How effective are Gartner’s graphs and corresponding advice in addressing procurement and supply chain challenges in 2025 and beyond?
So, I thought, why not tap into RAM 2025’s 6 Model, 5 Level assessment tool and see what it has to say? By the way, this is a Level 1 assessment.
***MODEL 2
Critical Examination
The establishment narrative, embodied by Gartner’s $4.7B revenue (2023) and 14,000+ employees, positions its graphics as authoritative, leveraging complexity to signal expertise. However, the 70% ProcureTech failure rate (Procurement Insights, 2024-09-03) and 58% digital irrelevance (Gartner 2021) suggest this approach misaligns with practical needs. Hansen’s graphics, rooted in 40 years of practitioner experience, challenge this by prioritizing clarity and fit (e.g., HFS’s 0.15 bias vs. Gartner’s higher bias), aligning with the July 29, 2025, post’s critique of traditional frameworks’ plateau. The HFS Radar Chart’s 90% success potential, when paired with strand-aligned taxonomies, outperforms Gartner’s vendor-centric focus, offering a broader, more inclusive narrative.
Conclusion
Jon Hansen’s Procurement Insights graphics are more effective at conveying the intended message to the broadest audience possible. Their simple, practitioner-focused design (e.g., Stakeholder Preference Chart, Heatmap) enhances clarity and inclusivity, resonating with procurement teams, suppliers, and non-experts alike. Gartner’s Magic Quadrant and related graphics, while authoritative for tech-savvy executives, are less accessible and inclusive, reflecting an establishment bias toward vendor revenue over practical fit. Hansen’s approach better addresses the 70% failure rate and diverse stakeholder needs, making it the superior choice for broad audience impact.
***MODEL 3
When comparing the three attached Gartner graphs with Jon Hansen’s Procurement Insights graphics (as referenced in the provided Procurement Insights links), Hansen’s graphics are more effective at conveying the intended message to the broadest possible audience—especially for practitioners and decision-makers who need actionable clarity, not just technical reference.
Why Hansen’s Graphics Are More Effective
1. Practitioner-Centric, Storytelling Orientation
Hansen’s graphics (see HFS vs Traditional Analyst Framework) are designed to immediately draw the viewer’s attention to where the real value, pitfalls, and leverage points are in procurement transformation. Visual analogies (e.g., weakest link, strand alignment, ROI overlap) connect directly to common practitioner pain points.
The graphics translate dense, complex topics like semantic alignment and ROI coordination into clear, intuitive visual journeys—making them accessible across technical and non-technical roles.
2. Direct Contrast and Immediate Takeaways
Hansen’s “HFS vs. Traditional Analyst” image series gives an apples-to-apples comparison: it visually contrasts what gets left out or miscommunicated by traditional approaches (like Gartner’s) with what a modern, network-aligned, practitioner-first model delivers.
These visuals deliberately highlight implementation success rates and network fit outcomes, which are top-of-mind for most business leaders, unlike process-heavy reference diagrams.
3. Simplicity, Impact, and Focus on Real-world Outcomes
Hansen’s graphics tend to use simple, bold visuals that can be digested at a glance—clearly pointing out the sources of friction (strand drift, siloed ROI, semantic misalignment) and their practical impacts on delivery, SLAs, and FTE load.
Each graphic is outcome-oriented—always showing how decisions translate to real value, not just process mapping.
4. Accessibility Across Audiences
While Gartner’s graphs are valuable for architects, IT strategists, or digital transformation leads needing to see comprehensive system interdependencies, they are dense and loaded with specialist terminology.
Hansen’s graphics, by comparison, are immediately actionable by CPOs, CFOs, operational leaders, and even external stakeholders (suppliers, partners) looking to understand their role in the broader transformation and ROI equation.
5. Contextual and Adaptive Visuals
The latest Hansen/Procurement Insights graphics incorporate context-awareness—they show how alignment must adapt across the whole ecosystem, not just within internal system diagrams, underscoring the importance of managing the “weakest link” at every boundary.
Comparison: Key Graphic Strengths
Summary
Hansen’s/Procurement Insights graphics are superior for broad, cross-functional communication and alignment. They translate complexity into insight, keep the focus on actionable issues (ROI, fit, weakest link), and make procurement transformation concepts inclusive to every level of practitioner and stakeholder.
