a modest hypothesis

Gartner Magic
Quadrants just aren’t
fair. Damn it!

GARTNER DISCLOSURE: MQ CRITERIA
• Market Understanding : The ability of a vendor to understand buyers' needs and translate these needs into products and services. A
vendor that shows the highest degree of vision listens and understands buyers' wants and
needs , which it can shape or enhance with its vision.
• Marketing Strategy: A clear, differentiated set
of messages
positioning statements.
consistently communicated throughout the organization and publicized through the Web site, advertising, customer programs and
• Sales Strategy: A strategy for selling products that uses the appropriate network of direct and indirect sales, marketing, service and communication affiliates to extend the scope and
depth of a vendor's market reach
services and customer base.
, skills, expertise, technologies,
• Offering (Product) Strategy: A vendor's approach to product development and delivery that emphasizes differentiation, functions, methodology and feature set in relation to current and
future requirements.
• vendor's underlying
Business Model: The validity and logic of a
business proposition .
• Vertical/Industry Strategy: A vendor's strategy to direct resources, skills and offerings to meet the needs of
including vertical industries.
market segments ,
• Innovation: Marshaling of resources, expertise or capital for competitive advantage, investment, consolidation or defense against acquisition.
• Geographic Strategy: A vendor's strategy to direct resources, skills and offerings to meet the needs of regions outside of the vendor's "home" or native area , directly
or through partners, channels and subsidiaries, as appropriate for that region and market.

Lots of ideas online
Personally, though I’m not a lawyer or legal expert, I think it’s unlikely that ZL can win its case. In one recent
case in which securities rating agencies’ opinions relating to the subprime mortgage crisis were found not to be
protected by the First Amendment, there were some different circumstances, such as one judge’s opinion that
plaintiffs had sufficiently proven ratings agencies did not sincerely believe their own statements had basis in
fact. The lawsuit between ZL and Gartner, on the other hand, seems to come down to the weight given to sales
and marketing strength over technical product specifications rather than Gartner’s sincerity.
ZL’s complaint appears to be a little different than the usual pay-to-play complaint. ... The legal
paperwork implies that ZL paid (although that is not clear), got to play, and didn’t like the way
the game turned out. ZL supposedly got marked down because of poor sales and marketing. ...
I would say Gartner got that right.
The central problem with ZL Technologies and their placement in the Gartner Magic Quadrant is that ZL has,
after 10 years, been unable to scale their business to match the competition. While the ZL Technologies
products may have superior features and capabilities, and the market leaders may have all of the deficiencies
cited in ZL’s legal filings, the fact remains ZL Technologies remains an extremely small player in a market
dominated by huge technology companies.

hypothesis
Companies positioned as leaders and visionaries
in Gartner Magic Quadrants are ranked higher
on the marketing and brand mq impact scale.

Validating the Hypothesis
• Methodology
– Quantitative-esque and Qualitative
• Content Analysis
– Reviewed Gartner MQ Criteria
– Reviewed 6 Final Gartner MQ’s
– Reviewed previous 11 MQ submissions and thought a little
about the eventual placement or inclusion
• 4 Products
• 5 MQ Segments
– Reviewed 4 hype cycles for market maturity and requirements
coverage
• Analyzed online brand and marketing of 2 samples from
email archiving and Integration service providers

The Tools

The Marketing & Brand MQ Impact Scale
Relative scale for determining placement of a
organization in a given MQ via online content,
social inputs, historical Gartner documents and
seemingly magical Hubspot marketing tools.
Marketing Value + Arbitrary Brand Value = MQ Impact Score

Marketing Value
What makes up the marketing value?
• Gobblygook rating
• Website Grade
• Google page rank via website grader

formula
(100-Gobblygook)+(google rank *
10)+web site rank = marketing
value

Marketing Value
MQ: Email Archiving
Autonomy
Symantec Leaders
Mimosa Visionaries
Chllgr
Quest Software
zl tech
niche
MetaLogix
CommVault
0 100 200 300 Marketing Value

Arbitrary Brand Inputs
• General online brand image
– Social presence, blog and delicious links
• Web site usability
• Messaging and positioning
• Four participants in the arbitrary sample – varied
levels of participation:
– @emmyeg: Female, Age 31, Luddite-ish
– Hadrian: Male, Age 2, Digs cool colors
– Prescott: Male, Age 4, More flash is always better
– @spatially: Male, Age 37, product guy, dad

Formula
Market Value
+
Arbitrary Brand Value
=
MQ Brand Impact Scale

Marketing & Brand MQ Inpact Scale
Autonomy
Leaders
Symantec
Mimosa Visionaries
Chllgr
Quest Software
zl tech
niche
MetaLogix
CommVault
Marketing Value
0 100 200 300 400 Arbitrary Brand Value

The Brand and Marketing MQ Impact Scale
Niche Challengers Visionary Leaders

Changing Impact Over Time?
Chall
Niche enge Visionary Leaders
rs
Niche Challengers Visionary Leaders

…conclusion…
Marketing and brand indeed do influence an
organizations placement on a magic quadrant,
not because of the math or diagrams, but
because Gartner ‘s criteria says it does.