Hmmm, interesting question.  It seems to me that Gartner has one primary
job - Research specific markets for customers.  However, this can cause
an influence problem, at which I think Andy might be alluding.  For
example, if I'm B.I.G. Software, Inc., and I pay several hundred
thousand dollars per year to have Gartner keep me abreast of all the
changes in my market, might I also want a little extra benefit?  Since
I'm paying so much, and the press listens to Gartner so much, shouldn't
they at least mention me in one of their articles, presentations, study
reports, etc.?

There are definitely good, solid individuals working at Gartner, doing
solid research in the computer industry.  I would also suspect that
there are a few companies being mentioned here or there because of their
influence to Gartner.

However, in my conservative, free-enterprise manner, I add that in the
long run Gartner wouldn't survive if they allowed too much influence by
their customers.  Gartner's strength is based on their influence to the
press, which is based on their research.  If, through influence of
customers, Gartner became more of a marketing firm versus research firm,
their strength to the press will be diminished.  Since Forest, Aberdeen,
and many other research firms are standing ready to de-throne Gartner as
the premier computer research company, Gartner would ultimately fall.
Once the press quit looking to Gartner for input, their customers would
move to whomever the press thought was best.

So, it's a catch-22.  Customers want the best information, but also want
that little "extra" benefit.  If they get it too much, they'll lose it
completely.  If they don't get it at all, they move to a different
"research" company to see if they can get some of that "extra" benefit
there.

Bottom-line?  In the end I believe it washes out, and the information
Gartner group provides is as good as anyone else's, or better.

Of course, in their prognostications they're just as bad as everyone
else.  While it takes a lot of work to gather the historical data, which
can then be reported ("So and So market expanded 12% in 1998"),
predicting the future has always been a little dicey for us mortals
("... and expected to expand by 78% in 1999" :).

lb

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
> Behalf Of Andrew Schriber
> Sent: Monday, February 01, 1999 11:24 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Gartner who?
>
>
> Just a question,
>
> Can anyone tell me how come whatever the Gartner Group says
> is considered
> scripture?  It seems I can not read an article in the trade
> publications
> (Infoworld, Computerworld, ..) without the phrase "the
> Gartner Group says"
> or something similar.    Why have they attained this level of
>  authority?
> Is it warranted?  Or should I apply the comments about Oracle
> from another
> thread,  and applaud there marketing team?
>
> OBTW, Has anyone ever heard the Gartner group say something
> bad about a
> product.
>
>
> Andy  (pondering in NC) Schriber
>
>
> Andrew Schriber
> LabCorp
> Systems Programmer
> [log in to unmask]
>