Executive Summary

  • We offer unique information on enterprise software with unmatched accuracy and accuracy measurements.
  • Our model is based upon complete independence as well as first-hand experience.

Introduction: Unique Information on Enterprise Software

Have you noticed how difficult it is to get accurate information on enterprise software? There is significant censorship in enterprise software. In many cases, we publish information that cannot be published anywhere else. The more we have analyzed the information providers in the IT space, the more we have uncovered financial bias.

It is close to impossible to find information or advice without commercial bias. We ran into this again in our article Why is There No Manual Adjustment or Commerical Preference Adjustment in Google Search?

  • This has been a continual philosophy to write from the perspective of implementation.
  • Real-life implementation is always less ideal than merely an application’s theoretical capability.

In our view, this makes us the most realistic outlets of information on enterprise software. While most other information sources are strongly tilted for the more significant software vendors, we treat every vendor the same regardless of their size. This is because vendors are not our customers and there is no way for a vendor to exercise control over what we write.

Observe our disclaimer that we use on articles (in this case, Gartner.)

Lack of Financial Bias Notice: The vast majority of content available on the Internet about Gartner is marketing fiddle-faddle published by vendors who republish reports they paid Gartner to publish, or Magic Quadrants they paid Gartner to score well. The IT industry is petrified of Gartner and only publishes complementary information about them. The article below is very different.

  • First, it is published by a research entity.
  • Second, no one paid for this article to be written, and it is not pretending to inform you while being rigged to sell you software or consulting services as a vendor or consulting firm that shares their ranking in some Gartner report. Unlike nearly every other article you will find from Google on this topic, it has had no input from any company's marketing or sales department. 

Who is Shaun Snapp? And What is Brightwork?

Shaun Snapp is the founder and Managing Editor of Brightwork Research & Analysis. He gradually moved into performing research into SAP through the smaller scale verification required for his customers on SAP projects. This is where one has to find out what functionality can be relied upon, what a new release means for implementation, what parts of SAP need to be augmented with external applications, etc..

Shaun covers SAP topics at a level of detail below most public sources such as…

  • Which SAP applications and areas of functionality are usable and which aren’t?
  • What are the implications of buying and using HANA and S/4?
  • Indirect access issues with SAP.
  • Is the SAP information presented to you by outside parties likely to be true?
  • Where is SAP going in the future, + how do things fit together?

Where it is extremely unusual to find an objective analysis of SAP, Brightwork does. Brightwork is one of the only wholly independent sources of information on SAP. And this research is generally at a much greater depth than other research published on SAP.

What is Brightwork’s Independence?

Brightwork Research & Analysis performs the most in-depth research into SAP that exists anywhere. We research SAP topics ranging from HANA to SAP’s TCO and best practice claims. Our extensive network of SAP sources, in addition to the first-hand experience with SAP, allows us to produce original research that entities like Gartner or Forrester cannot (will not?) do.

Brightwork publishes information that is often not complementary to SAP. If an entity publishes positive information about SAP, it will typically pass without commentary even if it is false (as it usually is). However, if the information is negative or just not in line with SAP’s marketing’s take on SAP, then questions are often surfaced (by those that work for SAP or benefit from SAP) as to a nefarious alternative motive.

Two options brought up include:

  • Is Shaun a disgruntled ex-SAP employee?
  • Is Oracle a paid employee?

Shaun never worked for SAP. Shaun has been working in SAP as a consultant since 1997 and for roughly 1/2 that time as an independent consultant. This is a primary way that Brightwork’s research is different from virtually any other IT analyst — that is, Shaun Snapp has first had experience turning the wrenches of SAP. Brightwork began as Brightwork Research & Analysis, which was entirely a website around the technical configuration of SAP. We change our name when our research extended into SAP overall — offering the most honest coverage of areas ranging from HANA and S/4HANA to indirect access. It was the observation of the chasm between SAP projects’ reality and the SAP marketing presentation that motivated producing publicly consumed independent research.

Secondly, Brightwork analyzes and critiques many companies — from Gartner to IDC to Forbes. The analysis is not motivated by an axe to grind with any of these entities — but is based upon analysis of their behavior. As they don’t pay us, we are free to critique — exactly as other entities that produce material in the area are not.

Notice who gives vendors and consulting companies the type of coverage they like, all of the entities that receive payment from software vendors and consulting companies.

Does Brightwork Take Income from Any Vendor?

