A front-row seat to vendor complexity
Spending years on the vendor side at Morningstar and AlphaSights gave me a front-row seat to how research and data are really used across asset managers, private equity, and corporations. One of the first things you learn is that research workflows aren’t linear. Teams go deep on a project – pulling data, commissioning custom work, researching portfolios, lining up expert conversations – and then they go quiet. From the outside, that can look like inactivity. In reality, it’s the most important phase: synthesizing information, debating implications, and deciding what matters.
You also learn how quickly complexity builds, often needlessly. There’s a common instinct, especially in large organizations, that more vendors means better coverage – more data sets, more expert profiles, more data feeds. Over time, the stack expands through small decisions: an additional mandate or a new hire requesting access to the tools they used in a previous role. In practice, I’ve rarely seen that end well. Most teams are better served by working with one or two, maybe three, providers in a given category – enough breadth to cover what matters, but not so much that managing the stack becomes a job in itself or that teams lose touch with the experts behind the data.
Our clients regularly tell us that their high value vendors are partners in creating alpha: someone to call to gather insights on best practices or to learn about disruptive trends in the market and emerging start-ups. Some overlap is healthy. Geography can matter. But at a certain a point, every additional tool adds complexity, not clarity – and that’s where problems start to show up.
Patterns start to repeat. Vendor sprawl. Redundant contracts. Tools that look compelling during procurement but never quite stick in practice. These all add up to an operational tax that creates inefficiency and bloat. These aren’t edge cases. They’re structural issues that show up again and again: renewals that sneak up on you, auto-renewals that no longer reflect how a tool is being used, pricing changes that are easy to miss until they’re not.
Even teams with deep experience struggle to stay on top of it all. It’s not a failure of sophistication; it’s a reflection of how much there is to manage alongside the work that drives actual results. I know firsthand what it’s like to manage too many seats, subscriptions, and RFPs at once – keeping everything organized is hard, and keeping it optimized is harder.
This is where experience becomes the product – and why I joined Concertiv.
Concertiv makes vendor relationships more intentional. Our role is to help clients save time and optimize their relationships through contract management, invoice reconciliation, cost allocation, and user access management, all through a single point of coordination. I sometimes think of it as having a sharp expert for your most important vendor relationships – not to take control away, but to free up attention for the things that matter more.
Leading a team that operates this way
As a leader, this perspective doesn’t stop with me. It shapes how I think about building teams. The market data team at Concertiv is designed around deep expertise in our client research categories, industry context, and outstanding client service. On our team, that means people who understand vendor motivations, know how our clients’ industries work, and can spot issues before they surface. Each client works with a market data specialist who brings deep vendor expertise, alongside a Client Success lead who manages the relationship. We’re not just managing logistics – we’re helping clients reduce unnecessary complexity and supporting the generation of alpha.
Few people think they are going to pursue a career in market data and client services. But I find our work incredibly rewarding: working with smart people to think about interesting problems, helping clients learn the truth, and hopefully making them smile along the way.
At the end of the day, it’s about being firmly in the client’s corner.
What comes next
Market data and technology are only becoming more central to how financial services teams operate. At the same time, teams are being asked to do more with less, under tighter timelines and greater scrutiny. New AI tools bring real potential, but also real uncertainty. Access alone is no longer the differentiator. Context, judgment, and wisdom are the differentiators.
I’m optimistic about where the market data world is heading, not because the landscape is getting simpler; it’s getting more complex. I’m optimistic because experience matters more as complexity grows. The ability to see broader themes, cut through noise, and help clients focus on decisions rather than administration isn’t a nice-to-have anymore. It’s essential. The practical question is what that looks like when you’re staring at a messy stack – with limited time – and have real decisions to make.
If you’d like to talk through your current setup or pressure points, reach out to our team HERE. We’re happy to start with a quick conversation and go from there.
.jpg)