Found on Geek and Poke, hat tip: Robert De Souza

My colleagues in the PA department have written a wonderful analysis of the Queens’s speech. This is available for download here.

This year’s Speech outlines the Government’s final programme of planned laws ahead of the General Election and has focused on a range of priority political issues. Included are measures to tackle the nation’s finances through putting into law a pledge to halve the budget deficit within four years, a Bill to prevent a repeat of the recession by stopping “reckless” bankers from getting bonuses and plans to improve welfare services, for instance by providing free social care for the most needy.

Headline points include:

• Financial Services Bill
• Fiscal Responsibility Bill
• Energy Bill
• Digital Economy Bill

The Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties outlined their respective opposition to the Speech this year before it was even made, with both stating that most of the Bills within the Speech will not become law, with a General Election due by June 2010,
and that consequently the Speech is little more than a Labour Party manifesto, considered by the Conservative leader David Cameron to be a “waste of time”.

The Government and Conservative Party continued their debate today about the practical reality of introducing so many Bills with so little time left before the General Election to bring them on to the Statute Book (there are 10 new bills and three Bills carried over from the last parliamentary year in this year’s Speech, with around only 70 days left when Parliament will sit before the General Election must be called). The Government continues to argue that “most” of the proposed Bills will be passed before the next election, whereas the Conservative Party has stated that its peers are prepared to obstruct many of the proposals in order to prevent this.

Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats, went even further than the Conservative Party in his criticism, stating that it should not even have taken place this year as the Government instead should have focused on the more pressing priority of reforming parliamentary expenses and spending in order to win back the trust of the general public.

TweetLevel is a new measurement tool that calculates someone’s importance on Twitter. In other words it is the Twitter equivalent to Google’s PageRank.

The explosive growth of Twitter has massively impacted the nature of communications. Initially the domain of the tech-minority, it has now reached a maturity level where it has branched out to multiple demographics.

Tables: Nielsen Twitter usage increase Feb 08 to Feb 09 and Nielsen Twitter usage age groups

My personal view is that as long as Twitter is the tool that key audiences use then I will use it too – if everyone changes next week to product X, then I will too. However, as a communications professional, it is my job to take part in the conversations that  my key audiences are having no matter where they take place.

Jeremiah Owyang of Altimeter Group sums it up:

I’ll be very clear on this. If you want to influence me, be in a conversation and dialog with me, in person, online, and wherever I go.

One of the common questions Edelman is asked is ‘who should I spend my limited time with?’. It is this question that has forced companies to tier their audiences depending upon their impact within the wider community. One of the common problems associated with ranking twitter users is the misconception that popularity = influence. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Popularity has its place but it should not be the only metric that defines ‘importance’.

TwitterLevel aims to answer this question.

This unique tool compiles twitter data from over 30 sources and feeds the data through an algorithm to rank an individual according to four weightings:

1. Popularity (i.e. How many people follow you)
2. Influence (i.e. What you say is interesting, relevant and many people listen)
3. Engaged (i.e. You actively participate within your community)
4. Trusted (i.e. People believe what you say)

Of course, the explanation above is a simplified definition of a complex algorithm(the full methodology of this is shown at the bottom of this post).

To illustrate how this works, I have selected four individuals who each excel in different areas. What this shows is not a measure of an individuals ‘importance’ in the world or even social media but simply how they use Twitter.

Popular – CNN Breaking News

With close to 2.8 million followers this account is exceptionally popular. However, by contrast its engagement score is very low – this is because all the account does is broadcast its opinion (and links) without engaging in conversations with other people. However, without doubt it is exceptionally important as people believe what it says (as shown by its trust score) and its content is retweeted frequently.

Influential – Calvin Lee

Calvin Lee at Mayhem Studios has a high influence score, but a low number of followers as compared to other people in the top 20 TweetLevel names ranked by influence. With less than 40,000 followers Calvin understands that within Twitter it is micro-communities that count not necessarily who can win the popularity contest. Calvin also has a very high engagement score as a result of interactively discussing frequent, relevant and interesting content.

