B2B/B2C online strategy and enterprise eBusiness blog

In light of the recent iPhone 3GS announcement this week at Apple’s WWDC conference, I investigated pricing and navigated through the “upgrade” steps made available on Apple’s site. My wife currently has an aging Nokia phone that is eligible for an upgrade and the 8GB iPhone fits the bill for her needs.

Abandoning the purchase funnel

Having said that, I went through the multi-step validation process on Apple’s site, but it was unable to retrieve our account information from AT&T, to which I was prompted to search for a local Apple Store. Not needing to do this, I simply abandoned the purchase funnel with a mental note to “visit the store this weekend” since I hit a dead end on the site and wasn’t going to be able to complete the upgrade online.

Automated follow-up to purchase abandonments

About 15 minutes later, I received the following, automated email:

Very impressive — an automated follow-up recognizing that I abandoned the purchase funnel for the iPhone upgrade. I must say that I am not used to this type of marketing where the website acts like a true salesperson.

Technically speaking, it’s not difficult to implement this. It’s a perfect blend of leveraging technology to solve a business problem: how do you capture the consumer’s attention after they’ve left your site without making a purchase?

Earlier this year the Amerock.com website become another branded site that our E-Business team was to manage. The challenge that came with this responsibility was migrating the “look and feel” of the existing site to a different platform. What entailed was about a week of work to craft a new set of stylesheets that essentially made the “new” site look nearly identical to the old site.

We did however take liberties in updating products based on new product rollouts and added functionality that didn’t previous exist. Here are some before and after screen shots:

Product Navigation (Old)

Old site consisted of a 4-layer navigation schema:

1. Choose Product Category
2. Choose Product Type
3. Filter Product List (Choose 1 Finish, Style, and/or Collection)
4. View Product (See details, finishes, etc.)

The problem with this style of navigation is it forced the end-user to make too narrow their product selection too soon in the process just to see a product list. Finish coordination across product types is important in cabinet hardware, so the desire to see “all products with a satin nickel finish” needed to be possible. With the old site, this could not be done.

Above we see Decorative Hardware product types.

Here we see a product listing, but we can only choose from thedrop-down menus for further filtering options.

And here we see product details with finishes. Lots of unused real estate.

Product Navigation (new)

A simple 2-step process exists:

1. Choose Product Category (from the main navigation of the site)
2. Select multiple filters and see your product results

Select multiple filters across multiple filter types. An additional bonus is seeing the filter “counts” so there’s no guesswork when you’re clicking on options wondering if you will see any additional product results or not.

Clear visibility in the left-hand navigation of what filters are selected and which product results you’re viewing. Additionally, there are “results per page” options as well.

Product comparison also didn’t exist on the old site. It is now available on the new site.

Image zooming was also unavailable on the old site. Thanks to Adobe Scene7’s dynamic image zooming technology, we use it on all product pages to enable the end-user to zoom in on-the-fly on the product image.

Table Stakes

It seems odd to be showing some of the above features as they are mostly “table stakes” features these days. However, there are many large e-commerce sites that still do not offer simple things like product image zooming, unlimited product comparison functionality (do I really need to be limited to comparing 3 products at a time so the site design stays scaled proportionately?), and “results per page” customizations. Amerock.com is now fairly level-set with these “table stakes” features an we begin the continuous improvement with repeatable processes.

I was floored when I saw the following article in a recent MarketingVOX daily newsletter:

Frustrated by Difficulty, Half of Marketers Forgo Analytics

Marketers will continue to invest significantly in online marketing this year, but less than half (47%) actually use analytics to measure their campaigns, and one-fifth only have a ‘basic’ website, according to the sixth annual marketing survey from Alterian (via MarketingCharts).

A marketing department can be a competitive advantage, but only if marketers understand how to measure campaign effectiveness.

Marketing budgets are usually the first to get trimmed in difficult economic times and it’s no surprise with over half of marketers not being able to tie a return (in revenue, customer satisfaction, brand awareness, etc.) to marketing dollars invested. A CFO at any company is going to quickly zero-in on this spending and cut what they don’t understand and certainly what isn’t being measured.

Are you measuring the effectiveness of your website with web analytics?

Free analytics tools readily available from Google and Yahoo! allow you to jump right in. But, it’s not just the access to the technology that will help derive value from marketing investments; ultimately, it’s accountability and the desire to continually improve your campaigns. Without either of these two characteristics, then you’re just viewed as an “expense” that can eventually be cut.

Target is doing a nice job of creating consistent creative and messaging across channels (online and television). Here’s a screen shot of an ad from the homepage of CNN.com advertising the upcoming 2-day sale for Thanksgiving weekend:

Click on it and you see this page:

Target ads still recognizable even when fast forwarding on DVR

And while fast-forwarding through DVR’d TV shows tonight, the familiar red background and white stick figure running with the shopping cart flew by on a few frames. How often do you recognize an ad and/or brand name in just a few frames of DVR fast forwarding? I’ve been paying more attention to this lately and it’s difficult to recall anything…particularly in anticipation of getting back to your DVR’d show.

Here’s a clip of similar animation which it looks like Target is recycling from this 2007 campaign (found on YouTube):

Consistency is key with integrated, multi-channel marketing

The consistency of the creative of these ads enabled me to recall the Target campaign with HIGHLY passive viewing (browsing for news on CNN.com — which I do several times per day) and fast-forwarding through commercials on our DIRECTV DVR. I can’t think of any other ways where I’m less engaged than quickly scanning for the latest news on a website or sitting on the couch watching TV.

As marketers grow to accept a world where consumers can easily ignore their ads, it’s really interesting to see how Target is able to penetrate the barrier to recalling an ad. It begs the question: how does one test the “recall” and “effectiveness” of multi-channel marketing prior to executing the full media spend?

Traditionally, consumer panels are shown various ads and asked follow-up questions. The problem is this doesn’t simulate a real-world environment of cross-channel entertainment & news consumption.

Think big, start small, deliver quickly

Incremental releases of ads combined with analysis of ad performance in each channel are really the only way to truly optimize a campaign — especially across multiple channels. I’m still not quite sure if Target is at the level of being able to measure or test the effectiveness or recall of their ads if only a few frames of them are seen. In any case, this current campaign of theirs has worked on me to generate awareness. Now the question is: will I make it to Target for the sale and purchase something?

Apple has launched a clever new advertising campaign online and it occupied a larger-than-usual amount of real estate on the CNN.com homepage this week. I snapped a few screen shots (please excuse the headlines in the images below from CNN, but this was the current news at the time of the screen shots.):

The two ads, while physically separated on the screen, were designed to interact with each other as “PC” walks away from “Mac” from the right-hand ad to the top ad to destroy the customer satisfaction odometer:

As engaging as the ad was, I realize now that I didn’t even click on the ad — probably because I’m not in the market and already am a Mac owner (and thus fully aware of my satisfaction with the Macs I own).

After “PC” is finished breaking the odometer, the ads fade out and we see the Apple logo up top and the call-to-action on the right-hand side. Very interactive and one of the few ads I’ve actually wanted to toggle the audio ON for. Smart of Apple to default the audio to OFF as I’m usually scrambling for the pause or mute button when audio automatically starts playing when I visit a site.

An excellent way to leverage the interactive medium of banner advertising by utilizing characters originating from traditional television spots.

Social media enthusiasts of the world often unite in the wake of internet riots with the “I told you so” speech and blog postings (present company included) about how a company or brand should have reacted to a social media meltdown. The latest debacle was made possible by Motrin with this :30 spot. 

Problem: You’ve alienated your target demographic

The speed at which a big brand like Motrin reacted was decent. Rumblings started over the weekend and by Monday afternoon, Motrin had this announcement posted on the homepage of its website (although several hours after the entire motrin.com site was not available):

Not sure what’s distasteful about the ad? Read the coverage:

http://blogs.forbes.com/sciencebizblog/2008/11/twitter-moms-si.html

http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/2008/11/17/motrin-mothers-groundswell-by-the-numbers/

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/motrin_bows_to_social_media_pr.php

How can this type of situation be prevented in the future?

In short, it can’t be 100% prevented. At the end of the day, even the best processes and procedures can fail and its why we live in a world of product recalls and warranty repairs. Dealing with a negative reaction to an advertising campaign is similar to a massive product recall — it’s all in how you react to the problem.

How should I react to an internet riot?

