22 replies to this topic

[businessservicesuk]

My business provides SEO services to the web industry, so far we have had no complaints from any of our clients, it helps that we provide an honest and upfront service plus we do not make promises to our clients.

Our own website is listed highly in all the major search engines, this is testament to our own optimisation skills and I believe the only way an SEO company can prove their worth. The excuses I constantly hear of "I don't have time" these comments are simply lies as the same people then manage to post 500 times a day in a forum.

We are good at SEO but we are not experts, an expert in any field should be suitable trained and qualified. In regards to SEO, search engines have strict secrerecy clauses are a totally fluid mechanisms. As far as I can see people are only proclaiming themselves to be experts in this area because it is a good marketing tool. The fact very few offer clients long term guarantees, shows the self proclaiming of the title is wrong.

The term SEO expert should be only bestowed on a person who works for a search engine organisation. I understand there are some clever people who provide cracking SEO services, but experts, hell no.

This can also be said of many online businesses, who really is bestowing the title of expert on people? Maybe the honour is found in christmas crackers. One thing is for sure, the term expert is that widley used the employees of McDonalds and Burger king are spending 2 weeks reading up handing in their notice and proclaiming to the world I AM AN EXPERT, HIRE ME.

Edited by businessservicesuk, 28 September 2007 - 12:27 PM.

[Ron Carnell]

... an expert in any field should be suitable trained and qualified.

Okay. I presume, then, that you consider yourself suitably trained and qualified to define our words for us?

I'll certainly agree that such titles are all too common and only rarely deserved, but I'm not quite willing to accept either that experts in SEO are nonexistent OR that you get to decide who is and isn't one. Who does get to decide?

The other experts, of course.

[ccera]

There are a few people (seems many of them can be found here at Cre8 ) who I might think of as "SEO experts" but, funny enough, they are certainly never the ones who bill themselves as such.

[ukdaz]

In todays climate the word "expert" or "experts" is bandied around by the UK news media like no tomorrow... so I switch off when I hear it.

[EGOL]

If you have high quality content just slap on a title tag and an H1... you don't really need high powered SEO.

Also, some people believe that Google is starting to rank websites on the basis of how their visitors engage them. The future might see all of the SEOs begging for jobs at the usability shops.

[iamlost]

An expert is:
Serious: one who is recognised as such by one's peer group or professional society certification.
Academic: one who knows absolutely everything about absolutely nothing at all and publishes it to great acclaim.
Marketing: one who knows no more than I about whatever, but has the information arranged more neatly and shares it on a blog as new or improved or secret sauce.

Be careful whose advice you buy, but, be patient with those who supply it. Advice is a form of nostalgia, dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it’s worth.

My ignorance abysmal, my expertise a crumbling ledge
The more I know the more I have yet to learn
Every question answered birthes two yet to be
Ipsa scientia potestas est.
Cave ab homine unius libri.

[Autocrat]

Well - to start with - I will ignore the SEO part of this, and instead tackle the Expert part from the title.



Okay... now to examine the post contents with more finesse...


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Our own website is listed highly in all the major search engines, this is testament to our own optimisation skills and I believe the only way an SEO company can prove their worth. The excuses I constantly hear of "I don't have time" these comments are simply lies as the same people then manage to post 500 times a day in a forum.

Okay then... "... simply lies ..." - can you back this up? You have Hourly records for numerous individuals in that field, profession or providing that service, that clearly indicates they sit around doing naff all for a large part of the day, or spend a large amount of time doing things that are not necessary and instead could be spent on improving their own sites ranking?
I doubt it (though I would indeed be impressed )
So - No hard statements nor factuals that are not verified or verifiable please.

Apart from the last part, I like the idea, and I am inclined to agree - you can only prove your worth by ... well, proving it!



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

We are good at SEO but we are not experts, an expert in any field should be suitable trained and qualified. In regards to SEO, search engines have strict secrerecy clauses are a totally fluid mechanisms. As far as I can see people are only proclaiming themselves to be experts in this area because it is a good marketing tool. The fact very few offer clients long term guarantees, shows the self proclaiming of the title is wrong.

Okay... now for this bit...

Expert
1) A person with special knowledge or ability who performs skilfully.
2) Having or showing knowledge and skill and aptitude.
Adept, Good, Practiced, Proficient, Skilled, Skillful.

Strangely enough - no where does it mention "qualified", nor "trained".


As for "guarantee" - considering the majority of highly respected, renowned, known, publicised and dare I say "experts" in the field/profession/service state that any company offering "guarantees" are to be considered as a little circumspect...
You have o control over how the algorythms work.
I doubt if you have access to any of the specs.
It is unlikely that you have any control over the content of their competitors sites.
Considering those three things alone, I would like to know how you can "guarantee" anything, as the current system is non-static and changeable within a day.

Here's a Fact - with no real effort at all, one of my clients appears within the first page of google - and has done since I got them. I've done no real SEO, I've done no submittals, PR work etc.
They will range from being 3rd through to 7th... and quite often switch places with their most heated competitor.
Yet I make no gaurentees, nor claims to be anything but a web-designer.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The term SEO expert should be only bestowed on a person who works for a search engine organisation. I understand there are some clever people who provide cracking SEO services, but experts, hell no.

Well... I can see the view point... if you are not in the field/profession... surely you wouldn't be an expert.

So, here are two things to consider;

1) I went years without belonging to a MA club, nor any official body/organisation - did I stop beig a MA?
Hell No... I still practiced every so often, and I still proved myself on the odd occassion (I have a knack for the wrong time, wrong place, wrong thing to say to the wrong person )

2) So, if a person doesn't work for a company that sells shoes, they cannot be a shoe salesmen. Makes perfect sense... yet for some reason, I cannot see that actually stopping them from knowing what shoes are, knowing the price, knowing that someone wants a pair, stops them from getting that pair or stops them from handing the pair over in return for money.
That would mean they sold shoes.
Not exactly a shoes salemens (or woman, person, alien etc. so as not to cause offence ), but it should highlight the minor flaw in the statement.


Seldomly is there anything that is of limited potential or singular application. It doesn't matter what it is nor what it is intended for, it can often be used in other manners/means/ways to achieve something else entirely.

So, I'm not quite sure that stating if you don't for for a company/busiess/organisation that does NNN, you are not an NNN person is true.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This can also be said of many online businesses, who really is bestowing the title of expert on people? Maybe the honour is found in christmas crackers. One thing is for sure, the term expert is that widley used the employees of McDonalds and Burger king are spending 2 weeks reading up handing in their notice and proclaiming to the world I AM AN EXPERT, HIRE ME.

Now, this I can appreciate (though really, two weeks... it takes them at least 2 Months to become a web designer)
(okay - I'm sorry - just couldn't resist that one )

So, people are making claims that they are fantastic, experts, especially good at something.... you know they are not, right?
You have quantifiable and qualifiable evidence that even a minor group of those folks have o iota of skill, knowldge, insight or talent in that field?

Didn't think so.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


So - ignoring the previous dissection and shredding.

I actually agree with what I would terma as the principal theme and nadir of the statement.

There are those in this "area" of owrk (that being the internet in general), that make claim to being something - with no apparent justification or proof of such.

I think that it is in fact almost criminal - for almsot all other professions, you need to be registered, to hae proof of certain skills etc.
You cannot be a plumber or electrician without having gained certification.
You cannot be a mechanic without it either now a days.

Yet, in this field, there are those that are taking money from people whilst providing them with what could only be viewed as shoddy goods.


Now... the real blittzer here is along the lines of what ... Ron Carnell ... was getting too...
Who gets to decide what is shoddy.
A Year ago, Iwas producing sites that were good - they looked good, worked well, clients were happy.
They where in XHTML Strict, used CSS and no tables.
They loaded fast.
Most important of all, I looked at over 20 competiros within 25 Miles... and I'd say I was better than all of them.
My sites were shoddy - they lacked some basic Usability features, they did not work well at high resolutions (1200+), and they were not really that accessible (they met the base line only ).

Now, I can say with authority, that they were shoddy - I built them, I know exactly how they work, why they work etc... plus I know I can produce better.

