Highly Competitive - software industry insights

Achieving the Social Business, Inside and Out

 

For the past few years, companies have been exploring initiatives internally and externally that dance around the notion of “social” methods for engaging all of the people in an enterprise ecosystem - to bring about better results for these companies. These social methods have been described with terminology such as “enterprise 2.0”, “social computing”, “web 2.0”, “social media”, and so on. The evolution of these social methods has led now to another term: the Social Business.

I find the term “Social Business” a necessary one:  to remind companies that people are very important to their success: customers, employees, partners, suppliers, and so on. I see the term “Social Business” encompassing what companies might become to engage people - inside and out – to achieve business goals, and frankly, to stay in business. Again looking at terms in common usage: Enterprise 2.0 has been concerned with the “inside” (I call it social collaboration) and social media / web 2.0 have been concerned with the “outside” (external-facing customer engagement). A blurring between Social Inside and Social Outside has begun, partly driven by the adoption of customer-facing social media tools by internal collaboration programs.   

A lot of the conversation for the ins and outs of social these days has focused on technology and practices - and even on “naming conventions” - but People as the focus is what really makes a difference for a business to achieve success. People participating in the “Social Business” are cross-generational: there are lots of people of all ages who are savvy about collaboration, communication, social media, respecting colleagues and customers – none of these activities are the sole turf of any generation. And I’ll repeat: the focus on the value of People and trust in what they can accomplish (not just on tech and practices or processes) is at the heart of healthy companies.

Why does a renewed - and authentic - interest in People matter to a business? From the customer perspective, much has been written about customers now driving relationships with businesses where businesses listen to what customers want, like and don’t like. From the perspective of employees and partners, a great deal of what companies need comes from people:  innovation, creativity, ideas for new directions, passion, enthusiasm, customer relationships, knowledge, experience, judicious consideration, and so on. 

The Human factor always has to be distinctly considered in anything called “social” -- otherwise it’s just a buzzword shell game. First there must be authentic respect for all the people in the enterprise ecosystem; then enterprises can work on building out social practices that consider the human element – afterwards, apply technology and processes where they make sense.

  

Value of Social Business - Inside

In enterprise activities such as collaboration, knowledge management, business intelligence, business process management, adaptive case management, there is a significant role to be played by social capabilities to improve how these activities perform and provide relevance and results. Social business on the inside is also rightfully tied to enterprise collaboration and intranets that are taking on more social media type capabilities. Many software solutions are including social capabilities as methods to improve solution usage and value, as well as do a better job of incorporating the importance of the human element.

For example, Business Process Management (BPM) solutions encompass practices and tools that are evolving and including more people-oriented methods in terms of social collaboration capabilities. Forrester’s Clay Richardson comments:

Enterprise social – and social BPM by extension – is seeing healthy adoption in industries and organizations that have open cultures and have a need to innovate and share ideas quickly. Although it might seem counterintuitive, we’re seeing the greatest adoption of social BPM patterns in the healthcare and public sector – specifically in defense.

Sandy Kemsley, independent analyst and systems architect for enterprise infrastructure, also understands well the people side of business:

Tom Davenport recently wrote about the need to add structure to social in order to bring enterprise value: Transaction systems like ERP and CRM, tools for workflow and document management, and project management systems all made it more clear to people what they need to do next in their jobs. That capability has undoubtedly led to productivity gains.

But work effectiveness also demands that people share their knowledge and expertise with each other. That’s where social media comes in. It makes it easy to reach out to others for help in making a decision or taking an action. And the transfer of knowledge through social media doesn’t require a lot of difficult knowledge management work in advance.

