At Abraham Harrison, we’re exchanging ideas with NetVantage, a Michigan based SEM and analytics firm.  Adam Henige will be guest blogging here from time to time.  We’re honored to have him here.

If you are a marketer, you should inherently love data.  In my own customer experiences (as well as my professional experiences) I’ve come to realize that many market research and data collection initiatives are focused on asking the question “Why?”  This question is asked to understand the triggers that make people perform a given action which is then used to generate plans to capitalize on those insights by reaching more of that target market.

Unfortunately, traditional methodologies for obtaining this data can be time consuming and costly, and typically do not correlate well with the different shopping and/or brand experience of a company’s web presence.  So if you’ve spent a lot of money on a website, you’re likely doing some basic tracking to understand where your traffic is coming from (particularly if you’re doing paid search or other forms of online advertising) and how well your site is converting visitors to customers.  However, if your site’s not generating business, or if you would like it to generate more (and who doesn’t?), you need to be looking into ways to ask your customers “Why not?”

I recently began working with a client to provide paid search management, search engine optimization and web analytics for their recently launched web store.  For the client it was their first venture into online retail, and they had no idea what to expect.  Upon our initial engagement, I was extremely impressed with how intelligently they had approached this initiative.  They chose an experienced developer who had put together a site which was aesthetically strong, had a logical navigational structure, and a robust content management system.  Upon first glance it appeared I would simply have to drive some qualified traffic to the site and the cash register would start ringing.

Not long after the contract was signed we had our SEO and SEM initiatives underway.  Traffic increased by over 500%, average page views and time on site were strong for visitors reaching the site directly as well as through organic and paid search.  We had only one problem…no one was buying.  The question, of course, was “why not?”

I began scouring the data available to me.  All of the baseline website health metrics, aside from sales, looked good.  So what was the issue?  The answer was found in a scenario analysis of the site’s shopping cart system.  Using most web analytics software these days allows the administrator to set up scenarios, or funnels, of defined steps users take through a process whether it be through a series of product pages or the steps to purchase through a shopping cart. 

In this instance, there were six pages through the purchase process from adding a product to the shopping cart to the final step which was an order confirmation.  When we took a look at the funnel, we saw that a large percentage of visitors were successfully getting through the first three steps, but when users got to the billing information page, 100 percent of users were exiting.  So we quickly jumped into the purchase process on the site and when we reached the billing information page, we put ourselves in the users’ shoes, and found the data had led us to the reason users were not buying.  At this exact step users were being asked to input their billing info after they had already input their shipping information, with no ability to mirror that information (a simple radio button saying “check here if the same as shipping address” would have sufficed).  This was redundant and annoyed users enough to make them not purchase despite the fact that they were halfway through the buying process.  Immediately after we fixed that step in the shopping cart, sales started steadily increasing and over time the funnel has continued to improve dramatically.

So in this instance, we were able to utilize web analytics to take data and determine the answer to “Why not?”  However, in sites that have more ambiguous goals, it can sometimes be hard to statistically measure if users are having successful visits.  In these cases, you may literally need to ask the question of visitors on your site.  Companies like Foresee Results have had great success instituting in site surveys to gauge customer reaction and generate a constant flow of feedback (you will run into this on sites like bestbuy.com and many others) for a broad array of organizations.  These solutions have been well received by clients, but in many instances, a much less intensive (read: free) solution can provide enough information to gauge your website’s pulse, and its ability to ask your visitors “Why not?”

One such solution I have used in the past is iperceptions’ 4Q, an in site survey tool that allows you to gather qualitative data to supplement your quantitative analytics data and help you answer some nagging questions about your site’s performance.  The tool itself is very easy to install, and once installed, provides a handful of customization tools to select the frequency of visitors who will be presented with the option to take the survey, select alternate answer sets, etc.  The 4Q survey asks users five questions, asking them to rate their experience, define the purpose of their visit, whether they were able to complete that purpose, what they value most about the website, and whether or not they were able to complete the purpose of their visit (here’s where you’ll find your “Why not?”).   

At Netvantage we constantly trumpet the Internet’s ability to generate accountable marketing decisions, and this is a prime example of what we mean.  Through the fluid ability to collect and analyze both quantitative and qualitative data, you can ask non-converting prospects “Why not?”  With this information you can continuously optimize your site and your online marketing efforts to break down those barriers and convert more prospects into loyal customers.

Adam Henige is a Managing Partner of Netvantage Marketing, an Internet Marketing Consulting firm specializing in search engine optimization, search engine marketing and web analytics.

My guess is a tentative, temporary yes.

If you aren’t clued in yet, Yahoo! and Google have come to an agreement that allows Yahoo! to display Google paid search results on keyword queries on Yahoo! Yahoo! can now tap into Adsense and Adwords. The agreement is for 10 years and is not exclusive, meaning that Yahoo can create similar agreements with other parties.

There are pluses and minuses to this agreement. But for now, let’s focus on smaller agenices that serve smaller businesses and smaller businesses themselves.

The upside is that there could be less to learn and more reach for small advertisers. Using paid search can get you results on Yahoo! It may be unnecessary to do anything broad-based. That’s a good thing. It may make it easier to enter the arena of local search.