Engagement – T-Mobile USA

Congratulations to T-Mobile for understanding that the key to using Twitter as a tool is to have two-way conversations that are informative with their community. They have mastered this medium and have been ranked top over a list of millions when it comes to who has the most engaged Twitter account.

Just as PR has gone to public engagement, and AR has gone to analyst engagement, it is only natural that I believe that instead of mass-broadcast (shown by popularity) or mass-amplification (shown by influence), I believe that the purest form of interaction is via multiple targeted micro-conversations where people actively engage and interact with the niche community. This is why when scores are weighted for ‘engagement’ the ‘involvement index’ becomes the most important factor.

Robert Scoble in his recent post discussing the merits of Twitter’s Suggested Users touches on engagement. He explains that the number of followers someone has (i.e. their popularity on Twitter) should be turned off and the answer… engagement.

Turn off follower counts for everyone and come up with a new “engagement score” that is more focused on how you use Twitter and how people engage with you.

Couldn’t agree more which is why TweetLevel has such a high weighting on this metric.

Trust – Paulo Coelhlo

The extra measurement of trust has been included as this factor is the key to action. When people are reviewing how they should act, they may take into consideration someone who is popular, influential or engaged – however, this final metric is the decisive or tipping point. This view is backed-up by the Edelman trust barometer which stated that:

77% of people refused to buy products or services from a company they distrusted

It is this final measure of trust that has been the most discussed during beta testing. After all how do you measure trust on Twitter? Although not the only factor that decides this ranking, in my opinion if someone is prepared to associate what someone else has said with them (via retweeting for example), then this indicates a measure of trust. Whereas some Twitter users achieve this via posting news (such as CNN), others such as Paulo Coehlo have achieved a magnificent trust score by tweeting content that other people wish to spread throughout the twittersphere.

As a final point, I know that when discussing this people tend to be far more interested in ‘influence’ rather than engagement or trust. My view was nicely echoed by AdAge when commenting on Ashton Kutcher’s use of bill board advertising when trying to win the (in)formal ‘first to 1million followers’ against CNN competition. In this piece they quoted a New York commenter who goes by Stevewax:

Seems to me what’s useful with Twitter is creating a small, two-way community with people who aren’t busy running a Twitter team and who have time to SHARE ideas. Rather than broadcast them.

Find out what your TweetLevel is

Simply go to: www.tweetlevel.com now and find out your score. While you are at it, try a few other people and see how you compare to them. I welcome your feedback as to how this can be improved or your comments in general.

Algorithm and Methodology

Following – Twitter lists the number of people each user follows. The tendency for most celebrities is to only follow a few individuals. The more people that someone follows, there is an increased likelihood of them actively participating in conversations with the community instead of simply broadcasting to it. Following ranges were determined (i.e. more than 20, more than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number (0 to 30) that was used as part of the algorithm. Note: Twitter opened its API to TweetLevel so that data could be sourced easily and quickly to benefit the user.

Followers – Twitter lists the number of people that follow each user. Like subscribing to a feed, this is a clear indication of ‘popularity’ as it requires someone to actively request participation. Even though TweetLevel has a ranking of people based upon popularity, it is influence, engagement and trust that is more important. Due to the nature of logarithmic ranges, a change in the number of people that follow someone, such as from 500 – 1000, will give a far higher change in score than a move from 180K – 200K. Following ranges were determined (i.e. more than 20, more than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number (0 to 30) that was used as part of the algorithm. Note: Twitter opened its API to TweetLevel so that data could be sourced easily and quickly to benefit the user.</p>

Twitter Lists – without a doubt this feature addition to Twitter will significantly change the influence score. Even though Twitter has released their API to us, this particular metric is not yet included. When it is, a TweetLevel score will increase depending upon the number of times a user is included in a list, the number of people who follow that list and the authority of those people.

