For months now I've been thinking about digital communications for public relations, especially in the B2B space. This of course coincides with my joining a PR agency, and getting deeply immersed in how PR views digital. In most cases, there is a heavy emphasis on social media support, most obviously Twitter and Facebook, but that's not always a viable area for B2B companies. Social media in a broader sense, in the sense of community building, has been an important part of interactive B2B for many years, but for most manufacturers of highly designed products (with long, carefully considered buying cycles) the worth in engaging with those kinds of channels is still under review.
In my mind, even beyond social media there is constantly a question as to how we measure success and therefore how we structure our efforts to bring real value to clients.Traditional PR metrics like share of voice or impressions have value but the B2B world is so focused on achieving specific results (i.e. generating leads, making sales, etc.) that PR metrics are often denigrated. Budgets for interactive PR often suffer because of this perceived notion of vague attribution and suspicion about ROI.
I've come to the idea of "actionable awareness" as a concept that leverages both the intrinsic goal of public relations (awareness) with the measurable impact of digital (action):
actionable awareness = ability for web users to not only BE aware of brand but also immediately act on that awareness in a way that helps drive business goals and objectives
Tactics like Search Engine Marketing, Email Marketing, and other inbound efforts clearly fall within this concept, but in the digital world, so does media relations, blog posts, Twitter links--anything that mentions your client can allow them to find your web site or landing page with just a few clicks, especially with text links that many publishers now routinely insert.
And that of course allows us to measure any number of data points which can indicate spread of our messaging, value of our communications, level of influence, and the $ metrics like data capture (lead generation) or even ecommerce sales.
For me, this means that actionable awareness is a good handle on which to hang one's B2B digital PR efforts.
Showing posts with label search engine optimization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label search engine optimization. Show all posts
Monday, March 1, 2010
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Display Ads, Whither to Wither?
According to the "Natural Born Clickers" study (released recently by ComScore and media agency Starcom), the number of people online who click display ads has dropped 50% in less than two years. They conducted a similar study in 2007 which found that 32% of the respondents affirmed they clicked on banner ads; now, two years later, the figure is down to 16%.
Ad Age, in their article discussing the study, leaps to the question of whether Click-Thru-Rate is the proper metric for online display advertising. They report ComScore as determining, through "client studies," that banners generate significant lift in brand-site visitation, trademark search, and both online and offline sales among those exposed to the ads.
I have to confess to skepticism about this. I'd have to see those "client studies" to determine their scientific rigor.
While I believe in the importance of branding, and I am willing to admit that display ads might be able to help lift a brand's awareness or mindset penetration, I doubt very seriously that really accurate data can be identified to prove this. We in the interactive marketing space like to tout metrics as a core part of the web's value, but in the case of display ads, the most obvious or intuitive metric (clicks) are usually SO LOW as to be worthless as a way to make money. I sure wouldn't pay thousands of dollars for at best a 0.4% CTR...so it behooves publishers to try and justify, however possible, this revenue-generation method with which they are stuck.
The paradigm needs to continue to shift and we need to continue to innovate. A reader identified as "ivak99" makes a very good response to the Ad Age article in which he points out that internet users are "active" while banner presentation, like TV commercials, are intended for a "passive" viewer. Marketers need to leverage the strengths of the medium and craft content, as well as traffic-generation methods, that DO work on the web. Banner ads really don't and we should not be wasting money on them when we can innovate and figure out new and exciting ways to get our customers the stuff they need, and when they need it.
Ad Age, in their article discussing the study, leaps to the question of whether Click-Thru-Rate is the proper metric for online display advertising. They report ComScore as determining, through "client studies," that banners generate significant lift in brand-site visitation, trademark search, and both online and offline sales among those exposed to the ads.
I have to confess to skepticism about this. I'd have to see those "client studies" to determine their scientific rigor.