As AdAge points out:

When Google search ads are mixed in with Yahoo search ads for a particular search query, Google will almost always win the better placement, according to search marketers, because it has a better ad-matching and monetization engine. And if Google consistently wins, marketers may be less inclined to bother using the Yahoo system, instead choosing to put their optimization efforts toward a single system. In other words, less to learn, less to manage.

That’s the good part.

Now the down side. It could get more expensive to place search ads. Google’s system tends to be more expensive - and effective than Yahoo’s! That expensiveness will now be extended into the Yahoo! sphere, likely devaluing Yahoo’s! own paid search results.

My thoughts are that, at least initially, this will bode well for locals who are looking to add paid search to their mix. I’m thinking that because I’m guessing the biggest barrier is lack of knowledge on how start off effectively…as opposed to cost.

But that benefit may not last for long if competition becomes to intense for localized keyword searches. Because this does decrease paid search alternatives.

Eric Schonfeld of TechCrunch poses the question as to whether Google Trend result will be a good predictor of the 2008 presidential election. He points to past statistics that show a relative symmetry between searches for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and the results for the Democratic primary.null

Blue = Barack Obama Red = John McCain

I think you can take all this with a grain of salt. Sure, there will be some relevance, but there are too many other factors involved that could skew the results. There are also a bunch of unrelated factors that can’t be prescribed to online search.

The electoral college is the deciding factor in elections and while you can break down searched by state, each state will have its own factors relating to voters and internet usage. And voters will vary as to how they get their political information. Evangelical voters will differ from young urban single people who will differ from Latinos who will differ from suburban housewives.

How thiis wold be helpful is to also measure terms such as health care, immigration, tax policy, and Iraq…and match them with each candidate. Better yet, match them by candidate and state. You’ll start to see what issues are important where.

Candidates then should create issue focused minisites that can directly address a candidates interests.

Hopefully, campaign advisors will look to do this as opposed to primarily run on slogans and attack ads that teach us very little.

Back in December, I made put forth my predictions for 2008, with #11 being “Conversion attribution will be a big bone of contention”. That’s about to happen. Only now, thanks to Microsoft, it’s called “Engagement Mapping”.

Conversion attribution and/or engagement mapping is basically this. When we buy something, it is often because we’ve been inluenced by several marketing messages from different channels. The online arena offers little measurable sense of exactly what made someone buy, but an (almost) exact sense of where someone came from (a search? a banner?). So, conversion attribution and/or engagement mapping is basically is the call for the revenue from an ecommerce transaction to be dispersed amongst the marketing channels according to some sort of formulaic attribution system of that tries to weigh the influence of each channel. In Microsoft’s version - I’ll stick with engagement mapping - only online channels are mentioned.

This seems to address a issue of real concern, but it fails to address the whole picture. As a result, we’re likely to see an upcoming battle of Titans.

The problem I have with it is that Microsoft will be trying to implement industry wide measurement metrics - more than likely specifically designed in its favor - to get inside our heads and measure the amount of influence all of these marketing channels had when we buy something. I’d rather see something like this worked out by a consortium of companies in the online advertising space.

In all honesty, the current system is a skewed. In the pay-for performance world, which is heavily slanted toward search, we never really know what factors led to that click. I’ve long believed in search, but have had a hard time thinking a small text ad worked wonders all by itself.

Controversy will rise up big time if this becomes standard because Micorsoft’s rival, Google, will stand to lose the most. And that loss could be huge. That’s because EM will be taking into account online display advertising such as banners and boxes and skyscrapers. They have been much derided with their low click thru rates, something that I’ve always have felt was unfair. To me, it’s never taken into account any branding aspects or simple enhancement of name recognition. While Microsoft obviously has a foothold in the search arena, they are players in display advertisng as well. This will be even more true if their attempts to buy Yahoo prove to be successful.

Now it will be Microsoft’s challenge to convince the ad industry to play along. Advertisers - angencies and internal marketing managers may go for EM because it could allegedly give them a more quantifiable measure of marketing ROI spend.

But this cuts right into Google’s business model. They’ll be losing money because yesterday, someone saw a banner ad for a product and today they’re on Google because they put in a industry related keyword and came up with a text ad. But there really is no telling how much weight each played in the purchase. At best, I don’t think we’re there yet.

Microsoft’s plan is short on detail. Look for a lot of headed discussion on this issue. I’ll be following it intensely.

Penny Crosman wrote a pretty good review of a book I hadn’t heard of,  Web Dragons, by Ian H. Witten, Marco Gori and Teresa Numerico, which seems like a pretty :

‘How do search engines work? Howare PageRanks calculated? WebDragons, by Ian H. Witten, Marco Gori and Teresa Numerico, takes a textbook approach to such questions using historical analogies. “In Oriental folklore, dragons not only enjoy awesome grace and beauty, they are endowed with immense wisdom,” the authors note. “But in the West, they are often portrayed as evil — St. George vanquishes a fearsome dragon.” Search engines, too, are large beasts and have the capacity for wisdom, good and evil.”In addition to celebrating the joy of being able to find stuff on the Web, we want to make you feel uneasy about how everyone has come to rely on search engines so utterly and completely.”‘ –Penny Crosman of Intelligent Enterprise