Category Archives: Analyst

Vendors Have Lured Big Analyst Firms Astray Because Buyers Don’t Understand They Get What They Pay For!

About the same time we asked Why Aren’t ProcureTech Analysts Doing Their Jobs Anymore, THE REVELATOR asked, in a comment stream, how did … the analyst consulting and ProcureTech solution providers lose their way by championing technology-led, equation-based modelling?”.

Which is a fair question as this ties into why we believe many ProcureTech analysts aren’t doing their job anymore. As per our previous post, we believe the firm is the problem (even if the firm doesn’t know it, but in most cases, the firm should), and, more specifically, the primary reason is bad direction.

But let’s get back to THE REVELATOR‘s question. The answer is this:

At one point, the successors to the founders and/or the sales team took the easy way out and switched to vendor sponsorship.

As us grey beards, who have been around since the beginning of ProcureTech, will recall, there was a time buyers paid for research because they understood the value of unbiased research. But, like Project Assurance, that’s a hard sell when a buyer might spend 10K, 50K, or 100K with no guarantee they’ll identify a single viable solution among those covered in a report. Seasoned, well educated, and thoroughly experienced executives will understand the value of risking 10K to 100K on a report or study before committing to a 100K or 1M+ annual investment, because losing 10K is much better than losing 100K or 1M, and can be chalked up as a cost to doing business. But those executives who are uneducated in management and risk and inexperienced, which are many of today’s executives who were put in place because of their affiliation with investors, or a perceived ability to run a business off of balance sheets alone (even though these MBAs are the reason so many high tech companies are struggling and companies like Boeing are facing disaster after disaster — they don’t realize that you can’t run a business you don’t understand and that’s why, in the first Industrial Revolution [and the Gilded Age the US is so desperately trying to bring back], Engineers ran the show, and not over-glorified accountants and lawyers), don’t understand that or the risk of using vendor funded reports to make a decision.

For these successor and sub-par sales people who just weren’t up to the task of the hard sell, when marketing organizations come along and, out of the blue, threw big money at them to sponsor a study, no sales effort required, they jumped on it. More vendors see the success of the first vendors to adopt this approach, follow suit, the money starts flowing in, and the model shifts. Unbiased researchers have to shift their studies to those aspects where the sponsors do well or leave the firm. Moreover, the search for new hires focus on those with less experience or ethics (who can be easily swayed in the direction the big sponsors want). (So before accepting the results of any study, you should be echoing Mr. Klein and asking Who Paid For That Study?)

This means that, over time, instead of an industry leading analyst firm we get a marketing organization that echoes the “technology-led” approach or puts the product, vs. the solution, first.

Moreover, it’s going to stay this way until some big firms step up and say “enough is enough” and stop vendor sponsorships all together and some big clients step up to fund the research. As Mr. Köse keeps saying, you get what you pay for.

If You Want To Get An Analysts Attention, Don’t Insult Their Intelligence Or Integrity!

This is a response to another MUST READ article from Mr. Köse on how NOT to do product launches and analyst relations! (And a shorter version might still be found at this link on LinkedIn.)

Mr. Köse’s post was a response to a new marketing campaign from a big Intake-to-Orchestrate (I2O) vendor who sent a very insulting cold email with a cringeworthy cocktail of buzzwords (“agentic procurement orchestration”, seriously?), inflated ego (“category we created”), and the cherry on top that made this one boil over … a beg for free LinkedIn amplification.

More specifically, the request included in his LinkedIn Post.

Before we continue, I must say that I’m ecstatic that I didn’t get this PR spam, because I do not know if I would have been so civil in my response. It took every ounce of restraint to maintain even a shred of my civility last year when they released their “FREE” Intake and Procurement RFP which, as I have screamed from the rooftops, is an outright lie (and using any of these “FREE” RFPs will be the most expensive thing you ever do! [Source]).

After all, as Mr. Köse states:

  • Analysts are not influencers.
  • Experts are not free marketing channels.
  • Your CEO ghosting emails while your marketing team spams us … is damaging you, not us.