While I believe in the importance of branding, and I am willing to admit that display ads might be able to help lift a brand's awareness or mindset penetration, I doubt very seriously that really accurate data can be identified to prove this. We in the interactive marketing space like to tout metrics as a core part of the web's value, but in the case of display ads, the most obvious or intuitive metric (clicks) are usually SO LOW as to be worthless as a way to make money. I sure wouldn't pay thousands of dollars for at best a 0.4% CTR...so it behooves publishers to try and justify, however possible, this revenue-generation method with which they are stuck.
The paradigm needs to continue to shift and we need to continue to innovate. A reader identified as "ivak99" makes a very good response to the Ad Age article in which he points out that internet users are "active" while banner presentation, like TV commercials, are intended for a "passive" viewer. Marketers need to leverage the strengths of the medium and craft content, as well as traffic-generation methods, that DO work on the web. Banner ads really don't and we should not be wasting money on them when we can innovate and figure out new and exciting ways to get our customers the stuff they need, and when they need it.
Monday, May 4, 2009
It's the End of the World as We Know It
…and I Feel Fine
(with apologies to REM)
Sean Carton recently wrote a very interesting column on ClickZ entitled “The End of Ad Agencies as We Know Them.” (http://www.clickz.com/3633372) He posits that a confluence of shifting forces have created a new world in which the “full-service monolithic agency model” is no longer effective and will likely die away.
- The Internet has changed how consumers are willing to receive information about products and services; instead of an “interrupt” model where channels are limited and attention has to be grabbed within a narrow set of viewing options, the consumer is now in charge and has a nearly infinite range of choices for viewing and receiving information
- Because of that, traditional media (broadcast television and newspaper/periodical readership, specifically) is experiencing monumental audience loss and a corresponding plummet in advertising revenue
- The economic downturn has exacerbated job loss in the advertising industry, releasing thousands of talented professionals into the market who often establish themselves as freelancers or independent contractors within their particular specialties. This has significantly improved the freelance pool and has made it relatively easy to find a qualified resource when one needs it for a particular project or program.
Agencies will need to remake themselves in a new image to cope with, and survive, these forces. Carton has an idea as to how that might work:
"So what's the agency of the future going to look like? Probably a lot smaller and focused on strategy, account/project management, creative leadership (but not execution), and media strategy (but not planning and buying). Most agencies will revolve around these hubs if they're honest with themselves. Agencies will exist to provide high-level strategic guidance that clients need in a media-chaotic environment. Agencies will expand or contract as needed or will explore radical solutions such as crowdsourcing to get work done for less money."
Historically, the B2B space has been smaller in scale than the monolithic full-service model as described by Carton, but the description is still applicable. Choices have been few on the business side, with media typically limited to trade publications and trade show sponsorship. Marketing consisted of making brochures or direct mail pieces, for the most part, or sponsoring educational outreach efforts that were necessarily limited in effect.
Now the options have exploded with the growth of the internet. Email marketing is now much more cost-effective and arguably more precise than printed mailers; web sites can be updated regularly and fresh information made available much more quickly and cheaply than a brochure redesign/print/mailing.
Coming from the interactive sphere, I have no reason to weep if this particular vision of Rome burning comes true. The key characteristics of interactive marketing are in direct contrast to those of traditional advertising.
Good interactive communications:
- Are crafted to receive interested visitors rather than reach out to grab attention
- Speak well to niche audiences as opposed to appealing to the lowest common denominator (and can speak directly to ALL audiences individually, there is no limit on the quantity or type of content that can be made available)
- Are measurable and can be tied to specific success metrics, vs. broadly distributed and only vaguely associated with quantifiable results
The challenge remains to develop a new agency model that can adapt to the realities of this new world and continue to properly service clients as well as be profitable. The value we bring as professional marketers will evolve from the “big idea” to more of a content-based approach, especially in these economic times where client staff has typically been reduced to skeleton levels. We will be integrated into not just the marketing of the client but the sales process as well. An agency of the future will:
- Staff core skills and abilities (like strategy, industry knowledge, creative direction, account relationship) but bring in freelance or independent resources for tactical execution needs (design, web programming, project coordination, media buying)
- Be a key partner to clients in developing content for use across all channels; this means becoming an expert in the client’s business and being able to step in and generate anything from press releases to web page content to technical white papers, at least in initial form. More importantly, the agency will need to be able to aggregate raw content from the client and refine to appropriate delivery format depending on the tactical need. Content management will be a key service in the future agency-client relationship.
