Monday, May 29, 2006


Analyzing the Analysts: Brenda Michelson

Figured I would provide commentary on Brenda Michelson, thought blogger with industry analyst firm Seybold Group...

First, let me get the bashing out of the way. She grew up as a Warrior and I am a Warhawk (Town rivalries) which means that I have to be highly critical of anything she does and therefore analysis will be even deeper seeking out holes than I would do for other analysts.

Second, my blogroll isn't filled with very many women bloggers which means that even though she hasn't acknowledged her duty, she needs to step up and get other women industry analysts to blog. It would be interesting if she could call up some women analysts from Gartner and Forrester and get them to realize the value proposition of having a two-way dialog.

Third, she is one of the only industry analyst bloggers in the United States that isn't babbling about product-oriented architecture and mentioning the latest greatest vendor she had a discussion with. Is she getting it twisted and think she is in the UK where analysts tend to only focus on customer problems?

Fourth, her blog entries are very insightful. I suspect this is due to the fact that she was once an enterprise architect for L.L. Bean Seems like other analysts in the blogosphere never worked within a large enterprise and therefore have an outsider looking in perspective on our thought processes. I wonder if you could help out other analysts understand what business-driven EA (vs product-oriented EA) really means by not blogging periodically but doing a blogothon and drilling down deep every single day for the next three months.

Five, your boss always talks about innovation but I have never seen you discuss this topic. Yes, this word is minimally abused and definetely overloaded. Many EA practitioners believe that EA is all about transformation which is distinct from innovation. Maybe you could tell us what innovation for EA is all about?

Six, how come you don't speak at conferences? I am tired of the mindless dribble that comes from other industry analyst firms. It is so high-level that I have to pretend I am Bill Clinton lighting a big one but not actually inhaling. What would it take for you to speak at an upcoming Infoworld conference? I am sure Jon Udell can hook you up.

Seven, it's ok to talk about personal things every once in awhile. What do you drive? Where do you vacation? What was the last book you read? Could you tell us what other industry analysts you have engaged in meaningful dialog with before (I know you and Stephen O'Grady have talked but who else?

Eight, we both have a vested interest in SOA and Portals but what would it take to convince you to start doing a research report on how enterprises can start embracing web 2.0? We know that other analyst firms are clueless to web 2.0 and you will have a headstart of at least six months before they finally get their ah-ha moment.

Nine, I'm in a sharing mood. What would it take for you to come and visit our enterprise and do a case study on how we do architecture governance or even on practices we use to construct our SOA?

Ten, does your boss know that you actually put references to non-seybold research in your reports? This is even more transparent than what any other industry analyst firm has ever done. Maybe the others will continue their practice of plaigarism and simply stay status quo but you need to talk about why you do this and encourage other analysts in the blogosphere to start doing the same. Transparency builds trust...

<< Home
| | View blog reactions

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?