just as important<\/em> for getting a decent score as, say, providing relevant and timely information.<\/p>\nWhile this isn\u2019t true for many analysts \u2013 we can infer, given the provenance of Levin and his compatriots, that Gartner analysts are perhaps more willing to boost scores if they have a good relationship with the vendor. Isn\u2019t this knocking the value of objective assessment<\/em> somewhat?\u00a0 I\u2019m sorry Simon, but most analysts do this job because they actually value their ability to be objective.\u00a0 While one analyst firm obsesses with incentivizing its analysts with P&L responsibilities, most separate their analysts from the direct revenue impact of license reprints. Having a good relationship never hurt anyone with any business engagement, but a decent ethical analyst is never dissuaded by a decent steak (or vegan) dinner. Which moves us neatly on to our next puddle of misguidedness…<\/p>\nMisguided principle 2: Fresh perspectives are bad \u2013 the game is about controlling stale opinions, not embracing new insight<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\nThis is a big one, and it slithers through Simon\u2019s blog as a core theme \u2013 the only stakeholder worth thinking about is the vendor. What\u2019s misguided here, though, is the prospect that a fresh analyst jumping on a piece of research is always a bad thing<\/em>. Sure, vendor marketeers and their analyst relations professionals may be rightly upset the steak dinner they bought has gone to waste as a new analyst\u2019s in town, but for the enterprise executive who relies on balanced research to make decisions, a fresh perspective is almost always welcome.<\/p>\nThe same staid analysis from a crusty ol\u2019 analyst recycling the same themes may well be predictable and easy to influence. We all know the types who have those decade-long loyalties to the likes of SAP, Workday. Oracle, IBM et al.\u00a0 It\u2019s very hard to convince a 30 year long analyst that the world is changing and and the vendor that have been lauding for their entire career may be losing its edge. \u00a0Changing things up a bit is important to keep the research fresh, and analysts on their toes.<\/p>\n
However, change<\/em> is nearly always inconvenient for vendor marketeers and their analyst relations professionals – the clientele that keep Simon Levin\u2019s coffers swelling.\u00a0 What\u2019s soul-destroying here is that the quality of the research (despite being the core focus of the misleading title) is pushed to the fringes<\/em> of the discussion. Simon\u2019s blog isn\u2019t about getting the best research and coverage into the market. It\u2019s commiseration on the annoyance that is losing a tame analyst for a new one that may not be as willing to down the Kool Aid.<\/p>\nNevertheless, quality is mentioned<\/em> \u2013 but it masquerades in the narrative as a single metric \u2013 the average tenure of an analyst. Because, of course, the longer an analyst is in a firm, and covering an area, the better they get. I mean that\u2019s just math\u2019s\u2026sort of. But unfortunately, even that old-world idea is being consigned to the history books. And – just like the rise of avocado ownership, and the crippling private rental market, we may as well blame the millennials for our next part.<\/p>\nMisguided principle 3: Experience trumps relevance<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\nThis is the bit that really goads us. Why are we perpetually locked in this bizarre world in which we believe the best perspectives come from those that have been doing it the longest? Why do we shrug off the new and refreshing insights because their origin hasn\u2019t been dipped in decades of painful CIO workshops?\u00a0 We endlessly hear the need to develop new skills, to re-imagine our processes and redesign our business models, so why do the analysts get a free pass when it comes to keep up with the times?\u00a0 Why shouldn\u2019t analyst firms practice what they preach?<\/p>\n
The main assumption in Levin\u2019s blog is that age begets wisdom. That there may be a quality issue at Gartner because the average tenure of analysts has dipped. But could it be possible, just possible, that the average tenure dropping is a good thing? Already we\u2019re seeing hordes of younger executives and professionals flood into enterprises, no longer restrained by mandatory experience quota\u2019s or ridiculous policies from HR insisting that employees stay put in a junior role until they\u2019ve paid their dues. This coupled with the army of young entrepreneurs driving growth in tech start-ups and disruptors, is starkly altering the demographics of the average analyst firm\u2019s client. So, is it reasonable to infer that the demographics of the analyst catering to this market also evolve?<\/p>\n
Comments and blogs that imply quality research is inextricably linked to the quality and value of research are not only wildly out of touch with the changing market. But they\u2019re just obscenely ill-informed. In a room full of 20-year-old tech innovators, does the experience of an analyst with decades of early 90s CIO experience more valuable than a young analyst who can live and breathe the unique challenges of the market?<\/p>\n
Bottom Line: It\u2019s not about tenure, it\u2019s not about gaming the system, it\u2019s not about wining and dining analysts. If this analyst is to survive to see 2020, it needs to focus on the quality, relevant research that a diverse market needs<\/strong><\/p>\nThe reality is that diversity is always beneficial and throwing in the perspectives of both analysts will undoubtedly be of benefit. But what doesn\u2019t help is commentators like Levin churning out the same vapid and misguided tripe, in a bid to form a reactionary guard against the changing tides of the market. If anything, they\u2019re proving themselves to be irrelevant and damaging to an industry that, much to our lament, is crashing around us.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There\u2019s nothing more jarring than an ex-Gartner analyst desperate to continue dining off a legacy analyst industry that is actually…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":4102,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[303],"organization":[],"ppma_author":[19,36],"class_list":["post-4101","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-enterprise-irregulars"],"yoast_head":"\n
(Weekend rant) Levin: a fading symbol of the legacy analyst industry? Or a hero helping edge those dots up the MQ for misunderstood vendors? - Horses for Sources | No Boundaries<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n