I am probably most asked from a services point of view about Accenture IBM and HP. This in itself is not breaking news. However what is of great interest to me is the focus in terms of relationships and client engagement of each company. Two are clearly defined, one is less clearly defined, and the recent fiscal results perhaps help illuminate this relationship.

HP is focused on selling to the CIO, this applies to technology as well as services. This is now after some internal confusion clearly defined and a decision that works for them

Accenture is focused on selling to the CEO and other lines of business executive levels. CIO engagement is a by-product (perhaps an over simplification, but it is clear) of any engagement with executive from "the business". Clearly this is working very well.

IBM is the vendor who is struggling to identify who it wants to engage. It aspires to target the CEO, but largely targets the CIO, when it targets the CEO, the CIO can be put offside and when it targets the CIO, the CEO et al, is confused as to what IBM aspires to. This is a tough call for IBM to break to be honest, it is something that is engrained in the organisation, and the GBS or consulting arm is clearly the most affected by it. If it can change the total IBM view it will provide clarity perhaps for clients, but this will take time and be very difficult to do.

Meanwhile, HP and Accenture have at this stage focus on their key relationships. The irony is that now they are complementary, the partnership is not really that tight. When there was more potential for conflict the partnership was perhaps stronger, but of course the world is not predictable

I will look to explore this moving forward,