| |
Archive for the ‘conversion’ Category
Friday, June 19th, 2009
I attended a webinar this week on the topic of Sales 2.0. Essentially it was about using some of the online tools we have to be more efficient in the prospecting and sales process. I also came across my first instance of the term ‘conversion marketing’, and the same day was asked about the impact of Web 2.0 on conversion strategy.
Now I appreciate the value of creating labels for things, it serves as a sort of short-hand, and allows us to convey a depth of meaning with only a few words. When Web 2.0 became commonly used, I just shrugged my shoulders, when Sales 2.0 came into use, I rolled my eyes. But at the point we have to label ‘conversion marketing’ I really have to draw the line.
Isn’t all marketing conversion marketing? Or if not, isn’t the old phrase ‘direct response marketing’ just as descriptive and useful as ‘conversion marketing’? Maybe we should go all the way and just call this Web 3.0!
I agree that there is somewhat of a void in the conversion space (just listen to me try to explain what I do for a living, to a neighbor or acquaintance), but I think the void is in understanding, not labels. Too few marketers and executives still ’settle’ for poor website performance, hiding behind industry average numbers (like 4-6% conversion rate), not even aware that a well implemented strategy can drive conversion rates well into the double digits.
If we’re gonna start a new bandwagon, then I’m all for it. Let’s beat the drum of a higher expectation from online lead generation. If that bandwagon needs a new label, like conversion marketing, then I suppose I’ll just bite my tongue as I beat the drum…
Posted in conversion | 1 Comment »
Tuesday, June 9th, 2009
There’s a problem that I see often. Companies are looking for fast results, and are unwilling to see a strategy through to its conclusion. I see this in AdWords, when companies want to test new ads weekly, and want to turn off low performing keywords before there’s enough data to really get a picture of what’s happening. I also see this in split testing, when the desire to ‘call’ a result outweighs the rigor required for statistical validity.
I noticed yesterday that Google’s free split testing tool, Website Optimizer, suggests that each page variation have at least 100 conversions before a split test can be considered valid. So for an A-B-C test, you would need 300 conversions before declaring a winner. Even with a 10% conversion rate, you are talking about 3,000 impressions, which might take some sites months to gather.
When looking at AdWords I understand the need for faster (and perhaps more intuitive) decision making, but there is still a simple rule I use here. When looking at a keyword (or ad, etc) that I think might be a low performer, I ask the question, if the next two clicks on this keyword (or ad, or whatever) were both conversions, would I still consider this to be a poor performer? If the answer is yes, then I feel okay making the change, but if the answer is no, then it’s a clear indication that there’s simply not enough data for a good decision.
Inside AdWords, I also try to look at at least a month of data, preferably two months. I never look at a single day of data, there are just too many swings of results for that data to be useful.
So, c’mon web marketers, let’s develop the discipline to see these strategies through!
PS If you’re Amazon.com, feel free to ignore this advice. You’re probably running split tests in a matter of hours…
Posted in conversion, google adwords | No Comments »
Friday, May 15th, 2009
I’ve been thinking about the new benchmarking feature in Google Analytics, and while I’ve signed up to see this data, I must admit that I’m a little concerned.No, this isn’t another conspiracy theory about how Google is mis-using all the data they collect – it’s far simpler (and perhaps more serious than that). My concern is that by reviewing benchmark numbers, many marketers will settle for mediocrity. If you look at the ‘average’ numbers published by Marketing Sherpa and others, you’ll see that about 5% is considered a typical conversion rate for B2B lead generation. However, I’ve found that much higher numbers are possible (certainly into the teens and even as high as 40%) by the use of effective conversion best-practices, split testing, etc.
My feeling is that just because your site is doing as equally badly as everyone else’s, that doesn’t mean that you should just live with it…
Posted in conversion, google adwords | No Comments »
Friday, May 8th, 2009
For a moment, I’d like for you to reflect on your experience of driving along the freeway. Have you ever seen a new billboard, but before you could understand what it was, you were past it?
Your web site home page, and other landing pages, aren’t so different. The visitor’s mouse hovers over the ‘back button’, just waiting for a reason to click. So, your goal is to provide a reason for the visitor to stick around and delve deeper into your site.
One of the problems with many homepages is the sheer amount of everything. Ideally, viewing your entire homepage wouldn’t require any scrolling. In addition, in a split second it should be pretty clear what you offer, and to whom you offer it (remember the billboard drive-by). There should also be a few very specific places to click next. Any extraneous information is likely to be a distraction.
To-do list:
- Identify any information that really doesn’t need to be there (your goal is to reduce the overall page length to eliminate scrolling).
- Reduce the overall number of possible links, and make sure that the main items visitors are looking for are more visually prominent than other navigation options.
- Replace any detailed text with a ‘positioning statement’ that describes your main value in less than 25 words. Use effective graphic design to make this positioning statement stand out.
Posted in conversion, landing pages | 1 Comment »
Friday, February 6th, 2009
In essence I would suggest that you build your site backwards. In other words, beginning with your site goal (i.e. a conversion) and creating a site structure that effective leads up to it.
For example, instead of creating a very open navigation structure, consider reducing the number of clickable links in order to drive visitors down a specific path. Let me tell you why I think that is important. Imagine you have the opportunity to sit down with a potential client to do a sales presentation, my guess is that you have a ‘story’ that you tell in a specific sequence. In other words, layer-by-layer you build the intellectual and emotional reasons for owning your product/service.
I believe that effective websites use this exact same strategy, pointing visitors down a specific path that builds an understanding of the value of your product/service.
Posted in conversion | 1 Comment »
Thursday, January 22nd, 2009
If you target group is diverse, you might want to consider creating multiple websites – especially if you have different products that attract different groups. At first glance, this option might seem cost-prohibitive, but we have found that the difference between a 3% conversion rate, and a 10% conversion rate can often justify the extra expense of creating multiple sites, and provides a return-on-investment after just a few months.
Posted in conversion | No Comments »
Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008
Marketers from a cross-section of categories and industries are feeling the pinch of budget belt-tightening – over half (53%) expect ad budgets to be reduced over the next six month – according to a survey from the Association of National Advertisers (ANA).
However, for those firmly focused on the right metrics, such as cost-per-conversion, justifying the marketing budget should be easy. With the detailed metrics provided by Google AdWords and Google Analytics, marketing costs can be demonstrated as being an investment rather than an expense. It would be a rather dim-witted CFO or CEO who reduces the budget when you can firmly articulate the exact ROI from every marketing dollar spent.
General reductions in marketing budget also present some opportunities for pay-per-click advertisers. Overall bid amounts may drop in AdWords, as the number of advertisers drops. Also clicks may well cost less later in the day, as competitors drop off-line due to their budgets being spent.
If your budget is being cut, consider trimming some of the fat in terms of pausing keywords with a higher cost per conversion and leaving the most profitable ones live. Also consider using ad scheduling to run your ads later in the day, when competitors may already be offline.
Posted in conversion, google adwords | No Comments »
|
|
|