Moreover, as Mr. Köse has stated, nothing they stated would indicate they discovered fire (which, by the way actually works), built a new category, or did anything except repackage existing automation with a fresh coat of jargon.

As Mr. Köse notes:

  • it’s disrepectful to the analyst (are we so dumb and lazy we can’t do our own write-ups?)
  • it’s transactional (and that should be reserved to describing specific types of ProcureTech)
  • it’s dumb (the louder you shout nonsense, the louder we’re going to respond)

But most importantly, nothing sums the situation up more than when Mr. Köse states:

“If your innovation is real, show it to me!”

He’s not alone in this belief.

As I said to Pierre in a recent comment stream in one of my many (ProcureTech) AI is BS posts, “why are you the only one defending the current state of AI in ProcureTech … if the vendors in our space actually have it, and it works … why aren’t the vendors defending it … and if it’s so great, why are they all scared to show it to me?”

Any vendor can come here to Sourcing Innovation, check out any of the 300 plus reviews of over 200 providers I’ve written about over the past 19 years, and see that there isn’t a single negative post about any vendor who offered a real solution that

  1. did what was claimed and
  2. solved a problem for
  3. the niche they targeted
  4. efficiently and reliably.

(Moreover, if these vendors have a Spend Matters subscription, where I would hope that at least half of the 200+ vendor reviews I (co-) authored are still up as well, they could check those reviews out as well.)

(Side note: the I2O vendors have been as quiet as the Gen-AI wrapper vendors ever since I called them Clueless for the Popular Kids and said it was time for Revenge of the Nerds.)

In other words, if you have something great, and you want a real analyst to talk about it, then don’t spam us with (what appears to be) Gen-AI generated marketing drivel. Instead, have an intelligent human reach out with a compelling new module, use case, etc, and maybe you’ll get a response and, if you give an honest demo, a good write up. (And that’s infinitely more valuable than someone sharing your Gen-AI marketing drivel on LinkedIn.)

Otherwise, as Mr. Köse makes abundantly clear, it’s probably best that you pretend the analyst doesn’t exist until you’re ready to engage properly. Otherwise, you’re just insulting our intelligence AND our integrity, and the only result you’re going to get from that is an analyst who doesn’t want to cover you (and who will happily blow up the false illusion you are trying to create).

Why Aren’t ProcureTech Analysts Doing Their Jobs Anymore?

If you accept, as per our last post on the subject, that ProcureTech analysts are not doing their jobs anymore, then why?

While many will say it’s complicated because there is often no single easy answer that encapsulates the entire situation, the reality is that there are only a few overriding answers, especially when you consider that if a job is NOT being done, there are only two fundamental entities in the mix that could be responsible for it not being done: the analyst and the firm.

The Analyst

If the reason the job is not getting done lies solely on the part of the analyst, then, sadly, the analyst probably shouldn’t have their job because, frankly, that means the analyst is lazy or stupid. (And you should know by now this site is NOT whatever your definition of political correctness is.) Unless the analyst is being prevented from doing their job properly by (actions of) the firm, there are no other explanations.

Lazy and while we agree with a fellow analyst who bluntly stated humans are naturally wired to be lazy, we also believe that if you are, you shouldn’t be an analyst, because you can’t even hope to get it right unless you work tirelessly to get to the truth ignored by marketing soundbites, hidden by demo personnel, and apparently shrouded in mystery at the C-Suite level

Stupid with respect to the smarts they need to do their job; doesn’t mean they are otherwise a stupid person, but if you don’t have a solid tech background (with appropriate degrees, experience, and understanding), no matter how smart you think you are, you shouldn’t be a tech analyst (or vendors will pull wool over your eyes on a daily basis)

The Firm

The firm is often the problem, even if they don’t know they are. (And that’s why many of the best analysts in our space, many of whom worked at bigger firms at one point or another, are with smaller firms or on their own.)

