How much can customers of the big IT research firms trust what they read and hear? After all, analysts sometimes write reports that have been funded by technology companies, and they appear in Webcasts and at trade shows for fees. InformationWeek set out to answer the credibility question in a story we'll be publishing in our February 6 issue. We interviewed dozens of IT vendors, end users, and executives at the top analyst firms. The resulting brushstrokes from each conversation helped paint a picture of an analyst industry that's tapped into an almost desperate need that businesses have to stay on top of emerging technology and a community of IT vendors even more desperate to make the sale.

Somewhere along the line, IT vendors and their customers both became beholden to the big analyst firms, to the extent where they consume large quantities of Gartner Magic Quadrant reports and IDC market projections, even if they sometimes question the reliability of these reports. Regardless of whether Gartner actually tests the products it places in its Magic Quadrant reports, IT executives want to know who's on the list and how they stack up. For most vendors, a positive placement in a Magic Quadrant or a Forrester Wave report means product sales, whereas exile to "challenger" or "niche player" status could mean a trip back to the drawing board.

The reluctance that vendors and end users have in publicly questioning analyst firms tells us all we need to know about the clout that these firms have. Even IT vendors who no longer subscribe to analyst services are hesitant to criticize these firms. This is because those vendors may someday find themselves branching out into new markets, a particularly vulnerable time when support or lack thereof from the analyst community could make or break a person's career.

What's your view on the objectivity of the work put out by IT research firms? Does it pass muster?