Updates – How often does someone update what they are doing. This number is purely objective as it scores someone highly no matter what the content of their post (i.e. how relevant is it). Nevertheless it is assumed that if someone posts frequently but has poor content then their ‘followers’ will decrease. Update ranges were determined (i.e. more than 20, more than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number (0 to 30) that was used as part of the algorithm.

Name Pointing – e.g. @name – How many people engage in conversation with a celebrity or point to their name. The clearest way to establish this is to run a search on the number of people who reference @username in a message. This calculation is based upon a one month period combined with a 24 hour period. The number of times this happens is calculated with each range was assigned a number (0 to 30) – again this was then used as part of the algorithm.

Retweets – Has a tweet caused sufficient interest that it is worth re-submitting by others? Despite a great deal of ‘noise’ (i.e. posts that are not relevant or interesting), when someone sees something that is of high interest, their post can be re-tweeted. The clearest way to establish this is to run a search on the number of people who reference RT @username in a message. This calculation is based upon a one month period combined with a 24 hour period. The number of times this happens is calculated with each range was assigned a number (0 to 50) – again this was then used as part of the algorithm.

Twitalyzer – “This is a unique (and online) tool to evaluate the activity of any Twitter user and report on relative influence, signal-to-noise ratio, generosity, velocity, clout, and other useful measures of success in social media.” This 3rd party tool is a useful method to combine automated metrics dependent upon criteria within posts and publicly available numbers. Where tools such as this are available, we incorporate them into the algorithm to achieve a more confident score. Twitalyzer gives users scores from 0 to 100. Ranges were determined (i.e. more than 20, more than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number (0 to 20) that was used as part of the algorithm.

Twitalyzer noise to signal ratio – Signal-to-noise ratio is a measure of the tendency for people to pass information, as opposed to anecdote. Signal can be references to other people (defined by the use of "@" followed by text), links to URLs you can visit (defined by the use of "http://" followed by text), hashtags you can explore and participate with (defined by the use of "#" followed by text), retweets of other people, passing along information (defined by the use of "rt", "r/t/", "retweet" or "via"). If you take the sum of these four elements and divide that by the number of updates published, you get the "signal to noise" ratio. Twitalyzer gives users scores from 0 to 100. Ranges were determined (i.e. more than 20, more than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number (0 to 20) that was used as part of the algorithm.

Twinfluence Rank – Twinfluence is an automated 3rd party tool that uses APIs to measure influence. For example: “Imagine Twitterer1, who has 10,000 followers – most of which are bots and inactives with no followers of their own. Now imagine Twitterer2, who only has 10 followers – but each of them has 5,000 followers. Who has the most real "influence?" Twitterer2, of course.” As with Twitalyzer, this index uses 3rd party tools to add greater confidence in the overall Twitter score. Similar to the other criteria, ranges were determined (i.e. less than 20, less than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number (0 to 20) that was used as part of the algorithm.

Twitter Grader – Twitter Grader is the final automated tool to add greater confidence to the final index. This site creates a score by evaluating a twitter profile. Similar to the other criteria, ranges were determined (i.e. less than 20, less than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number (0 to 20) that was used as part of the algorithm.

Involvement Index – The Involvement Index is unique Edelman IP that calculates a score based upon how an individual engages with their community. It is calculated by analysing the content of an individual posts. People who score highest in this category have frequent, relevant, high-quality content that actively involved the twitter community (asking questions, posting links or commenting on discussions) and did not purely consist of broadcasting. Ranges were determined (i.e. less than 20, less than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number (0 to 20) that was used as part of the algorithm.

Velocity Index – As more people engage on Twitter, it may become harder to keep activity going. The velocity index measures changes on a regular basis and assigns a score based on increased or decreased participation. Ranges were determined (i.e. less than 20, less than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number (0 to 20) that was used as part of the algorithm.

