Archive for the ‘quality’ Category
Posted by dpascoe on September 3, 2008
A website exists to further the organizational objectives of its owners. Those objectives are directly related to the nature and purpose of the organization. For example, the challenges for pure online companes like Amazon.com, Overstock.com, eBay and others are quite different from bricks-and-mortar businesses with online presence, which in turn is completely different from government agencies, universities or non-profit organizations.
Large organizations, particularly those with online/offline operations, have many competing interests and stakeholders. It is imperative for the organization to know whether their website is pointed in the right direction, whether it is structurally sound and able to deliver on its objectives, and whether landing and conversion event pages are being optimized over time. To the extent a site does this, it is in turn contributing to the organization’s larger goals and objectives – their true KPIs – increase leads, increase revenue, decrease cost per customer, improve self-serve rates, decrease complaint rates, increase inventory turn rate, etc.
Visitor measurement enables organizations to determine the effectiveness of their online presence. Online web analytics has received, and continues to receive, significant attention. A whole new discipline and career choice has emerged. Articles and blogs are written about it. It has its own industry association. Events have evolved that are devoted to it. All these things have cemented the term “web analytics” firmly in the online dictionary, and linked it at the hip with “visitor traffic”.
The downside is that online metrics have taken on a life of their own, as if the website is separate from the organization. The development of web-specific KPIs for example, puts the focus on short-term goals, not organization goals. While measuring web analyics data points that contribute to the organization’s overall success metrics is valid, those measurements are only a piece of the puzzle.
Management is bombarded everyday by people who claim to have the one thing to cure all ills. Managers may not understand the web environment well enough to ask for analysis that goes deeper than conversion rate or page views or any of the other basic measurements, and frankly, they shouldn’t be expected to. What they want is the “big picture” information, and what they need are people that understand these dynamics and that can be proactive in putting the web analytics information into the broader perspective.
In the recent “Where in the Organization is the Web Analyst” Survey, when asked “How do you feel about your web analytics activities”, 41% responded that they are frustrated because the organization does not act on the information, and 30% indicated they are overwhelmed with the amount of information they have to deal with. I believe this is a symptom of the internal disconnect between online and offline objectives.
And in the face of chaos lies great opportunity 
With that framework, here are six things I believe savvy web analysts can to to raise their profile within their organizations.
- Understand the total business. Are you in an organization where inventory is important? Are you in an organization where supplying information or support after the sale is vital? Are you in an industry where the website drives leads for sales that occur offline? Are you a non-profit whose goal is to educate people and secure donations? Are you in a government agency, providing information and services to citizens? Are you in the news business, where despite falling subscription rates, lots of people still get their news from the daily paper? Even if you are in a business that “grew up” on the web, offline activities such as fulfillment, customer service and returns come into play.
- Understand how your organization measures itself against its strategic goals. If you don’t know what the overall organization goals are, ask. If you don’t get an answer, keep asking.
- Identify the “goal gaps”. Think about how the website contributes to – or gets in the way of – those goals, and identify how the information you see every day sheds light on where the two are aligned and where they are in conflict with each other.
- Apply the 80/20 rule. With enormous volumes of data, it can be difficult to know what to focus on – another issue pointed out in the Survey results. As you gain more clarity around the organization’s goals, and how the strategy for the website supports them, focus on the 20% of the visitor data that supports overall organization goals, and disregard the rest.
- Frame your conversations with management in the broader context. Even if you don’t get it exactly right, at a minimum, you’ll make your boss aware that you are interested in the success of the business as a whole and you’ll create an opportunity to expand the conversation.
- Widen your circle. Seek out and network with the people in your organization that are responsible for web standards, search optimization, search marketing, overall site quality, responding to customer comments about the site, responding to customer inquiries that come in through the site. Encourage them to share their insights with you and share yours with them.
Web analysts that can get outside the box, look at the nature of the organization they are part of, think about why it is there and what its goals are, how the website fits into the picture and what other moving parts impact decisions, and present their data in that context will elevate web analytics – and themselves – in the organization. Those that focus on short term goals based on web-specific KPIs risk being sidelined.
Do you agree? Disgree? Let me know your thoughts.