But - who gets to draw the line?
Who is there to state that X is good whilst Y is bad?
What defines something being a good service an naff one?

Well, for a start - clients.
If the client is happy - brilliant.
Not the full measure - as qite often if they don't know, they don't care - they don't realise it's a pile of something nasty, and think it smells like roses.


So, the blatantly ovious answers is certificiation.
(Note - as a qualification, not as in "that one's is a nut and should be medicated).

Problem is... (and I really do apologise for this), all I have seen for qualifications in Web stuff is pure B**************.
Learn to use Frontpage/Dreamweaver/PageMill etc.
Nothig about learning standards, how to validate, Browser compatibility, Usability/Accessability. Nor do they cover trends, design types, client base comparisons, colour schemes, color reactions, image recation, customer retention, attention spans, line lengths, visual appeal, white space allocation, page real-estate... or all the other bits I haven't mentioned.

no - simply learn to use X to do Y.

Additionally, as is often the case with IT, and applies to SEO... it is out of date too soon.
By the time you get your name on the list, it may have changed.
By the time you are actually doing the course, it may have changed.
By the time you have finished... something should have changed.

Okay - it means you have a grasp of the system, you now how tings kind of work, and you should be able to spot trends and figure what goes where with a few attempts.

So what the hell is different from learning to do that yourself, in your own time?

I piece of paper and a shed load of money!



Something does need to be done!
There should be a governing body - an organisation that people refer too, that aids and supports, that verifies work and that people can refer too or pass comment to regarding certain jobs/sites/performances.

Only thing is... are you gonna pay the £NNN per year to belong to it?
Are you gonna handle it well when they say "you suck at XY, but excell at Z12345, so you can only charge X for Y"?
Are you gonna tell your clients that you cannot do part B of the job you are not qualified? Even though you know you can do it, as you don't hae the bit of paper with the date stamp on, you are ot allowed to do it!



Look at the "experts" in our field/s.
They are there as thy have proven themselves, time and again.
People ahve examined their works, seen the results, accepted that their methods achieve the desired results.

They are acknowledged by their peers.
That is "expert" - that is when you rise above the rest and get the creditation.
only others canstate yu are an expert.
oly those that know can make that statement with any veracity.

The only way to solve the issue is to educate the masses.
It is to inform them, give theme the detaisl they need to create their own opinions.

Telling them something is not right.
Claiming that Joe Bloggs blows chunks because 123 is wrong.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


So - please, read through all of this... I'd suggest 3 times as I did get a bit carried away.
You will, I hope, see the woods for the trees.
I agree whole heartedly with the sentiment - not the statement though.
I think it was worded poorly.

That aside, I support the idea as I see it, and salute you for saying it.



*cough*

Sorry folks... I think I may have overdone the caffine whist starting that... and kind of got all caught up

[kensplace]

SEO is a relatively new field, and one surrounded with hype, and secrecy from the major players.
Training and qualifications are not really around that much, sure there are training course, and some qualifications, but nothing really official, as you cant officially train in something that is a moving target like SEO.

The search engines wont give full details of their algo's away as it would mean they would be abused by the unscrupulous people out in the wide world.

I see lots of people who claim to be SEO's, expert ones no less, or so they claim - yet they dont know how to submit to a directory properly, they get the URL of their own site wrong sometimes! These people should not be calling themselves experts, thats fair enough.

But what about the people that do know what they are doing? Usually, they are regarded as experts by others in their field. They can show results. They can show damn good results at that...

Are they experts? Well, they know what they are doing, they do it well, certainly they can do it to a level far above what the majority of people can do. They keep on top of research, they keep refining there toolset, and their mindset. They dont stay static, they stay up to date.

You can be a expert in the english language, a expert speller, without needing to work for the company that publishes the dictionary. You can be a expert TV engineer, without having to work for all the TV companies that produce TV's. You learn a trade, to the level expected of a expert - ie being able to do it proficiently, accurately, and professionally. When you learn to fix TV's you dont learn a specific model and thats it, you learn the theory behind fixing all different models... Similar with SEO, you dont learn a specific course from google, or msn, you learn what works on the search engines, what is bad, what is good. You learn about content, delivery, users, products, the whole range of things that SEO encompasses. The skills you learn are then tested, and refined, and applied in real life situations.

But as you say, there are loads of self-proclaimed SEO's around, I see them all the time, asking questions like, how do you upload files, or how do you do this, or that, basic stuff a expert SEO should know.

[projectphp]

We are good at SEO but we are not experts, an expert in any field should be suitable trained and qualified

So, who trained those ppl? Circular reasoning.

The fact very few offer clients long term guarantees, shows the self proclaiming of the title is wrong.

For that sentence structure to hold, we should be able to substitute other terms and it still holds.

The format is:
The fact {X PERSON/PROFESSION} don't offer long term guarantees of {Y ACTIVITY THEY PERFORM} shows the self proclaiming of the title expert {PROFESSION} is wrong.

Lets try one:
The fact doctors don't offer long term guarantees of chemotherapy shows the self proclaiming of the title expert medical practitioner is wrong.

If that example seems false, and it uses the same format as yours, then the structure of the argument is likely flawed.

The term SEO expert should be only bestowed on a person who works for a search engine organisation

And only police should be deemed expert criminals I think you an see the flaw there.

Your whole post revolves around not your issue with the term "expert", but the fact you seem unhappy with how others use the term.

You are trying a two step argument here:
Step 1: Define what expert is.
Step 2: Show why people using the term are "wrong".

Unfortunately, you haven't yet done the first well enough, making the leap to normative (which means telling others what to do) at best misguided, and at worst deeply flawed.

So rethink what an expert should be, come back with that, and then we can argue who deserves the term

Oh, and just as a heads up, this sort of post rarely, if ever, leads to any work, even with the ad that the first two paragraphs amount to

[lee.n3o]

Our own website is listed highly in all the major search engines, this is testament to our own optimisation skills and I believe the only way an SEO company can prove their worth.

Any monkey can get their websites ranking highly in the search engines, it depends on what terms the site is highly ranking for!!

If I called my company pink fluffy tomatoes, I suspect I would be number one in all the search engines for my company name... But that doesn't mean I would have the skills or knowledge to get a client's website ranked for any half competitive term.

(Another heads up, the signatures on here don't pass any link juice ;-) )

Edited by lee.n3o, 29 September 2007 - 01:13 AM.

[businessservicesuk]

Only the good forums don't pass on juice

Auto thanks mate, I nearly died when I read the length of your post, good read and I agree with you. Pains me to say it, I enjoyed the post.

Someone said a person may be an expert speller etc. This is my point these kind of people would not self proclaim themselves to be experts.

To move on a little

If we had internet police and strict regulation would this not solve the whole issue. I recon for sure the masses would be flocking back to Mcie D's

Just to state how bad things are getting I have been recently approached by 2 seo companies, to provide optimisation on their sites. They did get some short shrift

Edited by businessservicesuk, 29 September 2007 - 03:05 AM.

[Black_Knight]

Just to state how bad things are getting I have been recently approached by 2 seo companies, to provide optimisation on their sites. They did get some short shrift

Its just one of the reasons that a lot of established SEOs give no weight (and thus little attention) to companies who rank well. They didn't necessarily do that themselves.

Even if they did, is the guy that did it named? still with the company? The same guy working on client X? etc

Then there's the whole matter of whether it is really a competitive term. Some newbies think that the broadest terms are the most competitive since they return the biggest result totals. But that only means there are a lot of pages that include the words. It doesn't say any of them are seriously competing for such a broad term with a pitiful conversion rate.

Most searches relating to SEO are kind of vanity search - they don't drive many genuine good customers, but it may give you bragging rights to clients, or jokingly with other SEOs. The best clients usually still come from the classic old means - either a direct sales pitch, or from a recommendation.

Edited by Black_Knight, 29 September 2007 - 04:27 AM.

[Autocrat]

... projectphp ...
Wonderful... and if I hadn't been on a coffee and chocolate binge... I might havegot the point across so succinctly.


... lee.n3o ...
Damn good point - the time I have spent trying to explain to clients that
you do not search for your company name !

But you are right - getting list ed is easy enough... it's getting listed for the right things that is harder.




