Re-designing or redeveloping a website has become a major issue for companies, as they seek to refine their online presence and invest in their websites. However, more than ever, the search engines are the biggest obstacle to website improvement.
Planning for a Re-Design
I find that in our development and Information Architecture consulting, one of the largest hurdles that we encounter is dealing with the transition from the old website to a newer architecture. For larger sites, planning a transition to maintain the links and rankings held by thousands of pages that will no longer exist is quickly becoming one of the more time consuming tasks.
Surprisingly, the main obstacle to developing improved websites (both architecturally and usability) is the search engines themselves. The method of retrieving pages into a central index for an algorithm is outdated and antiquated, as it does not account for improvements and changes in a website. In short, companies are being penalized for not being aware of the limitations of search engines, Google in particular.
What goes wrong:
1. In a new website project, the architecture of the site typically changes. Companies are becoming more aware of search-friendly programming and implementing it into their development. However, when the new architecture goes live, the old architecture and old pages addresses (URL’s) held the rankings. Results: Rankings are lost as old pages are no longer available.
2. Incoming links to the website and the deep pages within the website no longer have a destination (page names usually change with a new architecture). This reduces the “link juice” that is carried to that website, as the destination of the link no longer exists. Results: Decreased rankings and value based on incomplete (broken) incoming links.
Redirects
To remedy these situations, the old formula of applying URL rewrites and 301 redirects is employed in order to match the old pages to their newer counterparts. However, this requires server power to accomplish. In a re-direct, the old page is requested, and the server scans through the instructions to see if there is a new page to deliver instead of the old page. In doing this, rankings can usually be maintained.
Redirected Links
Links are also maintained, but lose their value overtime. Redirected links not a direct link; the new page destination may not be the page intended as the original link destination, thereby losing value. It is always best to have a direct incoming link for best link value. However, for site owners with hundreds to thousands of links, they now have to go back and ask other webmasters, site owners and companies to edit the links on their sites to point to the new URL in order to receive the full value. Is that really necessary? Is search engine technology so lacking in foresight that this will be the bane of webmasters and marketers for the next decade?
The issue with redirects is that every redirect takes a fraction of server resources to accomplish. A few redirects are fine, however when working with sites that are taking 8-10 years of history and thousands of pages, the redirects become a significant drag on server resources.
Duplicate Content
This also takes into account that the redirects are written and applied properly. I am amazed at the canonicalization issues that still hinder websites and the amount of work that a webmaster is expected to perform in order to “help” the search engines.
I have worked with many programmers that do fantastic, innovative work and develop amazing applications within websites, only to have the issues of duplicate content hinder the website. What can be considered effective user-based programming has to be tossed out the development window in order to accommodate search engine crawlers. How many companies are even aware of duplicate content and how that can hinder their rankings in search engines? How many websites are being penalized unaware?
Google asks: “Would I do this if the Search Engines Didn’t Exist”?
Companies are developing websites smarter than ever, using search friendly architecture, AJAX, CSS and other technologies in an attempt to make the experience better for their users. However, because the information of information retrieval is so outdated, these same companies are penalized for changing a site that would have been better left alone.
Essentially, Google has written the rules of website development, re-development and innovation. If a company is not aware of those rules or does not invest the time and money to reverse engineer their new website to accommodate outdated technology, then they are effectively penalized.
In short, the rule of “Would I do this is Search Engines didn’t exist?” (Google Webmaster Guidelines: Quality Guidelines – basic principles) is nonsensical. Especially when paired with the latest news of Google’s attempt to solve the AJAX issue – developers are left to struggle with increasingly outdated search engine technology in an attempt to have a new website (that is hopefully better for their users) maintain rankings.
I enjoy a good challenge, but the challenge is starting to come at the expense of innovation for developers and the companies that desire to improve their online presence and user experience. Rather than innovate in tools and applications, it’s time for the search engines to step up and improve their methods in their core service – search.
Otherwise, true innovators are the ones who are penalized.
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
Why Segmentation?