Weighting - Each specific variable listed above was given a standard score out of 10. Using a weighting scale I varied the importance of the each metric to establish an individual’s total score.

Weighted for Popularity – the key variable is the number of people someone has following them. There are many online tools that show this such as Twitterholic.

Weighted for Engagement – the key variables are an individual’s participation with the Twitter community (as measured by the Involvement Index), with additional emphasis on the frequency of people name pointing an individual (via @username), the numbers of followers and the signal to noise ratio. Other attributes were included in the final score but were given a lower weighting.

Weighted for Influence – the key variables in this instance is a combination of the number and authority of someone’s followers together with the frequency of people name pointing an individual (via @username) and the how many times and individuals posts are re-tweeted. Other attributes were included in the final score but were given a lower weighting.

Weighted for trust – the best measure of trust is whether an in individual is will to ‘trust’ what someone else has said sufficiently that they are also prepared to have what they tweeted associated with them. The key metric in this instance are a combination of retweets and number of followers. Other attributes were included in the final score but were given a lower weighting.

In the true spirit of ‘open sourcing’ this work, I welcome your comments, views and criticisms in how this approach can be as accurate as possible. Whereas I don’t believe for one moment that TweetLevel has found the holy grail of social media measurement, I think it is a good step forward and look forward to discussing this with you.

I will shortly be publishing the new list of top analyst blogs. This list has been compiled from Tekrati’s excellent blog directory. This league table will take into account new analyst hires and firms as well as a tweaked methodology.

I have taken the feedback I have received from the previous research and modified the methodology.

Scores are now calculated as follows:

Google PageRank – Google PageRank is a link analysis algorithm that interprets web links and assigns a numerical weighting (0 to 10) to each site. High-quality sites receive a higher PageRank. The ranking uses the actual PageRank as part of its algorithm.

Yahoo Inbound Links [date unlimited] – Yahoo counts the total number of inbound links that go directly to a blog. Each number was assigned to a range which was then used as part of the algorithm.

Google Inbound Links [3 months date limited] – Google allows people to search the number of inbound links to a specific blog but limit this to a predefined date period. Similar to how Technorati only looks at six months of data, this method was used in combination with the Yahoo Inbound Link count to assess which blogs were considered to be important due to the number of links that came to them, but also currently relevant as measured by the limitations on the timescale. Each number was assigned to a range which was then used as part of the algorithm.

Google Reader Subscribers – Google reader lists the total number of subscribers to a blog. I believe this is a more realistic number to that which Bloglines provides. Mihai Parparita confirms that “these numbers include subscribers across all Google services”. To account for people using other readers (e.g. Newsgator) it has been suggested that this number is multiplied by 3. Subscriber ranges were determined (i.e. more than 20, more than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number that was used as part of the algorithm.

Frequency of Posts – Updating relevant and interesting content frequently onto a blog will naturally cause more people to find this blog important. This score is established via Google Reader to understand the precise number of posts per week that the blogger makes. Frequency numbers were determined and assigned to a range that was used as part of the algorithm.

Date Last Blog Post Published – Working in combination with ‘Frequency of Posts’, this score mitigates against blogs that were once popular but haven’t been updated for a long time. The number of days since the last blog post was calculated and assigned to a range which was used as part of the algorithm.

Comments – A simple way to judge how valuable a blog is to other people is through the number of comments (where this is enabled) that visitors make. In a similar way to linking and subscribing this user requested service shows a significant value. The number of comments made over the last five posts were calculated and assigned to a range which was used as part of the algorithm.

Twitter Inbound Links – There are various online tools available to count the number of links inbound to a blog from Twitter. Backtype was used to count the number of these occurrences over the past five blog posts. The number of times this happened was calculated and assigned a range which was used as part of the algorithm.

Weighting – Each specific variable listed above was given a standard score out of 10. Using a weighting scale I varied the importance of the each metric to establish a blogs total score.

