• Recent Posts: Influencer Relations

    Fersht: some IIAR award-winners “just tick the boxes”

    Fersht: some IIAR award-winners “just tick the boxes”

    Some of the firms mentioned by the IIAR’s analyst team awards fall short of excellence. That’s the verdict of several hundred analysts who took our Analyst Attitude Survey, and of the CEO of one of the top analyst firms. Phil Fersht left the comment below on our criticism of the IIAR awards. We thought we’d reprint it together with the […]

    Do the IIAR awards simply reward large firms?

    Do the IIAR awards simply reward large firms?

    The 2016 Institute for Industry Analyst Relations’ awards seem to be rewarding firms for the scale of their analyst relations, rather than their quality. In a blog post on July 6th, the IIAR awarded IBM the status of best analyst relations teams, with Cisco, Dell and HP as runners-up. Together with Microsoft, which outsources much of its analyst relations to […]

    Unmaking fruit salad: 6 ways to help analysts segment markets

    Unmaking fruit salad: 6 ways to help analysts segment markets

     It’s a common challenge for providers: some new or fast-changing market contains very different solutions. Clients want either apples or oranges, but the analyst research reads more like fruit salad. As new solutions come into old markets, or as analysts try to squeeze hot new solutions into their less-exciting coverage areas, it’s increasingly hard for users of analyst research to make […]

    Control in Analyst Attitude Surveys

    Control in Analyst Attitude Surveys

    Because a lot of analysts take part in our Analyst Attitude Surveys, we are able to offer clients what we call a control group. In the language of research, a control group is a group of people who don’t get the treatment that we want to measure the effectiveness of. For example, most firms might be focussed on a top tier […]

    Time for a new direction in AR measurement?

    Time for a new direction in AR measurement?

    Worldwide, Analyst Relations teams are committed to fostering the best information exchange, experiences and trusted relationships with tightly-targetted global industry analysts and influencers. Sometimes the targeting is too narrow and analysts are treated inhumanly. However, the technology buying process is transforming and so must the benchmarking of analyst relationships. There’s already a long-term transformation of analyst relations. Over one-third of technology […]

Your analyst list is likely wrong – half the analysts should not be on it, half that should are not

Having reviewed many analyst lists over the years, it never ceases to amazes us how such a very high percentage of them are wrong. The analyst relations (AR) team’s analyst list(s) are a critical success factor. Having a poorly constructed list means that AR professionals are missing important analysts and wasting time with non-relevant analysts. As a consequence, the AR team will find both its efficiency and effectiveness negatively impacted. In the most dire circumstances, having a poorly constructed list could also negatively impact an AR professional’s ability to keep their job.

 This post focuses on which analysts should be included or excluded from a list, not on ranking and tiering (see here for that discussion).

There are many reasons why any particular analyst list can be so wrong (in order of importance, most important first): 

  • Perception that there is no time to do the work
  • Lack of formal analyst list methodology
  • Inadequate consideration of corporate, business group and team objectives
  • Lack of carefully considered weighted criteria
  • Infrequent review of the analyst marketplace for changes in analysts and coverage
  • Lack of mechanism for capturing how analyst list decisions were made
  • Focusing on large firms while giving boutiques short shrift
  • No access to a database of analysts
  • Internal political pressure
  • External squeaky wheels

 Frankly, creating and maintaining an analyst list is not rocket science, nor does it require a lot of effort – if the AR team has a formal methodology and supporting tools. It is more an issue of discipline to do the task and not push it to the bottom of the to-do list because of “lack of time.”

This issue is not limited to vendors, but extends to enterprise technology buyer analyst clients (typically IT managers), investor clients, and the press.

One approach that AR teams can take is to hire a third-party firm or agency to create or maintain their analyst lists. SageCircle does not offer this service, but we can advise AR managers on the players in the marketplace and how to decide which firm or agency is best to hire.

Part of the responsibility for this situation lies with the analysts that do not make the effort to educate the market about their role and coverage. Often the analysts that get the most angry about being excluded from analyst lists make the least effort to ensure AR knows about them. This arrogance, that it is AR’s responsibility to conduct in-depth research on every potential analyst, is unrealistic and counterproductive. While some biographical and coverage information may be on the analyst website it is often spotty, inconsistent, or out of date. It would not require much effort to generate a standard one-page description of role and coverage that could be emailed to AR managers.  This would ensure that they are not excluding the analyst from an analyst list where they would be appropriate. 

SageCircle Technique:

  • Include analyst list management in AR job descriptions and use it for annual reviews
  • Generate – or use SageCircle’s – a formal methodology and supporting tools for analyst list management
  • Document the criteria with weights for list inclusion or exclusion
  • Review the list for obvious changes periodically – monthly to quarterly
  • Rebuild the list from scratch annually
  • Capture why analysts were included or excluded for audit trail purposes

Related Posts:

Bottom Line: All member of the analyst ecosystem should establish a formal methodology for determining which analysts are relevant for inclusion or exclusion on an analyst list

Question: AR – Do you have a formal methodology for determining which analysts to include or exclude from your list? End user clients – Do you research which analysts you should be talking to or do you rely on the firms’ client service staff to make recommendations? Analysts – Do you take the time to educate – using marketing techniques – vendors and enterprises what your role is in the market and your research coverage?

6 Responses

  1. Actually, this isn’t just confined to analysts. Research from one of our partners finds that more than 80% of opinion leader advocates identified by

  2. Hi Aaron, Thx for the comment.

    I’m not sure if I should be relieved or horrified that it is just as bad for the broader influencer community. ;->

  3. Great analysis of the need for analyst list management. :-) Recently the Microsoft team revealed their list to the world by making the mistake of cc’ing the list on an update (not bcc). The size of the list was astounding! Well over 1,000 recipients.

    While Microsoft is indeed covered by every analyst in the IT space is it wise for them to include them *all* in their efforts? Do they have that sort of capability?

    -Stiennon

  4. Hi Richard, Thanks for the comment.

    Oops. :->

    The number does not surprise me. At major vendors there can total lists with easily over 1,000 analysts on dozens and dozens of lists because of the breath of the product and services portfolio and the vendor’s presence in many markets.

    So it’s not the number, but have they done a good job identifying which analysts get personal attention vs. email updates?

  5. Hi Carter,

    What we’re found at Lighthouse is that tiering is analysts correctly is also a challenge for many AR professionals, so I’m very glad to see the way you connected listing and tiering straight away. We are one of the firms that helps firms to list and rank analysts, and out observation is that around a third of most analysts lists needs replacing or removing.

    With proper tiering and the right technology, the AR programs can be both more exclusive and more inclusive. Richard’s comment should be read in that context. Last week I was with a large computer manufacturer which tracks 500 analysts, but only 50 are the focus for its relationship managers. That allows them to reach out broadly with “one-to-many” techniques that ensure that all the analysts interested in them are updated: it also allows them to focus on the small minority of analysts who give that vendor and its clients the most value.

    Duncan.

  6. […] your analyst lists to ensure that you know who are truly relevant to your […]

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: