http://dealarchitect.typepad.com/deal_architect/2010/07/more-tenets-for-the-next-gen-analyst.html

- we need to look way beyond infotech and start also focusing on claentech, healthtech etc. We need to recognize some of the most advanced tech innovations are coming from what we traditionally considered “buyers” – GE, BMW, BASF etc are now tech vendors that few analysts cover. We need to look at growing global sources of tech. And finally, we have to start leveraging communities, crowds for our research. Frankly, those niches will allow smaller boutique firms to distinguish themselves more than positioning themselves as knockoffs of the Gartners

Journalists are doing less quality reporting these days, as their beats grow wider and their reporting consequently grows less deep.

Part-time analysts (see my related post http://www.strategicmessaging.com/blurring-analyst-consultant-line/2010/07/28/ ) might opine without really doing much research, other than examining particular products they’re interested in using. Other people might just post a few insightful things and retweet a lot of other stuff and be viewed as “top-100″ analysts.

And of course a lot of analysts are so busy with client service that their research time is limited. That’s always a danger if you get popular.

Either way, I’m in full agreement with you: the line between journalists and analysts grows thinner by the year, as analysts do less research and journalists do more (aided by web, nets, invitations to the same briefings, access to the same data/human sources, etc.)

Thanks very much for your thoughts on this. Again, it’s a great post.

For both of you, I could add that one of the big opportunities is probably repackaging core analyst insights for various markets, in connection with the original analyst, whether by vertical, geography, or size. Up to the point, that’s an advantage for the big firms, where — for example — a CRM analyst can work with an analyst who covers general analytic technology, to both their advantages. But many other opportunities along those lines are underserved.

It’s all part of the disruption narrative: Serve certain markets better than the big guys do. Ultimately, they’ll only survive either by buying and embracing the disrupters, or by providing ever more differentiated value to their core customers.

You are absolutely correct. For example, I’ve decided to advise users on a more “project” basis, specifically targeting ones who never wanted and never bought a large analyst firm’s subscription services in the first place.

Gideon Gartner suggested that big users should use analysts the way institutional investors use stock analysts — talk to SEVERAL of them for one decision. In principle, I absolutely agree. In practice, I doubt it will happen much soon, for reasons of budget and buying behavior.

I think we assume that an analyst does research. (Even if you’re mainly the conduit for research performed by closely-associated colleagues, if you’re not part of the team figuring out how to synthesize the research, you probably won’t be a good conduit.)

To the extent an analyst is a purveyor of consulting services, what makes them be “analyst-y” rather than general consulting is that they’re based on research.

To the extent an analyst is a quasi-journalist, that quasi-journalism presupposes research.

As business models diverge, I’d say that the remaining consistent property of analysts is that they do research.

That said, I’d be interested in hooking up with some straight implementers, where they + I provide a lot of assistance to organizations in (re)designing their computing systems. It wouldn’t be necessary for EVERY member of our team to do much of their own analyst research.

CAM

You built your personal / business brand early on, and it’s great to see you reaching out and mentoring colleagues newer to the analyst game.

I have a question for you: do you think that “research” is a necessary part of an “analyst” job? if so, how do you describe the “research” that is requisite to being classified as an analyst?

I’ve used my own definition of “what constitutes an analyst” since launching Tekrati in 2000, and performing “research” has been a part of my definition. It’s time once again to re-evaluate my position on research and analyst roles. Would like to know your point of view.

I feel that these are questions which are far more likely to uncover the business model and “analyst” model that can emerge to compete in the next few years. The vast majority of advisory firms are way too focused on what content they produce versus what the outcome is that their clients are seeking. Why do firms engage? What are they trying to achieve and how can they best be assisted to achieve those aims?