Contentious conversation 1 – integrity of analysts and the future of AR

Blog my Tom Bittman from Gartner – A Rant – My Integrity as an Analyst

Summary: Gartner analyst angry that he has to justify his integrity

My view: Edelman trust barometer consistently shows that over the past few years analysts are the most trusted

Key comments: Vinnie Mirchandani questioning whether Gartner’s reliance on large vendor subscriptions means that their reports are truly representative

What this means:

There is an ongoing fight regarding how independent an analyst can be if they receive money from vendors. Whereas some firms in the past have been ‘White Paper for hire’ houses, they tend to lose industry respect very quickly and go bust. What can not be in doubt is that in subscribing to an analyst house, you have the ability to pay for more time in front of the analysts leading to a greater chance to educate them – often this will result in a more favourable position. I am not saying that to be successful in AR you need to have subs, it is more a case of – it helps.

The secondary argument (and possibly more important) is by having a look at who the key participants in this debate are. On one side we have the analyst and the other we have the IT advisor. The latter group frequently comes from an analyst background (see Vinnie Mirchandani, ex-Gartner; Ray Wang, ex-Forrester) but in their current role do not have a research agenda. By default this does not make them (in their mind) an analyst.

However, I believe we are playing semantics. Our view in AR needs to be simple: if they affect IT buying then they are an influencer and need to be dealt with accordingly. AR most closely deals with these individuals – we may need to adapt a different name so that they don’t get upset by being labelled analysts but they will remain a key audience for us to engage with and should continue to enjoy the same disclosure benefits that traditional analysts enjoy. With the growth of firms like Altimeter Group, this fundamental shift towards a larger influencer group will become more important than ever over the next few years.

Contentious conversation 2 – analysts liable for ‘incorrect’ positioning

Article in IT Knowledge Exchange – Email archiving vendor sues Gartner over Magic Quadrant

Summary: Claiming that Gartner’s MQ constitute “disparaging, false/misleading, and unfair statements” about its email archiving product that have done damage to its sales prospects, ZL filed suit for damages of $132 million to account for lost sales.

My view: This fight has caused great PR for ZL but someone’s position in an MQ should not be a surprise. If a vendor believes they are unfairly positioned the time to argue this point is before the quadrant is published.

Key comments:

The power of a positive ranking in Gartner is immense because it is often the case that large purchases of technology are based exclusively on the MQ Reports…For instance, the Office of the Inspector General, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) recently conducted an investigation into the use of the Gartner’s MQ reports in connection with the VA’s $16,000,0000 purchase of certain leases and services from Dell. The Office of Inspector General reported that the VA made this large purchase based solely on the leadership rankings in the relevant Gartner MQ report. (source: initial complaint)

In Mark Logic’s excellent analysis of this case, he makes the following comment about whether having the best technology means that someone should be positioned superior to another company who simply has better sales and marketing.

While Ingres arguably had the best database technology in the 1980s, Oracle’s sales and marketing prowess caused it to win the market and any analyst who — focused solely on the technology — would have recommended Ingres at that time would have done his customers a disservice.”

What this means:

Like it or not, Gartner are the original 800lb gorilla. Whether it is right or wrong, the fact remains that their MQ inherently has an influence in IT buying behaviour. What AR pros need to do is work with the analyst ideally six months prior to any publication to fully understand what success criteria are to be better positioned as a leader and work towards those goals. A great way to understand how to work with an MQ can be seen in the great IIAR White Paper.

We have to accept that the firm with the best technology does not always win (see Betamax vs. VHS) – for a company to be successful, they will need to have a great product that is complemented by a sound go-to-market strategy. Luckily for us this is where AR can help.

The IIAR (Institute of Industry Analyst Relations) has completed, via AR guru Peggy O’Neill, a certification test for everyone in this industry. As the analyst profession has matured it has become more important than ever for professionals to master best practices, analyst protocol, and basic knowledge of the industry.

This certification will form the foundation level for an Advanced AR Certification, which is currently under development.