Business Intelligence is another software solution space that is looking at building in collaborative layers throughout the BI lifecycle. The possibilities for new applications of analytics increase with collaboration. Inviting in many-to-many interactions also opens up processes to new ideas from participants. Gartner found that social venues and collaboration help to track and capture outcomes of the decisions made based on BI / analytics:

Gartner's user surveys show that improved decision making is the key driver of BI purchases. However, most BI deployments emphasize information delivery and analysis to support fact-based decision making, but fail to link BI content with the decision itself, the decision outcome, or with the related collaboration and other decision inputs. This makes it impossible to capture decision-making best practices. Solutions are emerging that tie BI with social software and collaborative tools for higher-quality, more transparent decisions that will increase the value derived from BI applications.

Promoting social on the inside draws on the rich value that lies in the many people who populate the enterprise.

  

Value of Social Business - Outside

Social media and social CRM solutions and practices are gaining interest and usage as means to work with customers throughout the customer lifecycle with the company. Social media and social CRM also play important roles for connecting the Social Business-Inside with the Social Business-Outside.

Social media is not just the latest fad in marketing; and to really work, social media is not “one-size-fits-all”.  Enterprises must understand how a go-to-market strategy that includes social media will help with objectives and obligations; then enterprises must figure out which social media to use and why. Social media commitments require an authentic personal touch, both for how customers are communicating with the enterprise, and how the enterprise responds and sustains customer conversations.

Maria Ogneva comments on the social customer and social CRM:

The ability for everyone to engage and be in alignment: Social media is not a silo, and no one department owns it. There must be a process in place by which each message gets automatically routed to the right person, classifying it by type (question, complaint or compliment), content (what it actually said), sentiment, action needed, and influence. This helps automate the triage process, which until now has been mostly manual.

Jeremiah Owyang’s work with brands employing social media to better connect and support customers is extensive and well-known. In his presentation on “Three Trends Companies Must Invest in for Social Business”, Owyang introduces the notion of Rings of Social Influence which include employees as company ambassadors for communicating with customers, as well as these recommended best practices for such employees:   

• Establish guardrails to protect both employees and the company
• Offer internal training courses, (like Intel’s certification program) and recurring training
• Offer an internal water cooler where they can talk in a safe place and plan: Yammer, Socialcast, Community Platforms

And of course companies must recognize the power of the customer voice and consider Owyang’s recommended best practices for customers active in social media:

• For better or worse, customers are already talking about you – how can you aggregate their voices closer to your brand?
• Develop an advocacy program to recognize and reward your top customers.
• Change your mindset to understanding that critical feedback is an opportunity for product and service improvements – then use to increase loyalty and WOM.

 

Social Business Equation: Inside + Outside = Eliminate silos

Many enterprises are understanding the value of social media to better engage and retain customers, to attract prospects, make sales, help customers solve problems: Social Business - Outside. But it seems to be much harder for enterprises to understand social on the inside and why that matters. Enterprises must come to understand that social on the outside won’t be substantially achieved – let alone sustained - if social on the inside isn’t working.

Social on the inside pertains to all company teams that touch customers, prospects, partners, and suppliers – basically the vast majority of the company.  The commitment, usage and value of social on the inside and the outside must be real – employees, partners, customers will quickly figure out if a company is faking it.  With healthy social practices inside a company, the support and growth of social for any interactions involving the enterprise human ecosystem – inside and out – should then be a natural and vital part of overall company strategy.

Here are the big questions:

1. Can the enterprises that need to, change quickly enough to re-humanize?
2. More importantly, will enterprises even choose to change?

This change – understanding and nurturing the value of all the people in the enterprise ecosystem – impacts how the company operates internally, how it does business externally, how the company effectively engages the human ecosystem that is truly needed for the company to survive as a successful business – inside and out.

From this change comes these rewards:  big impact on continuous innovation / relevant product development, drawing the best out of employees, collaborating with customers and partners on future direction and products, listening to all of the people in the enterprise ecosystem to draw on their experiences and expertise for building and sustaining competitive edge >> all contributing to the success and relevance of company.