Neither Shaun nor Brightwork nor anyone else at Brightwork has ever received any money from Oracle (or any other vendor). Brightwork has been repeatedly provided accurate coverage of Oracle, which Oracle would not approve of, as in the article How Real is Oracle’s Autonomous Database? And How Accurate Are Oracle’s Criticisms of Rimini Street? And SAP and Oracle are not the only entities we critique, as in Gartner’s Disastrous Advice on Mainframes.

Part of what we do is a fact check significant entities, and that puts us in opposition to them when they publish information that we find inaccurate. We have written positive articles about AWS on several occasions, such as the article How Oracle is Lying About AWS Internal Data Centers. And as soon as we did this, we were asked by an Oracle representative to declare whether we were paid by AWS (we aren’t). Curiously, Gartner, which takes in around 1/3 of their $5.1 billion in revenue from vendors, does not seem to face many open questions on forums regarding whether they take money from vendors.

Wouldn’t it be nice to take in roughly $1.7 billion in vendor fees and also not have your integrity or bias challenged?

Our Accuracy in Predicting SAP

We have a 10-year history of providing information about SAP with no funding from any software vendor. This has led to the most accurate history of SAP prediction anywhere and can be verified at A Study into the Accuracy of SAP. (accuracy is improved when one is not paid by SAP to write articles). We have also measured the accuracy of surrogates for SAP, such as A Study into John Appleby’s HANA Accuracy and A Study into Mark Chaflen’s Accuracy on S/4HANA SOH. As far as we can tell, we are the only entity in this space that measures other entities based on accuracy.

  • Not Gartner, not Forrester, not IDC, not Deloitte, and indeed not IT media entities can compare to Brightwork’s accuracy.
  • We commonly critique and outright lampoon the “analytical work” of media entities ranging from Fortune to IDC regarding their SAP coverage accuracy.

And this gets to the principle of Brightwork.

The Principle of Brightwork as Evidence-Based

Brightwork is based upon the principle of providing accurate information on SAP and other IT related topics, no matter what the outcome and whether that information is “positive” or “negative.”

In our view, the information commonly available from both SAP and SAP surrogates (those that make money from SAP, Deloitte, Accenture, Gartner, Forrester) is of deficient quality. SAP and their proxies provide “negative information” all the time. It is both information designed to get companies to make decisions against their interests and information that is both false and designed to take business away from the competition.

Therefore, what is “positive” or “negative” is dependent upon one’s perspective. The “positive” declaration of one course of action is necessarily a negative statement towards other action sources.

SAP and SAP consulting firms hide important information from prospects and sell applications and implementations based upon their revenue needs rather than customer needs. This explains why there is so much waste in the SAP market.

We perform all types of research, which illuminates things that very few people know. But to do so means following the evidence rather than working from the hypothesis and then trying to find information to support it.

Hopefully, this answers questions as to why Brightwork provides the type of research and coverage we do.

If you have any other questions about this or other topics, please reach out to us.

The Reality of Research in Enterprise Software

This video shows how an analytics solution can be used to show the Gartner MQ changing over time. This video illustrates the common problem with analytics — which is that it creates the analytics without any analysis as to whether Gartner’s Magic Quadrant has any validity. This is common in the enterprise software space, where none of the financial biases or claims are fact-checked. If you use an advanced analytics tool, but you don’t apply any critical thinking, nor do you know the domain — the result is false insight. 

There is virtually no analysis of Gartner in the enterprise software space. As we cover in the article How to Understand Why IT Lacks Functioning Research Entities Covering SAP, virtually no entities perform research or have independence from vendors and consulting firms in the enterprise software space.

The enterprise software space is brainless from a research perspective. Companies do not bother to check the accuracy of firms like Gartner. All that is normally necessary is for an established brand to say something is true.

How We Arrive At Out Information on Enterprise Software

  • Primary research such as our detailed studies into TCO, the riskiness of various implementation types, ERP versus non-ERP solution strategies, etc..
  • Reviewing academic research literature.
  • Interacting with software vendors in one of the most distinct ways possible.

We get out storylines that do not have other ways of getting out through the usual channels.

What Companies Need that Brightwork Can Provide

There is close to no place for enterprise software customers to turn for independent research to support their decision making. Gartner is not independent. IT media sources are not independent. The consulting companies are certainly not independent.

How to Get in Contact

You can contact us by using the chat bubble in the lower left-hand corner of this website and leave us a message.