Well - companies often exchange services.
I know law firms do it everyso often, as do some chemical/bio-companies.
There are design firms that much the same ting, and I know of at leat two local mechanics that do each others works (different engie types/makes etc.)

The reasons vary - but more often than not it's a particualr area that one excels in is required, or they want to observe and reverse enginer how they work - so it's not exactly uncommon.


Yet, taking the negative view - I can see the point.
If they were experts, surely they wouldn't want "help" would they?

It's not like they would ever realise they lacked something and asked someone else to provide it... or join a community to ask questions...


You mention having a "policing" of things.
The problem is, as I pointed out above, such things will cost and will cause problems.
The fairest way is to hae everyone assessed - and then apply a "level" to them based on the results.
Spot check certain projects and apply ratings based on those.
People would have to register ad get licensed.
People would have to be paid to conduct/administer such work.

Are you willing to pay for it?
Are you willing to stop what you are doing and jump through all those hoops?

As far as I can see, there is no real solution.
The only way it could be done is for people to voluntarily join a body/organisation that sets standards.
Failing those standards, and not remedying the failures woul result ina ban.
A Register would haev to be maintained that listed the "professionals".
People looking to hire would consult that register.

Now... that will cause various problems.
There would still be a cost.
There would be a necessity for people to check projects/work.
Companies would have to submit details of their work.

The solution ... well - we could do it!
Those that register get randomly assigned tocheck others out.
On a rations of 1:3... that means everyone is checked by 3 others.
Scores are assigned.
The problem here is that at some point... there will be scores assigned by those that have been deemed as "unsuitable".
So, once they are remeoved - you would have to do it again.
That way, you get a double-pass filter and refinement - plus you can then allocate "levels".


So - what are you going to do if you are deemed "unsuitable"?
Or if you pass and get level 4 (lowest)?

Will you abide by it - or go "rogue"?


Of course - this goes back to the issue of "Who are you/they to state you/they are suitable or not?"

[businessservicesuk]

Two good posts BN and Auto, you both raise very valid points.

Auto you really want to go back to the logo debate and read the post above mine, this is the real reason for starting the thread in the first place, simply because I believe there are 1000's of people out there that feel the same

Shocking.

Getting back on subject,

Being awarded the title expert, can only be bestowed on a person, from a higher authority. It cannot simple be bestowed on oneself.

Edited by businessservicesuk, 29 September 2007 - 05:46 AM.

[Autocrat]

The problem with that is as ... projectphp ... pointed out - you end up with a circle! There is no entry point... otherwise refered to as the chicken ad the egg or catch 22!

It is something betowed by peers, or done by comparison or achieved agaisnt some measure/rating system.
As far as I know, these are the only ways that thingscan be "rated"... by opinion, by showing against something else, or by a defined metric.
(I think it's great - it's better than that - it gets a 7)


For a comparative response - you say...

We are good at SEO

Please tell me how you got to that conclusion.
Did your clients say this (and if so, what is their basis for comparison)?
Did you compare agianst others?
Did you look at a check list and see at what point you came to?

Do you see what I'm getting at?


Further - fair enough - someone should not self-proclaim they are a professional.
The same works in reverse - someone else should not state they are not a professional.
These are names applied through external measures - not by the self.
Is that fair?

Further still - if, as I beleiveyou agree, that it is the peers that decide someone is an expert (e.g. other experts - which is flawed, but almsot makes sense), then who is to say that someone is not an expert.
You hae made clear that you state others are ot experts.
As you did in the other thread, you make a bold statemetn that XYZ is ot good enough, is not an expert etc.
You are ot an expert (your own admission/statemnt).
Therefore, what right do you have to state that others are/aren't?


I will PM with some ideas/thoughts for your review, and see what the results are.

[businessservicesuk]

I will try my best to write a more constructive response

Firstly 'we are good at seo' note I said good, not great or experts.

Good is gauged from results on our clients sites, as well as the ranking our own site has. We out rank companies with multi-million pound marketing budgets. To that end I state our services as 'good'

The point of this thread was to highlight the fact the internet has unvieled millions of experts in many fields, I used SEO as an example. A high perentage of internet based experts have no formal training, this has led to the term expert being grossly undervalued.