The strategic decision to become the social business has to come from upper management and boards of directors – it has to be a key aspect of the enterprise – or it won’t happen in any significant or sustained fashion. When an enterprise chooses to become a “social business”, the divide between social-inside and social-outside should blur as more and more as silos within the enterprise hopefully disappear, and as bi-directional connections to customers and prospects, partners and suppliers become more authentic and more immediate.

 

                                                                <<<<<              >>>>>

Jeremiah Owyang has produced a very good starting point for depicting the Social Business Stack, expressed in terms of technology. I’ve added a “reminder” element to his diagram:

 

 
 
 

 

Related Links

Social collaboration in enterprise:The heart–and goal–of Community is “collaborating people”, not collaboration tools

Levels of Social – and Integration – Cut Across Enterprises

The Ever-Expanding Importance of Analytics–True Intelligence for Business

The Effective Intranet – Engaging the Employee as Customer

I have a confession to make: I am a Hybrid – business technology hybrids bring real value to company competitiveness

  

About the author: Julie Hunt is an accomplished software industry analyst, providing strategic market and competitive insights. Her 20+ years as a software professional range from the very technical side to customer-centric work in solutions consulting, sales and marketing.  Julie shares her takes on the software industry via her blog Highly Competitive and on Twitter: @juliebhunt   For more information: Julie Hunt Consulting – Strategic Product & Market Intelligence Services

 

Content Marketing Strategy for B2B Software Vendors: Starring the ‘New’ White Paper

 

For the past several years, multiple studies by different research firms have been conducted to evaluate the most sought-out and influential content for B2B technology customers during decision-making buying cycles, and every time, in every study, the #1 preferred content is the White Paper.

The white paper is the #1 most influential piece of collateral that technology purchasers consult when making or influencing a buying decision for their company, according to a recent survey by Eccolo Media

However, many B2B software vendors still are missing the boat with their use of white papers and have not employed them in ways to engage potential buyers, let alone convert them to customers.

  

In The Beginning…

Technology white papers find their origins in government briefs that were called white books, alluding to the plain white binding that was used. With the transformation to the technology white paper, experts, lead architects, systems designers used these documents to provide authoritative discussions of key ideas or technologies to show thought leadership and future direction. The classic white paper was very technical and dissertation-like, rich with in-depth details and research results.

Then something happened to white papers when many software companies began to generate them as “product collateral”. White papers were hijacked by many product marketing and marketing groups to directly promote products. Content became thinly veiled product brochures extolling the virtues of the software offerings, highlighting information favorable to the vendor. White papers became just another item in the checklist of collateral to generate for a product launch. Little strategic thinking or advance planning went into creating white papers, including the recruitment of a top tech professional to write the white paper. Well, guess what: software solution buyers do not like that kind of white paper.

 When asked what most disappointed in a white paper, poor writing ranked number one.

 One surprise in the findings – the respondents said they're more disappointed when a white paper doesn't contain enough technical information rather than when a paper contains too much.

 

 What Potential Buyers Want In Effective White Papers

Quality Quality Quality

Customers continue to call out high quality writing with accurate and useful content as top values for the white papers that they want to read and use. They want plenty of details (tech / business), which means content has to be: tight, clear, compelling, authentic.

The survey also found that the quality of report writing gets noticed. Some 86% of respondents felt that high-quality writing was at least moderately influential and 51% ranked good writing as either very or extremely influential. By contrast, poor quality writing was the most frequent reason respondents gave for decreasing the influence of a white paper.

 

Less Time to Consume Content

A lot of great content is constantly published on the web, due largely to constant brisk evolution of business needs and corresponding software solutions. Customers would like to consume a large variety of content, so they prefer shorter lengths for white papers. Shorter white papers also allow vendors to generate a constant flow of new content that also keeps pace with business and tech changes. According to most of the studies cited in this article, the ideal length of a white paper is 4-8 pages. (Tech Marketing Best Practices Research Series on white papers states that 86% of tech buyers want white papers under 10 pages.)

 

Buyers are proactive in the use of white papers:

How to Maximize the Use of White Papers in Your B2B Marketing and Sales Process, released by InformationWeek in February 2009. Its survey of 542 professional buyers found that 93% of IT buyers pass along up to half of the white papers they read/download, and that 54% of those surveyed contacted a vendor for more information after reading a white paper.

 

No Registration Please

When marketing groups co-opted the white paper another marketing staple was added: requiring buyer registration to be able to download the white paper. There is a strong buyer sentiment that vendor websites should not require any information from the buyer for any content downloads.  After all, the sales engagement is buyer-driven, with the buyer deciding when and if next steps will be taken.

A recent survey done by Spiceworks (SMB IT management resource site) addressed the issue of having to register for white papers:

We also found a lot of people – more than 75% – DON'T sign up for papers requiring registration, which means the vendor is missing the opportunity to share and disseminate their knowledge.

         How many (vendors) stopped requiring registration as the result of your survey?

A handful so far. The results are pretty staggering. When you remove the "registration wall," downloads go way up. One white paper that was offered without registration was downloaded 500 times in three days!

  

White Papers and Content Marketing Strategies

Potential buyers visit B2B corporate websites with the intent of finding all kinds of information that will help with purchase decisions. Buyers also look for vendor information on other web venues. It is critical for any vendors who see web presence as a key to success to build a strategy for content marketing. A content marketing strategy for B2B software vendors should focus on providing relevant, compelling, and frequently updated information for target markets and customers/buyers. A high quality white paper is a significant business asset for content marketing: quality content holds its value for reusability, engagement, impact, and vendor credibility.

Adam Needles: Content marketing is the architecture behind information exchanged with the buyer before we can get them to ’sales ready’; it is the rationalization of what content that our prospective buyers need at various stages of the buying cycle and via what media and channels; and it is integral to the nurturing process.  Content thus has moved from tactical to strategic.

 

Many B2B software vendors could benefit greatly from building a content marketing strategy around white papers. Don’t just produce single white papers in a reactive fashion, as a product launch checklist item done in a hurry. Plan, create and publish excellent white papers well in advance of any product launches.  B2B software vendors should be publishing white papers with high frequency (since customers want shorter white papers): set the stage for what your company does now and will do in future. Show authentic thought leadership, clear understanding of various customer needs and real problem-solving.

Publishing sets of “companion” white papers is a good idea for vendors targeting buyers with different perspectives such as business and tech buyers, and biz-tech composites. Some white papers can be created to bridge the gap between business and tech, to encourage collaborative definition of needs and problem-solving. Series of white papers that break down a complex topic can be an interesting approach as well. These approaches will show vendor commitment to helping customers understand current technology trends as well as provide guidance for solving problems or for becoming more competitive.

Beyond publishing great white papers is the opportunity for vendors to engage customers in conversations through social media, wherever customers participate. There already is a social aspect to downloaded white papers – customers have a high rate of sharing white papers. Tap into social media for interactive conversations with potential buyers and industry writers. On download pages include links to communities and forums to encourage discussion. Schedule Tweetjams for topics covered in white papers. Comment on blogs that address the topics of vendor white papers, not to directly promote the white paper, but to add to the brainstorm and show command of the topic.

 

Value of white papers for B2B software vendors:

 
 

   

The Right Industry Professional to Create White Papers for B2B Software Vendors

Keeping in mind that customers have made clear that they want high quality content with extensive tech details, it would make sense to work with a software industry professional with strong tech experience, business smarts, and who can articulate complex ideas clearly and authentically. This would be a professional who has worked with customers, understands both business and tech, has the ability to hold the interest of these readers. And of course, this professional has to be a really good writer.

White papers will benefit from a professional who has decent smarts for several software solution categories and who has good hands-on experience on the tech side of software. The business-technology professional should contribute rich insight, produce creative content and original thinking, see unexpected connections and future trends. Direct customer experience enhances an understanding of how tech will help customer competitiveness, and will enable writing from the customer POV.

