Why technology industry disruption is also disrupting the analyst relations game

The analyst relations profession has always been a challenging one – fun, but challenging. Over the past couple of years, it has become tougher, and all indications are that it’s going to get even tougher in the coming years.

Like many buzz words that the technology industry latches on to, “disruption” is much over-used and often incorrectly applied. But the reality is that some technology market segments are being significantly disrupted by a range of forces, and by extension that is having a profound effect on the analyst business and the AR profession.

Confronted by this range of forces, many traditional IT vendors are struggling to get the attention they’ve previously enjoyed with the larger – and smaller – analyst firms. So, for AR pros, this means getting smarter & more creative if they want to get the cut-through they need.

But before we look at some of the potential solutions, let’s look at the problem. These are the forces at play:

Analyst business models are changing

To a large degree, analyst firms provide – and have always provided – pretty much the same thing to their clients, whether they are IT vendors or users. That is: content, engagement & advice. It’s a multi-layered approach which has worked for years & will continue to be successful, but here’s how it’s changing:

• “One to many” is being disintermediated. The subscription model for written research & market share data has long been the cash cow for analyst firms, but it is being devalued by the vast amount of information available for free on the web. Some emerging analyst firms are using freemium models to drive interest in paid services, but there is a wealth of information available online – on vendor websites, on blogs, on aggregation sites and elsewhere. Quality written research is still relevant for most analyst firms, but it is no longer a differentiator.
• “One to some” is gathering steam. Analyst firms have always done events – it’s a great way to promote the brand, the content and the ideas, but it also provides for more intimate engagement with customers. And it’s an area where many firms are focusing their investment. Gartner’s event business grew 17% last financial year, while the Symposium conference in Orlando in October sold out. IDC has a crowded schedule of events covering just about every country in Asia/Pacific, not to mention North America, Europe & elsewhere. And they’re not alone.
• “One to one” delivers value, but doesn’t scale. A key value proposition for Gartner – among many others – has been its enquiry service, through which it is able to provide specific, personalised advice to both vendors & users. This is what many clients really pay for, but there are only so many 30-minute enquiries that an individual analyst can manage. Increasing enquiry volumes means adding expertise, which costs money.

The technology business ain’t what it used to be

In the beginning there were just a few technology vendors – old hands will recall referring to one predominant group as the BUNCH (Burroughs, Univac, NCR, Control Data, Honeywell). The minicomputer business started the process of expansion, but the advent of the PC in the early 1980s truly democratised the technology business, with the emergence of software standards & platform independence. The web further built on this legacy, spawning thousands of new players, while the smart mobile revolution has made everyone an app developer. But it gets worse:

• There are few barriers to entry for new players. There are still barriers to success, but anyone with a good idea, access to some smart programmers and a half-decent marketing plan has the potential to carve themselves out a niche and/or disrupt existing business models. Add in some venture capital & social media cred, and they have the potential to be a real player. And guess what – they’re doing everything they can to get the attention of industry analysts.
• The Internet of Things. What can we say? Even Gartner has declared it as the #2 strategic technology trend of 2015, and many other firms have been beating the drum about this for some time. This brings a lot of non-traditional players into the mix. And guess what – they’re doing everything they can to get the attention of industry analysts.
• Everything old is new again. In part due to the IoT, many old established manufacturing companies are finding that they’re interesting & relevant again as they build sensing technology into products like jet engines, heavy haulage, air conditioning systems and more. As one analyst said to me recently, many of the new disrupters are 100-year-old companies, not creative start-ups. Think Honeywell, Siemens, Rockwell Automation etc. And guess what – they’re doing everything they can to get the attention of industry analysts.
• Traditional IT vendors are looking for greener fields. The vendors we know & love are not sitting idly by while all this happens. They are well aware of the factors shaping the market & the emergence of new competition, and they are exploring their adjacent markets to maintain their growth. Unfortunately, they’re not seen as “sexy” like a lot of the so-called disruptors. But guess what – they’re doing everything they can to get the attention of industry analysts.

