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:

• THE REVELATOR‘s comment and numerous other posts asking us if big analyst firm doubling down on technology is leading us astray
• FOUR KITE‘s withdrawal from a major map (and Eric Johnson’s follow up)
• Arthur Mesher’s scathing review of a recent analyst firm supply chain event

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!