Another very useful attribute of the right professional would be one who is inter-connected to individuals throughout the software industry: analysts, practitioners, consultants, writers, vendors. A professional who is in constant conversations with other industry SMEs will be up-to-date on key topics and trends, and will have resources at hand for research and confirmation. Quality white papers will result if the professional regularly writes software industry-related articles and blog posts, participates in new product briefings from various vendors and start-ups, and continually monitors several software solution spaces. A business-technology professional who is well-connected in social media can also provide guidance to vendors for content marketing strategies that target white papers and social media.

 

The ‘New’ White Paper:

• Reflecting studies cited: high quality and accurate content, plenty of deep details (tech / business), 8 pages or less which engenders content that is tight, engaging, well-written, inspiring
• Often written from the customer POV, using customer language
• Covers trends that matter: new solution segments – transitions of solutions
• Real takeaways that benefit customers whether they buy the vendor solution or not - vendor is associated with insight to solving problem, doing things in new way that is useful
• Inform, educate at sophisticated level to provide real depth
• Create companion white papers when different customer roles come into play for the topic (business, tech, hybrid/composite)
• Passion in the treatment: blogging has shown that writing about software solutions is more engaging if the writer inserts personality into the work – apply this to white papers when appropriate
• Provoke thought about the solution space: new thinking for addressing needs; provoke desire to find out more;  provoke a conversation that will lead back to the vendor
• Look into employing variety of buyer scenarios to connect customers to relevance of topic
• Infographics, tech details, guidelines, suggested reading, links to other resources (not necessarily on vendor site) – all add to value in buyer eyes
• Format for readability, flow, quick-scanning, engagement
• Publish on the distributed web – not just on corporate site but share on sites frequented by buyers
• Stir the pot: encourage social media conversations through blogs, Twitter, forums, communities, Facebook; also actively contribute comments on relevant blogs
• Not self-serving brochure-ware solely touting vendor offering – but can address issues that matter to buyers that generally could be solved with vendor’s offering

 

Related Links

SMB / Mid-Market B2B Software vendors - Findability + web presence + social: attracting the “customer as buyer”

I have a confession to make: I am a Hybrid

Goodbye Corporate Website – Hello Web Presence Management Framework?

 

  

About the author: Julie Hunt is an accomplished software industry analyst, providing strategic market and competitive insights. Her 20+ years as a software professional range from the very technical side to customer-centric work in solutions consulting, sales and marketing.  Julie shares her takes on the software industry via her blog Highly Competitive and on Twitter: @juliebhunt   For more information: Julie Hunt Consulting – Strategic Product & Market Intelligence Services

 

Influential Moving Target? -- Edelman’s Top Tweeting IT Analysts List

Jonny Bentwood of Edelman recently unveiled an example of Edelman’s approach to measuring influence on Twitter, utilizing the Edelman-branded TweetLevel tool. The list of Top IT Analyst Tweeters, initially published on July 21, consists of the top tweeters among the IT analysts who are active on Twitter. These analysts include individuals from large and small firms, consultants, SMEs, and even some firms and brand names.

 

A Curt Monash post, So who is an analyst anyway?, contributes a fine discussion of analyst services for technology vendors and buyers in a professional world that includes newer venues like social media. Monash also explores the notion of what qualifies a tech professional as an analyst. One point from Monash has particular relevance to the Edelman TweetLevel influencer work:

 

You need flexibility in how you deal with influencers.  Everybody is different

 

 

I conjecture that Edelman / Bentwood view this list of top tweeters as a test case / work in progress where they are fine-tuning calculations - and assumptions - while processing reactions, analyses and feedback.  They deserve props for jumping into the fray by publishing a list that results from evaluating a class of tweeters using their “influence” meter (TweetLevel). With so many calls for metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of many aspects of businesses, here’s a starting point for trying to determine levels of influence. It may evolve and mature into a useful tool -- if tested, tweaked and nurtured thoroughly. 

 

 

How do the calculations work?

