• Recent Posts: Influencer Relations

    Analyst Relations Value Forum to discuss Tragic Quadrant

    Analyst Relations Value Forum to discuss Tragic Quadrant

    The IIAR has updated its Tragic Quadrant, which ostensibly ranks the ten top analyst firms in terms of impact, relevance and ease of doing business with. Earlier posts have mentioned the weaknesses of both the Quadrant and the underlying method. The IIAR’s 2017 top ten drops PAC, the fifth most valuable analyst firm. Crisp Research, ESG and Machina (Gartner’s IoT […]

    Your pitch to analysts isn’t just about your solution

    Your pitch to analysts isn’t just about your solution

    In pitches to analysts, there are many conversations going on. At one level, there’s a communication about the business solution. There’s also a conversation about the wider market and about the personal credibility of the participants. Sometimes the slides used in pitches are just excuses for the interaction. The slides are used to assess both the market vision of the firm and the […]

    KPMG pushes out 451 in 2017 Strategy Analyst Firm Awards

    KPMG pushes out 451 in 2017 Strategy Analyst Firm Awards

    For the strategic heavy lifting, executives are reaching out to a very wide range of advisors. Gartner heads up the list when we look at the Analyst Value Survey data to find the analyst firms most valued by people who work on strategy. It creates almost 19% of all the value being produced by analyst services around strategy (If CEB, […]

    Save the date for our Analyst Firm Awards

    Save the date for our Analyst Firm Awards

    This year we’re publishing our analyst firm awards more or less monthly. Please put the dates in your diary. If you’re a subscriber to the Analyst Firm Awards, you can also access a webinar for each of these events, held on the final Thursday or each month. January – Global January 18 – Outstanding reports February 17 – Strategy March 15 – Internet […]

    IDC could flourish after IDG’s sale to Chinese consortium

    IDC could flourish after IDG’s sale to Chinese consortium

    As we predicted in our April Fool’s Joke last year, IDC has been sold as part of a Chinese-led purchase that leaves CEO Kirk Campbell at the helm. IDG Capital will take control of the IDG Ventures; China Oceanwide will control IDG and most of IDC, and an independent trustee will take control of IDC’s High Performance Computing (HPC) practice, […]

So, how much money did the US Federal Government spend with analysts firms?

Well, it was a pretty fair amount.   And the lion’s share went to Gartner of course. Gartner got at least $121,000,000 in the last four years. See below for a table of spending by firm.

logo-usa-spending-gov The information came from www.USAspending.gov, which is an interesting resource for market research.  BTW, the numbers below should be considered the minimum amount the firms received in US Federal contracts because not all agencies are required to provide data. In addition, there are a few major agencies that have not submitted their 2008 numbers yet so the contract numbers could go up for all the firms in 2008. Also, there might be purchases (e.g., tickets to analyst conferences bought with credit cards and expensed) that are not associated with the firm’s DUN number. Besides the summary numbers we list below, you can also drill down to determine spending by agency and some contract details.

This is not just a fun exercise in trivia. The amount of contracts a firm has with a client can be used as an indicator for the amount of influence with that client. Using the 2007 contract amount and assuming the GAO drives a hard bargain so each Advisory seat costs $11k, Gartner could have approximately 2,700 IT manager clients inside the Federal government it is advising on technology purchasing issues. As a consequence, Gartner could be influencing tens of billions in IT spending because it has the ear of thousands of decision makers.

SageCircle Technique

  • AR professionals at companies that target the US Federal Government should incorporate this data into analyst list management
  • AR can conduct inquiries with analysts to ask about the volume and nature of inquiries they conduct with relevant Federal agencies
  • AR should communicate insights about relevant analyst Federal contracts to their sales colleagues and how to utilize these insights

Bottom Line: AR managers whose companies sell to the US Federal Government should use data from www.USAspending.gov as a data point for their analyst list ranking methodologies. Of course, analyst firms can influence the US Federal spending in ways not related to client status. However, contract status is an easily acquired, hard number that can provide valuable insights.

Gartner

  • 2008 – $23,558,453
  • 2007 – $30,680,378
  • 2006 – $34,544,716
  • 2005 – $32,267,738

Forrester

  • 2008 – $1,406,028
  • 2007 – $1,463,435
  • 2006 – $1,247,101
  • 2005 – $1,605,754

Burton Group

  • 2008 – $793,372
  • 2007 – $561,472
  • 2006 – $702,468
  • 2005 – $577,554

IDC

  • 2008 – $197,575
  • 2007 – $124,850
  • 2006 – $  96,000
  • 2005 – $187,990

Here is a random sample of other firms, all of which received zero dollars in federal contracts: Aberdeen, AMR Research, Redmonk, Yankee Group

Advertisements

4 Responses

  1. Very useful infomation. Wonder what % this represents of the overall analyst market? Think you might have dropped a “zero” in your original number in first para.

  2. Hi Bob, Thanks for the comment.

    Relatively tiny. the 2008 aggregate purchases represpent about 2.4% of Gartner’s revenues. When you start getting into individual agencies then the percentages drop even lower.

    Not that 2.4% is anything to sneeze about.

  3. great insight. Is there any breakdown between syndicated research and consulting purchases?

  4. Great stuff, and very helpful with a current client I am dealing with.

    Not to nit pick because the bigger point still holds, but I get a bit different figures when I look up each analyst. For example, for Gartner last year I get nearly $9M higher ($32,047,517). Not sure why the discrepancy.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: