Talk:Gartner hype cycle

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Business High‑importance Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Economics Low‑importance Economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Sociology Low‑importance Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Marketing & Advertising High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Futures studies Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Futures studies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Futures studies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Engineering Mid‑importance Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Technology Technology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Computing High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Systems: Systems engineering Mid‑importance Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the field of Systems engineering.

Archives (Index)

2011 2014 2017 2019 2021 2022

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Request for editors to update article introduction

An impartial editor has reviewed the proposed edit(s) and asked the editor with a conflict of interest to go ahead and make the suggested changes.

My name is Burcu and I work for Gartner. I've posted several requests over at the Gartner article Talk page and one at the Magic Quandrant article Talk page. I have one brief request for this article: I'm hoping we can lightly revise the article introduction to provide a few additional details about the hype cycle's origin.

Right now the introduction reads as follows:

Current article introduction
The Gartner hype cycle is a graphical presentation developed, used and branded by the American research, advisory and information technology firm Gartner to represent the maturity, adoption, and social application of specific technologies. The hype cycle claims to provide a graphical and conceptual presentation of the maturity of emerging technologies through five phases.[1]

My suggestion is to change it to the following:

Revised article introduction

The Gartner hype cycle is a graphical presentation developed, used and branded by the American research and advisory firm Gartner to represent the maturity, adoption, and social application of specific technologies. The hype cycle framework was introduced in 1995 by Gartner analyst Jackie Fenn[2] to provide a graphical and conceptual presentation of the maturity of emerging technologies through five phases.[3]

A quick review of changes: I changed "research, advisory and information technology firm" to "research and advisory firm" as that's how Gartner is commonly referred to on first reference in media coverage (see here, here, and here) and it's already clear from the context that Gartner focuses on technology. I also noted that the framework was introduced in 1995 by Gartner analyst Jackie Fenn, as she is widely recognized as the creator. I supported this claim with a citation to an Engineering & Technology journal article from 2015.

I have a conflict of interest so I won't be making this change myself. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. BurcuAtGartner (talk) 18:52, 8 April 2025 (UTC) BurcuAtGartner (talk) 18:52, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The lead should generally summarize the body (WP:LEAD). Adding Jackie Fenn seems totally correct to me but I'd like to see it in the body if possible. Perhaps a section on the origin of the concept? The linked source looks like it could support at least a paragraph on it. Rusalkii (talk) 18:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's a great suggestion, Rusalkii. What do you think about this as a potential History section:

Gartner's hype cycle framework was introduced in 1995 by analyst Jackie Fenn, who had joined the firm the year before.^[2] In her research reports, Fenn identified common patterns related to the maturity of emerging technologies.^[4] Fenn referred to this familiar progression as a "hype cycle" and created a graph depicting its ups and downs with each distinct stage given a title, starting with Technology trigger and ending with Plateau of productivity.^[5] The chart was included in a one-off research report, but it was popular with other Gartner analysts and clients and the "Hype Cycle of Emerging Technologies" was soon developed into an annual report.^[4]

I'm sure this section could be expanded, but this seems like a good start and it would nicely flow into the Five phases section. Let me know what you think. BurcuAtGartner (talk) 12:13, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Go ahead: I have reviewed these proposed changes and suggest that you go ahead and make the proposed changes to the page. Rusalkii (talk) 16:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the careful review, Rusalkii. I went ahead and made the update. I have a similar request at the Magic Quadrant article Talk page that it would be great if you could look at as well since you seem to be interested in the topic. But totally understand if you're busy with other Wiki work. Really appreciate your help here. BurcuAtGartner (talk) 19:23, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

1. Linden, Alexander; Fenn, Jackie (2003-05-30). "Understanding Gartner's hype cycles". Gartner. Archived from the original on 2023-06-27. Retrieved 2023-06-27.
2. Edwards, Chris (May 2015). "Waiting for the drop". Engineering & Technology. 10 (4): 32–53. Retrieved April 7, 2025.
3. Linden, Alexander; Fenn, Jackie (2003-05-30). "Understanding Gartner's hype cycles". Gartner. Archived from the original on 2023-06-27. Retrieved 2023-06-27.
4. Fenn, Jackie; Raskino, Mark (2008). Mastering the Hype Cycle: How to Choose the Right Innovation at the Right Time. Harvard Business Review Press. p. xiii. ISBN 978-1-4221-2110-8.
5. Walton, Nigel; Pyper, Neil (2020). Technology Strategy. Bloomsbury. ISBN 1137605340.