Segmentation is the principle that people come to the website for many different reasons, they enter at many different points, the see different pages, and are looking for many different pieces of information. Basically – you can’t treat all of your visitors the same way, neither in the marketing and content nor in the measurement and analysis. As John Marshall of Market Motive (who also developed ClickTracks) famously said, “people are not cattle.” Therefore, we should not treat them as such.
Aggregate = Inaccurate
Funny enough, when we build reports on aggregate data (page views, visitors, top 10 pages, top 10 search terms) we are doing exactly that. Aggregate numbers view people as a herd of cattle, all with the same motives, behaviors and views. Segmentation allows a deeper examination of the website and the different types of people and their motivations.
Analytics finds Behavior based on Expectation
By simply segmenting visitors based on their keyword searches, motivation can be determined. By segmenting those same visitors based on goal completion and the entry point of the site, you can begin to compare behavior alongside the motivation. Comparisons allow new ways to interpret the data, and find areas of the website that need immediate improvement. Not all products can be sold the same, so why measure them the same?
Context, Context, Context
Building context is a primary step in developing new ways of viewing data. The more we know about a group of visitors, the more we can understand them. By viewing people as the complex organisms that they are, we can begin to develop the site around them and make changes suited to best market to that segment. This isn’t a difficult step; it’s actually very simple by using the 3C’s of Analytics: Context, Contrast & Comparison.
Context is simply building multiple data points into a specific view of activity. Essentially, the more data points involved, the better the story becomes. Adding content to a segment tells a particular story about a specific group of people and what they encountered on your website.
Start building context by segmenting visitors based on the acquisition method and their motivation. Contrast that with the average, which Google Analytics does by default, in order to see how this segment performs compared to the site average. Then, compare to other segments in order to find significant differences. Comparison allows the analyst to find specific segments that are performing at extremely high or low levels. This is the first method of a direct evaluation for the website.
Test poorly performing segments, and grow the higher segments. Compare segments and keyword rankings to be sure that you are targeting the right words. Get a clear picture on exit rates by finding the segment that is contributing the most. Comparing and contrasting segments is the basis of learning, and it is the easiest method to find opportunities for growth in your marketing. You may find that your best ranking keywords, the ones bringing in the most traffic, are also the worst performing group. Only segmenting and building context will allow that exploration.
More Data Points = More Understanding
The simple conclusion to this type of analysis is that there must be multiple conversion goals. One conversion rate doesn’t tell the story of who came to the website, what they expected to see, what they did see, and how they reacted to it. Multiple conversion rates; based on keywords, actions, product types, price points, keyword rankings, navigation methods are just a few of the ways that one can build conversion segments.
Action-based conversions, such as video views, navigation tendencies, point to the behavior of people within a segment and can provide insight as to how people respond when they interact with elements within the website. Understanding the actions and how they affect conversions will provide direction for continued development of interactions within the website.
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
Hamster-Wheel Analytics From Part 1, setting goals is the first and only place to start when developing an analytics strategy. Otherwise, the analyst or the website marketing manager will spend the majority of their time developing reports with numbers on them. The rest of their month will then be spent justifying why those numbers are higher or lower than the previous month. Without goals, there is simply no direction.
Large numbers become the goal, and people become enamored with large numbers, even though everyone knows that more visitors is not necessarily the goal. Qualified visitors are the goal . This is hamster-wheel analytics. The endless cycle of doing the same thing and going nowhere.
Why Do You Have a Website?
Clearly stated goals are the first place to start. I find that the best answers are the clearest and simplest. Points are awarded for brevity. Two word answers are clear, and everyone involved in the website should have these printed out and displayed clearly, as they are your new measuring stick – The measurement upon which every decision about the website should and must be based.
No guesswork, measurement.
1. What is the purpose of the website?
2. What is the company goal for the website?
3. What do we want visitors to do?
One of the best goal statements I heard from a company was the simplest. Make Money, Sell Shoes. Simple, to the point and a clear measuring stick from which to base every decision. From design, analytics, social media strategy and continued development, the questions are simple – “Does it make us money? Does it sell shoes? From that, a successful website marketing strategy is born.
