The industrialization of analyst relations has created an ironic problem: while AR teams have more tools and processes than ever, many influential analysts feel increasingly disconnected from the vendors they cover. However, as my ‘Rich get Richer‘ article discusses, recent SageAnalysts survey data reveals this isn’t a universal trend. Some vendors are bucking it by taking a more nuanced, personalized approach to analyst engagement.
The Communication Divide
Analysis of recent Analyst Attitude Survey data shows a growing polarization in how technology vendors engage with industry analysts. Some firms are improving their analyst relationships through targeted, consistent engagement, while others are falling behind with generic or minimal communication approaches.
Success Stories
IBM stands out as a clear example of positive change after some difficult changes in their AR team several years ago. The company has shown a 5% annual improvement in analyst satisfaction scores, driven by what analysts describe as improved access to relevant experts and more personalized engagement. For example, one analyst noted how the team took the initiative and set up a one-on-one (with a hard-to-find Asia Pacific leader) based on queries during the analyst sessions – demonstrating responsive, targeted engagement.
Amazon Web Services (AWS) has maintained strong analyst relationships through consistent communication and personalized service. Analysts particularly praise their ability to provide “personalized service/agenda for annual analyst summit” and their improvement in internal advocacy of analyst services.
Growing Gaps
In contrast, some vendors appear to be losing ground. Post-pandemic, several analysts report deteriorating relationships with previously strong AR programs. Even some major vendors face criticism, with one analyst noting that at one vendor, “AR is code for you’ll waste your time to help AR with their internal KPIs. They’ve been this way for 20+ years.”
The Regional Reality Check
The data strongly supports the importance of regional differentiation in AR approaches. While UK-based analysts cluster around London and German analysts concentrate near Frankfurt and Munich, their US counterparts scatter across multiple time zones and tech hubs. This fundamental geographic difference shapes how analysts prefer to interact with vendors.
Survey data shows that EMEA-based analysts report higher satisfaction when vendors maintain local presence and engagement, while North American analysts often prefer flexible, virtual engagement options. This isn’t new: it was well documented in DARA research on analyst relations in Germany, as long ago as 2008.
Beyond Generic Tiering
The research reveals a clear correlation between communication frequency and positive AR scores. However, it’s not just about quantity – quality and relevance matter significantly. Successful vendors are moving beyond simple tiering approaches to develop more nuanced engagement strategies. And the opposite is true. While I am big fan of ARInsightsPower Index, too many companies are using ARchitect’s generic influence scores and not using the data more thoughtfully.
What’s Working
Vendors showing improvement in analyst satisfaction scores typically demonstrate:
- Consistent, regular communication (2+ contacts per month)
- Personalized engagement based on analyst specialities
- Quick response to specific requests
- Balance of group and one-on-one interactions
- Regional awareness in engagement approaches
What’s Not Working
Common pitfalls identified in the survey include:
- Over-reliance on mass communications
- Poor response rates to specific requests
- Lack of access to relevant experts
- Generic briefing programs
- Inconsistent engagement levels
Bridging the Gap
The data suggests several key strategies for improving analyst relations:
Listen First
Survey responses show that analysts value vendors who take the time to understand their specific needs and preferences. As one analyst noted about Accenture : “They ask great questions” – demonstrating the value of understanding before engaging.
Personalize Engagement
Successful programs like IBM’s show the value of matching analysts with relevant experts and information. Their improvement in scores correlates with more targeted, personalized engagement approaches.
Maintain Consistency
The survey data strongly correlates regular communication with positive AR scores. Vendors maintaining consistent engagement (even if less frequent) tend to score better than those with sporadic, intensive bursts of communication.
Looking Forward
The future of effective analyst relations isn’t about more automation or standardization – it’s about bringing back the personal touch where it matters most. The survey data shows that vendors who invest in understanding and catering to individual analyst needs see better results than those who take a one-size-fits-all approach.
For vendors looking to improve their analyst relations, the path forward is clear:
- Audit current engagement levels and patterns
- Identify gaps in communication frequency and quality
- Develop regionally aware engagement strategies
- Create personalized engagement plans for key analysts
- Maintain consistent, relevant communication
The growing gap in analyst relations quality presents both a warning and an opportunity. Vendors who recognize and address these challenges can build stronger, more effective analyst relationships, while those who continue with generic approaches risk falling further behind.
Postscript
I have written a follow-up post to summarise comments on this post and relate it to the survey findings. It’s at: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/beyond-simplicity-complex-reality-modern-analyst-duncan-chapple-llwac/?trackingId=thQAXJn4Tf%2BYxGfEdElynA%3D%3D
Find out more
- Industry analyst? Contact me for a copy of the SageAnalysts 2024 Report for Participants to see what your peers say about vendors’ support for analysts’ work.
- Are you a high-tech solution provider? Contact Sarah Shamouelian to to find out what analysts say about peer firms’ AR performance in your market.
