Traditional -> Web2 -> Holistic, The Conversion Funnel Mindset Options

[iamlost]

I've been mentioning conversion funnels more and more frequently in various posts without actually discussing what they are and how best to design one. Please note that once again there is (at least) the traditional vision, the web2 version, and the holistic methodology.

First let us take a step back and realise that a conversion is pretty much any desired outcome. A visitor showing up could be viewed as a conversion - by golly, traffic! Writing an article and having someone link to it - yup, a conversion.

But most of us view conversions within a more restricted scope. And that scope is often prescribed by being one of four basic site types: content (conversion == subscriptions, ads), ecommerce (conversion == sales), lead-generation (conversion == form completions, whitepaper downloads), or self-service (conversion == fewer complaints).

In the end, however, it is up to you to decide what makes a conversion. And of course it is perfectly acceptable to target multiple conversions. Please note that my examples are are only examples and necessarily limited; use them to build out from, not to fence your imagination in.

1. Traditional:
The traditional conversion funnel is specific and linear, a series of steps within one application from beginning process entry to final conversion completion. There is only one objective. A funnel is viewed de-referenced from any other.

A text ad click is a one step process - there is an ad, it either is clicked or not. A shopping cart, at the other extreme, is typically a three to 3+n step funnel with the probability of losing visitors every step of the way.

The important considerations is always: which step has the greatest visitor dropoff and how can it be improved (rinse, repeat) remembering that the earlier the step the greater the impact (eg. if you are losing 25% at the first step and 25% at the second, that first 25% is the larger absolute number; if you are losing 25% at the first step and 33% at the second the absolute numbers would be (almost) the same).

2. Web2:
The web2 conversion funnel presumes that there are multiple goals to capture multiple visitor interactions possibly while directing the visitor in to the main conversion purpose.

Think of a cube, six exterior faces and a centroid. Each face is a different conversion, i.e. read review (conversion == validation), write review (conversion == UGC), recommend to a friend (conversion == virality), and the centroid (conversion == sale). Each conversion option continually references the others creating a conversion feedback loop.

Some web2 funnels also include the delivery systems, i.e. organic search/SEO (conversion == (optimised) query term traffic), PPC/SEM (conversion == paid campaign search traffic), email (conversion == email campaign traffic), referred traffic (conversion == backlinks). By treating each as a conversion funnel it can be tested and optimised and integrated.

3. Holistic:
The difference between the 'traditional' and 'web2' methodolgy is really one of scope, of breadth. The difference between 'web2' and 'holistic' is more one of mindset. 'Web2' still views each funnel as a separate standalone edifice. 'Holistic' sees a process of streams that may start separately but which flow into and out of each other, where the conversion funnel is maleable and variable and layered. And goes beyond mere application.

Example: an holistic advertising conversion funnel in three parts of three:
1. reach:
* the media (please note that media is the plural) for message dispersal
* the vehicles of choice within each medium
* the exposure (potential/actual viewers/participants) for each vehicle.

2. branding:
* awareness (recognise the offer and/or the brand)
* recall (remember the specifics of the offer and/or the brand)
* persuasion (affect/direct behaviour)

3. response:
* ad mouseover or click.
* lead (request, subscription, download)
* sale

Yes, there are no specifics. That is highly dependant upon the individual goal(s), name your conversions, set your funnels. No two focus quite the same on all the 3of3 points.

Thus on an holistic site multiple advertisers could each pursue unique goals on the same pages or could vary their offerings on different pages or by visitor click path. From 'tradition' to 'web2' to 'holistic' is not a change of kind rather a change of breadth, of increased inclusion/consideration, and finally of increased customisation. While remaining controllable and testable.

[DCrx]

Thus on an holistic site multiple advertisers could each pursue unique goals on the same pages or could vary their offerings on different pages or by visitor click path.

While I somewhat agree, this is a Creative Next Month rather than tomorrow kind of thing. For most people this is like going from 2D to 3D, there are a lot of possibilities but the shift in world view makes for an insurmountable barrier.

Yeah, everyone can say the buzzwords. Walking the talk ...not so much.

Rather what happens is every individual goal becomes muddy and unrealized. Individual path aren't clearly defined, lost in a blizzard of nice intentions. And it devolves from "mass customization" to a free for all "everything to anybody and nothing for anyone."

In practice poorly converting buckets outnumber high conversion funnels.

This post has been edited by DCrx: Oct 16 2008, 06:59 AM

[bwelford]

Yes, I must admit I am in the 'bear with small brain' school on this one. I would normally select the most important objective and try to optimize for that. Once I got that right, then I might add a second objective and optimize for that, checking that it did not jeopardize the first objective. Rinse and repeat as someone famous said.

