Buyers Look at More than Dots

Every vendor I know dreams of being included in the Gartner Magic Quadrant. For those of us in the tech world, it’s treated like the ultimate scorecard, the sorting hat of our industry.

But if we’re honest, the experience can sometimes feel a little like Dobby from Harry Potter, pleading with Gartner: “Please move my dot!”

Of course, Gartner’s process is far more sophisticated than waving a wand. Their insights carry tremendous weight, shaping how organizations perceive vendors and solutions. And yet, after more than 20 years in this industry, I’ve come to see that while the MQ holds significant influence, it’s rarely the magic key we vendors think it is. Buyers use it as a single data point among many to make informed decisions about what’s best for their organization. Their jobs and reputations depend on it.

This blog isn’t a critique of the Magic Quadrant, far from it. It’s a recognition of its value and a call for it to evolve into something even more useful for the buyers it ultimately serves. As a Visionary in Gartner’s 2024 Magic Quadrant for Email Security, we’ve experienced firsthand the significance of this recognition. You can read more about what this placement means to us and our customers here.

Beyond the Dots, What Buyers Need

Gartner consistently reminds its audience not to treat the Magic Quadrant as the sole source of truth (see Gartner’s guidance on “Positioning technology players within a specific market” for further context). They emphasize that vendors in the “upper right” quadrant aren’t always the best fit for every organization or use case. And they’re absolutely correct.

I'm in violent agreement. Let me share an example from the recent Magic Quadrant for Email Security. The inclusion criteria, based on factors like revenue or install base, mean some smaller, niche vendors might not make the cut. But what if one of those vendors is laser-focused on an industry like law firms? Most law firms are small, not particularly tech-heavy, and need straightforward, cost-effective solutions. Selecting a big-name vendor from the “upper right,” with complex and expensive offerings, might be a poor choice. A niche vendor with deep expertise in legal workflows might serve them far better.

This nuance often gets lost when the MQ is treated as a ranking rather than a tool. I believe buyers need more than a static view; they need tailored insights to match their specific needs.

The Potential for an Interactive Magic Quadrant

Now, imagine if Gartner’s Magic Quadrant were dynamic. Instead of a static grid, buyers could filter vendors based on their unique requirements:

• By Technology Approach
  Exclude traditional Secure Email Gateways (SEGs) if they’re only interested in Integrated Cloud Email Security (ICES) solutions
• By Key Features
  Highlight vendors offering account takeover protection, accidental data exposure prevention, or seamless integrations with collaboration tools like Microsoft Teams.
• By Peer Reviews
  Prioritize vendors with 4.5+ stars on Gartner Peer Insights, focusing on reviews from organizations of similar size and industry.
• By Customer Support
  Filter for live technical support availability or vendor responsiveness.

Gartner already collects this information through their MQ questionnaires, which include hundreds of data points on features, capabilities, and focus areas. Turning this data into an interactive tool could transform the buyer’s experience, providing a Magic Quadrant that adapts to them.

The Email Security Example (Nuance Matters)

In the email security space, the need for nuance is particularly evident. Gartner’s recent MQ included a mix of SEG and ICES vendors, reflecting a market in transition. While ICES solutions are often seen as more modern (API-driven, leveraging AI/ML), some SEG vendors are trying to catch up by acquiring or introducing ICES capabilities.

Yet many organizations are seeking SEG replacements or augmentations due to the limitations of traditional gateways in detecting advanced threats. The MQ’s current format doesn’t easily allow buyers to separate vendors based on these evolving needs, making it harder for them to identify the best solution for their environment.

What Gartner Gets Right (and Where It Can Go Further)

To Gartner’s credit, their reports like the '4 Tenets to Address Advanced Email Security Threats' complement the Magic Quadrant by offering prescriptive guidance. These resources provide strategies for addressing specific challenges, such as AI-generated and socially engineered phishing attacks, as well as outbound email security.

While the MQ offers a high-level overview, buyers (especially those navigating complex or niche requirements) can benefit from pairing it with these more detailed reports to make fully informed decisions.

A Vision for the Future

The Magic Quadrant has been an industry staple for decades, and it deserves its place as a trusted resource. But the technology landscape is evolving, and buyers’ expectations are evolving with it. They don’t just want to know who’s in the “upper right.” They want to know who’s right for them.

Imagine a Magic Quadrant that’s dynamic, interactive, and problem-focused. One that empowers buyers to filter, customize, and dive deeper into the data Gartner already collects. It would not only enhance Gartner’s value to buyers but also align perfectly with its mission to inform and guide technology decisions.

As for us vendors? We’d still obsess over our dots. But perhaps we’d obsess a little more about ensuring we’re meeting the real needs of the buyers we serve.