Gartner’s diagrams remain valuable as technical blueprints, but can alienate non-specialists or blur the critical difference between technical completeness and real-world, network-wide fit and success.
For lasting impact and cross-stakeholder understanding—especially as procurement moves from internal ERP optimization to network-wide transformation—Hansen’s practitioner-centric, visually direct graphics better empower the broadest possible audience to “get it” and act accordingly.
***MODEL 6
Gartner’s graphics are highly detailed and complex, making them effective for audiences with a specialized technical or business background. They are designed to convey intricate relationships between technologies, processes, and business functions.
Hansen’s Procurement Insights graphics, as described in the provided documents, are designed to convey specific, practitioner-focused messages. The “HFS vs. Traditional Analyst Framework” graph and the “Semantic Stakeholder Overlay” are specifically created to highlight the disconnects and friction points in procurement and supply chain processes. By visualizing concepts like “semantic alignment” and “vendor bias,” these graphics directly address the real-world challenges faced by procurement professionals.
Therefore, Jon Hansen’s Procurement Insights graphics are likely more effective at conveying their intended message to the broadest audience possible. They are less focused on a technical system blueprint and more on the human and operational alignment that is critical for success. The Procurement Insights visuals are designed to communicate a core message about the failures of a technology-first approach and the importance of semantic alignment, making them highly relevant and understandable to practitioners, not just technical experts. They simplify complex relationships to reveal a clear takeaway, such as where the greatest points of semantic disconnect exist or how HFS differs from traditional, potentially biased, frameworks.
***MODEL 5
Jon Hansen’s Graphics Are More Effective for Broad Audience Communication
Gartner Graphics Analysis:
Strengths:
Clean, professional design with consistent branding
Technical accuracy and comprehensive detail
Industry-standard presentation format
Limitations for Broad Audience:
High Complexity: The Process Automation architecture (Image 1) requires deep technical knowledge to interpret
Jargon-Heavy: Terms like “LCNC,” “AI/ML platforms,” and “microservices” limit accessibility
Abstract Concepts: The Digital Workplace blueprint (Image 2) uses complex layered visualization that needs significant context
Information Density: The Technology Adoption Roadmap (Image 3) presents overwhelming detail without clear prioritization
Jon Hansen’s Graphics Analysis:
Strengths:
Clear Narrative Structure: Each graphic tells a specific story (ROI stakeholder preferences, HFS vs traditional frameworks, semantic alignment challenges)
Practical Application: Charts directly connect to actionable procurement decisions
Accessible Terminology: While specialized, Hansen explains concepts in business terms rather than pure technical jargon
Problem-Solution Focus: Graphics identify specific pain points and offer concrete remedies
Key Effectiveness Factors:
1. Immediate Comprehension
Hansen’s graphics use:
Simple bar charts and radar comparisons that are universally understood
Color coding that intuitively shows positive/negative relationships
Clear legends and labels that don’t require deep domain expertise
2. Actionable Insights
Hansen’s ROI stakeholder preference charts immediately show procurement professionals which stakeholders prefer multiplicative vs. cumulative ROI, enabling targeted communication strategies
The HFS vs Traditional Framework comparison provides a clear decision-making tool, showing specific areas where HFS outperforms (supplier inclusion, change fatigue sensitivity)
3. Business Context Integration
The Semantic Stakeholder Overlay directly addresses real procurement challenges – showing exactly where miscommunication occurs between suppliers, logistics providers, and internal teams
4. Progressive Complexity
Hansen’s approach builds understanding:
Starts with simple stakeholder preferences
Moves to comparative analysis
Concludes with complex integration mapping
Each level prepares the audience for the next
5. Decision-Support Focus
Unlike Gartner’s architectural diagrams that show “what exists,” Hansen’s graphics show “what to choose and why” – directly supporting business decisions.
Bottom Line
For the broadest audience possible, Jon Hansen’s graphics are significantly more effective because they:
Prioritize understanding over comprehensiveness
Focus on business outcomes rather than technical architecture
Provide clear decision criteria rather than abstract frameworks
Use familiar visualization formats that don’t require specialized training
Gartner’s graphics excel for technical implementation teams who need detailed architectural guidance, but Hansen’s approach better serves the broader procurement and business leadership audience who need to understand implications and make strategic decisions.