Of course if the objectives are working with very different parts of the web page real estate then that can be a different matter.

This post has been edited by bwelford: Oct 16 2008, 12:21 PM

[cre8pc]

Just caught this in my travels...

"How To Make One-To-One Marketing Work"

But when it comes to acquiring new customers or getting consumers into these CRM programs, most marketers and agencies still default to a traditional approach. They use mass media (often including TV), search and online display ads to build awareness, and lay down generalized brand points in the hopes of engaging consumers and getting them into the top of the purchase funnel. As a result, upper-funnel efforts tend to be hit and miss, when a more one-to-one approach might deliver better engagement and accelerated path to conversion or sale.

The article has some bullet points that may be of interest for tracking and testing various funnels.

[iamlost]

While I somewhat agree, this is a Creative Next Month rather than tomorrow kind of thing.

Actually it is Creative Years Past...but you are correct that it is unlikely something that will become common in the short term. Which is not all bad.

there are a lot of possibilities but the shift in world view makes for an insurmountable barrier.

Especially if the new 'world view' is never mentioned. People still barely recognise holistic web design and that has been discussed for near a decade (at least).

People trundle along in their same old ruts (this includes entire industries) giving lip service or shoulder shrugs to new or contrary ideas until financial, celebrity, or other success provides a sufficient jolt. Then they stampede to where others have already left, moved on to newer brighter opportunities (or dark dead ends).

Rather what happens is every individual goal becomes muddy and unrealized. Individual path aren't clearly defined, lost in a blizzard of nice intentions. And it devolves from "mass customization" to a free for all "everything to anybody and nothing for anyone."

There is always some disconnect between theory and practice. And the distance is inverse to the time from introduction. Further, the devil is in the details, and until such time as various permutations yield general best practices as a firm foundation many folks will thrash about and moan.

In practice poorly converting buckets outnumber high conversion funnels.

That is true of any service.

Of course if the objectives are working with very different parts of the web page real estate than that can be a different matter.

I reread my post in light of both DCrx and bwelford's comments and believe that changing one word and adding some elaboration may help.
Thus on an holistic site multiple advertisers could each pursue unique goals on from the same pages or could vary their offerings on different pages or by visitor click path.

The typical ad, be it banner, text, image, or in-content link is the on page gateway to the actual ads/campaigns. You are right that one can not stack ads on the same page or ad-ify to the point where the content is lost.

Actually nothing much changes from what is 'now'. Just that the 'typical' small ad/link (and most pages do have several) leads not directly off-site for conversion but to on-site ads-as-content, info-mercials, helpful corporate link directories, very large very luscious display ads (more print-like than is typically seen online), etc.

These ad pages simply become, for the length of the contract, a part of the site. Totally blocked from SEs but appearing to visitors as part of the site flow. And visitors can return to the 'main site' or external landing pages simply, normally, at any time.

That at least is my construction format, there may be others.

The idea is that while ads and content remain separate they naturally flow together and apart via the magic of links offering seamless information to the visitor. To allow the density of ad-content available off-line, online. And throughout various conversion channels/funnels weave and merge and separate.

[EGOL]

I've read this thread three times. Lots of great information that offers springboards to ideas.

Thanks!!

.... the 'typical' small ad/link (and most pages do have several) leads not directly off-site for conversion but to on-site ads-as-content, info-mercials, ...... very large very luscious display ads (more print-like than is typically seen online), etc.

These ad pages simply become, for the length of the contract, a part of the site. Totally blocked from SEs but appearing to visitors as part of the site flow. And visitors can return to the 'main site' or external landing pages simply, normally, at any time.

I have two questions about the above....

==================================

1) How hard is it to convince the advertiser to have a page on your site rather than demand the link be to THEIR site where all of their prepared details are posted?

This idea sounds much like some affiliate pages that I used to make where I (in my opinion) sold the product more effectively than the manufacturer.

==================================

2) "Totally blocked from the SEs".... Why is that? These pages might pull some traffic? Would blocking them lose some sales?

==================================

[iamlost]

Lots of great information that offers springboards to ideas.
Thanks!!

You are welcome.

That is an oft overlooked point but the one that I believe most important - not that one receives a set of tab 'A' into slot 'B' instructions, rather that someone sees something in the proffered idea and runs with it their way.

1) How hard is it to convince the advertiser to have a page on your site rather than demand the link be to THEIR site where all of their prepared details are posted?

This idea sounds much like some affiliate pages that I used to make where I (in my opinion) sold the product more effectively than the manufacturer.

To take your sharp eyed comment first: that actually is where I got the idea from away back when.

The problem, as I'm sure you know, is that the manufacturer often feel they know best, even when the numbers do not agree. They just can not get their minds around the entire process happening elsewhere and only the completed order info being passed on. It was as if it was not 'real' unless they processed everything themselves.

But most advertisers are used to their entire campaigns being produced and delivered elsewhere. Also many corporate sites, even now, are not close to customer friendly frequently targeting investors instead.

There are two main difficulties to convince the advertiser:
* the biggest by far is to actually get in the door. Which is why getting the first is the longest and hardest. After that there is a reference point, a testimonial. I frequented a lot of marketing/advertising gatherings for several years working my way up from local through regional to national and international corporate accounts.

Fortunately for you late bloomers the web and web advertising is not so terra incognita in corporate circles. Like 'darkest Africa' in the 19th century they know it exists which is a major improvement.

* however, it remains mysterious. The only 'descriptions' many execs are familiar with are AdWords and banner ads. Both are quite different from the 'normal' advertising they are used to as are several of the metrics.

But when you show that their web advertising can 'look' more like what they are used to, that you can vary on-the-fly rather than by issue, that you can collect visitors and filter them down various funnels, that targeting is more precise, that analystics are more accurate and that reach is substantially increased...they aren't dumb, just ignorant. And the smart ones adapt very very quickly.

"Totally blocked from the SEs".... Why is that? These pages might pull some traffic? Would blocking them lose some sales?

I block for several reasons.

One is that the ad-content is developed and included for a specific contract for some set period. I really do not want to serve up ever increasing numbers of 404s as ad campaigns expire, contracts not renewed, etc. Similarly, I do not want the hassle of 301ing the multitude of changes that occur - ads are always in flux.

Another is that I want control of the ad-content traffic. Visitors come via my pages. No SE traffic, no direct links. All external referrals to ad-content URLs get redirected to one of my content pages. That way if someone comes following a link to an expired campaign or a changed offer or whatever I can still put them somewhere allowing them time to get their bearings and make their own choices.

That is not to say that some one else could not do it differently. I just do not see a ROI that exceeds the hassle.

[EGOL]

Thanks for the detailed reply.

I am getting the point now about why the content is on your site instead of the company who provides the product.

Also, I understand now why you block indexing of the conversion pages. My thinking has been very different. It has always been "get traffic"... and the approach is to produce evergreen content presented to attract search traffic. Your approach assumes that you either already have interested traffic or can get it onto your site.

Maybe your expertise is.... "What to do with traffic?"

[iamlost]

Also, I understand now why you block indexing of the conversion pages. My thinking has been very different. It has always been "get traffic"... and the approach is to produce evergreen content presented to attract search traffic. Your approach assumes that you either already have interested traffic or can get it onto your site.

I totally agree with your methodology of using quality evergreen content to attract traffic. I do the same.

The webdev web cloud is full of traffic generation advice. Lots to read and think about.

What I am doing is picking up the ball after a year or so, after one has built some minimum volume of traffic and learned its demographic values, after one has plateaued on AdSense and other 3rd party ad/af network offerings, after one has built a record of value to take directly to advertisers.

There is no shortage of advice on how to start and get to that point. Almost nothing (remember it is not in those ad/af networks interest for you to bypass them and go direct) about any next step. There are webdev fora where such conversations have been deleted without comment.

Most sites' content and marketing efforts are to acquire traffic. I am simply suggesting stretching that marketing to include ideas of how and what to offer additional revenue streams.

To paraphrase Star Trek:
My mission: to explore multiple new possibilities, to seek out new revenue and offer new campaigns, to boldly go beyond the defaults.

[EGOL]

There is no shortage of advice on how to start and get to that point. Almost nothing ..... about any next step.

I agree. I've been to some of the affiliate strategies meetings and they are all about slapping your ads right in the face of every visitor for maximum profitability. However, that, in my opinion, is short sighted because it stinks up your site and removes it as a candidate for links. Yet, no one addresses how do you set a balance between income promotions and content promotions. How much can you push income yet keep your content linkable. I realize its a tough question but I think that it is a very important one - yet very few people even ask it.

[iamlost]

Yet, no one addresses how do you set a balance between income promotions and content promotions. How much can you push income yet keep your content linkable. I realize its a tough question but I think that it is a very important one - yet very few people even ask it.

Yup.
Great insight.
And another reason much of my ad-content is 'away' from the linkable evergreen loverly traffic bait content.