Overwork
If the firm constantly overworks their analysts, doesn’t give them mental health days, doesn’t give them sufficient time off in the case of illness or family emergency/death, the analyst is going to be tired and/or distracted and not going to do a good job. Period.

UnderTraining
If the analysts don’t have all of the required skill sets and knowledge to be an analyst (deep knowledge of their area, deep knowledge of tech, profiles of an average platform and analyst to start from, the [preferred] methodology used by the firm, the unique methodologies/outputs produced by the firm, etc.), then it is the responsibility of the firm that hired them to ensure they get the proper training and education. Period. (Because an undertrained analyst can not produce good work.)

Bad Direction
If the analysts are told to do substandard work, ensure a certain vendor looks better than the rest in a map, or only write up the good parts, then any poor performance on the part of the analyst is entirely the fault of the firm giving them that direction.

And if the analyst isn’t doing their job, we’d wager this is the dominant reason. Especially when, of the big firms:

  • one will NOT include a vendor in their main map unless the vendor is a paying client
  • one changes their entry requirements every year so that it’s almost impossible for a non-client to make all of the entry requirements
  • one tends to only publish maps that are vendor sponsored up-front

The reality of the situation is that it’s quite hard to do unbiased research if you’re paid up front by a vendor for that research. Period.

Until the models change so that the only money taken from a vendor in relation to any published research report is an optional license after the fact, you can’t expect good, unbiased research or analysts to be allowed to do their jobs.

Are ProcureTech Analysts Doing Their Jobs Anymore?

Very good question. Let’s get down to definitions.

Analyst: a person who conducts analysis

Analysis: a detailed examination of the elements or structure

There are two key words here “detailed examination“. At the major analyst firms (i.e. Forrester, Gartner, Hackett, IDC, etc.), is this happening? And to what extent?

Those following LinkedIn will have seen a lot of posts putting down the major analyst firms (and one firm in particular) over the last few months, including:

And you have to wonder if they are doing a “detailed examination”?

Because, as

  • THE REVELATOR and the doctor have repeatedly pointed out, doubling down does not mean detailed inquiry, and technology first is (as it’s always been) a recipe for disaster
  • if firms are claiming a map is no longer relevant, then either the map is not analyzing technology (enough) or not doing a proper analysis with respect to actual marketplace needs for the technology
  • if the founder of one of the most significant supply chain analyst groups in existence is saying the most recent event was a tornado echo chamber of buzzword bingo and a vicious cycle of recycled hype—analysts feeding vendors, vendors feeding analysts. No one challenged the status quo. No myth-busting. No dragon-slaying. No industry policing. Just a milk-toast cycle with no actual analysis in sight

Then it seems actual analysis has flow the coup from at least one of these big shops (if not two or three). And if that’s the case, then what’s the point of these shops employing ProcureTech analysts?

Because an analyst should be

  • doing detailed technology examinations
  • giving their totally unbiased opinions, for better or worse,
  • telling buying organizations what’s important in analyzing vendor solutions and what’s not, and
  • telling vendors what they should be focussed on to serve the buying organizations they want to sell to

and should not be

  • defining arbitrary market parameters as to whom can be considered for a technology evaluation and whom can not (when it should come down to whether or not the vendor has a module that meets the core technology requirements from a stack and functional viewpoint),
  • analyzing AND scoring very subjective factors (“innovation”, “vision”, “sales strategy”, etc. etc. etc.),
  • repeating vendor soundbite and BS marketing ad nauseam and
  • accepting money to repeat vendor soundbite and BS marketing ad nauseam!!!

So while real ProcureTech analysts are sorely needed, the doctor also has to wonder if many of the existing ProcureTech analysts are doing their jobs anymore!

 

Dear Influencer: One Final Piece of Advice!

In our first two instalments, we gave you the top ten things you can do to be the Preeminent Procurement Influencer. While that’s more advice than anyone else is going to give you without a large retainer, we’re not done yet. We have one final piece of advice for you.

Find your next job sooner than later!

You might think this is crass, but the doctor has your best interests at heart because, being one of the last remaining OG analysts and bloggers who has now been in this space for two and half decades, he knows the cold hard truth.

