Credo 1. AR should be co-operative

Over the weeks since Gartner's Symposium we've been comparing some of the conclusions from our IDEAL Audits, which allow AR managers to see the strengths and weaknesses of their AR activities. We've developed a Credo as a result; a list of core principles that we feel AR professionals should subscribe to.

The first is the notion that AR should be cooperative, and not be adversarial. I'll be summarising this idea today, and nine further propositions over the next weeks, and then expanding them into a white paper with the help of your comments, emails and suggestions. We've also added a Credo tag to help you see the whole series as it grows.

But why is co-operation the starting point?

A co-operative standpoint on the part of the communications professional is essential for effective AR. Analysts expect to be treated as peers, if not superiors, by analyst relations professionals. Whether or not their personal self-evaluation matches that of the AR manager, an air of candid discussion, mutual exchange of information and mutual respect is optimal for developing real rapport with analysts.

This point is fundamental: it underpins many of the later points in our credo, especially because co-operation helps AR to meet analysts' needs and reflects the concerted, extensive and long-term nature of the best analyst relations strategies.

These points are even stronger amongst US analysts, because of the trend towards recession AR. Effective AR managers must now focus on assisting the successful progress of key analysts towards the analysts' personal goals, and not just to assisting with the transactional movement of information from vendor to analyst.

The lack of co-operation is most striking with some analyst relations programmes whose focus might be called 'AR for PR', but certainly not all. The task of these AR programmes is often felt to be the optimisation of written comment. That traditionally means reducing the negative volume and increasing the positive. However, it often leads to rather adversarial interactions after disagreements when analysts are prepared to write negative comments about vendors.

Our experiences shows that negative comments by analysts need to be dealt with increasing care and calm by vendors. Generally, analysts are writing research that is more neutral. That often reflects increased peer review processes, even at firms like Yankee which were previously more opinionated, and increased pace of work for analysts: with less time, they are more likely to avoid the time-consuming interactions with vendors who may be unhappy with part of the analyst's written evaluation.

However, this tendency towards greater neutrality means that when negative comments appear they are more considered and harder to shift or force underground. Therefore an adversarial standpoint is less likely to pressure the analyst into retracting their opinion. Furthermore, the increasing impact of spoken interactions also has to be considered. If a vendor pressures and analyst to retract a negative statement without convincing the analyst to change their mind, then that analyst will become more critical of the firm in spoken interactions. That will happen:

• first because the analyst will feel the need to express the key points not present in the document;
• second because they will want to reassert their own value and self-confidence against the vendor; and
  
• third because an adversarial reaction by the vendor often suggests to the analyst that she or he has hit a sensitive point, and not that they are off beam.

Adversarial approaches often push the analysts' concerns about vendors underground, where they are harder to counter. Many analysts disdain to share their concerns with those vendors who are not able to deal with disagreement in a collegial way. These adversarial vendors therefore start to sense negative feedback only through rumour and hearsay, which can develop a certain tendency towards paranoia.

Our surveys of analysts show us that the most effective AR programmes (those that are most likely to result in vendors being recommended by influential analysts) are those that are most candid.

Of course, that is not only because of the easier flow of information and more positive relationships, but also because AR reflects the corporate brand. If the analyst feels that the vendor's AR team approach is adversarial, abuse of power and aims to suppress problems then the analyst will place those same negative values on the supplier the AR manager works for. Perhaps some vendors celebrate confrontational cultures; the others will be able to benefit from the greater opportunity to build rapport.

Should Datamonitor sell Ovum? Join our 'Advisor Spotlight' call to find out

Would Yankee Group be a better owner of Ovum than Datamonitor? That's one of the questions kicked around in last week's Advisor Spotlight, our monthly discussion about leading analyst firms.

It's an interesting question. Datamonitor had strong grounds for buying Ovum last year, and it was a smart buy. It made Ovum part of a business that was growing its way up the value chain.

However, the purchase of Datamonitor by Informa is a little different. Informa is more like Datamonitor than Ovum is. Informa also extends over many more industries than just telecoms and tech. As we discussed in May, they have to work hard to generate cash from the deal. Our feeling is that Datamonitor was attractive to Informa almost despite Ovum -- Datamonitor's other businesses make a much better fit with Informa's structured and data-driven information products than does the Ovum advisory approach, which requires more domain expertise.

But if the Informa deal changes things, so does Ovum's evolution. The firm is seen by many as now poorly positioned in software and services, and thus more like a firm focused on global communications.

And that leads us to Yankee, which is also a firm focused on global communications in the broadest meaning of connectivity, but without a global base. If four-fifths of Yankee's revenue is from the US, then they have the opportunity to fit well with Ovum. And a sale of Ovum would certainly give Informa back some of what it paid for Datamonitor.

Of course, this is - perhaps - a worst case scenario for managers at Datamonitor. They have a cunning plan to take both Ovum and Datamonitor forward together. I can't discuss it for the next few weeks, but next month Datamonitor's strategy and execution will be the focus for our 'Advisor Spotlight' call.

Please join me on Thursday November 15 for the discussion: later this week you'll be able to book your seat at www.acteva.com/go/ar/ and subscribers to the AR Intranet get automatic seats. The call, as always, is at 11 am Eastern, 4 pm UK time.

Bouygues Telecom leads the way in the Lighthouse Telecoms Index

Bouygues Telecom is the top gainer this month as it leaps up 10 positions to get to the 45th spot. The firm has made plans to offer DSL to its customers in collaboration with Neuf Cegetel and it will surely be interesting to see how well it can penetrate the market. Among the high profile movers is Ericsson which has moved up 3 positions after a drop of 2 positions last month. The company has recently been awarded a contract by Telekom Srbija and is being noticed by analysts as it demonstrates its technological prowess.

O2 which has been selected by Apple as the exclusive carrier for iPhone in UK has also had a good month as its ranking improved by 7 positions. Telefonica which has announced plans to invest 8 million euros to develop new services and infrastructure has gained 5 positions and entered the top 25 this month.

France Telecom is the biggest loser of analyst focus this month and has dropped 9 spots. BT which had gained 3 positions just last month has lost 3 spots and is now back at 6th position. Cingular, which is now part of AT&T, appears to be losing its brand value. It has dropped from 16th position in January 2007 to 26th spot this month and has dropped out of our list of the top 25 telecom firms.

If you wish to be sent the top 25 firms in Telecoms Index each month, email us at analysts at lighthousear dot com. You can also read how we do our Analyst Index rankings, subscribe to our Spotlight service for new and interesting analyst research or register for our monthly Advisor Spotlight Webinars.

Yankee Group is the focus of Thursday's 'Advisor Spotlight' webinar

Our monthly 'Advisor Spotlight' webinar, this Thursday, will discuss Yankee Group. You can register online as usual.

Yankee Group is one of the firms that has changed the most in recent years. Previously known as a niche player in the telecoms market, the firm has broadened its focus into "anywhere" business, where businesses and consumers are connected by a network. It's producing very impressive basis 'anywhere' research. That allows Chief Strategy Officer Berge Ayvazian to help Yankee analysts to win some thought leadership positions on cross-technology topics like customer care, virtualisation and web advertising.

The emphasis on data-driven consumer research allows them to offer strong services for operators and vendors concerned with online business-to-consumer markets. In the process, they are winning business previously reserved for Forrester and IDC.

In the call we will discuss the firm's reach, goals, strategies, financing and issues. And there are issues! For example, moving into less familiar territory has produced some issues for Yankee along the way. The firm has recently pulled a report on Second Life, in which the firm had argued that the inability of Second Life to push from the PC onto mobile devices was limiting its growth. While the analysis seems reasonable, some cited issues with the quantitative work: Yankee Group's good work hidden under cloud of crap stats is one comment.

Perhaps they should be listening more closely to founder Howard Anderson?

To join the discussion, please register today (subscribers to the AR Intranet get free seats at the webinar). The webinar will be held on Thursday, October 18 [at 8 am Pacific, 11 am Eastern, 4 pm UK, 5 pm Central European time and 6 pm Finland/Israel time].

Informatica leaps up the Lighthouse Software Index

Informatica is the biggest gainer this month with a big leap of 22 positions and has also entered the top 25. It has entered into a strategic alliance with Cognos to bolster its product offering. SunGard, which has been placed in the Leaders quadrant in Gartner's Magic Quadrant for Higher Education Administrative Suites, 2007, has also gained 5 positions and has entered the top 25.

Check Point Software and Trend Micro are two other firms with big gains this month. Check Point Software has gained 18 positions as it is recognized as a leader by Gartner in the Magic Quadrant for Mobile Data Protection, 2007 while Trend Micro, another security specialist, has also gained 18 spots. McAfee, which has been awarded Best Buy Award by the SC Magazine, has also gained 5 positions.

The biggest loser this month is webMethods which has dropped 17 spots. The firm had dropped out of the top 25 in August and is now at 49th spot. This continued decline may be attributed to its acquisition by Software AG and a consequent decline in its brand value. Sage and Amdocs have both dropped by 4 positions and are out of the top 25 for this month.

If you wish to be sent the top 25 firms in Software Index each month, email us at analysts at lighthousear dot com. You can also read how we do our Analyst Index rankings, subscribe to our Spotlight service for new and interesting analyst research or register for our monthly Advisor Spotlight Webinars.

"The world's leading..." exponents of puffery

What attitude should analyst relations managers take towards boosterism, the use of positive hype that is so excessive it produces negative reactions?

Boosterism is a common sign of both weak marketing and self-orientation: promoters unable to identify valuable features and benefits can make generalizations that are hard to fault, but have little real meaning. A classic example is the term "The world's leading...", a term which implies something, but says nothing: it doesn't say largest, most respected, most profitable or anything verifiable.

It's deeply ironic that the most extreme boosterism -- puffery -- is popular in the US exactly because it cannot be taken seriously. Firms in the US are free to make vague and hyperbolic statements because they can use the legal defence that no reasonable person would take puffery seriously.

But while corporate communicators love it, technology buyers hate it: Randy Cronk's Blog has this lovely chart to show that it's one of the most despised communication techniques.

The supposed usefulness of boosterism is weakened further, of course, with those people who meet marketing puffery frequently, such as industry analysts.

Many analysts learn to discount a series of words: seamless, instant, real-time, leading, unified, comprehensive, unique... you know the list. The overuse of these promotional terms leads to a kind of buzzword bingo, in which analysts are so focussed on being appalled by the boosterism that they get distracted from paying attention to what the vendor wants to communicate.

Overblown language also creates difficulties outside the English language. In Anglo-Saxon marketing, it seems that every firm can claim to be the world's leading. In many countries buyers expect claims which are more concrete. Only one firm can be the leader, so how do you translate "the leading public relations company" (for example) if there are hundreds. In German, if a firm claims to have the Spitzenstellung, then they are the one with the largest market share. In French, only one firm can be en pôle position.

For these reasons, AR manager need to coach their colleagues away from using that like of language. I know one former analyst who built a macro to strip those words out of vendors' materials: Perhaps your firm should do the same?

What Gartner Symposium/ITxpo 2007 meant for AR managers

Most analyst relations managers can't get to Gartner's Orlando Symposium, but it's one of the most important events for observers of Gartner, alongside its annual investor day. It's the best possible opportunity to compare Gartner's execution with the vision it shared with the IIAR and DARA earlier this year.

Reflecting on the week, there are four key points of significance.

Gartner wants to deflect criticism.

Monday's AR Forum was very different from the same event last year, when Gene Hall had taken an open Q&A session in a room overflowing with AR directors and their anxious account managers. The room this year was three times larger. Gartner tightly controlled the agenda.

There were two principle presentations that focused on how the research process works at Gartner and how the database summarizing the firm's 100,000+ end-user client inquiries can be used. To say the least, many AR managers had more pressing and topical issues they wanted to discuss. The hosts, however, had little interest in discussing pricing and other disputed issues in the Forum. Gartner's agenda successfully controlled the meeting, but in the brief Q&A it was clear that AR managers wanted to be able to shape the agenda and have more time to discuss their concerns.

Gartner wants to reduce criticism.

However, Gartner realises that it has to respond in some way to concerns, especially from its most strategic accounts. It's had a major success over the last year in reducing one major bugbear: the time taken to respond to inquiries by half. Gartner was able to use a lunch of Tuesday with 16 or so AR magnates to test and discover ideas and options for how it can move ahead.

One real pressure on Gartner is the ambitious pace at which new role-based services are being rolled out: there would have been internal difficulties if the launch of Gartner for Analyst Relations had been delayed beyond the first quarter, despite the potential business benefits of taking more time to refine the offer.

Perhaps the same pressures are at work regarding third-party surveys of analysts. Gartner has the same concerns as vendors about surveys: how to estimate and limit the effort involved; will responses be represented as official positions or not; will the data be presented in too granular a way? However, the firm has executed quickly, gathered some negative feedback and now finds itself rapidly moving towards a policy that will meet its clients needs.

Another challenge arising from internal pressures is how to meet demands for expertise on new topics, such as virtualisation, Green IT and the consumerisation of IT. Gartner seems likely to add staff to these areas, while the total number of analysts and consultants at the firm will probably fall. Even within the core research business, it was to be remembered that Gartner now has 650 analysts, down from a peak of 1,000.

KCG is now calling for an AR professional association.

Perhaps the best news for the AR community is that KCG is, I hear, encouraging its customers to develop an AR professional association. Over the last year it has surveyed its clients to see if forming an AR professional association should have been one of the topics for discussion at KCG Connects.

Over the last year the IIAR has made particularly astonishing progress in Europe but, although one KCG colleague has joined the IIAR, KCG has so far not brought the Institute to the attention of its subscribers. One reason might be the lack of momentum generated by SPAR, the Silicon Valley-based AR network. Perhaps KCG is now sensing the possibility to bring together SPAR, the IIAR, DARA and a broader community of AR professionals? That should be encouraged.

The Orlando Symposium has lost its dominance.
According to this Gartner chart, the end-user research market is now mainly outside the Americas (the shaded portion shows Gartner's share of the end-user research market today). Around 45% of the market is there, but over 15% is in Asia-Pacific and almost 40% is in EMEA. Not every vendor 'gets' that: I still hear some vendors saying that 70% of the research market is in the US. That's not the case.

That clearly reflects a long-term bull market outside the US: Last year China overtook the USA as the world's second-largest exporter (Germany is top). Manufacturing is growing fast in the BRICK (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and Korea) which, for example, already accounts for half of world steel production.

Recognizing that long-term trend, Gartner aims to replicate its events in other geographies (especially in Asia) and to develop niche events for specific countries and hot topics. In its core geographies, we can also expect organic growth in events revenues through "price actions".

The bottom line is that the Orlando Symposium is now a mature, low-growth "cash cow" for Gartner, producing the profits to allow the firm to extend.

Gartner Symposium/ITxpo 2007 draws to a close

Here at the Gartner Symposium/ITxpo 2007, the emphasis is on using network and server-based solutions - like virtualisation, VOIP, web apps and 'green IT' - to reduce both costs and risks while developing the agility to respond to growing demands on IT.

It's a simple message and, in many ways, helps the event to have more relaxed feeling than in previous years, partly because of the dynamic industry context in which IT spending is set to exceed $3bn this year. There are few surprises for attendees here and, although final session may be on Friday morning, a lot of press and AR folk are happily packing up today in Orlando. The theme of few surprises was continued also at the AR Forum meeting and Tuesday's AR lunch (more on that in the next posting).

The one impression that's shared the most by attendees I have spoken with here is that analysts are cautious with their comments. They seem to feel that the audience here is more cautious and defensive with its IT than, for example, the audience at the other Symposiums around the world. The emphasis is more on change at those other events, especially because of the growth in emerging markets. One-third of IT spending is now outside North America, Western Europe and Japan.

The current estimates are 6,150 attendees (within 2 or 3% of last year's attendance) and just 147 ITxpo exhibitors. The ITxpo floor here feels much more spacious, with lounge areas for various communities and spaces for solution provider sessions. Furthermore, the ITxpo is open only in two sessions on four days: one between 12 and 3 pm, and then a second 5.30 to 7 pm session when the floor is lifted by 'cocktail receptions' and solution provider sessions. Since most attendees take lunch in a large marquee outside the Dolphin hotel, that means that footfall in the ITxpo is a little constrained during the first session: in the second many attendees are attracted by the food and drink, and that's perhaps more valable.

For the sales and marketing professionals staffing the booths, it must be frustrating to have the stalls and people there all the time, but for the ITxpo to be only open for around 12 hours over the six days of the event (including time when the floor is used for cocktails and vendor presentations). I don't really 'get' the rationale for having it closed the rest of the time.

One way to try to get more people into the ITxpo is to spend less time on lunch. Food lines seemed faster this year, and your correspondent noted the absence of dawdle-inducing dessert. In previous years ice cream or cookies were available on the ITxpo floor, but none could be seen. Perhaps dessert is out of fashion here.

In many ways the booths on the ITxpo floor seem better used. Fewer firms are giving away iPods, having realised that a list of attendees who want free iPods isn't the same as a list of prospects.

New leadership at RocSearch

We've been increasingly impressed with RocSearch's growth since it hit the radar in 2005. So it's going to be interesting to hear from COO Ashish Sinha about David O'Brien's appointment as Executive Chairman. O'Brien comes in just as Neeraj Bhardwaj, the firm's London-based CEO, is moving on (The Indian-headquartered firm has decided it needs a CEO based out its headquarters).

David is a 31-year veteran of the IT and services industries with a very different skill-set, and it will be interesting to see what happens. His backround in executive coaching makes him well suited to support strategic management initiatives.

His career has spanned sales, marketing and general management roles at Candle Corporation, Siemens Business Services and the outsourcing arm of Unisys. Then he became CEO of the US$ 1 Billion joint venture BPO company ipsl.

Until 2006 David was a senior partner at Accenture focusing upon large scale change programs. He was a founder of a new Centre of Excellence based in the US, based predominantly upon the work of the Harvard negotiation project.

Because of this outsourcing experience, David is a strong advocate for offshore services - and his ability to nurture and mentor could lead to a major development in the firm's culture.

Empty seats at Gartner's Symposium

Gartner has around 6,100 attendees at its flagship event, Symposium, which is on this week in Orlando. Over the last few years total attendance has been around 7,000 - but this year's event does feel smaller.

It's not just because the analyst relations workroom and press center are half their normal size. It's less crowded, it's easier to get a seat, there's no waiting in line for in the restaurants. It feels smaller.

A big part of the difference is the continuing decline in the number of exhibitors in the ITxpo downstairs: in 2001 there were 340, this year there are around 150. Amongst other things, that has to reflect the declining business value of the Expo: it's can't just be M&A that's reducing the numbers. Since few vendors put serious thought into getting the most out of ITxpo, it's probably a good idea for them to stay away: too many firms send attractive people out with barcoders who can't talk about their firm's solutions, and simply identify people at the ITxpo who want free iPods.

Of course much of the decline of the Orlando Symposium also reflects the success of Gartner's other events. Spring Symposium stresses innovation more, meaning that it is picking up. Taking together all the Symposiums around the world, almost 16,000 people now attend each year, roughly the same as in 1999. The firm organised 59 technology summits and 24 vision events last year. Overall, 41,000 attendees particpated in Gartner events last year, compared to 45,000 at IDC events.

However, there's one part of Symposium where numbers are always up: the AR forum. Yesterday's AR Forum was standing-room only, with at least 100 attendees hearing about Gartner's research process and customer insight service.

P.S. I don't have a camera here, so the picture is ripped from Richard's blog.

Hitachi gets to the top 10 in the Lighthouse Systems Index

This month Hitachi has made it to the top 10 in the Lighthouse Systems Index with a jump of 4 positions. The firm, which makes products ranging from turbines and washing machines to hard drives, is facing mixed fortunes for its wide range of products. It is said to be considering a sale of its hard drive business while its new flat panel televisions appear to be a promising product in its category.

Panasonic and Océ are the top movers this month with a jump of 5 positions each. Panasonic continues to introduce new features and products to its existing lineup of digital media and consumer electronic products ensuring that it gets due attention of analysts. Océ has also jumped up 5 positions to enter the top 25 this month. The firm continues to strengthen its position in the color printing market with the introduction of new printers and is looking forward to improving its sales in the US which account for nearly 45% of its global sales.

