Top analyst twitters / micro-bloggers… updated

05May08

Edit: 12 May: updated with 10 additional analysts

After I published the top analyst twitters last week, I am pleased to say there has been a surge of activity amongst the analyst community regarding who twitters and how they use it. I have now updated the table below to take the new players into consideration. Carter has kept his fantastic directory up-to-date and I have used this as a basis for who should be included.

Below this table I have also compiled some of the comments and anecdotes that people have made regarding how they use this tool as part of their job.

	Firm	Analyst
1	Forrester	Jeremiah Owyang	30	15	30	25	100
2	Message	Stowe Boyd	29	15	30	25	99
3	Redmonk	James Governor	27	15	30	25	97
4	Redmonk	Michael Cote	26	15	30	25	96
5	Redmonk	Steve O’Grady	22	15	19	25	81
6	AMR Research	Jonathon Yarmis	21	14	29	16	80
7	Jupiter Research	Michael Gartenberg	22	14	29	15	80
8	The451	Raven Zachary	23	15	19	20	77
9	IDC	Rachel Happe	19	13	18	23	72
10	Forrester	Charlene Li	28	9	18	16	71
11	Aite	Ron Shevlin *	14	15	29	13	70
12	Forrester	Josh Bernoff	24	10	18	18	70
13	Forrester	Peter Kim	25	12	13	18	68
14	Monash Research	Curt Monash	25	14	13	15	67
15	AIIM Market Intel.	Dan Keldsen	19	14	16	18	66
16	Ovum	David Mitchell	19	10	13	19	61
17	Burton Group	Mike Gotta	16	11	19	14	60
18	Tech~Surf~Blog	Graeme Thickins	16	12	13	19	60
19	Gartner	Thomas Otter	16	13	16	15	60
20	Freeform Dynamics	Jon Collins	15	13	16	14	57
21	Interarbor	Dana Gardner	17	8	14	18	57
22	Gartner	Ray Valdes	19	8	14	13	54
23	Gartner	Jeff Mann	14	9	14	15	52
24	The451	Vishy Venugopalan	14	12	16	10	52
25	Freeform Dynamics	David Tebbutt	16	10	14	10	50
26	Freeform Dynamics	Dale Vile	13	9	16	13	50
27	SiriusDecisions	Jonathan Block	14	8	13	14	49
28	AMR Research	Phil Fersht	15	9	11	9	43
29	Forrester	Event Handle	27	9	0	6	42
30	Accendor	Bruce Stewart	13	9	7	13	42
31	Gartner	Andreas Bitterer	10	7	12	13	41
32	Elemental Links	Brenda Michelson	12	9	11	9	41
33	Clew	David Carpe	11	7	10	13	40
34	Illuminata	Jonathan Eunice	10	7	5	18	39
35	Berlecon Research	PhilippBohn	9	7	7	14	36
36	NPD	Ross Rubin	11	7	2	14	34
37	Forrester	Merv Adrian	9	6	11	6	32
38	Patricia Seybold Group	Patricia Seybold	9	6	5	13	32
39	Hurwitz & Associates	Judith Hurwitz	13	4	8	6	32
40	Gartner	Andrew Frank	9	6	7	8	30
41	MWD	Neil Ward-Dutton	9	6	7	6	28
42	Gartner	Allen Weiner	12	8	4	4	27
43	Hurwitz & Associates	Robin Bloor	10	4	7	5	26
44	Bathwick Group	Gary Barnett	10	7	0	8	25
45	Freeform Dynamics	Martin Atherton	7	2	1	13	22
46	Gartner	Mike McGuire	9	5	2	6	22
47	Jupiter Research	Barry Parr	10	4	4	5	22
48	NPD	Sam Bhavnani	8	5	2	6	22
49	IDC	Frank Gens	9	5	2	4	20
50	Gartner	Gene Phifer	12	5	0	3	20
51	Gartner	David M. Smith	11	2	1	4	17
52	Gartner	Dan Sholler *	4	5	0	8	17
53	Gartner	Yefim Natis	6	3	0	1	10
54	Entiva Group	Alex Fletcher	3	0	0	6	9
55	IDC	IdaRose Sylvester	2	4	1	1	8
56	Quocirca	Dennis Szubert	6	0	2	0	8
57	Butler	Roy Illsley	2	1	1	4	7
58	Illuminata	Gordon Haff	3	3	1	0	7
59	Gartner	Tole Hart	6	0	0	0	6

* Updates protected – average Technobabble score given based upon Follower/Update ratio

Analyst comments:

Jeremiah Owyang:

It’s important for people to know that using Twitter actually helps me with my analysis, I’ve a direct connection with the marketplace that I cover (social computing) and I’m able to find out information at rapid speed, as well as deliver information.

