The graphic above illustrates the broader analyst ecosystem pattern. This post focuses specifically on Gartner’s Magic Quadrant; a comprehensive assessment of Forrester, Spend Matters, and The Hackett Group is available in the full report titled: Making the Short List: The Analyst Ecosystem and the 50-80% Failure Rate.
Conceptual pattern model derived from longitudinal Procurement Insights Archives (1998–2026), analyst publication timelines, and documented implementation outcomes. This is not a population dataset but a pattern-based comparative model.
The Question No One Asks
When procurement teams build a vendor short list, the first filter is often: “Are they a Gartner Leader?”
But has anyone asked: What happened to the Leaders from 10 years ago?
If “Leader” status predicted success, those vendors should be:
Still dominant today
Have documented implementation success records
Have grown market share proportionally
Let’s check the receipts.
The 2012-2015 “Leaders” — Where Are They Now?
Gartner Magic Quadrant for Procure-to-Pay Suites (2014-2015)
Vendor
2015 Status
Where Are They Now?
Basware
Leader
Still exists. Still a “Leader.”
Ariba
Leader
Acquired by SAP for $4.5B (2012). Integration challenges documented ever since.
Coupa
Leader
Went private (Thoma Bravo acquisition, 2023). No longer publicly traded.
SciQuest
Leader
Acquired by Accel-KKR (2016). Rebranded as JAGGAER.
Of the four P2P Leaders from 2015:
1 was already acquired
1 went private
1 was acquired and rebranded
1 remains
Gartner Magic Quadrant for Strategic Sourcing (2013-2017)
Vendor
2013-2017 Status
Where Are They Now?
SAP Ariba
Leader (2013) → Visionary (2017)
FELL from Leader. Gartner faulted them for “neglecting” the product.
BravoSolution
Leader
Acquired by JAGGAER (2017). Brand discontinued.
IBM Emptoris
Leader
Acquired by IBM (2012). Largely disappeared from rankings.
Zycus
Niche Player (2010) → Leader (2013)
Still exists. Now a “Leader” again (2026). Same implementation challenges documented.
Ivalua
Leader
Still exists. Still a Leader.
Of the Strategic Sourcing Leaders:
1 FELL from Leader to Visionary (SAP Ariba)
2 were acquired and absorbed
2 remain as Leaders
The Vendors That Disappeared
Vendor
Gartner Status
Fate
Emptoris
Leader
Acquired by IBM (2012). Product absorbed.
BravoSolution
Leader
Acquired by JAGGAER (2017). Brand discontinued.
SciQuest
Leader
Acquired (2016). Became JAGGAER.
Perfect Commerce
Evaluated
Acquired by Proactis.
Determine
Evaluated
Acquired by Corcentric (2020).
b-pack
Evaluated
Acquired.
Capgemini IBX
Evaluated
Discontinued.
The pattern: “Leader” status did not prevent acquisition, absorption, or disappearance.
Acquisition is not failure — but it does mean that “Leader” status is not a predictor of long-term independence, implementation dominance, or practitioner outcomes.
The Implementation Success Question
During this entire period (2012-2026), what happened to implementation success rates?
Year
Gartner Said
Implementation Failure Rate
2012
Published Magic Quadrant with Leaders
50-70% failure
2015
Published Magic Quadrant with Leaders
50-70% failure
2020
Published Magic Quadrant with Leaders
30-50% failure (COVID spike — temporary)
2024
Published Magic Quadrant with Leaders
50%+ failure
2026
Predicts 70%+ will fail by 2027
Pattern continues
The “Leaders” changed. The failure rate didn’t.
What “Leader” Actually Measures
Gartner’s Magic Quadrant evaluates vendors on:
Ability to Execute — Can they deliver the product?
Completeness of Vision — Do they understand where the market is going?
What it does NOT measure:
Implementation success rates
Post-go-live outcomes
Client readiness requirements
Time-to-value delivery
Adoption rates
“Leader” measures vendor capability. It doesn’t measure whether YOUR organization can successfully implement that capability.
The SAP Ariba Case Study
SAP Ariba is the most instructive example:
Year
Gartner Status
Reality
2012
Acquired by SAP for $4.5B
Highest valuation in procurement tech
2013-2015
Leader
Integration challenges begin
2017
FELL to Visionary
Gartner: “neglecting its market-leading application”
2019-2022
Returned to Leader
“Sixth consecutive time” claim
2024-2026
Leader
Same integration challenges documented in user reviews
SAP Ariba has been a “Leader” for most of the past decade.
Yet user reviews consistently cite:
Integration complexity
Implementation timeline overruns
Configuration rigidity
Support responsiveness issues
Being the “Leader” didn’t fix implementation success. It just meant they were the largest.
The Real Short List Question
Instead of asking: “Are they a Gartner Leader?”
Ask:
What is their implementation success rate? (Most can’t tell you.)
What is their average time-to-value? (Most won’t tell you.)
What is the minimum organizational readiness required? (None of them assess this.)
How many implementations met original business objectives? (Gartner predicts 70%+ won’t by 2027.)
The Bottom Line
Over the past 14 years:
Multiple Gartner “Leaders” were acquired or disappeared
SAP Ariba fell from Leader to Visionary and back
Implementation failure rates remained 50-80%
No correlation between “Leader” status and implementation success
“Leader” status tells you which vendors have the best technology and market positioning.
It doesn’t tell you which vendor YOUR organization can successfully implement.
That requires a different assessment entirely.
Access the Assessment That Measures Implementation Success
Product
Price
What You Get
Single Vendor Report
$1,750
Full Hansen Fit Score™ assessment, Capability Matrix™, 5-model consensus analysis
Annual Subscription
$3,000
24+ reports ($125 each), priority requests, full methodology access
These analyses are 100% vendor-neutral and therefore do not involve vendor interviews or demos. They are based solely on the RAM 2025™ multimodel assessment, evaluating multiple archives, including the proprietary Procurement Insights Archives (2007-2025).
The Hansen Fit Score measures three things:
Technology Capability (what the vendor offers)
Service Delivery Capacity (can they implement it?)
Minimum Client Readiness Required (can YOUR organization absorb it?)
The gaps between #1, #2, and #3 are why “Leaders” fail.
Get the Zycus Assessment Report (Coming February 6th, 2026)
Procurement Insights
Making the Short List: Are the Magic Quadrant “Leaders” Really Leaders?
Posted on January 31, 2026
0
By Jon W. Hansen | Procurement Insights
The graphic above illustrates the broader analyst ecosystem pattern. This post focuses specifically on Gartner’s Magic Quadrant; a comprehensive assessment of Forrester, Spend Matters, and The Hackett Group is available in the full report titled: Making the Short List: The Analyst Ecosystem and the 50-80% Failure Rate.
Conceptual pattern model derived from longitudinal Procurement Insights Archives (1998–2026), analyst publication timelines, and documented implementation outcomes. This is not a population dataset but a pattern-based comparative model.
The Question No One Asks
When procurement teams build a vendor short list, the first filter is often: “Are they a Gartner Leader?”
But has anyone asked: What happened to the Leaders from 10 years ago?
If “Leader” status predicted success, those vendors should be:
Let’s check the receipts.
The 2012-2015 “Leaders” — Where Are They Now?
Gartner Magic Quadrant for Procure-to-Pay Suites (2014-2015)
Of the four P2P Leaders from 2015:
Gartner Magic Quadrant for Strategic Sourcing (2013-2017)
Of the Strategic Sourcing Leaders:
The Vendors That Disappeared
The pattern: “Leader” status did not prevent acquisition, absorption, or disappearance.
Acquisition is not failure — but it does mean that “Leader” status is not a predictor of long-term independence, implementation dominance, or practitioner outcomes.
The Implementation Success Question
During this entire period (2012-2026), what happened to implementation success rates?
The “Leaders” changed. The failure rate didn’t.
What “Leader” Actually Measures
Gartner’s Magic Quadrant evaluates vendors on:
What it does NOT measure:
“Leader” measures vendor capability. It doesn’t measure whether YOUR organization can successfully implement that capability.
The SAP Ariba Case Study
SAP Ariba is the most instructive example:
SAP Ariba has been a “Leader” for most of the past decade.
Yet user reviews consistently cite:
Being the “Leader” didn’t fix implementation success. It just meant they were the largest.
The Real Short List Question
Instead of asking: “Are they a Gartner Leader?”
Ask:
The Bottom Line
Over the past 14 years:
“Leader” status tells you which vendors have the best technology and market positioning.
It doesn’t tell you which vendor YOUR organization can successfully implement.
That requires a different assessment entirely.
Access the Assessment That Measures Implementation Success
These analyses are 100% vendor-neutral and therefore do not involve vendor interviews or demos. They are based solely on the RAM 2025™ multimodel assessment, evaluating multiple archives, including the proprietary Procurement Insights Archives (2007-2025).
The Hansen Fit Score measures three things:
The gaps between #1, #2, and #3 are why “Leaders” fail.
Get the Zycus Assessment Report (Coming February 6th, 2026)
FUTURE ASSESSMENT REPORTS: Ivalua, ZIP, Oro Labs, GEP, Globality (and more)
👉 Subscribe for 24+ Reports/Year (Coming February 26th, 2026)
Source: Gartner Magic Quadrant archives (2012-2026), vendor acquisition records, implementation failure rate studies
Hansen Models — Practitioner Performance Analysis & Vendor Reconciliation
Exposed. Explainable. Repeatable.
Share this:
Related