A metric for small collaboration vendors
I estimate there are about 2000 vendors in the collaboration space today. A few large ones like: Adobe, Oracle, IBM, and Microsoft, and then many, many smaller vendors. The Gartner magic quadrant is only for large vendors, but how do analysts rate smaller vendors and on the same scale?
Some of my clients have brought this up, and so I have been thinking about it for a while. In terms of functionality, I have a 12 page list of collaborative functions (called the Collaboration Matrix) I have compiled over the last few years (and there is a vetting process for going through that with vendors), but functionality alone is not enough! Information about number of (paying) clients/customers, year over year revenues, # of employees, rate of innovation, and if the product is sold alone or with consulting I think should also be included in this metric.
What do you think? What should the metric be called? Since it takes some time for me to do the full analysis on a company should I charge the vendor for that? Or should I create some other form of revenue stream? These are all questions I am pondering and I would love to hear your thoughts?
Comments
It isn't an index per se - which is a single trackable measure such as a set of stock prices - but it is collection of product/service profiles.
First it strikes me that the prime function should be to assist a purchase choice. Revenues, # of employees, etc. are just indirect indicators of how safe a decision the customer may be making. Start with what matters most to vendors' customers and speak in their terms: Support; ease of use; longevity risk; cost of ownership; training; likelihood of organizational acceptance; likelihood of external collaborators’ acceptance. Most vendors would be reluctant to release the stats you suggest, but a user’s or analyst’s view of customer satisfaction with technical support or availability of training and training material are things you can surface on your own.
Prospects very much care about how satisfied other customers are - and some even care about how satisfied others are in their vertical sector. Consider a user generated star rating system on each purchase consideration alongside your own view. Those star ratings would be viewable to anyone foc.
An in-depth analysis of the top vendors' offerings is probably something you will have to come up with out of your own pocket, but they have the resources to assist you. Second and third tier players, to get on the page, would pay you for your analysis - but only if your views and service are seen to be pivotal to prospects’ brand choices. It will be difficult to build that credibility because decision making for collaborative tools is so diverse. Also I would charge a nominal fee to vendors' prospects to receive your indepth, individual analyses.
Secondly, as I am a marketing consultant based outside the US, I would expect to see the reports and ratings in several languages and I would hope to see the reach of a vendor’s channel – who could support a prospect, help that prospect integrate a tool, in Spain for example.
Jim,
Very insightful. I will look at some of the measures you talk about, and I was planning on a user "star" rating system. Information most likely will be in English. If some wants to translate them great! I need to do some more thinking about this, but really appreciate your thoughts.
David