Posted in accessibility, privacy, quality, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics, web design, web standards | Tagged: accessibility, KPI, search engine optimization, web analytics, web optimization, web standards | Leave a Comment »
Posted by dpascoe on August 27, 2008
First Michael Wexler holds up the mirror and asks “What Web Analytics is Missing”. Now Gerry Bavaro ponders the same thing about search engine marketing. Is there something in the water?
Gerry’s article is behind a password over at MediaPost, so I’ll summarize a few key points:
He starts out sharing feedback from people who attended the recent SES in San Jose.
“…it was really tactical…the widespread feelings primarily from agency folks about the state of our industry’s most popular trade shows reveal that they’re missing something….we’re not an industry that places the consumer at the center. Even worse, our channel (which gleans the most comprehensive, valuable intent data possible), is still a siloed, ancillary function in many organizations. “
OK, stop. I remember somebody else talking about disciplines fragmented (siloed) in organizations and how ineffective and ineffecient it is….oh, yeah, that was me, in February, 2007:
When Focus on ROI is Flawed
And again in February 2008 – Top Four Characteristics of the Optimal Web Team
And again in June 2008 – Web Optimization Defined
And again in July of 2008 – Continuing the Conversation with Joseph Carrabis
And again in the Response to Michael Wexler’s Post re:What Web Analytics is Missing
The words “broken record” come to mind.
So I wonder if they’ve been reading my blog, or have just finally come to the teachable moment on their own
His next point:
“Where Are The Experts When “Everybody” Is An Expert? …we’ve created a virtually indistinguishable society of search marketers without a highly respected short list of true expert agencies….how to find the true experts…”
An excellent observation, and a question worth pondering. While I don’t eat, sleep and breathe SEM, and SEM and SEO are third cousins, not identical twins, analyzing a site for its “indexability” by search engines is one of the aspects of holistic site structural quality and an important part of SEM. You can’t run an SEM campaign extolling the virtues of nice cab savs and merlots and then attract people to a site selling soy milk. I would love to know how to find the true experts. We could have some interesting conversations.
“Do We Even Care What Clients Actually Think? …I’d love to know whether, as the WPP’s, IPG’s and Publicis’ of the world continue banking on digital and staffing up their search postures, their clients are happy or disappointed.”
What a clear-eyed and relevant question to ask. Congrats, Gerry for being brave enough to voice it.
“Where’s Strategic Vision & Best Practices Beyond Our Sandbox? ….Are discussions about the challenges and rewards of breaking down silos in global businesses and transforming operational processes to effectively manage change, what’s missing?”
Bravo – give that man a prize. None of these disciplines – not web analytics, not search engine marketing, not search engine optimization, not VOC, not A/B testing – none of them can stand alone. And the answer to his question is YES. We (I and my colleagues at Accenture Marketing Sciences) are out in the market every day talking to organizations about this very thing, and people are responding positively.
I do disagree with one concept:
“…the sleeping giants in the SEM industry are technologies that will go far beyond bid management, Web analytics, and post-click landing page optimization systems.”
The technologies are merely the means to an end. Without breaking down the silos, recognizing that Web sites must be treated as an asset, at the same level as land, labor and capital, with deliberate attention to the business strategy and how the Web properties contribute postively to it, and then implementing the governance structures, processes and infrastructure to support that vision, the technologies are nothing more than a shiny toy.
Do you agree or disagree? Isn’t it time to come together and realize that it’s not either/or…it’s and, and, and, and, and…..
Posted in accessibility, high performance site analytics, privacy, quality, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics, web design, web standards | Tagged: SEM, SEO, web analytics | Leave a Comment »
Posted by dpascoe on July 19, 2008
I’ve been participating in a very interesting discussion with Joseph on The Future of Web Analytics Demystified.
My comments to his most recent comments are posted there and here.
Joseph’s comments:
“…my experience and learning indicate that most business people don’t care about science.”
Agreed, however they don’t have to care about it to use it. Anyone who has ever used a tire gauge or a tape measure has employed a scientific calibration method.
Take web analytics; vendor produces web analytics tool – company buys web analytics tool – company is responsible for correct, complete and functioning implementation of web analytics tool – automated monitoring identifies implementation problems. This last step is the rub. The web analytics vendor specializes in providing the measurement tool, not the calibration tool. The company does not have to be expert at science to employ automated monitoring of their web analytics. It must, however have accountability at a senior level – one neck to grab – and a recognition that without this calibration, all bets are off, and that manual discovery of implementation problems is a complete and utter waste of valuable time that their web analysts could be using to do more important things. The results of my survey that is currently underway (Where in the Organization is the Web Analyst – July 15-22, 2008) will bear out the chronic problems that practitioners have with their own implementations.
Going back to Avinash’s observation – “We have too many damn tools!’” Yep, the toolbox has 4 hammers, 5 screwdrivers and a utility knife, and the task calls for cutting a mitered corner. Now I suppose you could position the utility knife, whack it with the hammer, wedge a screwdriver in the crevice, and repeat the process until you make your way across the board…..it’s possible, not efficient, the outcome will be really ugly, but it’s possible.
Joseph’s question : “Is the natural progression due to the tools being used, due to the information provider becoming more trusted, perhaps due to the people receiving the information finally having the cognitive readiness to accept the information as both valuable and valid, …?”
I believe it is a confluence of things contributing to maturation in organizations. The web has disrupted entire industries – newspapers, auto, real estate, travel, consumer goods, government agencies. It would be great if somebody had an “Easy Button” for managing web assets – maybe Staples could start loaning them out. People are coming to grips with the fact that no one product is the magic answer, and that jumping from one vendor to another is not the answer either. They are coming to grips with the complexity of their sites, the fact that legislation and market conditions are constantly changing, that they are subject to the laws of all the countries they operate sites in, that achieving good natural placement in Google has a tangible benefit, and that bad things can happen to good sites, and can lurk there for a long time, that if you’re a great big company, you might be a “target” for lawsuits by people who find your site inaccessible to them, that the mobile web tsunami is coming, all this in addition to the daily grind of figuring out who is looking at what for how long using what type of viewing device and what are they doing as a result? Joseph refers to it as “cognitive readiness”. I’ve always called it “the teachable moment.” Increasingly organizations are getting there.
Joseph’s comment:
“I’d love to see a piece that demonstrates the successful implementation of such a group if such is available.”
Here are a couple of success stories. The first one is a site of around 2000 pages owned by a company with numerous locations across the country. The site’s primary function is lead generation and information provision on health-related issues. SEO is important to them and they run online ad campaigns. They conduct surveys through the site. The organization supporting the site is small, so they rely on their vendors. Once a month, the manager has a call where all the vendors are present – site structure, web analyst, SEM, search analyst, survey company. Everyone is expected to present information and recommendations based on the agenda the manager sets.
The second is a global B2B company. Their public site is large, their intranet is sprawling, and they have a constant flow of micro-sites going up. Their web team consists of people with expertise in search, web analytics, copyrighting, marketing, ad campaigns; yet they all are part of one team. Content management is dispersed throughout the organization using a CMS that was developed in-house after they determined that there was not a market solution that fit their business. This team, however, has dotted lines to content owners and teams. Decisions of what web site management solutions they use (whether it is traffic, search, A/B testing, surveys, or structural analytics) are made by this team. They have developed and are utilizing web standards and continue to grow from strength to strength.
There are others. I like these two because they are at opposite ends of the spectrum and demonstrate that there is more than one way to get there, once people define what it is they are trying to achieve.
Your comments are most welcome. What are you seeing in your organization?
Posted in mobile web, quality, search engine optimization, web analytics, web design, web standards | Tagged: joseph carrabis, web analytics demystified, web optimization, website structures | 3 Comments »
Posted by dpascoe on June 18, 2008
I have noticed that variations on the term “web optimization” are increasingly bringing traffic to the blog – “what is web optimization’, “how to do web optimization”, for example. In checking my stats, these variations were by far the top terms in the past 90 days. This just tells me it’s time to describe this in fuller detail.
Web optimization is much bigger than increasing your Google page rank, increasing your page views, having a sexier design, identifying web analytics KPIs or any of the other facets of the prism you can name. While each of those activities is important, and we are happy that there are people who focus on them intently enough to become subject matter experts, none of them can stand alone. None has the magic pixie dust that will, if sprinkled correctly, yield the optimal web experience for users and beaucoup dollars for the site owners.
The evolution of these different disciplines, while important and necessary, has had some unfortunate side effects. The surveys I conducted in Dec/January reflect an example of these side effects. Web analytics practitioners are often isolated in their organizations. They have significant challenges in getting people to listen and take action. The person they report to is frequently not at a high enough level to effect changes across the site.
Web optimization is the “big tent” that not only welcomes, but actually needs all disciplines. To optimize, site owners must utilize complementary solutions that enable them to bring together data from different sources so they can make informed decisions.
We are out in the market every day, talking to companies about their web properties. What we know is that companies are tired of being confused, and are looking for a way forward. And that way combines these elements:
- Strategic alignment – ensure that the site strategy is aligned with business goals
- Structural integrity – ensure the site is structurally sound and is delivering a good visitor experience and that the key areas are being continually optimized.
- Governance – implementation of solutions, methods and practices that facilitate continuous improvement and monitoring of digital assets all across the organization, for quality and compliance metrics, search optimization, web analytics measurements, survey results, advertising campaign effectiveness.
You can not optimize in a sub-optimal environment. The fragmentation has to stop. It is costly and inefficient. Companies are spending huge amounts of money, hiring agencies, buying solutions, and training employees to create, manage, market and monitor web sites, and this fragmentation muddies the waters and keeps companies from truly understanding whether their activities yield – or are even capable of yielding – the results they want for themselves and their visitors.
This message is resonating loud and clear with the people we talk to. It clears away the “magic pixie dust” cacaphony that surrounds and bombards their senses every day. It’s water in the desert, light in the dark, it’s……well, i’ve run out of pithy metaphors, but you get the picture
Do you agree or disagree? What are your observations?
Posted in high performance site analytics, metrics and measurement, quality, search, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics, web design, web standards | Tagged: page rank, SEM, SEO, transformation, web analytics, web optimization, web standards | 2 Comments »
Posted by dpascoe on May 29, 2008
The first time I laid eyes on the Maxamine software was in 1998 – the company was a year old at the time. Although a lot has happened and the software has gotten increasingly more sophisticated and powerful over time, the basics were already there, and I was immediately hooked.
The comprehensive data collection made possible by the incredibly thorough spider, combined with the storage of the data in a spatial data architecture was so powerful and elegant, and the maps were fascinating to look at and manipulate. Just think of it – if you could round up every detail there is to know about a thing – in this case a website – the only thing left to do is figure out what question you want to ask. When a regular person, with no technical expertise, can ask that question and get an answer back in a matter of seconds, it puts the power in the hands of the site owners and operators, to react at a moment’s notice to whatever is thrown at them and their websites – by visitors, regulators, competitors, even their own organizations.
This image is a shot of the way I see websites – not as pretty pages in a browser window; rather as an interlinked combination of words, images, scripts, stylesheets, pages in a three-dimensional space. The maps are always fascinating and beautiful, and the best part of all is that this seemingly complex picture holds the key to fast, flexible analysis: it preserves the relationships of all the objects to each other, and makes it possible for me to know every intimate detail about this site.
So what do you want to know? Are your web analytics implemented correctly and are the tags functioning? How easy have you made it for Google to index your site? Does your site speak the same language as the people searching for you? Are the pages you’ve linked to outside your site the same as they were when you linked to them? Are they still there? Does your site comply with privacy legislation? With Accessibility legislation? Are you drawing people in or driving them away? Exactly where in the site are all the references to the product you just discontinued, the prices you just changed, the subsidiary you just rebranded, the logo you just relaunched?
Over the years, we have examined thousands of sites. Themes emerge; relationships are identified; complexity visualized; problems are uncovered; all is revealed.
When you can understand your structure and the problems lurking inside it, then you have a framework for understanding how visitors find you, what kind of experience they are having, if it’s bad, what’s causing it, what is keeping them from taking the action you want them to take. You have a framework to determine whether the site is structured correctly and structurally sound enough to deliver on the business objectives you have set for it. You have a way to know what needs to be optimized over time and how those efforts impact the larger picture. And a way to put web analytics data and search optimization, marketing and branding efforts into perspective.