I would guess I have over 100 clients who are on twitter, and we’re building relationships, sharing, and learning about each other.

Peter Kim:

I have to give points to The Guv’nor – a few months ago, I was showing Twitter to a client and he offered his services to them as an alternative.

Rachel Happe:

I’ve found Twitter to be immensely valuable in understanding the state of the conversation in the space I am covering (social media technologies), getting to know people, finding inspiration, getting feedback, and highlighting (occasionally) some of my work.

Sam Bhavnani:

As work life and personal life blend into one, more and more I’m finding twitter to be an effective means of communication. Clients also seem to appreciate being able to reach you easily through whichever connection medium they find easiest at the time, whether its text message, facebook, twitter, phone call, or email.

Dean Bubley:

While I’m absolutely certain of the value of blogging as an analyst, I’m much less convinced by the Twitter proposition. Apart from a few of my clients in the wireless VoIP / Mobile Web 2.0 application area, I’m not aware that most of my contacts (primarily in the mobile industry) use or read microblogging in any form whatsoever. Also, nobody in my social circle has ever mentioned it at all, and I see no reason to play the evangelist.

Patty Seybold:

Count me in–When I noticed that my clients were twittering to the world from our seminars, I wanted in! Now we can thought-provoke one another and keep track… It’s a mini-support network…and having access to the other analysts’ who are out there covering meetings, trade shows, and breaking news, makes it easy to track the pulse!

More comments can be found on SageCircle’s blog on this topic

Analysis

It is not a massive shock that the people who have scored highest are the same as those who use blogging to great affect. Nevertheless, special mention should be given to Jeremiah Owyang, Stowe Boyd and the entire RedMonk crew for showing the world how Twitter can best be used.

Perhaps the biggest shock is that there are only 49 analyst twitters out there. Maybe I have drank too much kool aid but I would be surprised if this number doesn’t increase dramatically over the next year. Perhaps the other change would be that the tool of choice has evolved from Twitter to another media.

Methodology

Followers (0 to 30) – Twitter lists the number of followers each user has. Like subscribing to a feed, this is a clear indication of importance as it requires someone to actively request participation. Follower ranges were determined (i.e. more than 20, more than 30, etc.) and each range was assigned a number (0 to 25) that was used as part of the algorithm.

Updates (0 to 30) – 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 25) that was used as part of the algorithm.

Conversation (0 to 40) – How many people engage in conversation with you. 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 30 day period between 1 April and 1 May 2008. The number of times this happens is calculated with each range was assigned a number (0 to 25) – again this was then used as part of the algorithm.

Technobabble Points (0 to 20) – As the only personal subjective measure in the algorithm, 0 to 25 opinion points were assigned to each blog. People who scored highest in this category had frequent, relevant and high-quality content (asking questions, posting links or commenting on discussions). Please note that I have not scored people low by not having exclusive analyst-focused content as the very nature of Twitter is to engage in off-topic discussions. I also am fully cognisant that some people use Twitter in different ways (such as posting links, asking questions etc) – this ranking recognises the value of each and scores people accordingly.

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. For the table listed above the following weightings were used:

Followers	30%
Updates	15%
Conversations	30%
Technobabble	25%

This ranking system is not meant to be a score based on someone’s ‘popularity’. I have taken careful consideration of the analysts participation into the community and the corresponding willingness of third parties to engage. As with my other posts, this league table is not an end in itself and I hope to gain valuable feedback to understand how I can make this more valid.

Technorati Tags: twitter,top analyst twitters,top analyst micro-bloggers,analyst,analyst relations,ar

Filed under: analyst relations, blogger relations, social media   |  42 Comments