Why is this important?

This test will allow people to show their skills in a way that is often intangible. I know from my own experience, that it is difficult enough to explain what it is I do for a living, so how are you meant to explain to your peers, superiors and potential hirers that you are as good as you are when they don’t even understand AR themselves.

On a more practical level this test is essential to help individuals who may think they know it all (looking at myself here) to understand the areas they need to brush up their skills on.

Example question

   a) Gartner acquired META Group
   b) Forrester acquired Jupiter Research
   c) Datamonitor acquired Bloor Research
   d) IDC acquired Meridien Research

If you want to try a sample test, you can click here – (I’ll let you know the result of the above question at the end of the post)

This is a pretty tough test with 120 multi-choice questions to be answered in one hour (i thought I had left exams behind me after university). It’s not meant to be easy and those that who have tried it all passed with flying colours. A score of 70% is considered passing, and if test takers fail, they can re-take it in three months.

Analyst relations managers who pass the test are considered “certified” by the IIAR. Certifications are deemed lifetime and applicants do not need to re-take the test periodically. The test is administered by the IIAR and is available for members and non-members. The fee is £100 for non-members and includes the opportunity for one retake if candidates initially fail the test. The exam is free for IIAR members but is not mandatory for membership.

If you practice AR and are not part of the IIAR, it’s worth joining…

I admit I am biased as I am a founding member and board member of this association but it is worth it. From sharing best practice on getting the ideal placement in an MQ or Forrester Wave to discussion with your peers about how to solve a particular issue – this group helps AR as its raise d’être. This certification is just another example of how the IIAR aims to help and promoted the analyst relations profession. Oh, and the answer to the above question is ‘c’.

Recommending reading: IIAR blog, IIAR twitter, press release 

Pop quiz…

Question: what do you get if you combine the analyst of the year (Ray Wang), the analyst blogger of the year  and author of Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies (Charlene Li), the most influential social media analyst (Jeremiah Owyang) and the previous lead of the Social Media Lab at Proctor & Gamble (@debs) in one analyst firm?

Answer: The superstars or the galacticos of the IT advisory world – now currently partners at Altimeter Group.

There has been a great deal of speculation ever since Jeremiah announced he was leaving Forrester as to where he would end up. The result is an incredibly smart one.

Ever since Charlene jumped the ship and setup Altimeter her mission has been to focus less upon future trends to a more pragmatic customer-focused model. She explains:

Instead of worrying about the next wave of technology, focus on what your customers are using – or not using yet.

I was fortunate enough to have a conversation with Jeremiah to understand what the future brings…

What is Altimeter Group?

We are a company that focused on emerging technologies. Whereas yesteryear people looked at faxes and mobiles – now the focus is social media. Now the big disrupter is social. Change is coming at an increased pace but companies don’t have a policy to respond. Altimeter aims to help companies by evaluating technologies, identify key players and let people test in a safe setting.

The future of business requires a holistic approach to adapting and integrating emerging technologies.

Are you an analyst house?

We are not an analyst firm  – we are consultants. This is because an analyst is someone who has a research agenda. Instead we would like to have a few select relationships with clients and guide them through this process.

What are you each going to cover?

Ray mentioned specifically that he is:

Looking at bridging today’s world of enterprise apps with the E2.0 world of connected business platforms

What’s unique to Altimeter Group?

One of our key announcements is The Hanger

Physical and virtual spaces to facilitate experimentation

I think this is a great idea as it will enable that testing station in a safe environment to evaluate the most appropriate technology for a client. Surely this is better than installing it, paying thousands on consultancy support only to find it was the wrong thing to do.

How do you hope to remain as influential now that you have left Forrester?

It’s quite interesting to see that I have already lost quite a few subscriptions from my blog after I left. Some people value the Forrester brand over mine. However, what I am after is to seek fewer relationships more in a deeper capacity. I want to have long term relationships with clients

What type of customers will you be targeting?