When you compare this to business life away from the interent, you would not employ the services of a health and safety expert, that had no formal training. I also guess a person mascurading as an expert without qualification could find themselves in hot water in the unliklely event of an accident.

I like the idea of checks made on internet service providers, people new to the internet believe the first page of a search engine is full of genuine trustworthy providers, we all know this is not the case.

Pete

[Autocrat]

Qualificatiosn do not always equate to skill or knowledge.
It means you have learned how to approach something in a prescribed manner and show that you have retained the information invested in you. Insome cases this will also include proving you ahve the ability to conduct your own research and form your own opinions.

It is a common statement that having a qualification doen't equate to being good.
It means you should be good - up to some established level.

It will not, and never will, equate to expert.



Tell you what...
Looking at the answers that abound on this forum - how many of those that are members do you think have qualifications?
Out of those - how many do you think have College / uni / higher education passes/certificates?
Out of those that do - how many do you think have such in their current field of work?



The problem lies with the masses.
It is the seer lack of knowledge of the general populace that permits such "experts" to exclaim their own values and make such claims.
By providing insight and education , you can help towards stopping false claims.

I think that is a good way to approach it.

The problem is, you will encounter the same issues as webdesigners, car mechanics, painters and decoratores...
there is a high percetage that doesn't care - so log as it is done, done for a reasonable price, and seems to work - they are satisfied.
They don't care if it's invalid code - if the pipes are cleaned, if the undercoat wasn't applied etc... as they don't know or understand.



so... educate the masses and self patrol - these two options combined would go a long way towards solving the issue, or so I reckon anyways

[cre8pc]

The future might see all of the SEOs begging for jobs at the usability shops.

At least hiring us!!! #@$%!#$%!#$!

:naughty: :naughty:

Autocrat, you get the award for the world's longest forum post...or at least giving Ammon a bit of competition.

Good thread. This topic has bothered many over the years. The topic of training and certification has been hot in the last year or so, which is why THIS forum donated our ad revenue to sponsoring scholarships and internships to SEO/M education last year.

Personally, I'm never comfortable with the terms "expert' and "guru". I don't have the ego for it, nor do I think I've earned it. I work hard and ethically. But, an expert signals someone on top on the mountain and I prefer to be in the fields working my butt off, learning ever more and striving to excel.

Even leaders need to keep learning in an industry like SEO or SEM or web design, programming, and usabiltiy/human factors because we chose fields that don't sit still for a second!

[Autocrat]

LMAO - what, you mean I do't get a certificate or a title for supplying such lengthy posts


Persoanlly, I've neverseen any form of "education" or "training" for our lines of work that seemed worth a damn.
They are either stupid little courses that cover the absolute basics and are often out of date by over a year when they start - or - they give false information and seem only there to generate money for those "teaching".


I think the major issue is there is no real central body for such lines of work.
I know of no such organsiation in the UK - though I have looked.
The few I found were either self gratuitous, or don't actually do anything bar take you money and send you a letter.


Maybe... well, if all the "communities" got together, something could be arranged.
Most communities hae the relevant sectiosn and members... aybe with a bit of effort and organising, it owuld be possible to actually get a loosely associated group of business that would check each other out and police themselves sufficiently well to remove the immediately obvious false practicioners.
Of course, that still raises the issue of who is better than who... andwhat peoples reation will be when told they are not as good as so and so...

I myself know that I'm not perfect, and will never be up-to-date or cutting edge - I prefer to be slightly behind and wait for the path to be blazed by those better suited.
Then again, I also know I'l probably be highly offended if I am told I'm kind of naff.
(Well, I'm honest!).

[businessservicesuk]

This topic has bothered many over the years. The topic of training and certification has been hot in the last year or so, which is why THIS forum donated our ad revenue to sponsoring scholarships and internships to SEO/M education last year

How wonderful, in a world like we live in today, how great it is to read something like that.


Auto, I think you are missing the point slightly,

It is not about people being experts or guru's, it is about people self proclaiming themselves to be experts and gurus in an attempt to give their online business more credibility.