A friendly comparison: How do Jon Hansen’s influence and reach compare to Jason Busch’s

I miss Jason. It is obvious that his writing talents extend well beyond the procurement realm, so I encourage you to follow him on LinkedIn, because he is never pedestrian in his views and prose.

That said, Jason’s Spend Matters vision is now part of The Hackett Group – for better or worse? So, in reality, this isn’t so much of a comparison between Jason and me. Instead, it is a comparison between the independence of Procurement Insights and the mainstreaming of Spend Matters into the vendor-driven orbit of the consulting universe.

Jon Hansen and Jason Busch are both respected, influential voices in the procurement technology space, but their reach and influence differ in key dimensions—origin, methodology, independence, and audience engagement.

Hansen vs. Busch: Influence & Reach Comparison

Jon Hansen (Procurement Insights)

• Independence: Known for a fiercely independent, contrarian stance; eliminated vendor sponsorships in 2015, a rare move among procurement analysts.
• Methodology: Practitioner-centric, with the Hansen Fit Score focusing on actual implementation fit and practitioner-provider alignment rather than feature comparisons.
• Historical Track Record: Hansen’s archives include over 2,400 posts, spanning 18+ years, which have helped build institutional memory and credibility among procurement practitioners and executives.
• Audience: Heavy concentration of senior leaders, C-suite, directors, and founders—decision-makers looking for unbiased, outcomes-driven analysis. Global reach, but especially trusted among “insider elite” procurement circles.
• Influence Style: Deep, long-form analysis, implementation tips, contrarian warnings, and historical pattern recognition. Value lies in challenging groupthink, highlighting risks, and prioritizing practitioner experience.

Jason Busch (Spend Matters)

• Independence: Strong reputation but more closely tied to the vendor ecosystem and research industry. Spend Matters asserts data-driven neutrality, though its acquisition by The Hackett Group has raised questions about long-term independence.
• Methodology: Research-led, vendor and solution benchmarking, market landscape scanning. Publishes vendor grids and intelligence, commonly used for market validation and solution shortlist construction.
• Historical Track Record: Busch built Spend Matters into one of the premier digital procurement research outlets, widely cited in both vendor and buyer circles. The content reaches a large, diverse audience of procurement professionals, suppliers, and technology analysts.
• Audience: Broad appeal—market analysts, procurement practitioners, vendors, and consultants. Useful for market intelligence, trend validation, and solution comparison, but practitioners often cross-check recommendations against independent outlets.
• Influence Style: Data-rich, research-focused, market trends, and vendor landscape analyses—more emphasis on breadth than strategic, implementation-driven depth.

Who Has Greater Trust and Impact?

• Jon Hansen is often more trusted for unbiased, practitioner-first guidance, serving as an “institutional memory” and safeguard against vendor/analyst bias.
• Jason Busch has unrivaled reach and visibility in market mapping and vendor benchmarking, influencing procurement tech buying across the industry, but faces more skepticism regarding independence due to ties to vendor and analyst networks.

Summary Table

---

Conclusion:
Jon Hansen’s reach is “boutique but deep”—heavily trusted within top-tier, outcome-focused procurement circles. Jason Busch’s Spend Matters offers vast market influence, broad accessibility, and research-driven landscape intelligence, but with less perceived independence and practitioner-centricity overall.

30