I jokingly refer to these types of situations as “internet riots” however I realize they are to be taken seriously otherwise they will spiral out of control — much like a riot.

While mommy bloggers certainly rallied and voiced their opinion to Motrin via blogs, twitter, and other outlets, we have to remember that there are other types of visitors to the site — visitors who, like me, had never seen the commercial and had no idea what “everybody was mad about” this morning.

Plastering an announcement on the homepage of the site is probably “good enough,” but not ideal. Here’s why the Motrin execution falls short:

1. The entire homepage announcement is an image and not text. This means Google and other search engines cannot index the contents of the image. This then means the message will not be searchable on search engines. As of this writing, “motrin moms” (the ad campaign’s main message) dominates search results and motrin.com is nowhere to be found.
2. The message on the homepage is not clickable — it doesn’t take me to more information on the product, status on when the rest of the campaign will be disabled, or even a way to contact Motrin.
3. How long will this message stay on their homepage? What if we need to refer to it at a later date after the initial groundswell as died down?

Instead, the following steps would have been much easier and faster to produce and maintain on an on-going basis:

1. Post a blog posting containing detailed information on what the problem is, what you’re doing to fix it, and make sure to have keywords in the article that are found in the referenced blog posts, tweets, and articles (no need to involve IT or web developers to update the site)
2. Link to the post on the homepage of the Motrin site (so it can be later removed without eliminating the content of the article!)
3. Post a tweet on twitter to the channel of the dialogue with a link to the blog posting
4. Openly accept comments (I like the reference to the feedback, although there’s no mechanism to contact Motrin from this message on their homepage)

What can I do to monitor whether or not a riot is brewing?

In late 2006 I outlined some common ways to monitor your brand online via this post. If you find a site that is not RSS-enabled, you can also monitor it with a service such as this.

Help “steer the ship”

Posting content to your own site and managing comments on it can help you “steer the ship.” The last thing you want is a situation like Motrin’s that continues to spiral out of control with blog entries and tweets that carry a negative connotation about the product or brand name. By funneling all attention about the issue (good or bad) through a blog post our your website, you now function as the central source of information.

A couple weeks back we rolled more changes out on Levolor.com, one in particular included the implementation of Google’s hosted Site Search product: http://www.google.com/sitesearch/.

Considering we had never offered site-based search before and nearly every day we heard from our feedback tool that visitors wanted to be able to search, this was a really straight-forward, quick, and easy implementation that I wish we had done it sooner.

Search can help reveal visitor intent

Google Site Search offers several customization options within their interface. Perhaps the biggest thing we’ve learned thus far is what people are wanting to find on the site based on keyword reports. This offers another slice of valuable data to layer on top of navigation/pathing and conversion analytics to better understand the wants and needs for your visitors.

While search will certainly help search-savvy visitors find the products and content that already exist on your site, perhaps the more interesting piece of data is what they’re searching for that doesn’t exist on your site. This data can assist in providing you the necessary insights on what additional products and features to add to your site.

At a minimum of $100/year, the barrier to entry for site search is extremely low

Google’s pricing methodology is very smart — starting out at just $100/year for indexing up to 5,000 pages and offering 250,000 queries. That is very impressive technology and search sophistication that can be added to virtually any site on a budget. This really lowers the barrier to entry for smart, savvy search tools for websites thereby making it almost completely inexcusable to not have search on your site.

What Google Site Search is not

Google Site Search is not a search merchandising tool like the Fast Search and Omniture Site Searches of the industry. One can only hope that over time Google will integrate new merchandising-related features that make it a viable competitor to give these other industry players good competition. What Google Analytics has done for web analytics I imagine it will do for merchandise-based search optimization as their engineers continue to improve the product features and functionality.

MediaBuyerPlanner reports ”Only about 55 percent of search marketers integrate their search efforts with offline marketing efforts; the other 45 percent make no effort at integrating SEM (Search Engine Marketing) with offline initiatives, according to a new study by iProspect and JupiterResearch.”

You may have an SEM management gap

The above article claims budgetary and resource concerns. I think the bigger picture is one of the following scenarios that many marketing organizations face:

1. Marketing, being resourced constrained, probably pawns this off as an “IT project” because it involves technology.
2. Marketing has assigned SEM efforts to a vendor specializing in SEM and no other marketing initiatives.

Scenario #1: SEM lives in IT

I can understand why SEM has traditionally been an “IT responsibility” because SEM in large part, is still a rather large mystery to marketers. They don’t understand the rules of the game and the execution of your organization’s SEM campaigns requires a fundamental knowledge of your website and the visitors of your website. It’s commonplace that a marketing communications department, who handles traditional print and television advertising, may not be the resident experts on web strategy and design. It’s easy to pass SEM off to IT — because they handle “the technical stuff.”

Scenario #2: SEM execution lives with an outside firm

There are many companies providing SEM services and not surprisingly, these companies are technical in nature and not traditional direct-marketers. Those that are direct marketers are generally small and have a localized client base, making it hard for them to penetrate the mold of Fortune 500 companies. Those that are technical may have a great technology to sell, but lack the marketing savviness of a direct marketing firm to truly bring SEM the return on investment it demands — resulting in poorly performing SEM campaigns. This leads to the disconnect in online and offline marketing mentioned in the above MediaBuyerPlanner report.

How do you close the SEM knowledge gap? Who should manage SEM?

SEM “belongs” in marketing and should be on the radar of anyone executing any outbound marketing and awareness campaigns (email, direct mail, or otherwise). “Belonging in marketing” and “being executed by marketing” are two different things. From marketing communications, to product marketing managers, to channel marketing, each group has their own functional needs/goals for SEM. Establishing a governing body to ensure the proper SEM techniques and optimization are in place is recommended — but simultaneously avoiding the bureaucracy that’s often accompanied by “governing committees.”

A good place? The web experience/usability group within your organization. SEM may be funded by marketing while the governing body and “gatekeeper” for SEM can be facilitated through the people who know your site inside and out and intimately understand the experience an end-user desires when arriving at the landing pages on your site via an ad. After all, not much ends up on the site that doesn’t pass the approval of this group. Any campaigns directing traffic to the site are right up the alley of a usability professional.

I came across IntenseDebate.com today and am extremely impressed as well as excited about this new service. The service provides blog owners the ability to install a plug-in on their blog which will centralize the storage of blog commenting, streamline comment threading, improve comment moderation, and encourage additional posting.

The problem I run into a lot when reading blogs is while I’d like to take the time to comment, I’m busy, and don’t often want to create a new account to post a simply reply. Plus, when posting in an established community and without “street cred”, it’s hard to feel like you’re adding value to a conversation if you’ve never posted before.

IntenseDebate.com changes this. As an end-user, I now have a centralized account and any blog that uses IntenseDebate.com for their commenting system, I can automatically comment and my profile on IntenseDebate.com will be shown, as well as other posts on other blogs I’ve made via my IntenseDebate.com account. It’s really quite impressive.

I’ll post a few quick comments below to display how it works.

Sigh. This post claims that branding is irrelevant/dead thanks to search engines and how search is transforming the way in which people research and buy products.

Huh?

I couldn’t disagree more. You can’t honestly tell me that Lamborghini, BMW, Lincoln, and Hyundai (just to name a few random automotive brands) are all on equal playing fields when a consumer searches for “car” on Google. 

The post goes on to talk about the power of SEO and why SEO is not dead. SEO is most certainly not dead and should make for a critical component in your online strategy. His point in trying to prove why SEO is not dead is muddied by the claims of “branding being dead.” Brands don’t matter in certain categories (probably because there’s no clear category leader), but certainly not across the board.

Proper SEO can elevate your brand to the top of the listing for non-branded searches.

They key is creating brand awareness (through advertising, promotion, PR, etc. outside of search engines) and dominating on branded AND non-branded searches for your category. This is done by juggling your SEO work with your SEM campaigns to find the “sweet spot” so SEM can pick up the slack where you lag behind in SEO. Branding then goes onto heavily influence clicks on search engine results.

This type of tunnel-vision thinking is why “online” is still broadly viewed as an IT function.

Flat-out comments like this show the still “techy” and misguided view of some Internet strategists and how marketing and “tech” still quite aren’t aligned — even on established sites such as searchenginewatch.com. Any marketer worth their salt should understand that brands can drive search results. When industry publications and commentary throw out claims like this, it’s difficult to create alignment with a marketing department — especially when marketing should “own” (or at least have visibility to) SEO and SEM strategy.