Analyst behaviours are changing

Being an analyst has always been a good gig, but it’s been getting tougher over the past few years. It’s still a good gig, but in general, analysts have less latitude than they once had to explore ideas, to think, to pontificate, to focus on the big long-term issues rather than the immediate problems in need of resolution. In simple terms, they’re more accountable for their time, but let’s look at the pressure points:

• Analysts are busier than they have ever been. Most analyst firms have figured out how to get more productivity out of their analysts over the past few years, so many of them now goal their staff on the stuff that impacts their renewal rates – not just written research volumes, but also enquiry volumes and paid engagements. So analysts are not just more accountable, they don’t have the “slack” in their schedules they once had, or the ability to apply that as they choose.
• Analysts need to know more about more things. Analysts in the Asia/Pacific region have always been broad rather than deep because they have to understand multiple geographic & technology markets, more so than their US & European peers, who have the luxury of larger markets which allow them to specialise. But all analysts need to understand the adjacencies to their focus markets, and that has become more complicated. They need to understand – and explain – how the new market dynamics affect the narrower markets they focus on.
• Analysts are being used differently by their own firms. As we noted above, there is a greater focus on delivering events which engage analysts more closely with their clients, whether they are vendors or users. While these events deliver a good contribution to the bottom line, they require more time commitment, not just in terms of presentation delivery & travel, but also for preparation. Analysts involved in these events are expected to be “always on” even when they’re not on stage, doing client enquiries, networking & otherwise promoting the firm’s brand.
• Analysts are being used differently by their clients. Not only do analyst firms run their own events, but IT vendors host them too. The user conference/roadshow/roundtable is a stock component in the marketing playbook of most IT vendors, and they love to use analysts in keynotes and breakouts to add an air of credibility and independence to their events. There’s nothing wrong with this, but once again it sucks up a lot of analyst time in preparation, delivery & travel.

Bottom line

What this boils down to is that many traditional IT vendors are struggling to get the attention of the analysts with whom they’ve engaged for years. They are competing for airtime & mindshare with a growing number of new players, whose stories are often more “sexy” than the business-as-usual messages they deliver. And this is at a time when analysts have less time to listen to vendors, and are more selective about what briefings they attend.

It’s a tough landscape, and vendors are going to have to get a bit creative to stand out from the crowd. There isn’t space today to discuss potential solutions, but I’ll do that in another post in the next week or so. In the meantime, I’d appreciate your perspectives on this dilemma, the ramifications and potential solutions.

Cheers,

Dave

It’s all about the conversation – why Gartner Symposium works at so many levels

As Gartner Symposium season draws to a close this week in Barcelona, it’s worth reflecting on what a powerhouse this event has become right around the world & why it’s become so important – for users, for vendors and – most particularly – for AR professionals. Regardless of your attitude about Gartner, you can’t ignore Symposium.

Events have become a serious business for Gartner. Although accounting for just 11 per cent – $US174 million – of Gartner’s 2012 revenues, they were the highest growth area at 17 per cent. The firm now runs close to 70 events around the world, some of them technology-specific, but Symposium is still the big kahuna, with eight locations globally.

The numbers are big – in terms of delegates, exhibitors, sessions and analysts. And dollars. What separates Symposium/ITXpo from every other IT industry event is that everyone pays to play – in Australia, delegates pay about $3,500 each (sometimes included in contracts), vendors pay $50,000 and upwards to buy a piece of real estate on the ITXpo showfloor, and cheapskates like me pay a few hundred bucks just to hang around the showfloor chatting to exhibitors, analysts  & delegates.

But the interesting thing is that it delivers value for everyone – it’s symbiotic. I’ve written before about how AR professionals should plan to get value out of Symposium, but let’s summarise how this works:

• AR folks get to connect with analysts through 1:1s & informal discussions, as well as introduce spokespeople
• AR folks get to hear about what analysts are saying about their companies & their competitors
• Vendor salespeople get to pitch to high quality prospects, including CIOs
• Vendor sales & marketing folks get to hear what Gartner really thinks about them, 1:1 or in audience
• Gartner analysts get rich insights about hot button issues from conducting back-to-back 1:1s with the country’s leading technology users
• Gartner salespeople get to pitch their services to users & vendors alike
• Everyone gets to hang out & talk about technology, business & stuff….

In this video I talk with a few AR-savvy vendors about why they commit so much time & money to Symposium. It’s obvious that all of them go there with some very clear objectives.

It’s all about the conversation. If you can’t get some value out of Symposium/ITXpo, you’re probably not trying hard enough…

Cheers,

Dave

10 things I’ve learned about AR & the analyst business – and that you should know too…

It’s that time of year when just about everyone in the analyst business and the broader technology industry comes up with their prognostications and predictions for the year ahead. Inevitably, many of those will prove wildly inaccurate, overly optimistic or simply embarrassing.