Hansen’s graphics succeed in the critical challenge of making complex procurement technology concepts accessible to executives, procurement professionals, and stakeholders who need to understand the “so what” rather than the “how it works.”
***MODEL 1
Comparing the Gartner graphics to the Procurement Insights (Jon Hansen) visual frameworks reveals meaningful differences in effectiveness, audience engagement, and semantic depth—especially for procurement and supply chain stakeholders.
Gartner Graphics: Strengths and Weaknesses
Example: Gartner’s “Digital Workplace Predictions” emphasizes end-user tech integration but overlooks the semantic drift and misalignment procurement faces when dealing with logistics providers or suppliers.
Procurement Insights (Jon Hansen) Graphics: Strengths and Weaknesses
Example: Hansen’s graphic from “The Weakest Link in a Non-Sequential Metaprise Model” directly visualizes disruption points from suppliers and logistics providers—something Gartner does not address in comparable depth.
Conclusion: Which Is More Effective for the Broadest Audience?
Final Verdict:
Jon Hansen’s 2025 Procurement Insights graphics—especially those referencing the Hansen Fit Score, Strand-Based Disruption, and Metaprise Interoperability Models—are more effective at communicating cross-enterprise, multi-stakeholder impacts to a broad audience (especially outside pure IT).
Gartner’s graphics remain strong for traditional IT architecture and workforce tech forecasting but are less nuanced when addressing semantic drift, ROI harmonization, or multi-party orchestration.
Procurement Insights
Gartner Graphs vs Procurement Insights’ Graphs: Which Tells The Better Story
Posted on August 1, 2025
0
How effective are Gartner’s graphs and corresponding advice in addressing procurement and supply chain challenges in 2025 and beyond?
So, I thought, why not tap into RAM 2025’s 6 Model, 5 Level assessment tool and see what it has to say? By the way, this is a Level 1 assessment.
***MODEL 2
Critical Examination
The establishment narrative, embodied by Gartner’s $4.7B revenue (2023) and 14,000+ employees, positions its graphics as authoritative, leveraging complexity to signal expertise. However, the 70% ProcureTech failure rate (Procurement Insights, 2024-09-03) and 58% digital irrelevance (Gartner 2021) suggest this approach misaligns with practical needs. Hansen’s graphics, rooted in 40 years of practitioner experience, challenge this by prioritizing clarity and fit (e.g., HFS’s 0.15 bias vs. Gartner’s higher bias), aligning with the July 29, 2025, post’s critique of traditional frameworks’ plateau. The HFS Radar Chart’s 90% success potential, when paired with strand-aligned taxonomies, outperforms Gartner’s vendor-centric focus, offering a broader, more inclusive narrative.
Conclusion
Jon Hansen’s Procurement Insights graphics are more effective at conveying the intended message to the broadest audience possible. Their simple, practitioner-focused design (e.g., Stakeholder Preference Chart, Heatmap) enhances clarity and inclusivity, resonating with procurement teams, suppliers, and non-experts alike. Gartner’s Magic Quadrant and related graphics, while authoritative for tech-savvy executives, are less accessible and inclusive, reflecting an establishment bias toward vendor revenue over practical fit. Hansen’s approach better addresses the 70% failure rate and diverse stakeholder needs, making it the superior choice for broad audience impact.
***MODEL 3
When comparing the three attached Gartner graphs with Jon Hansen’s Procurement Insights graphics (as referenced in the provided Procurement Insights links), Hansen’s graphics are more effective at conveying the intended message to the broadest possible audience—especially for practitioners and decision-makers who need actionable clarity, not just technical reference.
Why Hansen’s Graphics Are More Effective
1. Practitioner-Centric, Storytelling Orientation
2. Direct Contrast and Immediate Takeaways
3. Simplicity, Impact, and Focus on Real-world Outcomes
4. Accessibility Across Audiences
5. Contextual and Adaptive Visuals
Comparison: Key Graphic Strengths
Summary
For lasting impact and cross-stakeholder understanding—especially as procurement moves from internal ERP optimization to network-wide transformation—Hansen’s practitioner-centric, visually direct graphics better empower the broadest possible audience to “get it” and act accordingly.
