What makes a tier 1 analyst house?
This has caused some understandable rantings as to whether they indeed fall into this top drawer. How are tierings evaluated? Is it as Armadgeddon suggest by revenue per analyst/consultant?
Personally I think you have to look at the analyst and measure their influence.
The sole reason why an analyst is important is that people take their views seriously. My subjective view is that any analyst that has a strong enterprise (like Gartner) or media (like RedMonk, Quocirca) influence is a tier 1 analyst regardless of where they are working.
Now that Geoff Blaber has joined CCS Insight does that make him less influential? Will he have thrown away his contact book?
It is time to stop looking at the analyst house and instead look at the analyst. Best practice analyst relations focuses on bespoke programmes for individuals and does not throw everyone into the same bucket.
Filed under: analyst relations | 5 Comments