So rather than fall into that trap, I decided to cast my mind back and consider what I have learned about analyst relations and the analyst business in APJ over 10 years of running the only independent AR consultancy in the region (that milestone ticked over in November), working with dozens of vendor clients and engaging with hundreds of analysts.

Here’s my list. I’ve written about some of these issues before at length – you’ll find more detail on previous posts. And while I’ve thought a bit about the rankings, this is just my perspective. Don’t be afraid to give me your thoughts.

1.         It’s the relationship, stupid

AR is all about creating a two-way dialogue between a vendor and an analyst. Relationship builders take the time to understand the analyst’s interests & needs, and personalise the engagement accordingly, but they’re also pretty good at creating internal executive support for AR, which is when the magic happens. A good relationship builder with a weak story and/or content will mostly do better than an average engager with great content

2.         Most analysts are decent human beings

Yes, some are arrogant, anally-retentive or just downright difficult, but 99% of the time they’re trying to do the right thing for their clients. An engagement approach that recognises this can turn an adversary into an advocate. Analysts also need to have some relationship skills, and dickheads just don’t last.

3.         Vendors will continue to under-invest in APJ

I’ve written about this before, and sadly it’s just a reality of the technology business in this region – it applies as much to overall marketing & sales investment as it does specifically to AR. Vendors have a poor track record of making decisions at HQ which don’t take into account the growth & needs in emerging markets, and the current global economic situation isn’t going to change that. (But reading the goat entrails available to me, I feel cautiously optimistic that the needle is swinging back a little in 2013, after a very lacklustre 2012).

4.         Many vendors just don’t “get” AR – nor do some analysts

Some vendors will never “get” AR, simply because they don’t try to understand the value that analysts provide, or how they are differentiated from other influence communities. Their loss. On the flip side, some analysts fail to see that most AR professionals are advocates for analysts, not gatekeepers – despite all the evidence to contrary. It’s not a perfect world…

5.         Analyst targeting is the most important element of any AR program

Full stop. Understanding your audience is the cornerstone of any marketing or influence program, and AR is no different. Targeting is the first step, tiering is the second, engagement approach follows. All analysts have different needs & require different approaches, regardless of their prioritisation.

6.         Influence is global/regional, but engagement is local

Many analysts engage with clients right across the world, not just in their home countries or cities, and it’s important to understand where individual analysts have impact. But it’s much more important to engage with analysts in their own timezones. Regardless of how you manage that, you can’t assume that information will trickle down to an influential analyst who’s sleeping when you decide to run a briefing.

7.         Training spokespeople to engage with analysts is a no-brainer

Why wouldn’t you want to give your executives the best possible preparation for engaging with key influencers? Dealing with analysts is not that complex, but it is not innate, and spending a few hours upfront demystifying the analyst business yields immediate benefits and also avoids embarrassing outcomes.

8.         Measuring results is critical to AR success

You might consider this a bit self-serving, considering I provide a measurement program, but really – if you’re not measuring what you’re doing, then what are you doing? Don’t try to measure everything, and focus on measuring where you’ve actually influenced analyst perceptions – this is where you’ll demonstrate value to your internal stakeholders (and holders of the purse-strings).

9.         Some vendors will continue to confuse running analyst summits with an AR program

Sad, but true. An analyst summit is a one or two-day event which provides the opportunity to showcase your key messages, introduce some key customers, dig into some nitty-gritty around technology or go-to-market strategy, and develop relationships between key executives and analysts. An AR program is a day-to-day interaction process which ensures that analysts get the information they need, when they need it – and ensures those relationships prosper. To do the first without the second is a waste of time, effort & money.

10.       Change in the analyst landscape is a natural state

It is for every other business, so why not analysts? Firms will continue to grow & prosper. Some will be acquired because they offer something different, others because they have lost focus but retain analyst value and/or an interesting client base. Analysts will continue to become disgruntled with their employers, then quit to explore new markets, business approaches and delivery models. And so the cycle continues…

Just one more thing, which doesn’t require a number of its own…

In 2013, doing AR will continue to be fun/challenging/rewarding/ frustrating/boring/exciting/bloody hard work/just a breeze… Pick your adjective – it will be all of the above, and more, but the one thing I hope is that for AR pros and analysts alike : it will be worthwhile!! And fun, of course…

So tell me what you think. Have I missed anything? Would you rank these points differently?

Cheers,

Dave

How to screw up an analyst summit….

