How Broadcasters of Different Sizes Rank Vendors for Quality

Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 09 2009

This is the fourth in a series of articles about findings from the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS)* that shows how a global sample of more than 1,000 broadcasters of different sizes ranked broadcast technology vendors on a variety of metricsFor information about how these results were collected, please see the bottom of this post**.

Previously I’ve discussed how broadcasters of different sizes ranked broadcast technology vendors for innovation, reliability and great customer service. Today I am going to look at how this group ranked vendors for “quality.” 

The table below shows the top 5 brands in the broadcast technology vendor league table for quality, as ranked by broadcasters, broken down by organization size.  For the sake of comparison, I have also provided the global ranking (responses of all 4,000+ respondents from all organization types) as well as the ranking for all broadcasters (regardless of size or location).

 

Please note that in all cases, these brands are shown in alphabetical order, NOT in the order of their ranking in the study

  

Question: How would you rate [Brand X] on the following attribute [Quality] where 1 = very poor and 10 = best in the market? 

 

   Quality by broadcaster by org size

Once again this chart makes for very interesting reading.  Here are a few quick thoughts on these findings:

 

* There are a total of 8 vendors in this list.  This makes quality the most concentrated and least varied of the metrics I’ve explored

 

* When you compare the four metrics I studied (quality, reliability, innovation and great customer service) broken down by broadcasters of different sizes, a total of 11 vendors made the list for “innovation;” 9 vendors made the list for “reliability;” and 12 vendors made the list for “great customer service.”

 

* What makes the appearance of these vendors interesting is where they appear in the charts (what size of broadcaster), and in which other metrics were they also ranked highly by broadcasters of different sizes.

 

* All the vendors in this chart are large and / or well established.  This was not necessarily the case with the other metrics where there was a much broader range of vendors listed.

 

* Two of these eight vendors in the top 5 quality rankings – EVS and Sony – appear in all six categories in the chart above.  These two vendors appear very consistently in the top five rankings for all the attributes I have broken out by organizational size. 

 

* The other vendors appeared in to top five rankings for quality as follows (in alphabetical order): Evertz (2), Harris (4), Omneon (2), Quantel (1), Snell & Wilcox (4), and Thomson GVG (5). 

 

* Thomson / Grass Valley makes an appearance somewhere in the top five of all the metrics in this series of posts (quality, reliability, innovation and great customer service).  In the case of quality they appear in all categories except one — the mid-sized broadcasters with 501-1,000 employees.

 

* Harris makes the top five quality list for the global sample (all respondents, regardless of company type), and the sample of all broadcasters (regardless of size or location).  When the broadcast sample is broken down by size, Harris appears twice – in the 50-100 employee category and 501-1,000 employee categories. In addition to quality, Harris appears in the top five rankings in two of the other three categories, reliability and great customer service, but not innovation.

 

* Omneon appears in the top five quality list for the two categories of mid sized broadcasters (101-500 and 501-1000 employees).  Like Harris, Omneon appears in three of the four metrics covered in this series of posts.  In addition to quality, Omneon appears in the top five ranking for both innovation and reliability (both in the 501-1000 employee category), but are absent from the top five rankings for great customer service.

 

* Evertz in appears in the top five quality list for small (50-100 employees) and medium (101-500 employees) broadcasters, but not in the lists of larger broadcasters.  This is fairly consistent with the other findings about Evertz.  The company makes an appearance somewhere in top 5 list for all the metrics (quality, reliability, innovation and great customer service), but it seems that Evertz typically appeals to the small and mid-sized broadcasters.  The exception is “great customer service” where Evertz made the top 5 list in the 501-1,000 employee category.  However the company did not make the top 5 list for large broadcasters (1,001-10,000 employees) in any category.

 

* The opposite is true of Snell & Wilcox.  S&W made an appearance in the top 5 list of each metric, but only in the large broadcaster categories (501-1,000 employees and 1,001-10,000 employees). 

 

* Another vendor to appear in the top five for only the largest broadcasters (1,001-10,000 employees) is Quantel.  In addition to this appearance for quality, Quantel also made the top five ranking for innovation among the largest broadcasters (1,000-10,000 employees).

 

* Finally, it’s worth pointing out that Axon is similar to S&W and Quantel.  Although Axon does not appear in the top 5 list for quality, the company shows a similar pattern to S&W and Quantel because for all categories where Axon does make an appearance (in the reliability and great customer service charts), it was only in the large broadcaster categories.

 

 

 

 

 

* The annual Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) is the largest ever and most comprehensive studies of broadcast technology vendor brands and industry trends.  The BBS provides insight into market trends and the perceptions of leading broadcast industry vendor brands by practitioners across the world.  It also delivers vendor brand ranking in a variety of product categories; all of which can be segmented by geography and customer type.

 

** Respondents to the BBS were asked to rank their opinion of twenty-five broadcast technology vendor brands in a variety of categories including awareness; overall opinion; change of opinion; recommendation; and a variety of brand attributes and brand drivers such as innovation, reliability, quality and great customer service.  The responses were then aggregated into a series of industry “league tables” that rank each broadcast technology vendor brand against the metrics mentioned above.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: