with their long-standing IT customers. For this reason, although many vendors keep their subscriptions to the major analyst firms, they also contract with the individual or boutique analysts for feedback and the impact of their influence.

But for any analyst who leaves a firm, only time will tell if that person will continue to have influence with IT customers, or if their former colleagues or competitors will fill that role. The analysts who remain at firms when others depart may find that they now cover more vendors, answer to more clients and are responsible for a wider scope of technologies, covering additional topics beyond their core expertise.

So what is an AR pro to do in this environment? Some recommendations:

1. •Don't just talk with the star analysts at a firm; include their lesser known colleagues within the same subject matter area. They may be "A" players soon.
2. •Develop a program for bringing new or junior analysts up-to-speed on your company and products as soon as possible. Ask the analysts what information they want to receive and how they want to receive it. Ask what reports the analysts are working on and provide relevant information.
3. •Remember that AR is a relationship business, not just a marketing program. The analysts' value goes beyond the data they analyze and the trends they spot - it's also the people they know and what they say to them. What analysts literally say to their customers one-on-one can be more important to an IT purchase than what they write in reports to their subscribers as a group. Similarly, the quality of the relationship you build with analysts can be more important than the data you share.
4. •Prepare your AR staff and briefing team, especially senior executives, for the fact that they may be dealing with someone less experienced and less knowledgeable about your company than in the past.
5. •Consider using the services of independent analysts or boutique firms, especially if your company or budget is small. If an analyst had a stellar reputation among customers while at a larger firm, the individual may continue to have sway. Regardless, these analysts can still provide vendors with valuable analysis and feedback.
6. •If you use independent or boutique analyst firms, monitor their influence with your IT customers and prospects. Ask buyers which analysts influence their purchase decisions - their answers may change over time. Notice which analysts continue to have influence or impact when they are no longer part of their former firms' brand. Are the analysts still in touch with vendors? With IT customers? Can they add value to your AR program? To your product development, market research and marketing?
7. •If you are a customer of analyst firms, monitor the quality and frequency of the reports that cover the technology segments and vendors you are interested in reviewing, as an end-user consumer of research and as a marketer of products. As a customer, you have a right to make requests for better, broader or deeper research.
8. •Negotiate for better rates as a customer, especially if you are dissatisfied with the quality of the reports or the exit of key analysts. Analyst firms need the revenue. It's cheaper for them to keep you as a customer than to replace you.
9. •Remember that although the firms and the people change, your AR purpose remains the same: positive influence.

Is DST really the top tech issue?

Is it just me?

Gartner's website is leading on the impact of Daylight Saving Time. Three of Gartner's vice-presidents have united to tell us that "While not on the scale of Y2K, this change could generate problems that modestly disrupt business operations, irritate customers and tarnish professional reputations."

By the time this news reached Gartner's PR team, the modest disruption seems to have grown. "Imminent Changes to US Daylight Saving Time Will Have Global Business Implications", said the firm. Readers outside the US should know that DST has been extended by four weeks here. This takes some software applications off the calendar they would have expected prior to 2005.

We accept that Gartner's research need not be at the leading edge because it focusses on the needs of big businesses. However, we have two concerns. First, if they want to get out of the CIO niche then leading with this kind of story looks really odd. They look super-geeky: almost as bad as IDC. Second, we just don't think it's that important. If even Gartner says it will have a smaller impact than Y2K, then who will even notice?

[CIO mind] Analyst reports: How to read them?

In this post (Analyst reports: How to read them) Felix addresses the basic rules of reading research: check who wrote it and do your homework.

We would add:

Understand the business model of the analyst firm (is it vendor facing or do their revenues come from end-users?)

Check if the report sponsored

Have a look at the methodology, and in particular at the sample size and distribution (did the analyst interview 5 clients in Cincinatti or did they survey 120 firms distributed in EMEA with a fair split by industry?)

But more importantly, is the analyst riding the hype wave (like Yankee in the old days) or do they provide actionable advice?

Special mention for market shares: whereas numbers are generally very accurate on a WW or EMEA basis, regardless of the technology. However, requesting 2 or 3 dimensional cuts from the data cube (for instance market shares for Managed Services in Denmark and Retail Banking) is asking for trouble. Do NOT EVER EVER base compensation on market share without having a discussion with the analyst on the statistical confidence interval.

ARmadgeddon's takes:

The huge variability in research quality hides a constant improvement: analysts are getting better at cutting the hype and providing meaningful actionable recommendations for users. The downside is that research notes have become a bit less entertaining.

Don't read research naively as if it was excerpts from a holy book. Dissect, reflect and question.

Read also:

• AR 101: the research process
• AR Classics: Don't Let Yourself be Misled by Analyst Bias
• 79.7% of all Gartner RAS statistics are made up
• More on Analysts’ Data Sample Size
• Why Gartner and Forrester will NOT be Disintermediated