 

The backbone of calculating the ratings of IT analyst tweeps is TweetLevel. TweetLevel can take daily influence temperatures that are tied to Twitter presence, based on 4 high-level attributes (as explained by Bentwood below):

 

1. Influence (What you say is interesting, relevant and many people listen)

2. Popularity (How many people follow you)

3. Engagement (You actively participate within your community)

4. Trust (People believe what you say)

 

 

Per Edelman, what constitutes a “top tweeter”, and potentially a top influencer, is described in the overview that explains the calculations on the TweetLevel site. The formula behind each TweetLevel rating for anyone on Twitter looks like this:

 

 

 

 

Jonny Bentwood comments on the calculations:

 

…as it happens the formula is all about being transparent. I can’t stand measurement tools that purely focus on popularity so have tried to be as open as possible about the inner works of how tweetlevel works. There is some real science and hard-core maths behind this if you want to dig deeper.

 

The full Bentwood post provides much more detail on the calculations, weightings of scores and methodology.

 

 

Anyone who tweets may visit TweetLevel to calculate current ratings based on the four attributes of Influence, Popularity, Engagement, and Trust. TweetLevel also provides comparison profiles to people included in an individual’s ecosystem of “friends”.

 

 

Personal Snapshots and Fluctuations

 

When first published July 21^st, the list stood at 1000, but two days later Bentwood added at least another 150 individuals, and then re-ran the TweetLevel ratings, which of course reset positions for many individuals. This change suggests the possibility of continuous updates for this list, perhaps on a daily basis. Such a list is dependent on the daily fluctuating nature of TweetLevel ratings, in turn based on the daily fluctuations of each participant’s Twitter activity. If maintained in this fashion, the Top Analyst Tweeters list would be in continuous flux, to a certain extent.

 

I’m in the list and was surprised by my inclusion. I’m a one-woman show for my consultancy, and while many years of a software industry market intelligence practice qualifies me as an analyst, I never really thought a lot about whether or not I’m an “influencer”. For a small consultancy, the Edelman list may help with visibility – to connect to more colleagues and potential clients. But am I a “top influencer” due to my presence on Twitter, or even through my professional writing and interactions? – I’m asking this while looking at the many very talented heavy-weights in the Top Tweeters list. Thorough study of Michael Wu’s marvelous work on influence would be quite helpful here.

 

After Bentwood replaced the original list of 1000 with the second version, and as I began to understand more about the nature of TweetLevel-measured “influence”, I decided to track my “TL influence” temperature over several days:

 

 
  
 

Like a game of musical chairs, the individuals in this list could continuously jostle one another for somewhat different positions relative to one another. Barring some major career-changing event (positive or negative), most of the participants may continue to hover in predictable plus/minus ranges near where each one is currently on the list, if Bentwood does not continue adding new individuals.

 

 

Analyst Influence On A Daily Basis?

 

How often should these ratings be rerun and published? Is that a helpful activity or just muddying the waters?

 

The flux of the TweetLevel approach is problematical but also to be expected for a work-in-progress. With this list of top IT Analysts on Twitter, we are not tracking a relatively shorter-lived entity like a Justin Bieber, where day-to-day popularity seems to matter. Bieber is currently the #1 TweetLevel “influencer” of all Twitter users, a position he has held for a while; Bieber’s overall influencer score is 95. The person in the #1 position on Bentwood’s list of top analyst tweeters is Jeremiah Owyang with an influencer score of 76.6.

 

Instead of tracking pop culture figures, Bentwood’s list of Analyst Tweeters covers highly-qualified and respected technology professionals whose influence and credibility emanates from a lot of work that occurs outside Twitter. Edelman’s TweetLevel measures Twitter attributes that are also impacted by influence earned elsewhere, sometimes subtly, from other actions and interactions involving these analysts. Yes, Twitter presence and worthwhile tweets are part of the story - but many people may follow these analysts on Twitter because of who they are and what they write in blogs or accomplish in client projects, not because of what they do each day on Twitter.