Every site is a new picture, and every picture tells a story, don’t it
Posted in accessibility, privacy, quality, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics, web design | Tagged: search optimization, sitemaps, spatial database, web analytics, web design, webmap, website structures | Leave a Comment »
Posted by dpascoe on April 30, 2008
Download the Conversion Rate Calculator
In my last post, I noted that Coremetrics has begun releasing benchmark data collected from their ~300 clients. A couple of the stats really caught my attention:
- The typical conversion rate is 3.29%
- Conversions Where Site Search Was Used – 14.84% of consumers used site search during their visits – conversion rate 5.60%
- The shopping cart abandonment rate is 68.42%.
Wow….think about it….
- out of 100 people, only 3 of them actually complete the desired action. AND
- out of 100 people that begin a shopping cart, only 32-33 of them complete the transaction and buy something (through the website – we don’t know if they walked in the store later and concluded the sale there); AND
- of the people that use internal search, they convert at a much higher rate than the ones that do not.
While some of my esteemed colleagues have decided that it’s not about conversions, it’s really about engagement (I’m not naming names, you know who you are ), it really is about conversions. That’s the bottom line. For every small improvement a site owner makes to improve their conversion rate or reduce their abandonment rate, they get repaid many times over. The philosophical diversion into “engagement” is really code for “we know people are leaving the site and completing the sale offline, we just don’t have a way to tie all the data together”. When that day comes, conversion will come back into vogue in a huge way.
Take this rate that Coremetrics has given us as a benchmark. If this conversion rate of 3.29% can be improved by one percent, sales would increase by 30%. That translates to real money. Similarly, 68 of 100 people walking out of your virtual store when they have things in their basket that they abandon in the last aisle represents real money that didn’t make it into the till. Everything that can be done to chip away at that represents real money.
So, how do you identify those improvements? Strip it back to its basic elements; look at what you’ve created – how usable is it, how findable is it, how free of defects, does it respect the visitor’s privacy, is it accessible to all potential customers? Are the key pages that lead people to the conversion event optimized? Do they have the right stuff in the right places with the right call to action to propel people forward and keep them moving forward to completion? You’ll notice these questions don’t have anything to do with studying how people have reacted to your site; rather they have everything to do with understanding deeply what you’ve given people to interact with. Traffic is a measure after the fact – it’s forensics. Evaluating traffic is great for understanding what people did; it is not a predictor of what they would do if things were different.
To help you visualize the impact that small improvements in conversion rates and abandonment rates can have, I’ve created a “conversion rate calculator”. I am not an accountant or finance expert. This is not complex econometric modeling. This is just a simple way for you to plug in some numbers that are meaningful to you to see that the impact over time is real and measurable. Have fun, dream big, and see what it might mean
Here’s the link to the Coremetrics Benchmark page.
Posted in accessibility, high performance site analytics, privacy, quality, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics, web design, web standards | Tagged: accessibility, cart abandonment, conversion, engagement, optimization, pivacy, quality, search, traffic, usability, web analytics | 2 Comments »
Posted by dpascoe on March 16, 2008
For years we have been telling site owners – and anyone else we talk to – that page weight matters. Occasionally, somebody would respond with something like ‘everybody has broadband, so that’s just not the problem it used to be’. There are several issues with this line of thinking.
First, as broadband has become more prevalent, page sizes have grown larger.
Second, code that enables tracking and more robust interactivity adds weight to the pages. While you are wondering why the page is taking so long, your browser is busy reading every single line of code in order to show you the page. Bloated code contributes significantly to page weight issues.
Third, the notion that broadband is everywhere has caused an explosion in the use of flash. Flash used thoughtfully can provide a richer, more satisfying experience for the visitor. Flash used with abandon and no alignment to business goals can provide a frustrating, confusing experience that is also inaccessible to visually impaired persons and invisible to search engines.
Last week Google weighed in on the page weight discussion, and in a big way. This month, Google has begun to measure the load times of advertisers’ landing pages. Once advertisers’ load time grades are provided to them, they will have 30 days to make necessary improvements before penalties begin to be applied. Google uses the measurement of landing page quality as a component of the advertiser’s “Quality Score”. Quality score impacts two things:
- The price the advertiser pays for keywords
- Ad placement
Here are four specific suggestions offered by Google to reduce page load time:
Use fewer redirects.
Reduce the page size by using fewer, smaller, and more highly-compressed images.
Do not use interstitial pages.
