Forrester 2012, Gartner 2010, and Autonomy

November 21, 2012

I don’t have much interaction with Autonomy and I have even less with Forrester or Gartner, both azure chip consultants stuffed with high IQ big thinkers about technology. How can someone residing in Harrod’s Creek hope to compare to sleek, real consultants who work in cities with electricity and running water.

However, on a recent trip to a dumpy Internet cafe near Victoria Station, I read “Hewlett’s Loss: A Folly Unfolds, by the Numbers.” In that article I noted this quote from an azure chip consultant working at the tony Forrester Research outfit. Here’s the passage that made my feathers twitch:

Autonomy, too, was facing challenges after years of fast growth but poor customer relations, according to Leslie Owens, an analyst with Forrester Research. “They didn’t invest in R&D; they didn’t have regular software releases; they weren’t transparent with a road map of where they were going; they didn’t seek customer feedback,” she said. “Customers complained, but the promise of managing all their information and making better decisions was so attractive. They bought more.” Soon after the H.P. acquisition, Ms. Owens said, Autonomy announced a new version of its core product. “We asked for a demo,” she said, and “we’re still waiting.”

Okay. I remember seeing a Boston Consulting Group dog, question mark, star, and cow type chart in 2009. Allegedly produced by another high end think tank, Gartner Group. I did not recall Autonomy getting low marks. I did some poking around and I would like to direct you, gentle reader, to this Web address: http://www.contentmanager.eu.com/graphics/gartner-wcm2010.jpg.

I am fearful of azure chip retribution, so you have to navigate to the page and look at the 2010 BCG style chart by Gartner Group experts.

What is interesting is that Gartner pegs Autonomy in the leaders quadrant for Web content management. I don’t know what that means. I do understand what it means to be a “leader”, singled out for excellence on whatever yardstick was used to size up 17 vendors of a particular type of enterprise software.

What is interesting is that two expert consulting firms have such conflicting opinions about Autonomy less than 18 to 20 months apart. Forrester “knows” that Autonomy had some issues. Gartner seems to find the company superior to such rivals as IBM and Microsoft.

Did Autonomy crash and burn between these two azure chip viewpoints? Are Forrester’s analysts more sveltish and brighter than Gartner’s high protein crowd?

Assume that each of these consulting outfits have comparable intellectual horsepower. Assume that each firm’s experts gathered information from open source and private sources. What causes two apparently superficial assessments of Autonomy.

My question: “If two blue chip consultants see Autonomy differently, won’t the truth and beauty of Autonomy will be in the eye of the beholder?”

In a legal dispute, subjective, maybe emotion, will play a larger role than dull old objective data. Little wonder so many advisors interpreted Autonomy differently. Enterprise software as an interpretation problem in 21st century business poetry. Lawyers are happy. HP and its shareholders, not so much.

Stephen E Arnold, November 21, 2012

Comments

2 Responses to “Forrester 2012, Gartner 2010, and Autonomy”

  1. ttuncut on November 21st, 2012 4:52 pm

    RT @BeyondSearch: Two differing views of Autonomy. Forrester 2012, Gartner 2010, and Autonomy: http://t.co/aoixS4gm #search

  2. ConsultRamy on November 21st, 2012 6:22 pm

    RT @BeyondSearch: Two differing views of Autonomy. Forrester 2012, Gartner 2010, and Autonomy: http://t.co/aoixS4gm #search

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta