Posts Tagged ‘quality’

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 5 – The 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research, technology trends, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 01 2011

This is the eighth in a series of articles about some of the findings from the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands.  More than 8,000 people in 100+ countries took part in the 2011 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

Each year, as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), we ask broadcast professionals worldwide to rank a variety of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  We use this information to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry “league tables” enable each vendor to understand its position in the market relative to the the industry as a whole as well as their company’s direct competitors.

In previous articles we wrote about the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table, the 2011 BBS Net Change in Overall Opinion League Table, the 2011 BBS Brand Opinion Leaders League Table, and 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table.

.

This post follows on from the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table, by focusing on one of the most important metrics for any technology company – quality.

In an industry that prides itself on the fidelity of its sound and images, the perception of quality is a very important metric for broadcast technology vendors.  Many vendors use quality as one of the key components of their market positioning, and customers often use technical performance and quality as a part of their procurement strategies.

To determine the market’s perception of the quality of broadcast technology vendors, respondents were asked to rank broadcast technology vendor brands for “Quality” on a scale of 1-10 – with 10 being best in the market, and 1 being worst in the market.

The top 30 ranked brands for overall opinion are shown below for the global sample of all respondents.

In all cases, these results are shown in alphabetical order, NOT in the order in which they were ranked in the study.

.

The 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table

.

As with previously published rankings, this list contains a broad mix of vendors including large and small firms; single product and multi-product firms; global and regional players; and audio and video technology providers.

In order to better understand what drives the perception of quality in the broadcast technology industry, let’s look deeper at the vendors on this list, beginning with the type of products produced by each vendor.

 .

Frequency of Product Category – Audio Takes 4 of Top 7 Spots

What about the product categories themselves?  Are some product categories inherently perceived as having higher quality?  If so are these products judged differently than other types of products by customers who are evaluating them for purchase?

As shown in the chart below, there is a very broad range of product categories included in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table – vendors that make products in 23 of the 26 product categories that were covered in the study.

However, when one looks at the frequency of the product categories produced by these vendors, it’s immediately apparent that the top categories are audio products.

.

2011 BBS Quality League Table — Frequency of Product Categories:

 

.

The top two products categories for quality are both from the audio side of the business – microphones and audio consoles.  In fact, four of the top seven product categories in this ranking are audio related, with only highly complex video products — video editing, camera lenses and ENG cameras — being included in this group.  This is an interesting data point, especially when one considers that out of 26 product categories covered in the 2011 BBS, only five were in the audio space.

The other product categories that appear multiple times are clustered in the live production and studio environments, and include camera lenses, studio cameras, production switchers, production servers, test and measurement and video transport.  Interestingly these products tend to be high ticket items that are produced by the industry’s larger vendors.

Since the industry’s largest vendors tend to operate in the most product categories, let’s evaluate the number of times each vendor appears in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table to see if there is a correlation between size of vendor / product range and the market’s perception of quality.

.

2011 BBS Quality League Table — Number of 2011 BBS Product Categories per Brand:

When considering what drives the perception of quality, one question to consider is which type of vendor appears more often in the above ranking – those that are focused on a single type of product, or large multi-product vendors.

While our research does not evaluate each product produced by every vendor, we do put vendors into categories based on their product lines.  This gives a good representation of whether a particular vendor has a narrow or broad product-line-up.

The table below shows the number of 2011 BBS product categories produced by each brand (as defined by the segmentation used in the 2011 BBS).

 

.

As shown above, the vast majority of the companies in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table provide products in just one of the product categories we measured as part of the study.

Please note that this is not a measure of company size, but rather a measure of how many product categories each of the above vendors was included in for the 2011 BBS. For example some of the “single product category companies” on the above list — such as Adobe, Dolby and Shure – are quite large.

Yet with 21 out of 30 vendors on this list producing a product in only one 2011 BBS category (out of 26 measured) it appears that that focused, specialized companies are regarded as quality leaders in the eyes of the market.  Nevertheless it’s also worth pointing out that large companies can also be considered industry innovators. For example, in the 2011 BBS study, Avid is covered in seven product categories, Snell is covered in five product categories, Sony is covered in four product categories and EVS appears three times.

To further illustrate this point, the chart below shows the number of 2011 BBS product categories per vendor in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table.

.

Number of products per vendor – Single Product Companies Dominate Quality Rankings

A breakdown of how many product categories are produced by each vendor in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table is shown below:

.

With more than two-thirds of the vendors in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table producing a product in just one 2011 BBS product category, this table clearly suggests that focused companies who apply their efforts to specialist product areas are often able to generate a higher perception of quality in the eyes of the market.

Of course, companies are listed here based on how many 2011 BBS product categories they produce, which is not an absolute measure of the products produced be each vendor. There are some very large companies on the list above who appear in just one 2011 BBS category. In total, the 2011 BBS looked at 118 vendors in 26 separate product categories (based on the IABM’s industry model), but even so, it did not necessarily cover the entire product range of all vendors.

Please keep in mind when reviewing this information that all data in these charts is presented in alphabetical order, not in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the 2011 BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all non-vendor participants in the 2011 BBS respondents, regardless of their company type, company size, geographic location, job title and budget for broadcast technology products.  Finally please note that this study evaluated a total of 118 brands.

 .

In order to get full value from this data, it is necessary to evaluate these results on a granular basis.  If you would like more information, please contact Devoncroft Partners.

 .

.

This article is based on the findings from the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 8,000 people in 100+ countries participating, the 2011 BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

.

Devoncroft Partners has published a variety of reports from 2011 BBS data.  For more information, please get in touch.

.

.

Related Content:

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 4 – the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 3 – the 2011 BBS Brand Opinion Leaders League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 2 – the 2011 BBS Net Change in Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 1 – the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Where is Money Being Spent in the Broadcast Industry in 2011? The 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Project Index

Tracking Changes in Broadcast Industry Trends — 2011 Versus 2010 Broadcast Industry’s Most Comprehensive Market Study Reveals Top Trends of 2011

More Information About the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey from Devoncroft Partners

.

.

 

How Broadcasters of Different Sizes Rank Vendors for Quality

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | 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.

%d bloggers like this: