Your link did not work.
However, I think you mean a Magic Quadrant, like so:
Is that what you mean?
Btw, I am in favor of providing high-level charts or summaries that help show big picture tradeoffs. I just think that basing it on 'vision' and 'ability to execute' are quite abstract and not highly correlated to helping users choose the right product.
Chesapeake & Midlantic | 03/04/15 04:37pm
Yes, I'd love a vague and abstract list of companies ranked on fluff and imagination and other non quantifiable factors. Also, please rank companies in order of coolest name to dorkiest name, because that's another metric that helps me choose which products to offer my customers. Maybe next week, you can choose which CEOs will be Homecoming King and Queen at the Security Industry Prom.
I think you could come up with something similar to this based on publicly available information.
"Completeness of vision" for example, at this point I would label single-product companies low on that scale. That is not neccessarily a bad thing, for example I think HID has done some innovative things in access control, but their vision seems to be more or less limited to AC, but their ability to execute seems relatively high.
Canon seems higher on the completeness of vision scale, assuming of course that they didn't just buy Axis and Milestone to keep them independent. I don't think Canon has a proven ability to execute though, although Axis and Milestone had both been pretty good on the execution scale previously.
For security, I don't know that the 4 quadrant labels are very accurate.
What would be cool, IMO, would be for IPVM to provide some ongoing X/Y axis rankings for key companies over time. I would be curious to see more of a heat-map style plot of companies over time. Is someone consistently emphasizing vision, but not executing? Is there a company that executes, but always a little bit behind the visionary curve (ref: recent Samsung thread).
IndigoVision Ltd | IPVMU Certified | 03/04/15 06:45pm
IPVM could come up with something similar. You guys have a lot of data already compiled.
The idea of the quad is not inherently bad, as long as the quad categories are compatible and the data points are reasonable, it can help give a newcomer/outsider to the industry an overall sense of the competitive landscape.
The categories shown are not unreasonable, and the data points exist already!
John, for example, has no aversion to labeling someone niche or saying their vision is lacking or recognizing their leadership. He and all of us do it all the time. So if one were to plot the datapoints honestly, without trying simply to place the companies directly for some hidden agenda it, it would be useful. How useful depends on the level of insight of the people whose datapoints we plot.
Will it be warped in some way because of the biases and limitations of those who created it? Absolutely! But no matter what a newbie viewpoint is going to be warped for a long time, as they slowly gain knowledge; a chart has the chance to be more balanced, since it normalizes the data.
If A likes the quad though he needs to throw one up with a couple of his own datapoints, then we can debate how useful it is.