Are Two Gartner CPM Magic Quadrants Better Than One?


In a previous post, I wrote about a changing of the guard in the Gartner Magic Quadrant (s) for CPM Solutions. I described how leaders Oracle, SAP and IBM are losing ground to more innovative and nimble vendors including Tagetik. Until recently these mega-vendors dominated the upper-end of the CPM market as finance organizations in large enterprises believed those were the only options that could scale to the size and complexity of their finance organizations.




CFOs of Large Enterprises Have a Choice

Fortunately, CFOs have realized that they no longer need to be blindly loyal to their ERP vendor or the CIOs technology vendor of choice. Some of the largest companies in the world have replaced their IBM, Oracle or SAP CPM solutions with Tagetik. They save time and money and make their finance organizations more agile and responsive by streamlining multiple finance processes in one application. Click here to view some of our 1 Minute customer videos.

The Magic Quadrant survey results support my premise that the stronghold of Oracle, SAP, and IBM on the large enterprise market is in jeopardy. Both SAP and Oracle ranked in the bottom quartile for customer satisfaction and all three had the exact same caution regarding their solutions (see below).

“SAP requires a relatively high degree of initial configuration and support expertise. Customers with limited technical resources should evaluate related implementation and support efforts.”



Weigh Your Alternatives

Contrast this with Tagetik and you can see that CFOs are weighing alternatives to “the big guys” and tend to be happy that they did.


“Tagetik is among the best for customer satisfaction among vendors with large customers…We asked the survey respondents the following question: 'Besides Tagetik, which other vendors did your organization evaluate, but not select, for its financial and/or strategic CPM solutions?'. Tagetik customers tended to evaluate IBM, Oracle and SAP more frequently than other vendors in this study. This is indicative of Tagetik's ability to compete effectively with the Leaders in this market.”

*Source: Gartner Magic Quadrant for FCPM Solutions and Gartner Magic Quadrant for SCPM Solutions



Two Quadrants, Twenty Vendors, a Lot of Variables

So, CFOs (in large enterprises or small) have more options for Corporate Performance Management than ever before. In fact, with the CPM Magic Quadrant being divided into two separate quadrants, there are now around 20 vendors to navigate across the two quadrants (Financial CPM and Strategic CPM). Gartner defines two types of vendors that are included in the FCPM and/or SCPM Magic Quadrants (Tagetik is one of the few that are in both quadrants). The two types are defined as follows:



*Source: Magic Quadrant for Financial Corporate Performance Management Solutions



Some Gray Area2016 Gartner MQ for CPM suites

While I respect Gartner’s desire to adapt to market changes, I find this new structuring of CPM a bit ambiguous. For example, in the FCPM Magic Quadrant specialist vendors that previously would have been categorized as niche vendors are in the leader quadrant this year. And the three specialist vendors (Workiva, Blackline, and Trintech) in the quadrant all have higher completeness of vision than every other FCPM vendor. That’s a real head scratcher to me. I’ve read the documents many times and talked to the authors, but I still don’t get it. Maybe I’m a little slow - does it make sense to you?


Don’t Lose Sight of the Forest for the Trees!

The key thing to keep in mind with this new format is to not lose sight of ‘the forest for the trees”. What I mean by that is, don’t lose sight of the big picture. Don’t lose sight of what it is you really want to accomplish both in the short-term and the long-term.

Are you simply looking for a budgeting solution or to address an account reconciliation issue? Or are you looking for a solution that meets your needs today and will be your platform for the future? Is your goal to fix a single process or to streamline multiple finance processes and reduce the number of applications, technologies, integration and IT resources needed to support the finance organization? Your answers will dictate what vendors in the Magic Quadrant to focus on to best meet your particular needs. Doing this should make navigating the 2 Magic Quadrants and 20 vendors more manageable. Good luck!


Are We Taking One Step Forward Two Steps Back?

2016 Gartner MQ for CPM suites

I want to preface this last thought. This is my personal opinion, not the opinion of Gartner or Tagetik. OK, with that out of the way, I can’t help feeling like we are going back in time. When you look at the satisfaction levels of large companies, it is apparent that the strategy of Oracle, SAP and IBM of cobbling together different applications into an ‘integrated CPM suite’ was flawed. That’s why they rank at or near the bottom in most customer satisfaction surveys. The biggest bottleneck and burden with this approach is integration, visibility across finance processes, redundant data, and the multitude of skill sets needed to implement and integrate the differing solutions together.


2016 Gartner MQ for CPM suites

Point Solutions On the Cloud Are Still Point Solutions

This new structure of the CPM Magic Quadrants rewards cloud point solution vendors with placement in the leaders quadrant and legacy market leaders Oracle, SAP, and IBM have now come to market with cloud-based point solutions for planning. But from a business perspective, does the cloud eliminate the reasons that drove the demand for unified CPM in the first place? It does for hardware and software infrastructure, but what about integration, data redundancy and synchronization or training on different products and interfaces? These issues will still be there and will drive the market away from cloud point solutions to a unified cloud CPM approach. I strongly believe this and that is why our cloud strategy has always been to provide a powerful, scalable and unified Financial Performance PlatformTM on the cloud. Because finance wants the cloud…without compromise.



What do you think? Do you like the new Magic Quadrant methodology? Is it more or less helpful than the old way?


On-demand webinar on board reporting

Share this post!