AMD has fallen 4 positions despite the release of its new line of Opteron processors and along with Philips it is the largest loser of analyst focus this month. EMC, which has been rated as a leader by Gartner in its Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Content Management, 2007 report, has also fallen 3 positions and is now at the 9th spot. The firm has recently acquired BusinessEdge in its efforts to change the company's focus from storage to include a wider range services. It would be interesting to watch if this acquisition helps EMC move up next month. Texas Instruments has also fallen 2 spots and is now out of the top 25.

If you wish to be sent the top 25 firms in Systems Index each month, email us at analysts at lighthousear dot com. You can also read how we do our Analyst Index rankings, subscribe to our Spotlight service for new and interesting analyst research or register for our monthly Advisor Spotlight Webinars.

Little downtime during yesterday's upgrade

Yesterday lighthousear.com got new surge protection equipment, as mentioned earlier this month, as well as improved fire and smoke detection systems. In total, the website was down for just 30 minutes - less than the two hours we anticipated - but apologies for any disruption.

'Analyst Direct'- the dangers of Numerophobia

The new 'Analyst Direct' service has serious flaws. Many of these issues relate to its market intelligence engine, 'MI Analyst'. Some of the issues I mentioned elsewhere have been resolved: for example, 'Ph.D.' was listed as analyst. However, three principal issues remain.

1. Some issues reflect data quality.
   
2. Some of them are statistical issues, rooted in the Numerophobia which is found in some parts of the AR community.
3. Finally, the reach of the database is short of the 95% coverage the service claims.
   

Data Quality.

As a beta-tester of the service, I raised a number of issues with Northern Light, some of which are illustrated on the screen shot on the right.

Among the 'companies' listed are 'Philippines' and 'AG' (the German equivialent of Inc., Corp. or PLC.) I've also seen 'Publications' listed as a company. As you can see, the system has a major glitch with firms whose names include the name of another brand: There's no listing for 'Alcatel-Lucent', for example, only separate entries for Alcatel and Lucent. That's bad news for Nokia Siemens Networks and Fujitsu Siemens Computers: and gives misleading data to their parent firms.

Of course, such issues may say something about the testing of the system, the analytic power of the machine intelligence in the system, and the resources available to maintain it.

Statistics.

Another major issue with the way that 'Analyst Direct' works is the way in which it charts the changes in share of voice data. The screenshot below shows Analyst Direct's way to charts the share of voice for the ten firms most relevant for telecoms. You can click on in to enlarge.

There are some clear issues here. There are almost 500% more data points for 2007 as for 2006. Almost two-thirds of the data come from one firm: Current Analysis. Gartner gets 5% of the 2007 score. Yankee Group fails to get into the top ten (it is 13th out of 16 firms).

Most people with any familiarity with analysts following the telecoms industry will know that what Analyst Direct is showing is not useful information. What's going on in this chart is that Analyst Direct is counting each item from Current Analysis as if it is the same as one item from Gartner or Forrester. Of course, Current Analysis is a small firm that produces many small items. Gartner, Forrester and Yankee produce fewer items but each of more influence.

The inability of the system to scale the data means that firms that produce normal volumes of research get swamped. For example, Analyst Direct recently expanded the number of firms by one-third but, taking the sample of reports on software, that one-third counts for around 11 percent of the sample, while Current Analysis is 32% of the sample.

Northern Light may face some difficulties in resolving some of these issues. We know from our own experience there's a simple way to get around the problems of firms that produce different volumes: the solution is to use statistics like standard scores to adjust each data series so the results become comparable. However, some analyst relations advisors seem to be scared of statistics. For example, KCG's newsletter has described statisticians working with share of voice data to be "snake oil merchants" - as if using Z scores to make data comparable is, in some way, "a form of tampering with data". Since KCG is the principal reseller of Analyst Direct, Northern Light may struggle to convince its stakeholders to support them in adopting statistics.

Reach of the database.