 

Does a particular analyst really have less influence during a day or even week of less activity on Twitter, than during the many days and weeks of constant activity? Not really. Call it “residual kharma” –  just because a well-known analyst that is a frequent Twitter contributor has taken a week or a month off, it doesn’t mean that all of the previous tweets suddenly have no influence. Nor does it mean that the anticipation of future tweets doesn’t carry influence across the break. Only if the analyst / influencer is absent from Twitter for a long periods of time, is influence likely to ebb a bit, until the analyst begins anew with tweets.

 

 

Vetting and Influence: Interested Parties

 

Who will be looking at a list like this? Most likely: buyers, vendors, other analysts, AR professionals, writers, consultants – pretty much anyone looking for guidance, assistance and forward-looking thinking regarding different segments of the technology industry.

 

®   While the notion of influence may matter more to AR professionals and vendors, a lot of people will still consult a list like this to understand more about whose work they want to follow or whose experience they want to enlist.  People and companies who are more attuned to Twitter may take this list more seriously, while others may think it trivial.

 

®   Does this approach help vendors identify analysts with influence?  In a very limited fashion, depending on the tweeting ability of each participant, there is a certain element of influence associated with analysts on Twitter. But to really assess “influence” and “reach”, there are lots of factors, including significant qualitative ones, that have to be evaluated as a whole.  Context of expertise for each analyst is the starting point – goals of the vendor also matter. There are great analysts who are influential but don’t make a lot of noise on Twitter.

 

®   From the buyer’s POV, are these fluctuating ratings helpful or distracting?  A list like this will draw buyers to look at certain analysts or consultants, but as for vendors above, many factors come into play to help buyers to decide on tapping a particular analyst for assistance.

 

®   AR Professionals are definitely interested in influence - take a look at a recent #archat on Twitter. I can see this list as particularly useful for introducing “new” players who are sharing information and opinion on Twitter. AR maestro Carter Lusher of Sage Circle has posted his take Technobabble 2.0’s Top Analyst Tweeters provides useful insights into visibility, but does not show who is influential where he concludes:

 

Bottom Line: Analyst influence is a complex condition that is the result of the interaction of business objectives, visibility, opinions expressed, client base, and so on. While a generic, mechanically-created list can provide useful input into a formal analyst list management process, such a list cannot measure actual influence.

 

 

Influence is still largely subjective and ephemeral. Reliability, credibility, expertise, integrity, top-notch work – all are probably more easily measured – but not necessarily as characteristics of Twitter presence. And reliability, credibility, expertise, integrity, and top-notch work are essential qualities of technology analysts and consultants who really make a difference for their clients and readers. To determine the ability of any analyst as a fit for a particular purpose requires looking at each individual’s body of work, knowledge and talent, original thinking, relationships to significant entities, and then evaluating how these attributes map to client needs and objectives.

 

 

 

Additional thoughts regarding influence, analysts who tweet, tech industry analyst practices:

 

§  Michael Wu’s series on Influencers

 

§  Twitter-based #archat on Influence, Analysts and AR professionals – transcript for the conversation

 

§  Vinnie Mirchandani - DealArchitect: More tenets for the next-gen analyst

 

§  Ray Wang: 7 Tenets of Building a Star Analyst Firm

 

§  Barbara French & Gideon Gartner: Advisory Industry Competition: Pushing Past ‘Business as Usual’    Part 1   Part 2    (also read the comments in each Part)

 

 

 

Related posts:

I have a confession to make:  I am a Hybrid

 

 

About the author: Julie Hunt is an accomplished software industry analyst, providing strategic market and competitive insights. Her 20+ years as a software professional range from the very technical side to customer-centric work in solutions consulting, sales and marketing.  Julie shares her takes on the software industry via her blog Highly Competitive and on Twitter: @juliebhunt   For more information: Julie Hunt Consulting – Market & Competitive Intelligence Services