Primarily these will be large brands. However, we would also expect a small set of clients to be vendors who want help with their product. The percentage split will still be more end users./brands vs. vendors. The priority will always be  to help the buyers first.

You are all based in the US – any thoughts of having a more global reach – or does this not matter as social media enables global communities?

If things go well, we will go where our clients are but no plans yet.

Opinion

There are two major impacts on this announcement.

The first is understanding how the business model has changed. Jeremiah positions his company via an analogy of a general contractor for a building project. What they want to do is ensure that the blueprints and plans are right before anything is built. I like this model as it is far more pragmatic for buyers.

From an AR point of view, the main difference is that they are not analysts.

They are not out to replace Forrester. In fact, what they are set to do is complement analyst thinking. They are a small company based in the US that is not out to compete against Forrester think it is a moot point in the whole definition game of ‘what is an analyst’ – the key thing to remember from an AR perspective is that they are influencers in the buying process and must be respected and engaged with as such.

End note: This post was meant to be published at 5pm UK when the embargo was lifted. However, seeing as this has now been broken and Ray Wang has given permission for it to go early, this has now been posted.

@jonnybentwood

Honesty, integrity, knowledge, curiosity, insight, passion, respect and influence

These characteristics were repeatedly highlighted when AR Pro’s were asked to identify the analyst house and individual who they wanted to recognise as being the best in the industry. This second post in the “analyst of the year” series aims to highlight individuals and firms who are seen as the best in the industry regardless of their speciality sector. See here for the first post.

At a time when vendors are having to evaluate carefully where they should invest their limited funds, it is refreshing to see best-of-class analysts receiving recognition for the value they deliver. Now, more than ever before, analysts have to prove their tangible worth and those that provide independence, integrity, flexibility and deep industry knowledge of their specific areas are being recognised as true partners for vendors and IT buyers.

Without further ado, here are the results:

Global Analyst of the Year

This is an incredible coup for Ray having been named the analyst of the year in 2008. Some people have argued whether his influence will diminish now that he has left Forrester but in my opinion, when we get to the cream of the analysts, companies seeking to work with analyst houses tend to invest in the individual rather than the firm they work for. Ray has of course now left Forrester and joined Charlene Li as a Partner at Altimeter Group looking at bridging today’s world of enterprise apps with the E2.0 world of connected business platforms. Commenting on this award, he explained:

It’s a great honor to be recognized by the IIAR, especially in a year where clients challenge analysts to provide more actionable and personalized advice.   As we rely more on social media tools to improve client delivery and outreach, I’m often reminded not to forget the other part of the equation – building strong relationships.  In fact the best AR pro’s I work with master the art of fostering strong relationships and understand that art often trumps science when dealing with people.

I mentioned this last point in the previous post but believe it is worth reiterating as to why so many European analysts tend to feature so well. At first analysis, I was immediately concerned over the relatively high number of awards that have gone to EMEA-based analysts and firms thinking that this was due to the physical location of the voters.

However, 72% of all respondents were based in the US or Canada.

My personal view is that whereas a great deal of syndicated research tends to get created and published from the US, the European analysts have to rely on their revenue stream coming from their local market knowledge, deep messaging insights and customer focus. To put it bluntly, they need to prove value otherwise they will be out of a job. This point may well be the most contentious and I am happy to discuss this point further.

Global Analyst House of the Year

This year has seen the larger, global firms dominate the awards when it comes to sector importance. It is of little surprise therefore that when it came to picking an individual firm who represented the highest value, Gartner came top. Their success should not be underestimated. In a time when many firms are cutting back on their analyst expenditure, the fact that the Gartner remains so highly recommended (even though they are far from cheap) is tantamount to the calibre of people they have working for them as well as their relevance and influence they bring to the table. Peter Sondergaard, SVP & Global Head of Research, Gartner was delighted at Gartner’s recognition and explained:

We really value this feedback from the analyst relations community as we are fully committed to constantly improving the quality of our products and the service we provide to all our clients worldwide.

