• Recent Posts: Influencer Relations

    Take the 2016/17 Analyst Value Survey

    Take the 2016/17 Analyst Value Survey

    The Analyst Value Survey is open! Each year several hundred users of analyst research tell us which analyst firms they use, and which are most valuable. In exchange, they get access to our results webinar, where they discover which firms are delivering the most value in key market segments. You can take part too. Go to AnalystValueSurvey.com and click on […]

    Guess Who’s Looking for Top Talent in Analyst Relations?

    Guess Who’s Looking for Top Talent in Analyst Relations?

    Looking for a new direction in your Analyst Relations career? October is a time when new opportunities pop up in the field. From IBM to Google, we gathered the top US Analyst Relations firms with vacancies needing to be filled. If you’d like to learn more about the opportunity and to schedule an interview, contact these firms directly. However, if […]

    Why KCG’s analyst relations awards beat the IIAR’s

    Why KCG’s analyst relations awards beat the IIAR’s

    We used 18,777 data points from the Analyst Attitude Survey to compare the two leading awards for analyst relations teams. Although we found that KCG‘s awards are more useful than the IIAR‘s, both primarily reflect corporate performance rather than that of the AR teams. As a result, there’s very little that AR teams can do better or worse in these […]

    Netscout continues unwise Gartner suit

    Netscout continues unwise Gartner suit

    Netscout and Gartner have scheduled their trial for next July. The case stands little chance of improving Netscout’s value. It does, however, risk harming the reputation of both analyst firms and analyst relations professionals. Over the last weeks, pressure has mounted on Netscout’s lawyers. Netscout claims Gartner’s Magic Quadrant harmed its enterprise sales and that the truth of Gartner’s statements […]

    Is this how the Quadrant lost its Magic?

    Is this how the Quadrant lost its Magic?

    Gartner’s Magic Quadrant is the most influential non-financial business research document. In the late 1980s, it was a quick and dirty stalking horse to provoke discussions. Today it is an extensive and yet highly limited process, based on the quantification of opinions which are highly qualitative. The early evolution of the MQ tells us a lot about the challenge of industry […]

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?


  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.


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

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: