Analyzing What Is Lacking in Analyst Reports; Research as a Service is Nigh

A topic that is almost taboo in the storage world today is criticizing analysts’ reports. Vendors hesitate to criticize these reports (at least publicly) for fear of either getting on an analyst’s wrong side or serving to substantiate the analyst report. Conversely, on the analyst side of the world, they rarely publicly criticize the work of other analysts to avoid drawing attention to their competitors.

But this lack of critically analyzing reports in the analyst space is unhealthy and has resulted in analyst firms themselves exhibiting remarkably little technology innovation despite feeling free to comment on each vendor’s innovation prowess (or lack thereof.) So today I wanted to take a look at:

• What types of analysts’ reports are generally produced and distributed
• What problems they solve
• The benefits and shortcomings of each
• The huge customer needs that current analyst products and services do not satisfy
• The need for analyst research to be delivered as a service

Understanding how analyst reports differ and what you should expect to read when you open a specific report can be a bit bewildering to the average IT end-user who is just trying to find information so they can make an informed buying decision. However, having now been doing analysis for a long time, there are five general buckets into which most analyst reports fall. They are:

• Case studies. This report will consist of an analyst interviewing an end-user or doing an onsite visit to validate how the technology is being used in the end-user’s environment.

• Head-to-head product comparisons. These are head-to-head comparisons between similar, specific products that are designed to solve a common business challenge. These reports are available in a number of forms including buyer’s guides, charts and graphs with the analysis ranging from general descriptions of each product to doing actually scorings and rankings of the products.

• In-depth single product evaluations. The content for this type of analyst report is gathered in one of two ways and possibly both are used depending on the scope of the paper. The analyst may do a hands-on evaluation of the product and then do a write-up based upon his/her experiences in actually testing and using the product. Alternatively, the analyst will gather the information for the report by doing a technical deep-dive with a vendor’s product architect or developer.  

• Statistics and trends. These reports are usually based on end-user surveys where a series of questions are asked to gauge specific technology adoption trends. These reports will reveal information such as if a certain technology is gaining (or losing) market or mind share among end users or where end-users are at in the adoption cycle of a specific technology.

• Technology review. These are high level comparisons between the various approaches that vendors take to solving a similar challenge. Rarely is one technology the “best.” However certain technology implementations are better for solving certain challenges than others. These analyst reports will look at the various ways available to solve the problem, which ones are best under which circumstances and then a recommendation is made in the report on how to best proceed. While general technologies are cited in these reports, rarely are specific products cited.

For example, to understand and categorize where this blog entry fits in this spectrum of analyst reports, it may be most appropriately categorized as a technology review as it lists or cites no specific analyst reports for any specific analyst firm. Instead it categorizes the types of analyst reports that different analyst firms produce.

All of these reports have their purpose with their respective benefits and shortcomings. Consider the following chart that illustrates some of the pros and cons of each type of analyst report:

So two items immediately jump out when you look at the pros and cons of each of these analyst reports. 

• All of these analyst reports provide some form of value in terms of helping users either understand the general market landscape or a specific product or technology.

• Vendors may play anywhere from no role to a significant role in funding the development of these reports or their potential outcome and the conclusions that are publicly shared

But what are less obvious are the shortcomings that all of these reports share in common regardless if they are vendor funded or not. Consider:

• All reports are dated and static. The findings of these reports are often made available weeks or months after the report is prepared or results are tabulated. Today’s world moves at a far, faster pace and there is no way for these reports to keep up to provide real time data on the information users most want and need to make buying decisions.
• No way for analyst or users to provide real-time input or updates. We live in the social media age where Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc predominate. However there is no comparable model for end-users and analysts to securely and confidently interact and share real-time information in the appropriate context.
• Reports are timely and difficult to produce. The best case scenario for producing any of these analyst reports is two (2) weeks with many taking 60 to 180 days or more to produce. That is way too long when buying decisions are made while the research is taking place.
• The reports do not provide immediate, actionable information for users. Users have less time than ever before to make buying decisions on technology that is more complex and powerful than ever. They sometimes only have minutes or at most hours to make a comprehensive buying decision and do not have time to pore over the reams of data buried in analyst reports – of which it is likely they only need a portion. They need detailed, head-to-head relevant product information upon which they can rely and turn to to make informed buying decisions.

So what is the answer? Frankly, it’s time for analyst firms to move out of the dark ages and into the 21st century. Analyst firms are stuck in a rut doing things largely the same way they did 20 years ago and have failed to adapt to the world around them which they profess to cover. As a result analysts are largely NOT delivering their services in the same way that they expect and even demand that vendors deliver their products and services.

Regardless of the reason, this oversight on the part of analysts has created a tremendous hole in the type of analysis reports they deliver. On one end of the spectrum, they produce reports that provide very detailed information about specific products and technologies. On the other end of the spectrum, they offer up reports about general market trends.

Yet what is lacking and what users really want are real-time analyst reports based upon their real-time requirements that enable them to easily and intuitively map their specific needs to specific products. Getting access to these types of reports will enable them to get beyond reading all of these reports – the activity of which takes valuable time away from the business – and enables them to get back to the business of doing the job that they were hired to do.

So why has this gap existed? In large part because the
tec
hnology did not yet exist to deliver what can only be described as “Research as a Service”.  This new form of analyst reports would aggregate research that has largely resided in analyst databases, the Excel spreadsheets of end-users and engineers, and vendor data sheets and expose this data in such a way that it makes it equally easy for users, VARs and vendors to consume and understand.
 
Further, for it to remain relevant over time, it must embrace today’s major media trends by merging analysis, journalism and social media in a single, integrated, turnkey, easy-to-use service that is available as a web-based offering and even as an iPad app.

So for those of you wondering when this type of research-as-a-service analyst report will be available, wonder no more. Research-as-a-service is the future of analysis, is where analyst firms must go to remain on the leading edge and is where DCIG is going. In fact, DCIG is not just going there. DCIG is ready to go there with this next generation of analyst reports in just a few weeks.

Analyst reports have served and will continue to serve a valuable role as users look to make technology buying decisions. These traditional forms of analyst reports are not going away and will continue to serve a vital role in understanding the broader market as well as facilitating deep dives into specific products.

But the world has changed with users needing a new type of analyst report that bridges this BIG GAP in analyst reports and delivers the information contained in these reports in a way that is easier for them to consume and act upon. The time for Research as a Service has arrived and DCIG is poised to deliver it. So stay tuned and get ready because the world of analyst reports is about to change from being dry and static to becoming dynamic, relevant and actionable.

Note: This blog entry was updated mid-day on Friday, March 9, to clarify some statements about some analyst firms and reports that were inadvertently made in the original posting. My apologies to those affected for inappropriately characterizing any analyst firm or report.