Into Action
How these are answered provide the framework for building measurement outcomes for the website. By now, I am hoping that the numbers developed for typical reports would start to seem like foreign concepts. How can you measure company goals and visitor expectations by unique visitors and page views? Hint: you can’t.
Clearly, we need to think differently about our concept of analytics.
This concept was made clear when I read Iconoclast. The book features examples of those individuals who went against common thinking and the wisdom of crowds. Gregory Berns, a neuroscience attempts to explain how iconoclasts think differently, respond differently and can even learn things differently.
Pursue Ambiguity
In one of the sections he discusses the concept of Bayesian updating. Most people learn by entering a subject with a preconceived idea of what they need or want and then find the information that develops and reinforces those ideas.
People tend to avoid ambiguity – as ambiguity is traced to a fear of the unknown. People desire some semblance of structure, which is why it is easy to cling to the concepts of unique visitors, hits, page views, time on site, etc. However, when the goal is to increase sales and get to the “why” of analytics, it requires foraging into the unknown and making guesses. Some of those forages may not yield substantial information; most will reward the analyst with a gold mine of information.
The most important trait is the ability to learn and respond as new information is found.
Bayesian updating is important to an analyst as it is the process of using new information to update probability. As Berns writes, “The key reappraisal for ambiguous circumstances is to view ambiguity as an opportunity for gaining knowledge.”
Once the goals have been established and the analyst has been freed from the shackles of mundane reporting, the process can be viewed as a blank slate. Start from the company goals to determine how the website is doing.
The very first report I would recommend building is an acquisition report based on motivation. Who came to the website and why? Segmentation is the principle that answers motivation.
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
Hearing the questions from so many that come to my seminars, one would think that analytics was difficult or hard to grasp. Seriously, it has caused great wonder as to why the concept of analytics would prove such a perplexing and daunting task to so many people. Unlearn Analytics
At the heart of the matter, I believe, is that many people have been incorrectly “trained” based on their thinking and practice of analytics. Those that have been online for many years know that the earliest analytics packages were simply traffic counters, hardly “analytics” as we call them today, but more “stats,” as they became more widely known. The basic stats packages still exist today: FunnelWeb, AWstats , just to name a few.
The History of Bad Stats
Because the early stats program provided just that: statistics. Mainly, the statistics were based on numbers that webmasters needed to estimate bandwidth and hosting requirements. People assumed that the numbers provided in these reports were important. Granted, for many businesses, a goal of increasing visitors was able to be reported, but that’s about as far as one could go. Because of the limited amount of information provided in these reports, marketers simply added them into web reports and they essentially became part of doing business online. It was (and still is) assumed that if these were the numbers provided by the stats, then these must be important and necessary – the measuring stick with which we are provided.
Your Measuring Stick is Wrong
And that is my theory. We were given a measuring stick at the beginning of the internet age, and many people have not yet realized that the measuring stick is wrong. Thus, the words “hits” is so engrained into the vocabulary of many business people, not realizing exactly what hits are, nor how they affect the website, or even much larger, the business.
So, we need to trade in our old measuring stick for a new one. One that is based not on off-the-shelf, one-size-fits-none numbers, but one based on the company’s website marketing goals.
Goals?
Goals are the starting point for any analytics endeavor. “Analytics works best when measurement expectations are clearly defined in advance,” wrote Eric Peterson in Web Analytics Demystified “not after the fact or on an ad-hoc basis.” Smart words.
Most marketers attempting web analytics are missing this piece of the puzzle. What are the measurement expectations? Does management simply want to know the number of visitors to the website and why that number is lower than the previous month? If so, then I pity your job. Justifying visitor numbers within in a vacuum without any context has nothing to do with improving the company website.
Every analyst needs to demand clear goals in order to create the correct measuring stick. Without these goals, there is no point in tracking anything.
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
This has been stewing for a while. Just brimming under the surface. An brewing anger towards companies that do not understand accessibility, nor the commitment that is required to be accessible, but will give it a light treatment simply as a sales tactic.
Basically, I’ve had it. I’m mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore.