Minimize the use of iframes on your landing page.
The good news is that this is a very manageable issue, from a technical perspective. The challenge, as it has always been, is for site owners to find the delicate balance that provides the best possible user experience without going overboard on design.
Posted in ads and ad spending, page load times, quality, usability, web design | Tagged: broadband, page load times, quality, usability, web design | 1 Comment »
Posted by dpascoe on February 13, 2008
It doesn’t take too much reading and talking to people to recognize just how fragmented the various web management related disciplines are within organizations. This was recently reinforced by the results of the two surveys I did – Where in the Organization is the Web Analyst and What in the Organization does the Web Analyst Do. I also ran across a survey over the weekend that was done by the Internet Strategy Forum(PDF doc) that mirrored my findings in a lot of ways.
This is not a criticism – in fact quite the contrary. Even though the web has been around for what seems like a long time now – can you remember how you did certain things before the web, like locate addresses on a map, look up a phone number or make travel reservations – the “web” organizational structure has not yet reached equilibrium. It is still evolving, the moving pieces are still being identified, and people are working to get their heads around how those pieces fit together. With that as the backdrop, here is my list of the top four characteristics that the Optimal Web Team will have.
1. The Optimal Web Team will be multi-disciplinary. Currently, web analysts are gaining in numbers and growing as a discipline. SEO/SEM people may be in the same work group, but there are equal odds that they are in a different work group. Content contributors are scattered through the organization, and the people managing the content management system, if there is one, are in another organization altogether. The Optimal Web Team will be a multi-disciplinary team, where people with specific expertise will work closely and regularly to make decisions based on a 360 degree view of the complexities that impact data quality, site quality and compliance issues.
2. The Optimal Web Team will report to a senior level executive. Organizations have come a long way from “the web as IT…thing” to “the web as mission critical”. Increasingly processes are performed by employees, vendors, investors, customers, and prospects via web-enabled pages and forms. Even so, organizations have not yet fully recognized their web investment as equal to land, labor and capital. It is that important, and the management of it must be at a level in the organization that reflects that importance.
3. The Optimal Web Team will have a bigger seat and a louder voice. The current state of fragmentation results in people reporting into lower levels of the organization and despite investments in tools and training, the expertise that these people are developing is often not heard at a level within the organization that can effect changes as a result.
4. The Optimal Web Team will manage what it doesn’t directly control. Organizations everywhere are employing web analysts and people with SEO/SEM expertise. At the same time, other disciplines such as voice-of-the-customer (VOC) surveys, A/B and multi-variate testing are frequently best done by organizations that do it for a living. Content management will continue to loom large and touch many parts of the organization as the number of contributors continues to grow.
The Optimal Web Team will consist of people with specific expertise sharing knowledge across disciplinary lines, leveraging existing market expertise when it makes sense and coordinating requirements like content contribution and defect correction that are, of necessity, dispersed throughout the organization.
Posted in accessibility, content management, high performance site analytics, quality, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics, web design, web standards | Tagged: accessibility, optimal web team, optimization, search, SEM, SEO, web analytics | 1 Comment »
Posted by dpascoe on January 21, 2008
It’s been a while since I posted any numbers about broadband adoption, so I was glad to see eMarketer’s newsletter on January 18. The Headline – “Who Doesn’t Use the Internet” – caught my attention. Much is written, with great flourish and excitement, about internet adoption, and it’s written in a way that leaves the impression that everybody has it and in a big, fast way. This headline is quite unique.
The article goes on to highlight the results of a new study by Pew Internet & American Life Project and the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana (PDF). In addition to information about broadband adoption, this study is full of great information that will be of interest to our friends in local, state and federal government. People are increasingly turning to the web and expect that they can find what they need from their government there.
Three key findings:
- “Digital Divides Matter” -”low access” people – those with no or low bandwidth – are not as successful as “high access” people in finding needed information to address their personal issues.
- “E-Government is not an Option; It’s a Necessity” – See above. All citizens – rich and poor, old and young, high-band and low-band, are turning to the agency websites for information.
- Government agencies can not afford to disenfranchise people, and must provide information in many different formats so that it can be accessed by all.
This is an excellent paper and well worth the read.
eMarketer’s research, using International Telecommunication Union for select countries, supports the broadband numbers. We know people access the internet from work; we also know that this is a problem for employers and not something that is preferred or encouraged.
Interestingly and coincidentally, the subject of page download times was discussed at length this past week on the Web Analytics Forum. Practitioners are talking about it, thinking about what to do about it, asking others about it. Page weight continues to be an important consideration for site owners.
Unfortunately, organizations are frequently in the dark about just how large their pages are.
We are seeing increasing instances where a very heavy page is not the result of images or even a flash file -those can load in the background. Rather they are the result of pages with very large amounts of code required to build the page. In some instances, code is commented out, but never removed. Browsers must read every line of code in order to build the page, so every unnecessary line adds to the time people have to wait.
The creation of an attractive site with sleek code that can reach your target audience in an acceptable time frame may require thinking critically about just how the site is put together. But it can be done, and it is worth the effort.
Posted in broadband, page load times, quality, usability, web design | Tagged: broadband, low band, page download times, page weight, Pew Research, usability, web design | Leave a Comment »
Posted by dpascoe on November 18, 2007
Information intoxication – it’s that state we find ourselves in today where we have miles and miles of data about our site visitors. We’re swimming in an ocean of data, drinking it in as fast as we can. But the real question is:
Is the data any good?
Site owners are beginning to realize that the quality of their data is directly linked to the quality of their web analytics implementation, and is directly impacted by site quality factors such as broken links, search optimization problems and duplicated information, and compounded by compliance issues like accessibility and privacy-related concerns.
These three things – data quality, site quality and compliance – are the inextricably linked gears driving your online engine. Organizations are beginning to understand that changing vendors is not the answer. Whether you use Omniture/Visual Sciences, WebTrends, Unica, Coremetrics or any of the other vendors, the underlying issues remain the same. Only by addressing them will you be able to have confidence in your data.
Data Quality
Organizations that take the step from log file analysis to page tagging make a commitment, not only in dollars, but in human resources as well. While your vendor of choice will do everything they can to ensure a successful implementation, the responsibility ultimately falls on the site owner to know if the pages are tagged, and if the beacons are functioning. And your site is constantly changing. Untagged pages and malfunctioning beacons result in systemic errors in the data, meaning you are missing traffic information about those pages 100% of the time. Your assumptions about the resulting traffic patterns will be incorrect because your data is incorrect.
Site Quality
Even if your web analytics implementation is perfect, you can have site quality issues that show up – or don’t as the case may be – in your traffic data. A broken link is a path that can’t be taken. Pages missing from your internal search are destinations that can’t be arrived at. Inadequate search optimization for search engines like Google result in less traffic. Is there anybody that would say, “I’m happy with the amount of traffic I’m getting and don’t want any more, thanks”? Of course not – sounds ridiculous. But sites missing opportunities to optimize for natural search placement are settling for less.
Compliance
Site owners can’t know the impact of poor accessibility or the insecure collection of personally identifiable information (PII) by looking at traffic patterns. When these issues result in visitor departure, the result in the data is absence – “raise your hand if you’re not here”. The assumptions made by reviewing traffic patterns will be flawed, and the actions taken as a result will be misinformed.
Compliance issues impact the visitors use of the site, as well as putting the company at risk. Accessibility and privacy continue to attract attention as the web continues to mirror the bricks and mortar world, where you can shop, bank, research, catch up on the news, secure government services, arrange travel, communicate and socialize with others. Many governments have already implemented legislation, and the focus on these issues will continue to grow. People following the Target lawsuit will have already noted that the National Federation of the Blind is not looking to federal legislation; rather they are pursuing legal actions in state courts, where accessibility has been addressed.
Bottom Line
The good news is that this is a manageable environment. Data quality, site quality and compliance are three pieces of the same puzzle, and must be treated that way, with an automated solution that frees the web analysts to have confidence in the data and the assumptions, conclusions and recommendations they make as a result.
If you haven’t seen it, take the time to read Avinash Kaushik’s blog post titled “Multiplicity – Succeed Awesomely at Web Analytics 2.0″.
maxamine
Posted in accessibility, multiplicity, privacy, quality, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics | Tagged: accessibility, compliance, data quality, Omniture, privacy, site quality, Unica, web analytics, WebTrends | Leave a Comment »
