Just kidding, Mr Sholler. I really hope that’s the Dan I think it is, given the title of this post (which is of course in reference to our recent bus ride). Nice to hear from you though, and I only wish I could write as clearly as you do.
In respect of my points yesterday about the generalist/aggregator/pro-am trend in the industry analyst business, Dan says:
“I believe that there will continue to be value in people who aggregate this informed opinion, supplement it with their own research and observations, and offer to distribute that for a fee.”
I agree – RedMonk’s business looks something like what you describe, although we don’t charge for distribution (this Interweb thingy kind of drives down the cost of distribution, though, we find). A major difference as i see it, in how the industry analyst business needs to change, is being transparent about who and what gets aggregated. We like our clients to be able to “view source”. You certainly can’t say that for the research methodologies, or seed ideas, of the big firms.
But its putting the context in context that really matters.
To that end Dan also says:
“You need to actually talk to the people involved, understand what it is that they are trying to accomplish, what their constraints are, and then help them to come up with a plan based on the analysis of experiences of others, and analogous situations.”
One of my points about engaging with practitioners in a nutshell. Its a services model. Not sure how you think consulting limits our scale any more than a big firm, but i won’t disagree. We’re not into scale for its own sake.
Dan is evidently doing some good work on his blog. I enjoyed this riff on software as a service as a foundation for SMB engagements.