Vendor Sprawl & Consolidation Map
Find every category where your prospect runs 5 point-solutions and 1 platform would do.
9 parallel BI tools are competing for the same $49.9M spend pool
| Vendor | Role in Stack | Signal Intensity |
|---|---|---|
| Tableau + Power BI | Self-service BI | 3,035 / 2,001 |
| Alteryx + KNIME | Data prep & pipelines | 1,661 / 1,612 |
| Oracle AC + TIBCO Spotfire | Embedded / eng. analytics | 2,146 / 1,891 |
Overview
Your prospects run 5 BI tools, 4 CRM platforms, and 3 marketing-automation suites — and don't even realize it. This workflow audits the account's HG technographic stack by category, scores each as a consolidation candidate (≥3 overlapping point-solutions), pulls company_spend data to estimate the redundant-dollar pool, and ranks the top 3 plays your platform can replace. Every overlapping vendor is named.
Use cases
Consolidation pitches your champion can defend internally
Your AE walks into a CFO meeting with 'we replace 5 tools with 1' and gets asked to prove it. This workflow surfaces the named vendors competing for the same job (Tableau + Power BI + Qlik + Oracle Analytics, etc.) from HG technographic data, pulls the redundant-dollar pool from company_spend, and ranks the highest-leverage consolidation play. The pitch becomes a board-ready thesis with sourced numbers, not a 'platforms beat point-solutions' generality.
RFP responses anchored in the prospect's real stack
When you respond to an RFP, your differentiation lives or dies on whether you can name the actual sprawl in the buyer's environment. This workflow pulls HG technographic intensity scores for the named vendors, flags categories with 3+ overlapping point-solutions, and gives the proposal author a one-line discovery question per consolidation play. The RFP stops sounding like a brochure.
View workflow prompt
# Vendor Sprawl & Consolidation Map
## Parameters
- `{{domain}}` *(required)* — Target company domain HG Insights uses for lookup. Example: `siemens.com`
- `{{consolidating_categories}}` *(optional)* — Comma-separated product categories your platform consolidates. Leave empty to scan top 8 categories. Example: `CDP,marketing-automation,analytics`
## Purpose
You are an AE selling a consolidation platform into {{domain}}. The output names specific overlapping vendors, ranks consolidation candidates by sprawl score, and gives the AE a discovery question that validates each play. Cite every vendor and spend figure.
## Process
1. **Stack inventory** — call `company_technographic` for {{domain}}. If {{consolidating_categories}} is provided, scope the audit to those categories; otherwise scan the top 8 categories by detected-vendor count.
2. **Sprawl detection** — for each category, list every detected vendor with the date first seen and intensity score. Flag any category with ≥3 distinct point-solutions as a *consolidation candidate*.
3. **Spend overlap** — call `company_spend` for the spend categories that map to each flagged sprawl category. Estimate the overlap-dollar pool (the cost of running the redundant point-solutions in parallel).
4. **Sprawl scoring** — compute `sprawl_score = (# vendors) × (estimated overlap $M)` for each candidate. Rank descending.
5. **Top 3 plays** — for each top-3 candidate, draft a 2-3 sentence consolidation thesis: which named vendors overlap, why the AE's platform replaces them, and a one-line discovery question that validates the pain (e.g., "Who owns the retirement decision when Tableau, Power BI, Qlik, and Oracle Analytics all run in parallel?").
## Output Format
Markdown with these sections in order:
- `# 🧹 {{domain}} — Vendor Sprawl & Consolidation Map`
- `## Executive Summary` (3 bullets max — total sprawl categories, top consolidation candidate, headline overlap-dollar estimate)
- `## Sprawl Heat-Map` (table: Category | # Vendors | Est. Overlap $M | Sprawl Score)
- `## Top 3 Consolidation Plays` (for each: named vendors involved, overlap thesis, one discovery question)
- `## Appendix — Full Vendor Inventory` (table: Category | Vendor | First Seen | Intensity)
Every figure cited inline. Use HG tools first; `web_search` only when HG is sparse.
## Quality Checklist
- Every flagged category has ≥3 distinct vendors named (not "multiple")
- Sprawl score formula is shown explicitly so the AE can defend the ranking
- Each Top-3 play references the actual products' brand names, not categories
- No fabricated overlap-dollar numbers — every $ figure ties to a `company_spend` category
- Discovery questions are open-ended and reference a specific stack-detail