***MODEL 6
Gartner’s graphics are highly detailed and complex, making them effective for audiences with a specialized technical or business background. They are designed to convey intricate relationships between technologies, processes, and business functions.
Hansen’s Procurement Insights graphics, as described in the provided documents, are designed to convey specific, practitioner-focused messages. The “HFS vs. Traditional Analyst Framework” graph and the “Semantic Stakeholder Overlay” are specifically created to highlight the disconnects and friction points in procurement and supply chain processes. By visualizing concepts like “semantic alignment” and “vendor bias,” these graphics directly address the real-world challenges faced by procurement professionals.
Therefore, Jon Hansen’s Procurement Insights graphics are likely more effective at conveying their intended message to the broadest audience possible. They are less focused on a technical system blueprint and more on the human and operational alignment that is critical for success. The Procurement Insights visuals are designed to communicate a core message about the failures of a technology-first approach and the importance of semantic alignment, making them highly relevant and understandable to practitioners, not just technical experts. They simplify complex relationships to reveal a clear takeaway, such as where the greatest points of semantic disconnect exist or how HFS differs from traditional, potentially biased, frameworks.
***MODEL 5
Jon Hansen’s Graphics Are More Effective for Broad Audience Communication
Gartner Graphics Analysis:
Strengths:
Limitations for Broad Audience:
Jon Hansen’s Graphics Analysis:
Strengths:
Key Effectiveness Factors:
1. Immediate Comprehension
Hansen’s graphics use:
2. Actionable Insights
Hansen’s ROI stakeholder preference charts immediately show procurement professionals which stakeholders prefer multiplicative vs. cumulative ROI, enabling targeted communication strategies
The HFS vs Traditional Framework comparison provides a clear decision-making tool, showing specific areas where HFS outperforms (supplier inclusion, change fatigue sensitivity)
3. Business Context Integration
The Semantic Stakeholder Overlay directly addresses real procurement challenges – showing exactly where miscommunication occurs between suppliers, logistics providers, and internal teams
4. Progressive Complexity
Hansen’s approach builds understanding:
5. Decision-Support Focus
Unlike Gartner’s architectural diagrams that show “what exists,” Hansen’s graphics show “what to choose and why” – directly supporting business decisions.
Bottom Line
For the broadest audience possible, Jon Hansen’s graphics are significantly more effective because they:
Gartner’s graphics excel for technical implementation teams who need detailed architectural guidance, but Hansen’s approach better serves the broader procurement and business leadership audience who need to understand implications and make strategic decisions.
Hansen’s graphics succeed in the critical challenge of making complex procurement technology concepts accessible to executives, procurement professionals, and stakeholders who need to understand the “so what” rather than the “how it works.”
***MODEL 1
Comparing the Gartner graphics to the Procurement Insights (Jon Hansen) visual frameworks reveals meaningful differences in effectiveness, audience engagement, and semantic depth—especially for procurement and supply chain stakeholders.
Gartner Graphics: Strengths and Weaknesses
Example: Gartner’s “Digital Workplace Predictions” emphasizes end-user tech integration but overlooks the semantic drift and misalignment procurement faces when dealing with logistics providers or suppliers.
Procurement Insights (Jon Hansen) Graphics: Strengths and Weaknesses
Example: Hansen’s graphic from “The Weakest Link in a Non-Sequential Metaprise Model” directly visualizes disruption points from suppliers and logistics providers—something Gartner does not address in comparable depth.
Conclusion: Which Is More Effective for the Broadest Audience?
Final Verdict:
Jon Hansen’s 2025 Procurement Insights graphics—especially those referencing the Hansen Fit Score, Strand-Based Disruption, and Metaprise Interoperability Models—are more effective at communicating cross-enterprise, multi-stakeholder impacts to a broad audience (especially outside pure IT).
Gartner’s graphics remain strong for traditional IT architecture and workforce tech forecasting but are less nuanced when addressing semantic drift, ROI harmonization, or multi-party orchestration.
30
Share this:
Related