- Build metrics and analysis into all client work; ROI calculations need to be considered for every engagement. Even broader-scope communications like TV or radio advertising are going to be tied into an interactive component, and agencies must be very sophisticated in how they track results that will cross several media channels and impact brand engagement over time. Clients will expect this as they themselves become more concerned with cost control and managing tighter budgets.
- Have a tight estimating and proposing process, which will then result in a tight project management process. Agencies need to know their actual costs for prospective projects, and make sure they know what they are providing for any retainer fee structure. Clients will pay for good talent, but measurable return is the benchmark of the future.
So it may be the beginning of the end, but smart marketers know that an end of an era marks the dawn of a new one, and if we play it properly we will emerge stronger from the cataclysm and succeed where others will fall away.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Towards a General Theory of Web Site Relativity
I have been grappling with a way to distill the essence of web site marketing into a structure or presentation that can instantly and easily be comprehended by potential clients. In my more grandiose moments, I feel like Newton or Einstein trying to craft a new language to describe things that seem so evident but remain so hard to crystallize. Fortunately, my co-workers and family members are quick and thorough in deflating my grandiosity before my head swells to dangerous proportions. Nevertheless, I feel moved to expound a bit on the essence of communicating via the interactive channel, and specifically what we are talking about when we talk about the web site.
Essentially, this is what we want to do when we craft a web site:
ATTRACT --> ENGAGE --> MEASURE --> ADVANCE
Please note the use of arrows, implying motion. One might envision a circular illustration depicting the cyclical nature of this process. That’s a core element of my theory, that a web site is not an object but in truth a process that involves not only creation of engaging content objects but also developing ways of bringing in users, measuring patterns of their interaction with the site, and iterative improvements designed to maximize both successful audience generation and effective user engagement.
Too often a client tends to envision a web site as an object, perhaps a library or maybe the snake curled around the globe, swallowing his own tail. In fact, in the modern web world, we cannot afford to think in terms of communicative content only (no matter how dynamic it might be). We must think holistically about how our users engage the web (and the world as a whole) to make sure that we have an effective interaction with them.
ATTRACT: to draw by appealing to the emotions or senses, by stimulating interest, or by exciting admiration
Most people first think about a web site in terms of the site itself: content, structure, functionality, domain name. But in reality the first step is to envision who we want to experience the site, which leads to an examination of how they might find it. Search Engine Optimization of the site’s content is only the starting point. A key phrase strategy must be a core part of any modern web site content plan. That concept extends beyond the site copy. We need to make sure that videos are also uploaded to YouTube with appropriate key phrase tags and clear linkage back to the site. Social media tagging for site content must be easy and comprehensive, as well as the ability to forward to a friend. Linkback and blogger support must be considered.
In short, the site itself must be as friendly as possible to all of the ways in which our preferred influencers, aggregators, and editors might encounter it.
ENGAGE: to attract and hold fast
Needless to say, once a visitor comes to the site, we want to maximize his/her experience. But it is keenly important to realize that does not always mean keeping the person on the site. Especially in the B2B space, sometimes the most effective interactions are the quickest: user is looking for something specific, s/he finds it, and they are done. Success is not measured through time on site (in fact, that might more often indicate failure.)