Northern Light claims that "Analyst Direct now enables users to conduct integrated searches of 95 percent of the billion-dollar database of all IT industry analyst research published annually". In fact the tech analyst industry has been sized at anything from $2.5bn to over $10bn by a range of researchers. Out of 750 analyst firms, Analyst Direct overs just 19, two of which are headquartered outside the US. Almost 100% of the research is in English, other than a few papers by Celent in French.

There are also major issues with the ability of the system to track all the research published by those 19 houses. For example, search for Treasury within Gartner research over the last 12 months: Analyst Direct gives four of the 65 items shown on Gartner.com.

As a simple data integration tool, Analyst Direct is very promising. However, as management information tool it is immature: it will prevent some vendors from getting a real focus on which firms are mentioned the most in influential research; it will encourage vendors to spend more time with analysts who produce volume rather than quality; it will turn AR teams away from international markets.

Of course, all of that produces great opportunities for those AR teams who can identify the analysts who are most heavily influencing sales. While their competitors are wooing Current Analysis, they can focus on the more influential analysts.

P.S. Thanks to Sherry for her comment wondering if we have a competitive product to Analyst Direct which is motivating our concerns. We don't have a similar product, and we're not aimed at the same market segments as Analyst Direct/KCG. Our Analyst Index and Analyst Mindshare Benchmark services also use share of voice metrics however, so we do have deep expertise in the area. Not that you'd need deep expertise to be worried about these issues with Analyst Direct ;-)

See you at Symposium!

Tuesday's AR Forum will be one of the best-attended events at Gartner's symposium next week.

Many of the leading figures in the AR community will be there, and I'll be at DisneyWorld, where the event is held, from Saturday. I'll there blogging for Analyst Equity: let me know if you have any questions you'd like me to ask during the forum or comments about what's going on.

To meet up me with there, either email orlando@lighthousear.com or call +1 408 786 5965 or +44 750 901 4319.

LIES: a two-day course

There's no analyst relations angle to this post. I was just looking through the email summary of this month's Harvard Business Review when, over to the right of my gmail page, I saw this headline: LIES: a two-day course.

You can click on the screen-shot on the right to see the advert: it's the second advert down.

The course discusses Leadership, Innovation & Enterprise Skills, from which the initials LIES come. Surely, it cannot be accidental. No-one can overlook that, especially when using it as the opening word of an advert.

So, the suggestion is that lies are, in some way, part of leadership skills. What a disaster.

P.S. Indeed, it's a conscious choice: read this.

Yahoo gets 2nd spot in the Lighthouse Services Index

Yahoo has jumped up 3 positions to get to the 2nd spot in the Lighthouse Services Index. Its purchase of Zimbra, an innovative provider of opensource email solutions and services, is certain to help it tap into the email market even further. Infosys, which is the first company outside North America to join the Financial Institution Shared Assessments Program, has also gained 2 spots and is now at 7th position.

Xansa which has announced a new contract with "Qualifications and Curriculum Authority" is the biggest positive mover this month with a jump of 7 positions. Dimension Data, which has just opened a new office in Toronto, has gained 1 spot and entered the top 25.

Orange Business Services which was rated as world class by Telemark in August as recently as August has dropped 4 spots and is out of the top 25. Announcement by Fujitsu Services of a new contract with Norfolk Constabulary has not arrested its decline this month and the firm has also dropped 4 positions. T-Systems and CGI Group have also dropped 4 spots each and are now at 17th and 31st positions respectively.

If you wish to be sent the top 25 firms in Services Index each month, email us at analysts at lighthousear dot com. You can also read how we do our Analyst Index rankings, subscribe to our Spotlight service for new and interesting analyst research or register for our monthly Advisor Spotlight Webinars.

Lighthouse website offline for part of Sunday

This Sunday some new surge protection equipment from Germany will be installed on the machines that host the Lighthouse website. The work to upgrade the power feed is scheduled to take place this Sunday, 7 October.

We have arranged for backup power generators to be brought in so to maximise the 'uptime' of our hosting infrastructure. However, there will still be two short service outages at 8am and 6pm on Sunday 7 October 2007. Each outage may last for up to 1 hour although we hope that the reality will be closer to 30 minutes.

Our email, AR Intranet, blog and project management systems will not be affected.