I’ve worked with too many projects where a vendor has sold a program, content management system or software application as a part of the overall project, and claimed that it was “technically compliant”. “Sure it is 508 compliant,” they say. Not understanding the implications of such a statement.
Invariably, the application is exposed for what it really is. A basic treatment of accessibility veiled in sales gibberish. The charade lasts until it is actually placed under scrutiny of those will be needing accessibility features. When asked to produce evidence of 508 compliance or some sort of accessibility certification, there is rarely any documentation, other than a simple automated test.
So, what is “technically compliant”?
I would describe “technical compliance” as a label company’s use when they go through the motions of compliance, without truly understanding the reasoning and methods of accessibility. Simply running a page or an application through an automated accessibility checker is NOT an approval for the “accessible” label.
Accessibility is much more than the “strict” side of the technical checklist. Accessibility is about much more than screen readers. Accessibility is about understanding the people that use a website and that making a website accessible actually makes it easier to use for everyone, not just a single, small group of people that need these features.
To better understand the “technically accessible” label that people like to use, I like to examine some of the elements of the Web Accessibility Checklist, version 1, developed by the W3C. These are elements that cannot be tested by automated software, only by actual human testing.
Where Automation Fails MultiMedia
Checkpoint 1.3 Until user agents can automatically read aloud the text equivalent of a visual track, provide an auditory description of the important information of the visual track of a multimedia presentation.
This just makes sense. Search engines can’t read images, video, podcasts or other multimedia. Instead they rely on tags, descriptions and transcripts. For accessibility, this also provides information to anybody; regardless of access device, technology, browser, or assistive technology.
Color Contrast
Checkpoint 2.1 Ensure that all information conveyed by color is also available without color.
Checkpoint 2.2 Ensure that foreground and background color combinations provide sufficient contrast when viewed by someone having color deficits or when viewed on a black and white screen.
There are numerous contrast tools available online, some are much better than others at identifying contrast issues on a web page. I prefer aDesigner from IBM, as it highlights specific areas on the page and identifies them as problem areas. The main issue is that running a website code through a validation test does NOT identify problem contrast areas. This is a visual test, and must be tested by humans in order to find the problems.
Contrast is also a key element in design. By using contrast designers can influence the path of the eye as it follows the information and is attracted to specific calls to action. High contrast areas on a page get much more attention and are easier to see. Misusing or misunderstanding contrast results in a very poor user experience
Markup
Checkpoint 3.1 When an appropriate markup language exists, use markup rather than images to convey information.
Checkpoint 4.2 Specify the expansion of each abbreviation or acronym in a document where it first occurs.
Another validation test that an automated procedure will miss is the ability to spot when an image is not clear and mark-up would do a better job of conveying information. IN addition, there are many times when another graphic might even be more explicit. Again, only human testing will show these issues and no amount of automated testing will provide correction.
Abbreviations and acronyms are to be defined in the markeup, which enables users to simple see purpose of the letters. It provides clear context to the abbreviations or the confusing world of acronyms. This is especially helpful when the acronym is also a word, which can be confusing.
Issues related to this area are the surging popularity of tag clouds, where large numbers of words are rendered on the page and their popularity is shown based on text size. For users accessing the site through a reader, there is no method of understanding the difference in size of these tags. The tags are simply read aloud with no context, order or understanding of their purpose.
Programming
Checkpoint 7.3 Until user agents allow users to freeze moving content, avoid movement in pages.
Checkpoint 6.1 Organize documents so they may be read without style sheets.
Checkpoint 9.4 Create a logical tab order through links, form controls, and objects.
Movement on pages is just like the aggravation of watching cable news networks. The news ticker that tries to compete with our attention as we watch the talking head and listen to the news and look at the news video – too many things compete visually for your attention. When the same principle is applied to a web page, the same result applies. When there are too many competing elements for the viewer’s attention (movement) there is no clear place for the user to focus their attention. It lessens the ability of the page to communicate a specific idea or purpose.
