ECM - It Must be Magic

Gartner recently released its 2007 ECM Magic Quadrant.  You can download the report compliments of OpenText.  One must thank Gartner for helping to keep the industry focused on ECM as the industry umbrella acronym that encompasses document management, imaging, records management, workflow, web content management and document-centric collaboration.  (Of course I would suggest they add enterprise search and BPM).  Its great when industry analysts can agree and provide a single, cohesive message regarding what technologies comprise a market space. 

It is unfortunate and confusing, however, when we do not agree. This is the case with some of the rankings vendors received this year.  It is interesting that Gartner labels the quadrant a "magic" quadrant, for it is somewhat magic how these vendors get positioned I guess.  The scientific objective mathematical equations used to position Opentext, for example, 1/2 inch further along the "completeness of vision" axis, than Oracle, are not shared - its "magic".  Indeed Gartner advises that readers not try to compare the rankings from one year to the next, stating that, "The market is changing, and the criteria for selecting and ranking vendors continue to evolve."  All well and good - the market is changing.  But I must confess, this year's rankings (like previous year's) have some "surprises", but one in particular caught my attention enough to warrant this posting.

(Did anyone else see this and have issue?) Microsoft is strongly positioned on the "completeness of vision" axis, rivaling OpenText, IBM and EMC.  But, it is relatively weakly ranked with regards to "ability to execute", below not only IBM, EMC, OpenText and Oracle, but also Interwoven, Vignette and Hyland.  OK, maybe the Microsoft vision is not fully matured yet, but it was not on the "completeness of vision" ranking that they paled, but the "ability to execute".  Gartner defines this axis as "Product/Service: Core goods and services offered by the vendor that compete in/serve the defined market. This includes current product/service capabilities, quality, feature sets, skills, etc., whether offered natively or through OEM agreements/partnerships as defined in the market definition and detailed in the subcriteria."

Its interesting to note that "leaders ", EMC and Opentext are "strategic partners" of Microsoft along with vendors such as Vignette.  Indeed, AIIM is currently running its Sharepoint Meets ECM Roadshow providing education on how a host of ECM players integrate into the Microsoft Sharepoint platform, many through partnerships.   Take this into consideration, along with the sheer size, budget and market attention that Microsoft commands, and you have to think - Wow - this is magic - how could Microsoft ranked so low with regards to ability to execute?

Comments

[Paula Thornton]

Purely a guess, based on what I know, Microsoft is clearly reinventing itself based on their discoveries of going through the entire process to deliver Vista. They have changed into a Design-focused organization. That means (since Design Thinking is clearly more strategically-enabling) that they would be farther than anyone in their vision.

But learning how and making the necessary changes throughout the rest of the organization IS questionable. They don't have a good change record.

If I were Gartner, I'd likely have made the same observations.

[Carl Frappaolo]

Paula:

Thanks for the insights. Its a shame that even knowledgeable people such as yourself have to make guesses when it comes to these rankings. It is interesting that you do not feel that MS does not have a good change record. I have always admired the way they turned the organization into a web platform - i.e. the success of Explorer, and the market penetration they are experiencing with Sharepoint. Oh it might take them a few tries, and they may move in stages, but they often get to the destination. I just find it somewhat puzzling, when a firm with the installed base, track record, staff and capital of MS is ranked weaker than someone like Hyland in an ability to execute.

[Daniel Hinderink]

I understand the lower ranking of MS in terms of their "ability to execute" is due to the performance and scalability issues with MOSS 2007. From one of my projects I can report that these are massive shortcomings to the point of real shows-stoppers.
That said, the practice to declare those annual magic quadrants incomparable, while at the same time keeping the process of placements on the axis a secret makes the magic quadrant rather look like voodoo.