Logic says that the best way to screw up an analyst summit is do the reverse of everything I wrote about in my last post What makes a great analyst summit? But life is never that simple, and there are other “worst practices” which don’t necessarily map neatly to the positives.

One would hope that nobody deliberately goes out to create a bad event. But rigid adherence to inappropriate structures and a lack of awareness about what could go wrong can certainly contribute to poor outcomes.

Once again, these 10 “worst practices” are in no particular order. Everyone has different priorities, so these issues will vary in importance. Some folks will no doubt disagree entirely with some of these – that’s fine, just so long as they’re aware of them. And whereas last week’s best practices tried to strike a balance between analyst & vendor needs, these points are probably biased to an analyst’s perspective.

 Death by PowerPoint                      Until someone comes up with an alternative, PowerPoint will continue to be used as the main communication platform for briefings & conferences. But it doesn’t have to be used in every session. And it doesn’t have to be used ad nauseam – less is often more, and in this situation, fewer slides often deliver better insights.

 Marketing mumbo jumbo             The technology business delights in jargon, whether that’s abbreviations, acronyms, verbifying nouns, repurposing phrases or just trying to make things sound more exciting. Without much of this jargon, you’d struggle to make yourself understood, but you need to stick to the generic. Internal buzzwords & abbreviations are generally unintelligible (and irrelevant) to the outsider, while over-hyped product descriptions gain zero to little traction with analysts.

 Mixing analysts & media                This is a constant pet hate of analysts. Journalists & analysts are different breeds with different needs, so why assume that they can be productive together? Certainly there may be times when you need to invite both analysts & journalists to the same event eg a user conference, but you certainly wouldn’t give them the same program. As to other influencers such as advisors, consultants & bloggers, well, the jury is still out, but you need to tread carefully.

 Expecting positive “stories”        To the point above, analysts don’t produce their outputs in the same way that journalists do, so it’s illogical to expect that to change just because you’re running a briefing. While some analysts may produce an event summary, most won’t & this certainly shouldn’t be one of your summit objectives. Executives need to be educated not to expect immediate gratification from event bulletins which look good, say little and have even less market influence.

Failing to follow up                          It will be impossible to answer all questions at a summit, simply because they require more time, more depth, or a spokesperson who isn’t at the event. All of these outstanding issues offer an opportunity to continue to engage with the analysts & deepen the discussion. Failing to follow up on them is a bit like not returning calls from sales prospects – who knows what you will miss out on?

 Not managing time                          It’s hard to shut down a really interesting discussion, but there are two things you have to remember: this may not be interesting to everyone in the room, and whatever time you add here, you need to take away elsewhere. It’s impossible to be time-perfect, but you need to keep on track. Build in buffers, wrap-up some sessions early if the opportunity arises, give presenters time calls & shut down folks who run off at the mouth. That applies equally to executives & analysts, you just have to be more tactful if it’s the CEO!

Speaking, not listening                  Analyst relations is a dialogue, a two-way discussion. Vendors who want to present their view of the world without discussion, questions & debate are doing themselves a disservice (as well as boring the pants off the analysts!). Often, the best insights for both vendors & analysts come from the debate, not the canned presentations.

Mis-using analyst data                   Analysts define markets, and generally have pretty good methodologies for doing that. That doesn’t mean that Analyst Firm A agrees with Analyst Firm B. Using data or quotes from one firm when analysts from another firm are in the room is always a bad idea. Redefining market data or replicating analyst firm signature research to reflect your own view of the world is even worse.

 Sticking to the script                      Of course, you’re going to build your analyst summit agenda around a core set of topics and messages, but that doesn’t mean you can’t stray a little outside them. Your executives are knowledgeable people and (generally) are capable of having an open & honest conversation. Analysts value candour, & will suspect the motives of anyone who sounds too rehearsed & on-message.

Overdoing hospitality                     Everyone likes to be pampered & made to think they’re just that little bit special. Good venues & accommodation are essential, but there’s no need to overdo it. The same applies to mementoes & giveaways – your presentations don’t look any more convincing wrapped up in a brand-name electronic device than they do on a logoed USB stick. Some analyst firms have strict rules about the value & type of gifts they are allowed to receive, and it’s a pity that more don’t follow their lead. Often, those analysts most willing to take advantage of your largesse are the ones of least importance & influence.

I’m sure there are more examples of analyst summit “worst practices” out there, so what have I missed? Tell us what made you cringe (no names, though – to avoid embarrassing the guilty!!).

Cheers,

Dave