Please note: You must be subscribed to the DAM research stream(s) to download this advisory. Please log in if you're subscribed to any of those research streams. Otherwise, see subscription details here.
In 2008 we stated that digital asset management was always the bridesmaid, never the bride. The industry’s most prominent vendors hung in a stasis of 20–50 employees and $8–15 million in revenues. Now in 2012, DAM has earned a more prominent spotlight in the content technology spectrum and moved into the mainstream. Companies beyond the ad agencies and movie studios of the world are implementing DAM and MAM systems at a rapid pace; the job titles of "Digital Asset Manager" or "Director of Digital Assets" are not as rare. As a result, vendors are growing their services teams and plugging their existing technology — or pushing new wares — to meet the demand.
All prospective DAM customers should take a multi-dimensional approach to identify the best solutions for each individual scenario. Traditional approaches for categorizing vendors previously only considered: technology underpinnings, geographic footprint, likely cost, and target customer segments and scenarios. All of this is useful criteria, but it is incomplete; a broader picture accounts for the pace of evolution — both of the vendor and within its core tool set.