Tuesday, February 17, 2009
How come Redmonk is the only analyst firm that cares about transparency?
Their clients are posted clearly on their site. Every time they mention a client (in a blog or otherwise) they include the disclaimer. I see them as being more of a pulse on what's going on than a mouthpiece for clients (e.g. Gartner). I never feel like I have to look at their research with a microscope and wonder if any string manipulation is going on. I know that many are curious how many companies have ever been in the Gartner Magic Quadrant without paying fees but if Redmonk had their own, this too would be transparent.
What I find even more fascinating is the readership of Redmonk which is equally transparent. If you want to know who is reading Redmonk, then all you have to do is go to Google to check links or simply look at web page statistics by third parties. Can you ask the same question with the same amount of visibility for content produced by Gartner.
While I am not employed by any software vendor, it feels like many of them are throwing away their money by not getting exactly what they think. Gartner is the model for what's wrong with the industry analyst community and I am curious when others will see the wisdom of the Redmonk model...
NOTE: James McGovern is not a Redmonk client...
Links to this post: