Business Management Consultant - Stuntdubl Search and Marketing Consulting

Fun commentary, but technology sometimes sucks…Graywolf and I talked with Greg about click stream analysis and its’ potential impact on search engine results positions. Most people that talk about search engine rankings sometimes forget to realize that there are 100’s if not 1000’s variables to tweak in the search algorithms. Disclaimer: generally when I ramble on the radio, it is nearly all pure speculation.

Grab the podcast download of the show at Webmasterradio.fm

There are at minimum a good 100 + prominent variables or more for influence and rankings.

Qualifying for search click stream validation:
I think there may be the potential need to pass certain variable threshholds in order to validate the findings that a site should be in the top 10,20,50, etc.
Variables I would validate with toolbar data:

Top 8 Ideas for tracking Clickstream to Validate Quality Indicators
What I would do if I search relevancy was my goal:
-track clickthroughs on serps
-link clickthrough
-bookmarks
-history
-user data
-freshness
-community data
-social trend data

Graywolf, GoodROI, and I talked on the implications of click data in the mp3 download here for GoodKarma.

From threadwatch - clickstreams are dirty

Google patent

Rand on the historical patent

Notes:
Clickstream data is used to validate quality indicators
Example: influx of links from 10k sites clickstream data must validate that x% of the links are clicked on by users

Top most likely uses of toolbar data
1· Validation that links are for users (monitoring clickthrough)
2· Validation of site size to detect cloaking page filesize etc.
3· Understanding different types of sites different verticals have different behavior
4· Users will spend more time on a reviews site and visit periodically vs. less time on a directory type site
5· Number of times results are clicked

1 - history data relevant to:
2 -

• The “number of times that a document is selected from a set of search results
• The “amount of time one or more users spend accessing the document”
• The relative “amount of time” compared to an average that users spend on a particular site/page

Statdubl says…stat I missed in the radio show.
MSN messenger is the MS community data at 26 - 28 min. range.

Dumbest thing out of my mouth: “it’s always gettin’ tougher and tougher…”.

Sources Cited:
Google historical data patent
Roger on community loyalty

What I learned…
MG is much smarter than I am.

Thanks for a great discussion guys.

I’ll be talking with Greg GoodROI Niland tomorrow on Good Karma about various topics including the pros and cons of using clickstream data in search engine algorithms, speculation on how it may be used and a slew of other totally speculative topics that I probably have minimal expertise to comment on but will anyways. If you have questions, or get a chance stop by webmasterradio and check it out.

I was over perusing on Lee’s marketing blog when I noticed a post Thomas had done on Clicktracks appetizer. I’m a big fan of clicktracks mainly because the people behind it rock, they have excellent support and have made analytics extremly usable and yet still highly informational. Best of all they listen to their customers and implement feature requests. Do yourself a favor and pickup a copy of their free web analytics software. By the way, I have no affiliation with clicktracks other than really enjoying their software.

Link valuation is the most fundamental component of current SEO strategies in my mind. There are certainly other important aspects to ranking well, but without understanding how to put a value on a link you are sunk. That’s why I harp about it on a daily basis, and think about it myself just as often.

Pubcon conferences are always exceptional for the insights that are triggered by being around of a slew of intelligent resourceful people. One of the ideas that had sort of dawned upon me beforehand, but was driven home during the conference was a new idea on pitching viral marketing to a client based on the value of the links that are naturally attracted.

Branding is a bonus
I must first say that I barely believe in branding. I understand the concept, and I’m sure there is value to it, but since I can’t measure it well enough…I don’t like it. I don’t like big brands that waste money in the commercial equivalent of political lobbying. If you have to pay to tell people how cool you are…you lose coolness points in my mind. This leaves me as a direct marketer. I love ROI tracking. I love analytics. I love seeing the bottom line and making it grow. Of course this isn’t always possible, but to me, branding is a bonus.

The SEO Lifecycle
I really enjoy link development. Well, let me re-state…I really enjoy TRAINING on doing link development. I have put in my time Link Serfing, and I still do from time to time to keep my skills in the area strong. There is nothing like coming across a nice strong link with a lot of googlejuice flowing and getting them to vote for your site through a simple e-mail. Little link serf’s have grown up all over the world from sending requests for a backlink to becoming CEO’s of million dollar companies. The power of a good link is enormous. The understanding of this power has lowered the barrier to entry to nearly all industries, creating a unique window of opportunity for those that stumbled accross it.

In order to be a good SEO, you must understand how to value links. In order to truly appreciate the value of a good link, you must hunt for and acquire links for your site or someone elses. Link begging is a tough job. Link bartering isn’t all that much easier. As folks get better at these jobs they learn negotiation skills, SEO skills, networking skills, and much more. As their skills improve, there is the expectations of advancement. If these expectations are not met in a company setting, the link serf will continue the stages of the SEO lifecycle, and the best of them will go on to become their own business owners, or self employed.

Link Monger’s Anonymous
1. We admit we are powerless over links — our lives have become unmanagemeable trying to measure everything in toolbar PageRank.

2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity, and that someday algorithms will no longer rely so heavily on a link popularity which is a ballot box that we can stuff, but more likely something with a much higher barrier to entry that will restore the balance of power back to those who have maintained control for so long already in all nature of industry.

3. Made a decision to return to sticky content development with a focus on natural link acquisition.

4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of our backlinks.

5. Admitted to Google, to ourselves and to another human being the exact nature of how unnaturally acquiring links can be wrong.

6. Were entirely ready to have Google remove any sites that were artificially inflated by off-topic links that did not occur “naturally”

7. Humbly asked folks at Google to reconsider relevancy - that it can sometimes be commercially defined (as in the case of Bill Gross inventing PPC) and asked that they redefine their concept of legitimate advertising to include the use of relevant text link advertising for the benefit of improving search engine rankings.

8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed through reciprocal linking, suggestion of linking schemes, and links pages, and became willing to make amends to them all if only by explaining to them how search engines work these days.

9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.

10. Continued to take personal link inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.

11. Sought through e-mail and message boards to improve our communication with Google and other search engiens, as we understood it, asking only for consideration of relevant text link advertising and it passing link popularity to help sites rank.

12. Having had a webmaster/SEO/marketing professional awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to link mongers everywhere, and to practice these principles in all our development so that webmasters/SEO’s/marketing professionals will be viewed in a more positive light despite their link mongering tendancies.

So What’s This Got to Do with Viral Marketing?
Well, it is basically me trying to bid farewell to link mongering. I love links. From directories to reciprocals, bought, borrowed, begged, and bartered, links have been excellent to me. I have, however, always been one to look for the easier way of doing things. I’ve also always been a guy who liked good ideas. It’s sometimes hard to pitch good ideas to people, and even harder yet to monetize them to make it profitable. In my mind, viral marketing has become the easy way to get links. If you understand social dynamics and what will be widely adopted, you have a much better chance at creating a successful website through linkbaiting than through hours and hours of link development. (Hmmm…I’m starting to sound like the “create good content militia”).

Now this is not to say that I don’t like link development. I think it still has it’s place along with just about every other type of link. Links aren’t going to hurt you as long as there is a natural distribution of the different types linking to your site. Link buying, press releases, presell pages, etc. are just a piece of the puzzle. Someone who’s been a link developer, however, understands the immense value of a good viral marketing campaign if only for the links. Make it easy for people to link to you. Maximize the benefit of your links in the same ways that you would if you were requesting them directly. Steer the nature of the link to benefit you the most with incentive based viral marketing.

Link development alone won’t make you millions. SEO is not a silver bullet. The understanding of the fundamental principles, however, help to visualize bigger more creative ideas that can make a site “tip” to achieve critical mass. Understanding that paying $50 per link per month for several dozen a good link will cost you tens of thousands in a year (and for the right links may have two to several dozen times ROI through their value in the SERPs), sure make that viral campaign that make cost 10, 20, 30 times your link development initially seem much more attractive. It makes it much easier to do the math if you understand the numbers.

Book: The Tipping Point by: Malcolm Gladwell

Subtitle: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference

Here’s the scoop: Malcolm Gladwell was the keynote speaker at the recent Boston Pubcon. I figured the memes from the idea in his book would be spreading like wildfire from all the procrastinators that finally found a good reason to read the book like me. This is one of those books that I had heard about so much about in other places, that I felt like I already knew the thesis…and I suppose I kind of did. What was astounding was that the narrative was so compelling that I really enjoyed it despite feeling as though I had already read the cliff notes from the summaries of others.

Interpreted Thesis: Idea epidemics are the result of the right people, the right packaging (approach, distribution, presentation, etc.), and the right time and place.

Traditional thinking creates traditional slow change. Little ideas that reach the right people at the right time can create amazing results towards the adoption of something new. Just because and idea is great, doesn’t mean it will widely adopted. An understanding of social dynamics, methods of presentation, and situational context can greatly increase your likelihood of having an idea spread virally.

Topics:
-Evolution of Ideas
-How things change
-Sociology
-Marketing

Key Terminology

Three rules of the tipping point:

• Law of the Few

Based on Connectors, Mavens, and Salesmen, the law of the few states that it only takes a few of the right people to start an epidemic.

-Connectors - The people who know “everyone” - People motivated by getting to know and understanding a wide variety of people.
-Mavens - Yiddish for someone who collects information. - Someone who enjoys collecting and redistributing information, often from a tendency to enjoy helping others. People motivated by educating and helping others.
-Salesmen - People who are naturally persuasive without necessarily intending to be. People who are naturally charismatic and have a subtle persuasive effect on those around them through their demeanor.

• Stickiness Factor

Probably the most overdone phrase of the last ten years in regards to websites. This phrase alone has reached the masses, and I was well aware of the definition long before ever reading Mr. Gladwell’s initial description. There is a simple way to package information, that under the right circumstances, can make it irresistible. All you have to do is find it. This idea has been so inspirational, that “stickiness” has probably been mentioned in every strategic discussion of a website in the last few years.

• Power of Context

This was probably my most favorite section of the book. The idea is that, “epidemics are sensitive to the conditions and circumstances of the places and times that they occur”. The power of context is an amazing tool for trying to determine logic or motive in people’s actions. It’s easy to judge people on poor decisions, it much more difficult to understand the rationale behind why they made those decisions. Understanding of people can be a very powerful tool that is sharpened by an understanding of the power of context.

This section was made extremely interesting by discussing the “broken windows theory” in regards to the reduction of crime in NYC. I must note a compelling counterpoint to this theory in Freakonomics, but both theories seem to have some very logical and thought provoking points.

These were the main points of the book that were followed by many strong examples of the points being made including some interesting case studies. Despite the redundancy of the stories, the examples were descriptive enough to draw me in as the reader not only to the ideas being pitched, but also to the story at hand. The non-fiction description of characters and companies was compelling enough that I could visualize them, making me want to understand further how they’re circumstances applied to the idea of a tipping point.

Quotes from dog-eared pages:

In the advertising world, direct marketers are the real students of stickiness, and some of the most intriguing conclusions about how to reach consumers have come from their work.

Eye movement research is based on the idea that the human eye is capable of focusing on only a very small area at one time — what is called a perceptual span.

Epidemics are sensitive to the conditions and the circumstances of the times and places in which they occur.

**In reference to the Stanford prison experiment
Zimbardo’s conclusion was that there are specific situations so powerful that they can overwhelm our inherent predispositions

The mistake we make in thinking of character as something unified and all-encompassing is very similar to a kind of blind spot in the way we process information. Psychologists call this tendency the Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE), which is a fancy way of saying that when it comes to interpreting other people’s behavior, human beings invariably make the mistake of overestimating the importance of fundamental character traits and underestimating the importance of the situation and context. We will always reach for a “dispositional” explanation for events, as opposed to a contextual explanation.
More on Fundamental attribution error.

The 150 rule:
Dunbar has actually developed an equation an equation, which works for most primates, in which he plugs in what he calls the neocortex ratio of a particular species — the size of the neocortex relative to the size of the brain — and the equation spits out the expected maximum group size of the animal. If you plug in the neocortex ratio for Homo sapiens, you get a group estimate of 147.8 — or roughly 150. “The figure of 150 seems to represent the maximum number of individuals with whom we can have a genuinely social relationship…
More on Dunbar’s number

Wegner argues that when people know each other well, they create an implicit joint memory system — a transactive memory system — which is based on an understanding about who is best suited to remember what kinds of things.”
More on transactive memory systems
Somewhat related - Aaron’s post on memex

That is the paradox of the epidemic: that in order to create one contagious movement, you often have to create many small movements first.

This is what is meant by translation. What Mavens and Connectors and Salesmen do to an idea in order to make it contagious is to alter it in such a way that extraneous details are dropped and others are exaggerated so that the message itself comes to acquire a deeper meaning. If anyone wants to start an epidemic, then — whether it is of shoes or behavior or a piece of software — he or she has to somehow employ Connectors, Mavens, and Salesmen in this very way: he or she has to find some person or some means to translate the message of Innovators into something the rest of us can understand.

“discordant details were leveled out, incidents were sharpened to fit the chosen theme, and the episode as a whole was assimilated to the preexisting structure of feeling and though characteristic of the members of the group among whom the rumor spread.”

More on Gestalt, from which comes the idea of “leveling and sharpening”.

Contagiousness is in larger part a function of the messenger. Stickiness is primarily a property of the message.

The world — much as we want it to — does not accord with our intuition. This is the second lesson of the Tipping Point. Those who are successful at creating social epidemics do not just do what they think is right. They deliberately test their intuitions.

Application to SEO:
Many of the principles and ideas in the book have a direct impact on human understanding. Any enlightenment of the human disposition helps a marketer/seo to do a better job of reaching prospects successfully. SEO is much bigger now than reaching robots with meta tags.

The idea of “transactive memory systems” is extremely intriguing to me, and is one of the main reasons that I started a blog. I no longer have to remember all of the subtle details of a book that I read, because if write about it, I have a searchable memory system for later. I only have to remember some of the points in order to trigger the response to go and search for more information. In some ways, search engines are transactive systems as well. You can become as smart as what you are searching for, and have a better understanding of something in only minutes. It is hard to contemplate the impact that SE’s will have on human learning, having reduced the time for information retrieval from perhaps hours with libraries and other analog means to the mere seconds it takes to type a query.

I have more and more interest in social networks, sociology, and other social dynamics in regards to becoming a better marketing professional, and a better person in general. The studies and experiments are often profound and life-changing experiences when you understand them better.

Closing Notes
I am very pissed off at myself that I didn’t make it to the keynote speech now. I got involved in a good conversation and before I knew it it was too late to slip in. I was lucky enough to walk in to the signing session about the same time as Malcolm, and had him autograph the copy I have just finished reading complete with dog-ears. It seems awkward to ask for an autograph, but the timing was just right where I only had to stand behind a few folks, and had my copy with me, so I thought it was worth it. I would have much rather just had a conversation about nearly anything, but I imagine Malcolm has surprassed Dunbar’s number long ago. I thank Mr. Gladwell for writing such an inspirational and forward thinking book. If anyone has done summaries of the keynotes, please post them below so others can check it out.

Usually by the time I return from a conference, I have all the mental capacity of a sea snail. I really don’t understand how folks blog and still manage to enjoy themselves. I generally shut down from the online world for about a week or so:)

I think I’ll skip all the shoutouts for fear of missing someone, but thanks to all those that I did have conversations with. I can’t think of one that I didn’t enjoy. WMW takes it’s fair share of kicking from haters, but I don’t think anyone can argue with the community atmosphere of a pubcon. Everyone is incredibly friendly and happy to be there. The entire show has a different vibe of positive energy of people discussing amazing ideas and creating lasting partnerships.

If I talked to you at the show, or you didn’t get a chance to say hey…feel free to drop me a line anytime. If you missed the show…or really just want to know a bit more about buying text link advertising, you can check out my Paid link strategies presentation. Thanks again to everyone who helps make the show a success, and makes attending very enjoyable.

We’ve already discussed SEO generations, how some folks entered the industry at different times and learned from others. Outside of the SEO sphere, however, SEO seems to elicit a much different response from folks based on their different (often negative) experiences with those claiming to be an SEO.

To me, SEO has been a very positive experience to which I ascribe a lot of appreciation and respect. When I call someone a “good SEO”, “veteran SEO” or even admit to them being “a SEO” I consider I am giving them a compliment, even if their knowledge and expertise reaches far past simple search engine optimization. It is a much different idea to me for someone to “be an SEO” than it is to many other folks. It seems in other circles that same respect doesn’t apply to someone “being a SEO”. It’s sometimes frustrating to have the industry shut off to its’ own little world, but as many have mentioned, it’s probably a good thing that most folks don’t “get it”. I tell most folks I am an “internet marketing consultant”, but in my heart I am an “SEO”.

I have a somewhat bad habit of encompassing all knowledge of the internet into “being an SEO”. I think being an SEO is being a “meta-webmaster”, project manager, or internet marketing engineer. It may even be more than that. It is a way of thinking. SEO’s are resourceful soldiers of fortune. It is fundamental understanding of all opportunities available and applying the best solution for a given situation, and prioritizing goals into an actionable plan that considers business principles of scaling cash flow and other important concepts. Perhaps my view is wrong and I give “SEO’s” too much credit. Perhaps someone with these qualities needs a new flashy moniker to seperate them from those who have just started to do meta tags and search engine submissions.

Part of the problem may be the fact that there is a definitive life cycle to SEO’s. Most folks will be drawn in at some point as part of a job our their own business. They will proceed to grow their understanding to use it to help others, grow their own business, or do consulting. Most of the stellar SEO folks will end up doing affiliate marketing or starting their own non-SEO business models. They grow increasingly frustrated with the information gap between themselves and the prospects seeking services. I truly enjoy the education process myself most the time, and have learned ways to filter folks that I can’t help in a reasonable amount of time, and try to provide them with some resources to educate themselves. Those starting to the game a bit later have the added benefit of an abundance of QUALITY information once they manage to find it.

This life cycle of SEO’s has caused a shortage and high demand for in-house SEO’s that are willing to be trained, as well as consultants who can help do so, or provide more value than in house resources. The increased demand only serves to drive many new folks to claim to provide SEO services (I was guilty of this myself about 4+ years ago). The new faces with little experience combined with hucksters trying to make a few quick bucks in a fledgling field has helped to sully the reputation associated with SEO in the eyes of many who still just view SEO as a one-dimensional discipline.

If the web as a whole can enter a second bubble with Web 2.0’s excessive gradients, nice round corners, mirror effects, and other nice graphics and social networking ideas, can’t SEO’s come up with a new way to market their services? I’ve already tried to disavow SEO once, but I was drawn back with it’s sauve siren-song seductiveness. Isn’t there some other way that we can differentiate ourselves and retain the positive history behind the title?

A Modest Proposal - SEO 2.0
I think it’s time to rebrand SEO a little bit as SEO 2.0. SEO 2.0 will never over-hype expectations, make false promises, or sell services without discussing risks or educating clients. SEO 2.0 will have a fundamental understanding of design, conversion, technology, webservers, business, psychology, PPC, shopping feeds, affiliate marketing, economics, and other broad principles to apply to more than just higher search rankings, but to making businesses better. SEO 2.0 will continue to learn beyond the normal realm of meta tags and on-page tweaks to understand social networking, marketing, business, and anything else that may impact the success of a website. SEO 2.0 will be pretty, shiny, maintain a stellar reputation and will be well funded. Step up your game and jump on for SEO 2.0. Your services and knowledgebase will evolve or you’ll be obsolete and your luck will run out when the bubble bursts.