In general, though, content is king and the more compelling and useful content one can provide, the better. A content strategy must be based around a deep understanding of the target audience and what they will want or need from the web site. In B2B, this often means a clear definition of the Buying Cycle and the stages the customer must pass through before they are ready to purchase. Content has to be mapped to support each stage, and for each classification of potential site user—decider, influencer, researcher.
Finally, the call to action must be crystal clear and immediately available at all times. In B2B that usually involves contact, but it might involve an online sale or some other success metric that means we have achieved a business objective.
MEASURE: to estimate the relative amount, value, etc., of, by comparison with some standard
We have attraction and we have engagement, but are we getting the result we want? Are the visitors doing what we thought they would? How do we know if we have wisely spent our web-development $? Or have we wasted it all?
Web analytics seems like a basic sort of tenet yet I am consistently amazed at how many clients do not pay attention to site statistics. One must identify Key Performance Indicators that can be used to gauge activity on the site.
It is almost worse than ignoring analytics when customers pay attention to stats that ultimately have no meaning. As mentioned above, things like Time on Site can be worthless barometers of success. Even a large quantity of site visits or numbers of pages viewed can mean nothing if few users do what we’d hoped they would do.
We must construct the site in such a way as to be able to determine whether or not we are achieving our goals by statistical analysis. Data that documents this is called the Success Metric, and when a user completes our objective we call it a Conversion. It can be a direct-to-the-bottom-line sort of parameter, such as quantity of sales for an e-commerce site, or indirect as in a lead generated (for most B2B sites), to as ephemeral as visitors following a designated content path to get exposure to a particular set of information pieces. It is up to us to decide our success metrics when we design the site. And then, we must build the site to suit our needs.
Measurement is an ongoing process. Unless you are in the midst of a particular campaign with a particular calendar, you will want to regularly measure your Key Performance Indicators. The definition above indicates one needs a standard for comparison, and regular review allows that. One can see user behavior before and after an implementation; and of course averages over time give the best indication of trending and allow some estimation for the future.
ADVANCE: to improve or make progress
Finally, the real purpose of all of the measurement is to determine whether or not you could do it better. Take the data you have gathered, make some conclusions (or at least develop some hypotheses), and make changes to see if you can improve. Testing is a key to this; keep track of before and after data, and make sure you are scientific in your efforts. A/B testing is simplest, but multivariate testing is also very valuable. A book like Tim Ash’s Landing Page Optimization (http://landingpageoptimizationbook.com/) spells out the process very well.
The main idea is that one must keep moving forward, even as the process cycles back around to generating more traffic. Whether your web site moves on a seasonal basis, or can be rotated through a regular monthly cycle, or whether other market forces shape the ebb and flow of your universe, you need to keep refreshing at each stage in order to maximize your return on investment and achieve the greatest success. In order to attract new visitors, keep generating fresh and relevant content within your communication plan. When you have traffic on the site, measure to see if your goals are being achieved and whether you can learn anything helpful from the data. And then use that information to make changes that can improve the whole process, and begin the cycle anew. Thus my General Theory of Web Site Relativity.
Ow! Like Newton, I just got hit on the head by an apple, but I think it was thrown by our VP of Strategy…
Essentially, this is what we want to do when we craft a web site:
ATTRACT --> ENGAGE --> MEASURE --> ADVANCE
Please note the use of arrows, implying motion. One might envision a circular illustration depicting the cyclical nature of this process. That’s a core element of my theory, that a web site is not an object but in truth a process that involves not only creation of engaging content objects but also developing ways of bringing in users, measuring patterns of their interaction with the site, and iterative improvements designed to maximize both successful audience generation and effective user engagement.
Too often a client tends to envision a web site as an object, perhaps a library or maybe the snake curled around the globe, swallowing his own tail. In fact, in the modern web world, we cannot afford to think in terms of communicative content only (no matter how dynamic it might be). We must think holistically about how our users engage the web (and the world as a whole) to make sure that we have an effective interaction with them.
ATTRACT: to draw by appealing to the emotions or senses, by stimulating interest, or by exciting admiration
Most people first think about a web site in terms of the site itself: content, structure, functionality, domain name. But in reality the first step is to envision who we want to experience the site, which leads to an examination of how they might find it. Search Engine Optimization of the site’s content is only the starting point. A key phrase strategy must be a core part of any modern web site content plan. That concept extends beyond the site copy. We need to make sure that videos are also uploaded to YouTube with appropriate key phrase tags and clear linkage back to the site. Social media tagging for site content must be easy and comprehensive, as well as the ability to forward to a friend. Linkback and blogger support must be considered.
In short, the site itself must be as friendly as possible to all of the ways in which our preferred influencers, aggregators, and editors might encounter it.
ENGAGE: to attract and hold fast
Needless to say, once a visitor comes to the site, we want to maximize his/her experience. But it is keenly important to realize that does not always mean keeping the person on the site. Especially in the B2B space, sometimes the most effective interactions are the quickest: user is looking for something specific, s/he finds it, and they are done. Success is not measured through time on site (in fact, that might more often indicate failure.)
In general, though, content is king and the more compelling and useful content one can provide, the better. A content strategy must be based around a deep understanding of the target audience and what they will want or need from the web site. In B2B, this often means a clear definition of the Buying Cycle and the stages the customer must pass through before they are ready to purchase. Content has to be mapped to support each stage, and for each classification of potential site user—decider, influencer, researcher.
Finally, the call to action must be crystal clear and immediately available at all times. In B2B that usually involves contact, but it might involve an online sale or some other success metric that means we have achieved a business objective.
MEASURE: to estimate the relative amount, value, etc., of, by comparison with some standard
We have attraction and we have engagement, but are we getting the result we want? Are the visitors doing what we thought they would? How do we know if we have wisely spent our web-development $? Or have we wasted it all?
Web analytics seems like a basic sort of tenet yet I am consistently amazed at how many clients do not pay attention to site statistics. One must identify Key Performance Indicators that can be used to gauge activity on the site.
It is almost worse than ignoring analytics when customers pay attention to stats that ultimately have no meaning. As mentioned above, things like Time on Site can be worthless barometers of success. Even a large quantity of site visits or numbers of pages viewed can mean nothing if few users do what we’d hoped they would do.
We must construct the site in such a way as to be able to determine whether or not we are achieving our goals by statistical analysis. Data that documents this is called the Success Metric, and when a user completes our objective we call it a Conversion. It can be a direct-to-the-bottom-line sort of parameter, such as quantity of sales for an e-commerce site, or indirect as in a lead generated (for most B2B sites), to as ephemeral as visitors following a designated content path to get exposure to a particular set of information pieces. It is up to us to decide our success metrics when we design the site. And then, we must build the site to suit our needs.
Measurement is an ongoing process. Unless you are in the midst of a particular campaign with a particular calendar, you will want to regularly measure your Key Performance Indicators. The definition above indicates one needs a standard for comparison, and regular review allows that. One can see user behavior before and after an implementation; and of course averages over time give the best indication of trending and allow some estimation for the future.
ADVANCE: to improve or make progress
Finally, the real purpose of all of the measurement is to determine whether or not you could do it better. Take the data you have gathered, make some conclusions (or at least develop some hypotheses), and make changes to see if you can improve. Testing is a key to this; keep track of before and after data, and make sure you are scientific in your efforts. A/B testing is simplest, but multivariate testing is also very valuable. A book like Tim Ash’s Landing Page Optimization (http://landingpageoptimizationbook.com/) spells out the process very well.
The main idea is that one must keep moving forward, even as the process cycles back around to generating more traffic. Whether your web site moves on a seasonal basis, or can be rotated through a regular monthly cycle, or whether other market forces shape the ebb and flow of your universe, you need to keep refreshing at each stage in order to maximize your return on investment and achieve the greatest success. In order to attract new visitors, keep generating fresh and relevant content within your communication plan. When you have traffic on the site, measure to see if your goals are being achieved and whether you can learn anything helpful from the data. And then use that information to make changes that can improve the whole process, and begin the cycle anew. Thus my General Theory of Web Site Relativity.
