- Keeping it Real
- The physical security industry has built a culture and sales model around vendor and channel relationships where end user interests are pushed into the background. Its not a statement that wins us popularity from industry insiders, but its true and end users need to navigate around it if they are going take control of their own destiny. D6 is built around helping end users transform how they execute,
- The Challenge
- Integrators and consultants generally approach strategy by providing a copy of their playbook they gave to their last customer (which has many elements that came from a vendor who is their close partner). We don’t subscribe to these practices – in fact we repudiate them. D6 Research has a “no partner policy” – meaning, we don’t resell, benefit from the sale or selection, or the influence of success of vendors. In fact, we don’t even participate in “partner programs” because they typically come with some type of requirement that’s not worth compromising our neutrality. So when we’re sitting on your side of the table as an extended team member – you know we’re really on your side.
- A Different Model
- End users are the center of how we measure our success. We were founded on the principle of helping end user organizations optimize their planning and execution of their security, identity and privacy programs with increased clarity, vendor neutrality and effectiveness.
By doing so, we remain entirely neutral and always look for a strategy that enables our clients to achieve the same. By combining our years of project experience in similar initiatives, current research, and sampling across the market and your peers, we provide clarity around your key decisions, risks, and execution.
- We started tackling latent problems in the industry that CSO’s and CISO’s were struggling with and others weren’t willing to address because it was either too complex to do or so far outside of industry norms. But it made sense for customers, so we did it. We know, because we had to build the knowledge, tools, and models from the ground up ourselves which are unique to the industry. We hear it often from our clients, ”
We asked 8 of our integrator and they all advised the same thing – we have to spend millions to rip-and-replace to make the problem go away”. We come in to help customers not do that, or a fraction with better results./
ADVISORY SERVICES CATEGORIES
Advisory Services (2)
First and most importantly, we are not a consulting firm. We are an analyst firm, and perform consulting to complement our research to benefit our clients in refining their understanding, adapting it to their unique circumstance, and applying what we learn back into our research and methodology and contribute to the community. It is mutually beneficial as it avoids cooking things up in a vacuum. Further, it is not our aim to bill lots of hours, but rather the opposite by giving clients the knowledge and tools to tackle initiatives themselves and decide where they need specialization on a limited basis to fill the gaps.
Typically, consultants are either so busy working direct contract hours to perform continued research or have a set of key partners by which they get much of their knowledge, training, and even leads. This is less prevalent in the IT market than in the physical access market, where it is pretty standard practice. Businesses are unique and the last thing we would want is someone telling us how to do something based on what they typically advocate per the relationships that they have and approaches taken. It is much more desirable and effective to have a process that searches across the spectrum until it is a best match for what is required. This is the difference.
This is one of the primary reasons why this firm was founded. Often, especially in the physical access industry, the way of doing business is a “buddy system” throughout the whole supply chain. The people delivering the solution are often getting their leads from the vendor and/or representing a shortlist of vendors to supply customers with. Too often loyalties are bestowed to partners as opposed to the end users paying them and other times cookie-cutter recommendations come right out of the same old playbook.
This leads to ill-thought strategies, incompatible technologies, and a great deal of rip-and-replace considerations in the future. Also, it produces lots of bad advice around what is really secure, since many vendors just try to sell more widgets to improve the situation. We believe that in order to TRULY serve the interests of end user customers, we can’t have relationships that contain aspects of conflict to the point where both D6 Research and vendor benefit while the end user does not. Yes, even if that means turning business away and having significantly less revenue.
Yes – but only in ways that doesn’t cause a conflict of interest and benefits end users in the industry.
For example, we do discuss innovations, ideas, and encounter a broad range of opinions where we align and don’t align. We may choose to engage more often, or at deeper levels where we believe individuals can provide deeper perspectives. We may introduce vendors to advisory clients – ONLY if that end user client is seeking the specific viewpoint or capability that they possess. D6 is not compensated by the vendor, only by the end user, by working as part of their extended team and within scope of the advisory work itself.
Other times, a vendor or an integrator may need assistance with specific areas where we’re unique subject matter experts (with an end user project or internal solution strategy). We do so but only in ways where we perform our defined function but remove ourselves from any specific customer sales, product sales, account relationship, or product-specific processes and discussions. It’s also engagement specific, so we’re never there long enough to earn a coffee cup with our name on it.