Tab order is especially critical, especially in administrative screens, ecommerce sites, interactive technologies and other form-intensive applications. This can take place in everything from a content management system to setting up a YouTube account. Tab order allows keyboard-only users to tab through forms and options. If the order is not logical, the cursor focus can easily be lost.
Tab order is not something that can be tested with automated software or web validation. It requires strict human testing and intervention, especially on different operating systems, browsers, computers and assistive technology. The combinations of all of these technologies create issues and different combinations may produce very different results. Human testing is the only way to find this issue.
Readability
Checkpoint 12.3 Divide large blocks of information into more manageable groups where natural and appropriate.
Checkpoint 12.4 Associate labels explicitly with their controls.
Checkpoint 13.8 Place distinguishing information at the beginning of headings, paragraphs, lists, etc.
Checkpoint 14.1 Use the clearest and simplest language appropriate for the site’s content.
Checkpoint 14.3 Create a style of presentation that is consistent across pages.
None of these points are able to be tested in any type of automated environment. One of the most difficult problems online for websites is readability. Beyond readability, it is estimated that 40% of the population has lower literacy skills. Add to that low-vision, senior citizens and new adopters of the internet, and there is a significant learning and learning curve that keep people from easily accessing the information that they need.
Clear and simple language, consistent presentation, making text readable by arrangement, mark-up and headings – all of these are techniques that make content more accessible. They also rely on testing with target audiences rather than an automated button-push.
Navigation
Checkpoint 13.1 Clearly identify the target of each link.
Checkpoint 13.4 Use navigation mechanisms in a consistent manner.
Checkpoint 13.5 Provide navigation bars to highlight and give access to the navigation mechanism.
Users need to have a sense of location when they are on a page – Where do I go if this is not the right page? Where is there related information? How do I get there? These are all questions that can be answered quickly and easily by a good navigational structure with visual indicators, highlights and clear labels and targets.
In a sense, users need a sense of location, clear content relation, common sense navigation and a call to a specific destination in order to reduce their frustration. Deny any of these mechanisms, and your site is a whole lot harder to use. Automated tests, again, fail to properly identify issues of clarity, purpose, consistency, readability and understandability.
Automated Testing Fails True Accessibility
These are issues that no amount of automated testing will grasp. When a company claims “technical accessibility” it is because they have not actually tested their software or content management system with people, much less tested with those that rely on assistive technology. Simply choosing which checkpoints are more important than others and adhering to those are a dangerous precedent to establish. In doing so, adhering to strict technical issues, but not the grammatical, layout, contrast, navigation or readability issues ignores a significantly large portion of the population that can benefit from these improvements.
No amount of automated testing will explain to you that your instructions are unclear and visually hard to find. Only testing performed by people that are familiar with assistive technology, accessibility and the multitudes of combinations of these issues can ensure that a site is truly certified as accessible.
Developing a new website?
If you are a project manager or web manager, and you are tasked with purchasing or building a specification for a website, application or content management system, I recommend that you demand a third-party verification of accessibility. Relying on the manufacturer’s word and getting the “technically accessible” line can come back on you when a user discovers the truth.
As an example, a well-known software manufacturer claimed that their software was “technically accessible” that they met 508 requirements. Interestingly, the reports the software generated were accessible, but the methods necessary to generate those reports were not even close to being accessible.
Do the Work, Reap the Rewards
In their haste to be technically correct, programmers and development companies have forgotten (if they ever even knew) that the readability of the content, and the clarity of instructions, and calls to action are just as critical to accessibility as alternate navigation, alt attributes and graceful degradation.
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
Multi-channel merchants suffer from a self-fulfilling prophesy, and it is completely understood. On the surface, it makes perfect sense. For those that slept through Psychology 101, Self-fulfilling prophesy is when you tell yourself that you are no good at math, you keep telling yourself this and as a result, don’t study as much, give up easily, so that when you finally take the test, you score low, and you mark it up to the reason: “I’m not good at math”.
Multi-Channel marketers tend to overstate the reach of catalog sales, they see that catalog makes up 90% of sales, and the website makes up 10% of sales. So, they reason, the catalog will continue to have most of the marketing resources, and website will have a small amount of resources, because it doesn’t perform as well as the catalog.