I am especially pleased to see that Ovum and AMR can be recognised after they both missed winning ‘importance’ awards by sector by coming in fourth place. As an aside, and similar the UK premier league, it is always refreshing and healthy for there to be a highly competitive market where the larger firms cannot rest on their laurels and must continue to innovate or be overtaken by the competition.

EMEA Analyst of the Year

It has been a great year in Europe for boutiques. These firms, more than any, have had to challenge traditional analyst business models and the boundaries in which they operate such that the art of defining what an analyst is and does has had to change. Nevertheless, a few firms with considerably fewer analysts have seen their share of voice rise disproportionately – within the market they are recognised by AR Pros as being able to contribute a level of service that is exemplary. Jon Collins, who has recently taken over the role as MD at Freeform Dynamics explained upon receiving his award:

I’m delighted to be called out, I see this as a vote of confidence not just for me but the whole Freeform Dynamics team, not to mention its collaborative philosophy and approach, which keeps us all grounded in the real world of mainstream IT usage and makes this job such a pleasure to do. 

EMEA Analyst House of the Year

Gartner once again steal the show. With a solid presence of industry experts, they are recognised as being the best in the region. However, a significant number of ‘boutiques’ also make the top 5 – edging out likely candidates such as IDC and Ovum. In the previous post I explained that it is of little surprise that firms are cutting back and focusing on the analyst houses that have the greatest global reach. However, it is somewhat refreshing that other houses have managed to carve out their own niches – notably: Verdantix and Quocirca in the green IT space and RedMonk and MWD in the developer/ IT Pro sector. It is in these smaller, areas where ‘boutique’ firms have managed to push their own USP and become sector leaders.

Comparing important analysts and ‘analyst of the year’

it’s quite an interesting dichotomy between the analysts who were voted as most important by their coverage areas (as it highlights perceived expertise) compared to the analyst of the year overall ranking. The characteristics that stand-out amongst this crowd are difficult to combine but necessary to be a good analyst:

• Social/Relationship (ease to deal with)
• Domain Expertise
• Influence/Presentation skills

Final thoughts

My congratulations go to all the firms and individuals who have been recognised with awards. The third and final post to be published in a couple of weeks will look at which firms provide the greatest offering for bespoke research, consulting/inquiry and reports. It will also identify which firms have increased in relevance the most over the past year and the key reasons why people tend to work with analysts in the first place.

As I complete this second post, a statement that Vinnie Mirchandani made to me when I was discussing the definition of an industry analyst sticks to my mind:

"analysts" are just a small subset of a 1000 points of influence

Regardless of the debate regarding ‘who is an analyst?’ – a clear point remains. We work in a time where those that can influence buying decisions are in high demand. If analysts wish to remain a significant player within this, they must continue to offer the level of service and value that the firms and individuals who have been recognised by the IIAR in these awards provide.

Methodology

1) Entrants:

This survey was open to anyone who works in analyst relations in any country, either in-house or at an agency/consultancy. In order for someone’s entry to be validated, they had to submit their email address and company name to verify they not an impostor trying to distort the results. This personal information will not be distributed or used beyond sending copies of the results to all participant. The survey was open for specific period of time and IP addresses were taken to ensure that someone could not vote twice. A total of 137 AR Pros completed this survey.

2) Questions:

The survey specifically focused on an individual’s perception of the analyst world. A full list of every analyst house was made available for respondents to select their preference.

3) Segmentation:

Respondents were asked to specify their submissions based upon geography and segment. Based upon these criteria further analysis could be made of the results to identify specific regional or segment champions.

If you have any questions or comments about this survey please contact me (@jonnybentwood)

Note: This post is also published on the IIAR web site

Via: Geek and Poke

And an old one that is worth showing again…

How analysts make predictions?

Via: GAF, courtesy of Dilbert