Right hand commoditizes left. Gluecode and RedMonk’s business model

As soon as i heard about IBM’s Gluecode acquisition i thought this was a research note in the making. Potentially big news, multi-dimensional, with a clear narrative case that a vendor wants to make and or buy into. My thoughts are likely to be somewhat well aligned with those of IBM’s; after all, I have been calling for IBM to reduce complexity in the WebSphere portfolio for a while (haven’t we all?). This alignment means i can potentially write something independently for our clients, but something that might also be licensed for use by IBM’s marketing machine. This is the kind of thought process an “independent” analyst makes. We don’t do commissioned white papers at RedMonk but we do like to be able to afford a veggie burger at the day, and maybe a pint of beer.

Anyway, as an analyst you always want to be seen to be prescient so i was also keen to follow up on my recent argument- IBM Software Group: The Baby Eating Starts Here.

The Gluecode news should be seen in the context of breaking news about Harmony, an attempt to consolidate Java around a single open source J2SE implementation. For a good explanation of the issues surrounding Harmony see my business partner’s take. In my opionion it’s fine for hackers to claim open source forking is never a problem, but try telling that to people in ops, that have to support production environments…

So, i thought, Stephen has done a great Harmony Q&A, so i will write a formal note on the Gluecode deal, that we might be able to make a few bucks licensing. At least that’s what i thought until i read tecosystems this morning. Stephen has only gone and done it…

That is – Stephen has written a rather insightful conversational Q&A about the Gluecode deal and its implications. Its on the blog. Anyone can link to it. So how do we sell it?

IBM can, and probably should, link to the note, and maybe put a permalink on its analyst insights intranet.

At least though, Stephen’s blog is published under a Creative Commons license, which doesn’t allow commercial use; in other words IBM couldn’t just download and reprint it at will. Oops oh yes it does… at least this license does. [Note to Stephen – you should put your creative commons license button further up the page, to make it clear what licensing conditions are]

So, we’re back to step one. Which is – i am wondering if IBM would be interested in a note that looked like an “Analyst White Paper”.

You know what though? I am happy for IBM to use the material on our blog. I am not going to whine about a few dollars lost. IBM is a good customer, and that’s the way it goes.

Have you all grokked where I am coming from? The bold moves IBM is making, as it tries to cope with the dual disruptions of software as a service and open source, mirror the chalenges facing the industry analyst business. Web content is commoditizing us left right and center. Experts and practitioners are popping up all over the blogosphere. They are like mushrooms; field mushrooms at that; if you go hunt for them you can get great, tasty, rich insights into which technologies work and why.

Is Gartner a services business or a product business? I would argue it thinks it the latter but is really the former.

Certainly we think RedMonk primarily provide services rather than products. We support our subscribers by tailoring our analysis to their needs, helping them understand a world that is changing ludicrously fast, with insights, contexts, and narratives, rather than trying to sell them a place on a quadrant or a pay for play research note, or a library of research they will never read.

I can’t help thinking then, that RedMonk is to to Gluecode as Gartner is to WebSphere. We’re a small nimble outfit determined to reduce the configuration nightmare (I have never spoken to a Gartner customer that didn’t complain about problems navigating the firm). We don’t charge for products so much as services. We’re incredibly easy to do business with. I would even argue that our willingness to offer advice to people that brief us is not so different from a free download model. Some oldline analyst firms charge for briefings; now that is an off the charts conflict of interest… With RedMonk on the other hand, every briefing we take we try and provide at least one key insight and one piece of actionable advice. Not consultations mind, but briefings: if you a vendor briefing us you will hopefully come away thinking… after all, its a conversation. Being on a briefing should not be like watching a broadcast. We also believe in open source analysis and sharing of intellectual property, and that many eyeballs make bugs shallow; including errors or ommissions in research. The truth is, most analyst firms offer vendors early looks at research notes for “fact checking”; they just don’t say who added what fix in the final public version.

RedMonk puts something in – we like to make a contribution. That is one reason the executive from a cash rich company, one of the biggest in the business, that has never paid RedMonk any money annoyed me last week when he said, at the beginning of a pre-briefing for an announcement its making this week: “Oh you should treat this an opportunity to offer us advice and feedback before we take these messages to market.” Ummmm…. what exactly do we get out of it? You expect free advice? Maybe you should call the Citizen’s Advice Bureau.

But back to my meme, and some closing remarks.

We’re moving into an era where the pace of change is so fast that service oriented economics looks like the only way to go. We need to be able to roll out new services in shorter time frames than ever, and we have to keep customers happy with quality of service, not quality of lockin. This is true of software, just check out flickr and MSN Spaces, Its also true of analyst reports. Most analyst research is out of date as soon as its published.

Or with a right hand man like Stephen even before its written…

IBM still may license something that looks more like an analyst research note. Perception is nine tenths of the law, after all. Think J2EE certification… But if we have already explained the implication of a deal on our blog, should i replicate the work to make some money? [the $64k question]

I think its kind of funny that even RedMonk, a small firm, has an idea what it must feel like to work at a software company that is mixing and match open source and proprietary business models. Today i probably feel something like an executive in IBM’s AIX business, looking at IBM’s Linux push. Or like a WebSphere application server product manager, or salesman, who is trying to work just exactly what the implications of the Gluecode purchase are for his business, or quartely bonus. For help with that question look no further than Stephen’s free primer.