Obviously, I have a number of responses to that proposition.
Is there a sales tracking mechanism in place that covers each channel?
Many catalog retailers that I’ve talked with don’t have sales tracking on the website. It is an assumption based on a number of factors, but mainly their gut instinct and initial sales numbers, which can easily reinforce that thinking.
It’s not a wrong assumption at its face value, but it must be explored more in depth. Each channel must have a sales tracking mechanism in place in order to know for sure which channel accounts for a percentage of sales.
Have the basics of search engine optimization been implemented on your online catalog?
If not, then of course, your printed catalog will perform better than the website. If search engine optimization has not been performed on your website, then the average amount of search traffic is about 20% of total visits, and 80% of that 20% is most likely branded searches for the company.
Search Engine Optimization reverses the traffic sources from your website. It takes general product searches that result in visitors and increases it to 60%-80% of your traffic. The branded searches and other means of accessing the website actually slightly increase their levels, but get dwarfed by the incoming search traffic very quickly.
Because of the increase of search traffic, sales from the website will increase, as should sales from every channel; call centers, catalog requests, and the catalog itself. This is where tracking is critical. Knowing the source of growth and action is vital to continuing marketing efforts.
The Internet is not a single channel.
The internet is a broad term covering significant channels and it has changed the very definition of multi-channel to include: Organic Search, Paid Search, Shopping Search Engines, Email, Banner/Networks, Social Media, Online Public Relations, Link Building, Blogging, and more every day . . . .
Tracking is vital again in order to understand the value of each channel. While some channels are more effective in providing a direct response for sales, others are just as vital in providing an accurate story of your company and product. Others are important simply for visibility, others for buzz.
The channel determines the motivation, expectation and the qualification level of the visitor.
Segmenting the channel is important because the source determines the motivation and the behavior of the visitor. To treat all visitors to your website the same, regardless of HOW they got there is to ignore the individuality of the consumer and the method of which you acquired them.
Expectations of the visitor are everything; understand what they expect and tuning the message to them is vital to convert them into a long-term customer. I am surprised by the amount of companies that do not start with the simplest of segmentation analytics just by channel. There is an immense amount of intelligence to be gathered, but just starting with the basics will provide a significant reward.
To quote a famous stand-up philosopher, the website gets no respect.
I remember talking with one multi-channel manager, who took the website to an amazing 70% of sales revenue for the company. But as he asked me – “Do you think I can get even 50% of the marketing budget for the best performing channel in company history?” Here is the case where the tracking, search optimization, and marketing were all in place and humming along, but the majority of the budget still goes to print. Maybe because “it’s the way it has always been done”? I’m not sure, but history will have to answer that one.
My guess? Print is tangible, and it wins awards, but the web will win sales.
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
I’ve read two books in the past few weeks, and have been amazed at the difference they make in my understanding of two subjects: Grammar and Algebra. I wish I have had access to these two books while in school, as I know they would have made an impact on my learning and understanding of the subject matter.
I hate x
I used to be really good in Math, until I met Algebra. Then I learned to hate x with a passion. I never understood why endless equations were so important, or how it would affect my life – why are we learning all of this? If I want to find out how many cans of paint are necessary to paint a room, I’ll buy four cans and return one if I don’t use it. That’s what Home Depot is for.
Traditionally, algebra classes are simply about performing harder and more complex equations, and I remember my teachers getting frustrated with me, as I simply did not understand algebra. I think the main reason is that I didn’t understand “why.” Why are we doing this – what does it prove? What am I learning?
Learning the “Why”
Enter a friend’s recommendation of a book, “Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea.” And now I have to ask myself – why don’t we start math classes with history lessons? Why do we not learn about why these equations were done in the first place and what they were meant to prove? This book showed the history of zero as mathematicians, philosophers and scientists either embraced or refused it.
More than Math
The author showed how zero challenged all areas of life; mathematics, theology, science, philosophy – all affected by the principle of zero. And so was my conception of algebra. By learning the history and context of this amazing subject, and its influence throughout history in so many disciplines, I learned to appreciate what I once hated, the infamous x.
Language
The second book was a fascinating romp into the formation of the English language – Bill Bryson’s “The Mother Tongue: English and How it Got that Way.” Now, I love English and language studies to begin with, as that has aligned perfectly with understanding search marketing and semantics algorithms, but this book (again) showed the historical; changes and influences upon our modern language.
I learned to never split an infinitive.
I wish I had been armed with some of this knowledge as I defended my papers from the dreaded grammar errors that seemed to dominate my purpose. Knowing that the “rule” to never split infinitive was the result of an 18th century bishop who decided that English should be like Latin. Never mind that English is not a product of Latin, as are Spanish, French or Italian, and is it impossible to split an infinitive in Latin because the verb and infinitive are hopelessly joined together in the same word. (to speak = hablar. You can’t split the Spanish word “hablar” because the construction of the verb and infinitive are one and the same)
Yet, somehow, the romance of making the English language reflect the Latin language because of the love affair with the enlightened Greeks and Romans stuck, and now fourth graders have to beaten into submission to comply with random phrasing that is nothing like our normal verbal patterns of speech.
If you need an example, try rephrasing the heading of this section, “I learned to never split an infinitive.” In a way that sounds natural. You can’t do it without sounding like a pretentious grammar stickler.
If I had known these things in my youth, I could have argued up another letter grade – or at least befuddled the teacher to an extent that she may question the roots of grammar for the reminder of her life. At the very least I would have been satisfied to be an irritating pest to the teachers that constantly reinforced ancient writing rules that aren’t reflected in our natural speech patterns.
Bringing it together: Context Builds Understanding
In all areas, knowing the historical accomplishments and milestones always promotes understanding. Our modern educational system is not based on presenting this context. I would think that all classes should start with a history lesson of the factors that have shaped the modern understanding – how we got here. I do this in my marketing classes. It provides context as to why there is such crappy advice about search engine optimization on the internet.
Context determines everything. The same content can be presented on two different websites. However, the context of how that content is presented will cause two very distinct reactions. The readability and accessibility of one will usually trump the other, simply based on the context in which it was presented.
Understanding how information works online and how it is viewed by both humans and machines helps to create an understanding of the online marketing world. Understanding the history of online communications can help a marketer realize that social media will last much longer than any campaign, and that he had better be ready for the long-term investment, rather than a short term campaign.
Simply focusing on one part of marketing, say search engine optimization, (or in other words, the equations), without including other factors of usability, analytics, design, marketing and customer testing is neglecting a serious part of a successful campaign. Everything must be done in context in order to fully reach a targeted audience effectively and build a long-term association.
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
Cultural critics and wordsmiths gather around for this outstanding foray into verbal investigation.
Have we lost our way when declaring ideas?
Why has the declarative been exchanged for the inquisitive?
Have we lost our ability, or our nerve, to declare our thoughts with confidence?
Highlights include:
“We’re the most aggressively inarticulate generation to come along since, you know . . , a long time ago.”
“It is not enough these days to question authority, you’ve got to speak with it too.”
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
Next month, I will be traveling to the Googleplex to be a presenter for their “MarketingTalks@Google” series. This is an awesome invitation, spawned from the “Analytics According to Captain Kirk” segment in my analytics training and presentations. I’ve known the staff at Google Analytics since their Urchin days, so it’s always nice to see their success and adoption into Google.
I’ll be in San Jose for Search Engine Strategies that week, presenting at two sessions; Analytics 2.0 with Analytics heavyweights Jim Sterne, Erik Peterson, and Marshall Sponder, and then a fun panel on IT for Marketers, where we de-mystify the dark secrets of IT web-speak language for Marketers. I’ll also get to moderate a panel which has the potential for a lot of fun – Black Hat v White Hat tactics with Greg Boser, Jill Whalen, Todd Freisen, Bruce Clay and Dave Naylor. I’ll wrap up the week by presenting a 4-hour training class on Analytics on Friday.
