Due to a recent court case brought by ZL Technologies against Gartner Group, our industry is once again debating the validity, influence and accuracy of Gartner’s Magic Quadrant (MQ) research.
Magic Quadrant for E-Mail Active Archiving
Regardless of what side of the argument you fall on, the Gartner MQ wields a tremendous influence over enterprise technology buyers. While no major enterprise-wide application or technology purchase, which can easily run into the millions of dollars, is made solely based on a Gartner report, many IT buyers use MQs to develop their vendor shortlists and to present findings to senior management.
Therefore, vendors covet mention and preferred placement in their respective MQs.
However, there’s more to garnering a positive review than just throwing money at an analyst firm including:
- Establishing a good relationship with the analysts who cover your space
- Providing access to your CEO and other top executives
- Opening up your technology roadmap and soliciting feedback
- Providing access to key customers
- Demonstrating a superior understanding of user requirements
- Developing relevant marketing messages and strong sales channels
- Delivering solid, innovative products and superior customer service
Not All Magic Quadrants Are Created Equal
The quality of the MQs drawn up by the scores of Gartner services has less to do with the formula or methodology and more to do with the rigor and effort of the hundreds of analysts who create them.
Some segments of the technology landscape fit the MQ formula more easily than others. For example, rating server hardware vendors is more straightforward than rating, say, a still-maturing software market segment. In the former, quantitative benchmarks are more easily acquired and a plethora of productivity and measurement tools are available. In the case of the latter (segments such as archiving or e-discovery solutions), new products or releases, acquisitions, mergers, regulations, requirements and other critical factors are changing the landscape for buyers on a weekly, if not daily basis.
Bottom Line
Magic Quadrants, along with its competitive derivatives will continue to live on in some fashion no matter how imperfect because, ultimately, they provide a useful shorthand tool for buyers, users, vendors, press and other members of the technology universe. However, a simple “rating” of a technology segment can never replace an informed decision that draws from many opinions, sources and viewpoints.
#1 by dvellante on October 28, 2009 - 9:32 am
Gary…I agree Magic Quadrants serve a purpose. More often than not for practitioners its a cya on a vendor/product decision or a good shortlist of which vendors to invite to an rfp. What they don't do, especially in areas like email archiving and eDiscovery, is give a clear indication of strategic fit and the ROI 'sweet spot.' Horses for courses as they saying goes.
#2 by ajbowles on October 28, 2009 - 9:53 am
nice note Gary – I love the way Gartner's attorneys position the MQ:
“Thus, the Magic Quadrant format itself rebuts any suggestion that it is a statement of fact.”
That's the last line on page 12 of Gartner's motion to dismiss. They also describe “Completeness of Vision” as “an inherently vague, qualitative judgment” so I think they have a valid defense. Of course, that may not be what clients hear from the salesforce, and it isn't what analysts like to talk about…
#3 by garymacfadden on October 29, 2009 - 4:24 pm
Dave…Well said
#4 by garymacfadden on October 29, 2009 - 4:26 pm
A…Thanks for the comments. I guess being vague can have its advantages.
#5 by sbanovic on November 3, 2009 - 10:48 am
Gary – You have a very good grasp of what the market is about in the archiving space. As you know, the lines between archiving, records management, digital asset management, eDiscovery and compliance are blurring at a rapid pace. In order for Gartner to maintain a value proposition they must continue to pigeon-hole their criteria in order to maintain credibility (and customer retention). The sad thing is, if the solution isn't a leader or at the very least a visionary, it's an also-ran product that many executives about the virtues of a product that is considered not “cutting the mustard”.
#6 by garymacfadden on November 8, 2009 - 9:27 pm
S…Thanks for the comments. Integration of key information management applications is of paramount importance to users.
#7 by garymacfadden on November 9, 2009 - 2:27 am
S…Thanks for the comments. Integration of key information management applications is of paramount importance to users.