Six Steps to Elevating Web Analytics in Your Organization September 3, 2008
Posted by debbiepascoe in accessibility, privacy, quality, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics, web design, web standards.Tags: accessibility, KPI, search engine optimization, web analytics, web optimization, web standards
add a comment
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.
Target Settles Accessibility Lawsuit with National Federation of the Blind (NFB) August 29, 2008
Posted by debbiepascoe in accessibility, usability, web design.Tags: accessibility, adobe, Flash, NFB, Target
add a comment
August 27, 2008 – Target settled the suit brought against it in 2006 in California by the National Federation of the Blind.
Jared Smith’s article on the WebAIM site provides a summary of the settlement, commentary, and opinions of some WebAIM readers.
Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind, said: “Access to Web sites is critical to the full and equal participation of blind people in all aspects of modern life. The National Federation of the Blind is pleased to have reached a settlement with Target that is good for all blind consumers, and we recognize that Target has already taken action to make certain that its Web site is accessible to everyone. We look forward to working with Target in the coming months to help make additional improvements that will enhance the experience of blind visitors to Target.com. It is our sincere hope that other businesses providing goods and services over the Internet will follow Target’s example and take affirmative steps to provide full access to their Web sites by blind consumers.”
“We feel that it is a wake-up call to companies that have Web sites that are selling goods and services,” said Christopher S. Danielsen, a spokesman at the NFB. “They need to pay attention to accessibility. It is the right thing to do.” He also pointed out that the benefits of attracting new users far outweigh the costs of making changes to the site…Danielsen said that currently there are many retail sites that are “at least somewhat accessible” to the blind, but there’s more work to be done.
Back to WebAIM, their site contains excellent, detailed information about accessibility issues surrounding PDF and Flash, how they can be made accessible, as well as challenges and shortcomings.
I also recently ran across information about a browser specifically designed for visually impaired persons, called WebAnywhere.
Webguild tried it out and provided some observations.
The challenge of organizations to make their sites accessible is not going away. In looking at the comments above, I believe that the NFB, which has right on their side, is pretty comfortable being proactive on this front. Most, if not all, of the states have already passed or are considering legislation. Even though this settlement did nothing to clarify ADA Section 508 requirements where corporates are concerned, individual states have not stood still. Because of that, the NFB has plenty of other venues to press their case, if (when) they identify other opportunities to raise awareness.
Your comments/thoughts/observations welcome…..
Conversion Rates Revisited – The One Percent Solution April 30, 2008
Posted by debbiepascoe in accessibility, high performance site analytics, privacy, quality, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics, web design, web standards.Tags: accessibility, cart abandonment, conversion, engagement, optimization, pivacy, quality, search, traffic, usability, web analytics
2 comments
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.
Top Four Characteristics of the Optimal Web Team February 13, 2008
Posted by debbiepascoe in accessibility, content management, high performance site analytics, quality, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics, web design, web standards.Tags: accessibility, optimal web team, optimization, search, SEM, SEO, web analytics
1 comment so far
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.
Web Analytics 2.0 – How to Get over Information Intoxication November 18, 2007
Posted by debbiepascoe in accessibility, multiplicity, privacy, quality, search engine optimization, usability, web analytics.Tags: accessibility, compliance, data quality, Omniture, privacy, site quality, Unica, web analytics, WebTrends
add a comment
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″.
Judge Allows Accessibility Suit to Proceed October 4, 2007
Posted by debbiepascoe in accessibility, search, search engine optimization, web analytics.Tags: accessibility, lawsuit, search, search optimization, Target
add a comment
To update a previous story, a federal judge in California has certified the suit brought by National Federation of the Blind against Target, and rejected Target’s motion for summary judgement.
The progress of this case will be closely watched. If NFB prevails, the issue of accessibility will extend past federal and state agencies and become much more of a concern to corporates than it has been to date.
Corporates shouldn’t wait until the outcome of the case, though, to put accessibility on their radar. A more accessible site is also more searchable, more easily indexed by major search engines, more likely to be found and visited. The more visited it is, the more “traffic” it has, and the more opportunities to generate a lead or a sale, allow customers, employees and investors to self-serve, thereby reducing calls and the costs associated with them. It’s not a simple one-for-one equation – an organization that takes the approach to accessibility as a point problem with a point solution is leaving money on the table.
As with so many things in the web space, accessibility is not an isolated, unrelated-to-other-site-characteristics issue. Some people would have you believe that the only reason to pay attention to accessibility is because it impacts one discrete group of stakeholders and the only reason organizations have done it to date is as a defensive move – to avoid lawsuits. I reject this view, and prefer to advocate a view that doing “the right thing” has broader benefits to the organization.
The essence of synergy is producing a whole that is more valuable than the sum of it’s parts. Accessibility is a “part”. Search optimization is a “part”. Transitioning from call centers to online self-serve is a “part”. Utilizing techniques and best practices that address these parts will result in a larger benefit to the organization as a whole.




