Response to ‘A case of don’t kill the messenger’

This is a response to Neil Raden’s post on B-eye network – I was unable to submit a reply on the BEN-site.

Hello Neil,

I’m happy to see that you have taken the initiative to follow-up on this controversy. What bothers me the most is the unwillingness (by Evelson in this case) to engage in a real and critical discussion regarding the topic in question. Every such discussion is a new opportunity to further our knowledge and improve our collective understanding. One can argue whether a tone of voice like Few used in his reply encourages such a discussion but while doing so we omit the fact that Few is trying to make a real argument (he’s not solely ranting, far from it). I even suspect that Few’s wording is not only triggered by Evelson’s post but has been fed by more inaccurate statements regarding his topic of interest, published in other media and by other people.

I have too little knowledge about the business models of analyst’s firms to comment on your explanation in detail. But your general observation that analyst firms seem to lack true in-depth insight has also crossed my mind. Moreover, the lack of critical discussion and more factual insight is IMHO a more fundamental problem that endangers our profession in general. As you twittered yourself: know what you’re talking about and challenge the facts. Keep spreading the word.

Posted in Uncategorized
One comment on “Response to ‘A case of don’t kill the messenger’
  1. Ronald Damhof says:

    I think my tweet initially was that ‘the establishment was not happy’. And they were not – Stephen got burned big time and it was shamefull. I hold Stephen in high regard – he really knows his stuff, wrote some classic books etc..

    He took on Forrester head on when they wrote about his expertise.The response of Forrester was simply something like ‘I have 30 year experience, how dare you…’. He was in his right to respond. And please, if you tend to disagree with someone it is hard to distinguish between the person and the sh*t he’s writing. So Stephen went for the ball and took the person with him…but in that order.

    In the analyst commmunity nearly ALL took side…the side of forrester (source:twitter). For me, that was quite a shock. That ‘thought leaders’ took the side of the big analyst firm and did not went for the real arguments was quite a shock to me…..

    Two exceptions; Mark Madsen and Neil Raden, where Neil Raden wrote the above post. I bow to these giants.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: