Kea Insight / Analyst Relations

Preparing for Magic Quadrant Analyst Conversations

By Derk Erbé

Good Magic Quadrant preparation begins with research and a clear set of questions. It does not begin with a request for the analyst to explain how to give the company a better position. The first task is to understand the market being assessed, the information required and the evidence the company can provide.

Even experienced AR teams benefit from revisiting those foundations. Familiarity with an analyst or a previous evaluation can create confidence without current knowledge. A disciplined preparation process separates what the team has verified from what it remembers or assumes.

Research the market before arranging the conversation

Read the relevant research available to you through authorised access, including the current market definition and methodology. Where earlier editions are available, compare their scope and the issues they emphasise. The objective is to understand how the market has developed, not to predict a future assessment from small movements in a chart.

Record changes in terminology, buyer requirements and coverage. Note the publication dates and distinguish historical material from current guidance. Older research can explain context, but it cannot establish what the next evaluation will require.

Turn that review into a short preparation note. It should state the company’s understanding of the market, the evidence behind that view and the specific points requiring clarification. A focused note is more useful than a folder of reports nobody has synthesised.

Use the appropriate interaction

Be clear about whether the meeting is a vendor briefing, a client inquiry or a communication connected to an evaluation process. A briefing primarily informs the analyst. Advice and clarification should be sought through the appropriate arrangements and within the boundaries of the research process.

Do not expect the analyst to reveal confidential competitor information, internal deliberations or a future score. Ask questions that help the company understand the published scope and represent its own business accurately. That creates a professional discussion with a useful purpose on both sides.

Bring questions that resolve uncertainty

The agenda should follow the gaps identified during preparation. Avoid asking the analyst to repeat material the team could have read in advance. Useful questions can address the market’s boundaries, the relevance of a use case or the process for submitting supporting information.

Which buyer problems and use cases fall within the research scope?
Where should we look for the current requirements and timetable?
What changes in market terminology or scope should we understand?
How should we distinguish generally available capabilities from roadmap plans in our response?
What is the appropriate route for clarifying a requirement or correcting a factual error?
Which evidence can we provide to explain our business more accurately?

The analyst may not be able to answer every question in that setting. Record the remaining uncertainty and establish the proper next step. Do not turn an unanswered question into an internal assumption that later appears in an executive briefing as fact.

Convert the discussion into an evidence plan

Afterwards, separate confirmed information, your team’s interpretation and unresolved questions. Assign owners for the evidence required and record any commitments made. Product, customer success, sales and leadership may each need to contribute different parts of the picture.

For each material claim, ask what demonstrates it, whether the evidence is current and whether it can be shared. A customer example should identify the relevant use case and outcome. A product assertion should distinguish what is available from what is planned. Consistent definitions matter when several departments contribute to the same response.

Maintain understanding between evaluations

Return with meaningful developments rather than waiting for the next deadline. New customer evidence, a significant product change or a genuine shift in strategy may justify an update. Repeating a sales pitch without new substance is unlikely to improve the analyst’s understanding.

Preparation makes the company easier to assess accurately and reduces avoidable confusion inside the business. It also helps executives enter the conversation with realistic expectations. For related guidance, read how executives can communicate with analysts and explore the Kea AR Knowledge Map.

Put this into practice

Prepare the evidence before the evaluation.

Get experienced support with analyst questions, evidence gaps and evaluation preparation, grounded in the business you can demonstrate.

Explore AR Support

Not sure where to start? Take the eight-question AR Readiness Check.