Magic quadrant of Gartner Magic Quadrant (MQ)

Example: Gartner quadrant with data on a research of software developers

Leaders

Leaders show stable progress and efforts on all indicators on which the assessment is carried out. Their actions raise competition level in the market, they can change a course of development of all industry. However the producer which entered into group of leaders not always is the most acceptable since requirements and the needs of some buyers can be not met.

Applicants

Applicants for leadership (Challengers) have qualitative products which meet the main market demands and have the high level of sales, popularity and a market share which allows them to exceed niche players. Applicants ensure profit by the competition at the level of basic functions, but not at the level of more perfect opportunities. Products of data of vendors are good for the solution of highly specialized tasks.

Far-sighted players

Far-sighted software makers (Visionaries) invest means in the leading technologies which will form the basis of the next generation of a product and will allow buyers to get more quick access to the improved management and security. Vendors from this group can have an impact on development of the industry, but cannot influence leaders and applicants for leadership. Buyers will incline the choice to far-sighted producers for the purpose of receiving not only a possibility of use most of the softwares modern functions, but also closer attention from vendor.

Niche players

Niche players (Niche Players) propose viable solutions which meet the main requirements of buyers. It is improbable that they will appear in the final list of purchase, but they should give chance. Most often these vendors miss opportunities to have an impact on the market, but it does not mean that they obediently follow leaders of the industry. Niche players can be focused on small segments of the market and often show on them more high efficiency, than leaders. Buyers give preference to vendors of this type when stability and focusing on several important functions and features of the software product are more important, than long-term and grandiose development plans for the producer.

How to read Gartner quadrant

The exact heading of a quadrant is important

The most important when you look at such quadrant - it is to read about what it? How it is entitled? So the square can be on the subject 'BI Platforms', and can be 'Plaftorma for data warehouses'. Or 'Platforms for creation of reporting systems'. Them can be much. It and is good and bad. The producer can find among a heap of squares such on which it is provided better, and the ordinary audience is confused. But the fact that if our Platftorma BI, then progress of this producer on the Niva of creation of storages – influences this square little is important here. And vice versa.

The unsophisticated visitor of the presentation, usually does not pay attention to it. Moreover, not all offhand can tell what BI Platforms differ from 'Platforms of storages'. Though difference, actually big.

The technique of drawing up a quadrant is important

Each quadrant is followed by the big long text which, by the way, too nobody reads. And in vain.

There, in particular, is determination of about what this quadrant that enters it and that is not present and on what selection criteria producers get to it. And also, about each of leaders it is written what in him is pleasant to experts of Gartner and that is not present.

Of course, the subjectivity share in these quadrants is present as it is made by people, however by accurately registered criteria it is possible to understand that it is possible to expect from it.

For example, in a square according to BI platforms, the producer applying for hit in a quadrant should show sales volume on this subject not less than 20 million dollars a year and the platform should support 8 of 12 functional areas, such as OLAP, Dashboards, Metadata Management, etc. (they are listed)

Two axes

Two axes – Ability to Execute and Completeness of Vision are difficult in itself, but the general sense that the first reflects marektingovy and selling indicators of the producer, and the second – technology advancement and the strategy of the company in this subject. Therefore, the producer is more right, the he is technology more advanced (according to experts of Gartner), and the higher, the more successful in marketing and sales. Those at whom it is good both with marketing and with technologies – get to a quadrant of leaders.

Actually the structure of axes is slightly more complex, but the idea such.

Criticism

2019: Closing of one of quadrants after charges of bribes

In January, 2019 Gartner reported that it stops making a magic quadrant in the field of unified communications. The analytical company explained the solution with desire "reorient" researches, however the criticism of IT manufacturing quite could affect: those accused Gartner of unfair drawing up reports.

In August, 2014 NetScout Systems which is engaged in product output for performance management of network submitted a claim against Gartner, having accused the opponent of what the companies which pay consulting services of Gartner, cost in rating above, than those which do not do it. In the statement of reply the vice president of Gartner for corporate communications Andrew Spender called complaints of NetScout absolutely groundless.

The magic quadrant of Gartner in the field of unified communications published in July, 2017

Earlier, in 2009, the software developer for archiving of e-mail ZL Technologies submitted a claim with similar charge of bribes and the general injustice by drawing up magic quadrants. However the claim which was considered in California was not satisfied by the judge.

For many years clients and resellers in the system of unified communications (UC) relied on market reports, such as magic quadrant of Gartner to define the leading suppliers. Though the magic quadrant represented not the most complete overview of the market, it gave the main information on some leading providers in the field of communications and about what they can offer.

Nevertheless, in January, 2019 in a short note announced the researches Gartner the solution "reorient" that the era of a magic quadrant comes to an end. In article it is said that as models of corporate purchases continue to move towards cloud solutions for UC and contact centers (CC), the magic quadrant for unified communications with local placement is not necessary any more.^[1]

Some experts however believe that the decision on liquidation of a magic square of UC in 2019 is sign that people finally lost trust to the report. On the other hand, it can be just sign that Gartner needs to update the reports to meet the requirements of the changing market. For example, they advise to begin to release a uniform magic quadrant for the joint communications (UCC), but not completely to cancel UC a quadrant. The concepts "communication" (communication) and joint work (collaboration) are naturally connected among themselves in a business environment, and it would give the chance to expand a scope of suppliers.

Gartner convicted of taking of bribes for positions in a magic quadrant

Though it can be the end for a magic quadrant of UC, Gartner announced that reports on unified communications as service (UCaaS) and contact centers as to service (CCaaS) will continue to appear. However now focus of these editions will be shifted towards suppliers of complete solutions in the field of SaaS. It means that in the forthcoming reviews there will be only those providers who are engaged in development, management and support of complete solutions for unified communications and contact centers.

According to experts, Gartner makes sense to concentrate attention on the areas focused on the software as the industry continues to move in the direction of a cloud. Buyers of UC by the beginning of 2019 seldom place the main focus on such things as "completeness of vision". Instead their choice often is defined by ability to integrate or popularity of a brand.

Though the decision on elimination of a magic quadrant of UC is disputable, it shows that Gartner pays attention to moods in the market. It is not excluded however that the requirement about providing complete solutions can lead to additional complaints from suppliers who are also dissatisfied with how Gartner makes the research reports.^[2]

Notes