InfoWeek has a piece on Gartner’s commentary on it’s piece on Gartner. If you get what I mean. The media comments on what the pundits have to say about the media commenting on the pundits. And around and around we go on the old issue of bias, transparency and pay-to-play.
Not alot of new ground in the original InfoWeek story, but they are right – these issues warrant discussion. This is even more the case considering Gartner’s power to influence decisions. All of my recent exchanges with Gartner reinforce my view that the analysts are very ethical and bound by some pretty rigid rules of engagement designed to enforce their independence.
What still doesn’t make sense to me are many of their models (such as scoring relevance and momentum based on inbound inquiries from clients) and the precious magic quadrant. And, what really doesn’t make sense are buyers that make decisions based on where a company is on a magic quadrant. I’ve bumped into a few CIOs who are doing this inside F100 companies – something that Gartner discourages. The misuse of the research is often as nonsensical and the confines in which the research is created.
What is really good news is that Gartner seems up for the conversation. And I agree, the more teeth they get, the more relevant they become.