You’re getting into it for the fame, thinking the fortune will come, but it won’t.

You need to remember that THIS IS PROCUREMENT. It’s Not Public Relations. It’s not Marketing. It’s not even Sales. You’re not selling to someone who’s cool. You’re selling to someone who’s less cool in the corporate culture than the IT Squad locked in the basement, who has significantly less budget and oversight than the IT Squad because the C-Suite at least understands their e-Mail and ERP needs supersized servers (even if it doesn’t, because that was what was required two decades ago and they haven’t learned anything about IT since) and their shiny new gadgets (laptops, tablets, smartphones, and Garmin GPS devices which are great for hiking the Himalayas) cost big bucks, and someone who has almost no say into corporate decision making and goal setting. Moreover, you’re selling to a function which has the least professionals of all functions across the business, as well as the least jobs (about 500K in the US compared to about 2.5M marketing and 5.5M sales professionals in the US). They are few and far between.

As a result, that rush of getting new likes and followers isn’t going to last very long because you’re not going to get that many followers no matter how hard you work, how often you pump out that flashy content we chronicled earlier this week, or how cool you are. The first few hundred followers will come very fast, the next few thousand will come at a good pace, but then, things will slow down. The gratification and dopamine highs from seeing those numbers trend up will be fewer and further between. Right now, the most popular influencers in our space on LinkedIn have about 30K followers. Think about that. 30K followers, when most big name influencers have 100K+ or 1M+. That’s not very many, and that’s because of the very small market you’re targeting. If there are only 500K in the US, that means the number of professionals you’re targeting across North America, the UK, and EU (where LinkedIn is popular) is only a little over 1M — and they aren’t all on LinkedIn.

Thus, at the end of the day, there’s no fame.

And there’s no fortune either.

I don’t know if you bothered to do your research, but like most actors and actresses (who have to waitstaff or do odd jobs just to survive on their cans of tuna), most influencers don’t make money! YouTubers who get 1Million views a month can’t even pay their rent on that. UNLESS YOU HAVE A MILLION FOLLOWERS AS AN INFLUENCER, YOU CAN NOT MAKE A LIVING OFF OF IT!

But I can get sponsors? Good for you. You might pay your (office) rent on that, but you won’t pay your bills on that either. Ask the OG bloggers.

The daily grind is all there is. The ongoing, never ending, slog that will be there day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year with no fame, no fortune, and no reward.

And if you’d stop to ask why there are so few bloggers, sorry, content creators, left in our space, even fewer that have been doing it for more than a couple of years, and next to none that have been doing it for more than a decade, and did your research, you’d know that it’s because many started thinking it would be cool and fun, get them recognition and renown, and it would eventually pay off big.

But after a couple of weeks, months, or years, the vast majority of these bloggers, sorry again, content creators, realized that it’s not cool and fun (it’s just hard work), the breadth of recognition and renown was much (much) less than they dreamed, and the money, well, it just wasn’t there. They still had to make their living as a procurement leader, consultant, or startup founder — which, as we know, already required constant overtime before the content creation.

Dear Influencer, This Is Your Life! And let me save you some heartache by telling you now that You Don’t Want It. So figure out what you want to do and go do it. You’ll be much happier if you do. (Because no one is going to write your content creator obituary when you suddenly stop one day because you’re just too tired to keep going. the doctor stopped keeping track after the first hundred (100) or so dropped off. Yes, you read that right, hundred or so. Shortly after THE PROPHET and the doctor started almost two decades ago, we went from maybe a dozen bloggers to over one hundred, and then back down to less than two dozen three years later. They didn’t last, and you won’t either.)

Most of the time, it’s only the strong survive, but in our space, it’s only the non-sociopathic masochists with a pressing need to try and educate (or at least intellectually stimulate) others that survive. (And the doctor hopes THE REVELATOR agrees!) In other words, if you’re mentally well balanced, your chances of success are about equivalent to a pig flying through hell fast enough to keep the snowball from melting …)