So, it made sense to schedule a time while I was in town, and I’ll speaking at Google on Tuesday the 19th, at the Mountain View location, and then conduct a small round-table discussion later in the day. Both sessions will be taped and made available on the AtGoogle Talks channel on YouTube.
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
Velleity is a word that has dropped out of the general vocabulary, unfortunately. I am attempting to bring it back, as it has more relevance now than ever.
Velleity is a desire to see something done, but not enough desire to make it happen. Wow!
Reporting v Analyzing
In my analytics training classes I ask the attendees about their analytics reporting routine. Sometimes I make fun of the in-house analyst that has to report numbers like unique visitors, hits and sessions. Then, they spend the rest of the month justifying why that number was higher or lower than the prior month. Unfortunately, as I make that statement I see too many heads nodding in agreement. I feel for those people who are locked in a never ending cycle of velleity. Companies that understand that analytics can be valuable, but not enough to change their culture, provide the analyst with the tools they need, or provide them with the freedom to make changes that will improve the profits of the company itself.
These are what I call “Caveman Analytics.”
Unfortunately, too many businesses are trapped into thinking that big numbers are impressive. Big numbers = big business, right? But what do you do with those numbers? How does that affect your strategy?
Questioning the Strategy
As soon as someone starts asking questions, the house of straw blows away. Simply reporting numbers is not an analytics strategy, and it certainly will not lead to any amount of website improvement. And yes, I do know of some companies that include “Hits” in their monthly reporting. (If that is you, reporting hits, stop. Hits are not a count of any relevance for your marketing. It’s just a big number.)
Questioning As a Strategy
Questions are the foundation for our learning. They expose motivations and require explanations. Many corporations and businesses are famous for encouraging the heads-down, lock-step agreement survival tactics. Asking questions is not popular, nor is it encouraged. Asking questions is perceived as rebellion, rather than progress. In the 60’s the radicals told us to question authority. Now that they are in authority, the last thing they want is to be questioned.
Neil Postman speaks about the importance of questioning, saying “question-asking is the most significant tool human beings have.” Even more important that software, servers and summaries, questions are an analysts’ primary tool. Postman even suggested that the reason why we don’t teach the ability to question in schools, is because eventually the students will question the teacher. Questions are subversive, but they result in people finding answers.
Questions – The Cure for Velleity
Velleity is what keeps companies locked in this mindset of reporting useless numbers. Desiring, even expecting to someday have an epiphany of change, but not willing to change the mindset or the culture of locked-in reporting to achieve it. Nor are they willing to ask the hard questions in order to uncover what must be done.
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
Subscribe to Marketing Logic
Surprisingly, the main obstacle to developing improved websites (both architecturally and usability) is the search engines themselves. The method of retrieving pages into a central index for an algorithm is outdated and antiquated, as it does not account for improvements and changes in a website. In short, companies are being penalized for not being aware of the limitations of search engines, Google in particular.
Matt Bailey is the owner and founder of SiteLogic and has over a decade in the web marketing industry. He focuses on consulting and training to help companies take control of their websites and marketing strategies.
Basically – you can’t treat all of your visitors the same way, neither in the marketing and content nor in the measurement and analysis. As John Marshall of Market Motive (who also developed ClickTracks) famously said, “people are not cattle.” Therefore, we should not treat them as such.
Start building context by segmenting visitors based on the acquisition method and their motivation. Contrast that with the average, which Google Analytics does by default, in order to see how this segment performs compared to the site average. Then, compare to other segments in order to find significant differences. Comparison allows the analyst to find specific segments that are performing at extremely high or low levels. This is the first method of a direct evaluation for the website. 
From Part 1, setting goals is the first and only place to start when developing an analytics strategy. Otherwise, the analyst or the website marketing manager will spend the majority of their time developing reports with numbers on them. The rest of their month will then be spent justifying why those numbers are higher or lower than the previous month. Without goals, there is simply no direction. 
. The book features examples of those individuals who went against common thinking and the wisdom of crowds. Gregory Berns, a neuroscience attempts to explain how iconoclasts think differently, respond differently and can even learn things differently.