Request about new Examples section

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined.

This is Burcu from Gartner again. I noticed that an editor, Novem Linguae, added a new Examples section to the bottom of this article, along with a request to add content.

To this end, I put together a draft detailing a few specific hype cycle examples in chronological order:

Hype cycle examples

Gartner's most notable hype cycle diagram was the e-business hype cycle created by analyst Alex Drobik in 1999 during the dot-com bubble.[1][2] The diagram suggested that e-business was currently in the Peak of inflated expectations phase and would soon drop into the Trough of disillusionment.[2] The report containing the diagram was published in November 1999, and the U.S. stock market crashed four months later.[2] A Source Code Capital report noted that "Drobik not only predicted the decline of e-businesses in 2001, but also the birth of 'true' e-business after 2003" as "LinkedIn (2002), Skype (2003), Facebook (2004) and Twitter (2006) all emerged during this period."[2] In 2016, Gartner began including blockchain on its emerging technologies hype cycle.[3] Blockchain initially appeared between the Technology trigger and Peak of inflated expectations phases.[3] In 2019, Gartner placed blockchain near the bottom of the Trough of disillusionment phase, and estimated that more than 90 percent of enterprise blockchain implementations would fail or require replacement.[3] That same year Gartner began publishing a hype cycle diagram for discrete blockchain technologies.[3] By 2024, most of these technologies had transitioned from the Peak of inflated expectations phase to the Trough of disillusionment phase.[4] Gartner's 2024 emergent technologies hype cycle placed most AI technologies within the Innovation trigger phase.[5] AI-augmented software engineering was within the Peak of inflated expectations phase, and Generative AI was entering the Trough of disillusionment phase.[5] The same chart also showed humanoid working robotics within the Innovation trigger phase.[5] A separate hype cycle diagram for mobile robots and drones predicted that the market for supply chain usage would mature within the next five years.[6]

Per the wording above, the e-business diagram is arguably the most famous example of the Gartner hype cycle, so I started with that one. I thought the blockchain example was useful as I could pull from the cited textbook to show how blockchain's positioning changed over time. And then I cited more recent news coverage to discuss additional examples.

Would this work as content for the Examples section? BurcuAtGartner (talk) 16:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like this a bit less promotional in tone Likeanechointheforest (talk) 16:02, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response, Likeanechointheforest. I see your point about these examples seeming promotional. I think the problem, though, is that the individual hype cycle charts that have attracted the most independent media coverage (which is what I tried to pull from) have been the ones perceived as being prescient or otherwise notable. That's certainly the case with the 1999 e-business one from Alex Drobik, which is widely credited with predicting the dot-com collapse.

There is, of course, already a Criticisms section in this article which covers shortcomings with the hype cycle's conceptual framework as a whole (and particularly with the difficulty in accurately charting trends over time). The section doesn't mention specific examples of a hype cycle graph being "wrong" per se, but the cited LinkedIn post from investor Michael Mullany does contain a few such examples. I updated my proposed Examples draft to highlight a few of these.

Hype cycle examples

Gartner's most notable hype cycle diagram was the e-business hype cycle created by analyst Alex Drobik in 1999 during the dot-com bubble.[1][2] The diagram suggested that e-business was currently in the Peak of inflated expectations phase and would soon drop into the Trough of disillusionment.[2] The report containing the diagram was published in November 1999, and the U.S. stock market crashed four months later.[2] A Source Code Capital report noted that "Drobik not only predicted the decline of e-businesses in 2001, but also the birth of 'true' e-business after 2003" as "LinkedIn (2002), Skype (2003), Facebook (2004) and Twitter (2006) all emerged during this period."[2] In a LinkedIn post, investor Michael Mullany noted that head-mounted displays appeared on the 2001 hype cycle, but the technology was then "dead on arrival." Mullany argued this was an example of how particular technologies "make steady and sometimes breakthrough progress after they're considered played out" and that head-mounted displays only became commercially viable after "two decades of software and hardware advances."[7] Mullany also identifies technologies that "flew under the hype cycle radar", including NoSQL and the open source licensing model.[7] In 2016, Gartner began including blockchain on its emerging technologies hype cycle.[3] Blockchain initially appeared between the Technology trigger and Peak of inflated expectations phases.[3] In 2019, Gartner placed blockchain near the bottom of the Trough of disillusionment phase, and estimated that more than 90 percent of enterprise blockchain implementations would fail or require replacement.[3] That same year Gartner began publishing a hype cycle diagram for discrete blockchain technologies.[3] By 2024, most of these technologies had transitioned from the Peak of inflated expectations phase to the Trough of disillusionment phase.[4] Gartner's 2024 emergent technologies hype cycle placed most AI technologies within the Innovation trigger phase.[5] AI-augmented software engineering was within the Peak of inflated expectations phase, and Generative AI was entering the Trough of disillusionment phase.[5] The same chart also showed humanoid working robotics within the Innovation trigger phase.[5] A separate hype cycle diagram for mobile robots and drones predicted that the market for supply chain usage would mature within the next five years.[6]

Does that draft offer more balance? I wasn't sure if you would accept a LinkedIn post as a source. Please let me know and thank you again for the constructive feedback. BurcuAtGartner (talk) 12:34, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly, the LinkedIn post is a primary source, it's like a blog post, it wouldn't count as a reliable source Likeanechointheforest (talk) 16:32, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the LinkedIn post is a primary source and thus not ideal for Wikipedia, but it's already cited twice in the Criticisms section. The passages it supports have been in the article for nearly a decade. And because the Criticisms section precedes the (currently blank) Examples section, I thought it would make sense to discuss an oft-referenced source in more detail. I'm trying to add more critical commentary to address your concerns. I'm not sure what else I can do here. Again, the Examples section currently has no content. Surely there's something in the draft I put together that can work? BurcuAtGartner (talk) 21:08, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've thought about it more and I genuinely don't think the article needs an examples section. The article is already veering on promotional and these examples seem to serve to just puff up Gartner Likeanechointheforest (talk) 12:46, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Likeanechointheforest (talk) 12:53, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

1. Bresciani, Sabrina; Eppler, Martin J. (2010). "Gartner's Magic Quadrant and Hype Cycle" (PDF). Università della Svizzera italiana. Retrieved April 29, 2025. The most influential Hype Cycle was the E-Business-Hype Cycle created by Alex Drobik in fall 1999 that predicted the burst of the dot-com bubble in spring 2000.
2. Xiaoliang Wang (November 2, 2017). "Pitfalls in Technological Predictions". Source Code Capital. Retrieved April 29, 2025.
3. Lacity, Mary C.; Lupien, Steven C. Blockchain Fundamentals for Web 3.0. Epic Books. p. 200. ISBN 1682262251. Cite error: The named reference "Lacity" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
4. Gross, Grant (March 6, 2025). "RIP (finally) to the blockchain hype". CIO. Retrieved May 6, 2025. Cite error: The named reference "Gross" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
5. Field, Shivaune (August 29, 2024). "The emerging technology you need on your radar: Gartner's 2024 Hype Cycle revealed". Forbes. Retrieved May 6, 2025. Cite error: The named reference "Field" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
6. Vella, Heidi (November 21, 2024). "Supply Chain AI Mobile Robots Ready for Business: Gartner". IoT World Today. Retrieved May 6, 2025.
7. "8 Lessons from 20 Years of Hype Cycles". LinkedIn Pulse. 2016-12-07. Retrieved 2017-01-04.