Integrity in the Collaboration Business?
I've typically joked about the value of "consulting research" firms - who typically ask me and several others what we think, then charge us for a report to tell us what we said... Some seem even less authentic in their efforts.
I became especially disappointed with one particular firm that goes by the last name of the female head of the firm a few years ago. They conducted a survey to report on the relative cost of operating Lotus Notes/Domino or Microsoft Outlook/Exchange environments. I was asked to participate in the fairly detailed survey, responded, and had my response acknowledged with a complimentary copy of their report.
In reading the report, it was clear that my input had been distorted. There were only 5 responding firms in my "size" category who were running Lotus Notes/Domino. There report indicated that no one was hosting more than 1,000 users on a Domino server. However, I had clearly responded (correctly) that we were running 4,000 users per Windows Domino server.
This seemed suspiciously like an attempt to make Microsoft appear better in the study. I began watching this firm's reports and studies more closely. They seem to consistently rate Microsoft more highly than seems reasonable - and in comparison to similar studies performed by other research organizations.
What's the harm? Is all fair in business? Why do I care since I don't think very highly of such reports anyway? -- I value integrity. I strive to adhere to the utmost standards of integrity myself, and look for the same in others. I have no problem with people who honestly disagree with my opinions, analysis, and conclusions. I respect people who are trying to make a living producing and selling a product that I don't wnat need or like. I have no respect or tolerance, though, for people who are willing to sacrifice truth for a buck.
I became especially disappointed with one particular firm that goes by the last name of the female head of the firm a few years ago. They conducted a survey to report on the relative cost of operating Lotus Notes/Domino or Microsoft Outlook/Exchange environments. I was asked to participate in the fairly detailed survey, responded, and had my response acknowledged with a complimentary copy of their report.
In reading the report, it was clear that my input had been distorted. There were only 5 responding firms in my "size" category who were running Lotus Notes/Domino. There report indicated that no one was hosting more than 1,000 users on a Domino server. However, I had clearly responded (correctly) that we were running 4,000 users per Windows Domino server.
This seemed suspiciously like an attempt to make Microsoft appear better in the study. I began watching this firm's reports and studies more closely. They seem to consistently rate Microsoft more highly than seems reasonable - and in comparison to similar studies performed by other research organizations.
What's the harm? Is all fair in business? Why do I care since I don't think very highly of such reports anyway? -- I value integrity. I strive to adhere to the utmost standards of integrity myself, and look for the same in others. I have no problem with people who honestly disagree with my opinions, analysis, and conclusions. I respect people who are trying to make a living producing and selling a product that I don't wnat need or like. I have no respect or tolerance, though, for people who are willing to sacrifice truth for a buck.
- The research analysis firm who shades a report to favor a company they think will provide more business, or
- The software vendor who tells my company we'll be able to run their product on half the number of servers it will reall take,
- are no different from the used car salesman who swears the salvaged vehicle has never been in an accident.
posted by Tim Haugen | 1:51 PM
|
0 comments