Ow! Like Newton, I just got hit on the head by an apple, but I think it was thrown by our VP of Strategy…
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Re: direction
Most web site redesigns are more than a simple update of the look and feel, particularly in the B2B space where I spend most of my time. The cycle of updates in the B2B world tends to be ponderous and almost glacial, reflecting an accumulation of time on what is for the most part stagnant and static content. A site redesign really means a content overhaul.
This is a good thing. The more fresh content on a site, the better. It would be best to have a vibrant and active site, with lots of new content and a vigorous content management program. The reality, particularly in B2B, is that this does not always happen and once a site is built, it tends to sit.
So change is good. However, if you're lucky, this can present a problem. Let me explain the conundrum.
If your client or your B2B company has had a web site for a while, and by now almost everybody has had at least a bare-bones site for many years, you may have developed decent search engine rankings for good key phrases. You don't want to lose that "equity" when you move to a new site with new page names and new content.
That's why any part of a new site plan needs to include 301 redirects and other programming or system tactics designed to send users (or spiders) to new pages when they are looking for the old.
Imagine the scenario: you have a new site design which includes new information architecture and updated content. You remove your old page www.sitename.com/widget.html because your new page, www.sitename.com/widget_new.html, has the updated content.
A searcher goes to Google and looks for "widget." Your old page was ranked #5 on the organic SERP. The searcher clicks on the link, which sends her to the old page, /widget.html. This is now a dead link and you've lost her. She goes back to the Google SERP and clicks on #6 instead.
Better scenario: you set up a 301 redirect so that when she clicks on your link, her browser tries to load the /widget.html page but is told by the server to instead load the page at /widget_new.html. Thus she lands on your new site, on the new page that still talks about widgets. She's happy (she's looking for widgets, after all); you're happy (you did not lose her); and the search engines are happy because a 301 is an approved redirect process and they don't think you are spamming.
This article by Erik Dafform at ClickZ does a good job of talking about some of the tactics that can be used to ensure that proper redirection takes place.
http://www.clickz.com/3626928
This is a good thing. The more fresh content on a site, the better. It would be best to have a vibrant and active site, with lots of new content and a vigorous content management program. The reality, particularly in B2B, is that this does not always happen and once a site is built, it tends to sit.
So change is good. However, if you're lucky, this can present a problem. Let me explain the conundrum.
If your client or your B2B company has had a web site for a while, and by now almost everybody has had at least a bare-bones site for many years, you may have developed decent search engine rankings for good key phrases. You don't want to lose that "equity" when you move to a new site with new page names and new content.
That's why any part of a new site plan needs to include 301 redirects and other programming or system tactics designed to send users (or spiders) to new pages when they are looking for the old.
Imagine the scenario: you have a new site design which includes new information architecture and updated content. You remove your old page www.sitename.com/widget.html because your new page, www.sitename.com/widget_new.html, has the updated content.
A searcher goes to Google and looks for "widget." Your old page was ranked #5 on the organic SERP. The searcher clicks on the link, which sends her to the old page, /widget.html. This is now a dead link and you've lost her. She goes back to the Google SERP and clicks on #6 instead.
Better scenario: you set up a 301 redirect so that when she clicks on your link, her browser tries to load the /widget.html page but is told by the server to instead load the page at /widget_new.html. Thus she lands on your new site, on the new page that still talks about widgets. She's happy (she's looking for widgets, after all); you're happy (you did not lose her); and the search engines are happy because a 301 is an approved redirect process and they don't think you are spamming.
This article by Erik Dafform at ClickZ does a good job of talking about some of the tactics that can be used to ensure that proper redirection takes place.
http://www.clickz.com/3626928
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
