… because the satellite circus won’t leave town.

And continues to push their 2*2s as your solution to all your tech woes. It’s not just Gartner and their Magic Quadrant, although that is usually the first map pushed in front of C-Suite Executives as part of organized corporate brainwashing — usually by Big Consultancies and vendors who sponsor the map in order to push it in front of their C-Suite targets.

Especially when the vendor, or the vendor that the consultancy has diamond/platinum/sycophant status with, is in the upper right quadrant which — according to map definition — makes the vendor one of the de-factor best vendors, no matter what.

And it’s complete and utter bullcrap exceeded only by the Gen-AI bullcrap.

So when an executive tells you they need to use vendor X because the Big Analyst 2 * 2 says so, you need to have a systematic deconstruction playbook at your disposal. In fact, you need to have it memorized because they will spring it on you just as they are about to sign a contract and you will have to stop them dead in their tracks.

Which means you need to understand everything about what the 2 * 2 maps aren’t.

They aren’t best tech, or even best vendor.

They aren’t exhaustive, or even modern.

They aren’t unbiased, or even consistent.

In a post from this summer, which probably flew under your radar, Joël Collin-Demers tackled busting the Gartner MQ because, as the most popular map, it’s the one you are most likely going to have to refute.

In his post, Joël makes it clear that:

“Leader” status measures market presence (and the analyst firm’s definition of vision, which usually correlates to how many zeroes they can see on the cheque the vendor writes)

“Transformation” capability is not measured, nor is real client success.

“Strategy” measured is theirs, not yours.

And many other things.

Moreover, it ignores the fact that:

“Subjectivity” is the name of the game. There’s no well defined scale because the majority of factors being measured are purely subjective.

“Axes are Meaningless” as they typically squish half-a-dozen factors into one, whether they fit together or not.

“Different is same” because six different factors averaged into one means that completely different company profiles become indistinguishable if the average is the same.

In other words, while the maps can point you to some vendors that are, or at least were, rather significant in the space that you might want to consider adding to your potential vendor list that you are considering for your RFP, that’s all these maps are good for. Creating a partial starting list. No more, no less. Especially since, as you do more research and hone in on your industry, strategy, spend profile, actual needs, and financial means, they might all fall off that list as you identify vendors that are likely to be better for your needs and invite them to the RFP instead.

So be sure to check out Joël Collin-Demers post where he tackled Gartner MQ Busting and start creating a playbook you can immediately bring to bear on a moment’s notice.