Site Diagnostics
By David Golding
| 
Print This Post
When you go to the doctor, you’ll notice a barrage of tests and questions to zero-in on what could be wrong. Just like the doctor trying to diagnose a problem, site technicians need to continually filter through the site in an effort to diagnose potential problems. In keeping with the analogy, doctors are experts with high levels of experience before they are even able to see a patient. They’ve had tests and have gone through intense certification procedures.
While medical science is, I believe, much more complicated than internet technology, and certainly can mean the difference between life and death, you ought not to turn your site check-up over to someone without some substantial levels of experience.
But there is a problem in all of this that only compounds the difficulty in finding certified experts: the internet is insanely volatile. By volatile I mean in constant change. Yesterday’s experts have become today’s has-beens. I read a PDF of an e-book that a friend emailed me. It was written in 2000, just before the big dot-bomb. I noticed serious flaws in the strategy that author recommended and thought how interesting it would be to pick up the article today and try it out. No doubt it would flop. But I’m positive it was a worthwhile technique… 6 years ago. Interesting that in 6 years serious internet experts have had to completely revamp their strategies.
So how do you determine a good diagnostician for your site? You know, I suppose you just have to see their track record. Trust the numbers. Do your best to find out which sites they have worked on to improve ranking and exposure and traffic. If they have little to report, they’re likely hiding failed attempts.
Here’s a list you can work with when trying to diagnose problems yourself, an “at-home check up” if you will.
Checklist For Diagnosing Problems
1. Site Navigation Is Easy and Bug-Free. Click around the site. Test every link. Make sure that to get from any point to any other point the user isn’t interrupted at all by bugs built into the site inadvertently. Try out different browsers like Internet Explorer, Firefox, Opera, and Safari (on the Mac) to see if there are any bugs related to just one browser.
2. The Main Point of Each Page, Including the Home Page, Is Straightforward and Easily Understood. In graphic design, we live by the “1.6-second Rule.” Studies have shown that most designs are consumed with an initial 1.6-second review. Gestalt theory is grounded in how the brain perceives everything in one whole before is processes all the parts, and over the years, has proven one of the most revolutionary concepts in graphic design and architecture. If the brain finds any value to any portion of the design after the 1.6-second review, it will concentrate more fully. Otherwise it considers what it has seen as noise and rejects the initial review. So try to write your site around this rule. If you need more than 2 seconds to know what the page is about, you will probably have more visitors reject the page altogether.
3. Your Site’s Ranking Suddenly Drops More Than One to Three Positions. It’s quite normal to see some fluctuation in your site’s rankings. But if one day you were ranked no. 5 and the next no. 25, then most likely the search engine updated its index and your site didn’t agree with it too well. Go find an expert who can isolate what took place and repair the damage so you can be back and running in your normal ranking.
Aside from these three items on your checklist, there could be many more. But the point is, look for ways to keep your site running at its optimum strength. And like your doctor says, come in for a regular check up.
The Networking Power of LinkedIn Groups
By David Golding
| Print This Post
Today I was discussing some options for a client that was looking for a way to bring together literally hundreds and thousands of alumni from a particular university department. They were sold on the idea of LinkedIn Groups. Here’s why I think it is an ingenious solution for anyone out there looking to bring together their staff, friends, and more.
First of all, LinkedIn is a social networking site like MySpace and Facebook, except it’s designed specifically for business interaction. If you haven’t seen it yet, you really ought to. It’s like super charging your resume with legitimate endorsements and recommendations because it’s completely powered by people you know and trust.
The “six degrees of separation” theory says that we can eventually reach every human being on the planet through a chain that connects all the people we know with all the people they know and on and on. LinkedIn is built on this concept, except only 3 degrees of separation is the maximum. So I create a profile, post my resume to it, and endorse other people. But that’s not all. They can then connect to other people and those folks are now within my network. If I ever wanted to contact any one of them, I could enlist the help of the person I do know to gain the introduction. The whole concept is genius. Business cards squared.
Well, you can also set up, for free, a LinkedIn group. In this case, people with similar backgrounds can link to each other via the group. For example, let’s say I wanted to hook up with old high school friends and acquaintances. I search on LinkedIn, and behold, there’s a group there representing my high school. I put in that I’m an alumnus from said school, and get connected to it. Now I have access to everyone within that same group.
I know what you’re thinking… This concept has been the dream of the internet since its inception. But the good thing about LinkedIn is its structure. You have control through spam because to communicate with others in the network, you have to go through other people. That one added measure is enough of a security function that your email box doesn’t get nailed. And the introductions that are made are always endorsed by someone known to you, or it doesn’t go through.
So, a cheap, wonderful way to establish groups for interested folks out there is through LinkedIn. I love to add my own heartfelt endorsement of what LinkedIn is doing for the business world.
Internet Marketing Is Just Marketing, Part II
By David Golding
| Print This Post
I have mentioned before that I believe that internet marketing should not be considered as its own complete marketing strategy. When putting together an internet marketing strategy, too many assume that the elements of that strategy only involve the internet. No, there is no internet marketing or e-marketing. When taking a look at your site and everything that goes into it, view it from an overall marketing strategy basis.
I have gotten strange looks for this position from others in the past. I guess there are a lot of search engine optimization experts who have only studied the search engine’s way of doing things. Or tech wizards who only look at the GUI or the technical aspects of getting a site up and running. In the end, though, it all comes back to the marketing strategy and the company’s offering to the web. Those in the top marketing positions, though, hold to what it is I’m saying.
Michael Porter wrote back in 2001 about the dot-com bust and what the internet has to offer in marketing terms. It’s amazing to me that 5 years later, all those SEO gurus still don’t catch on.
To quote Porter:
“Many of the pioneers of Internet business, both dot coms and established companies, have competed in ways that violate nearly every precept of good strategy. Rather than focus on profits, they have sought to maximize revenue and market share at all costs, pursuing customers indiscriminately through discounting, giveaways, promotions, channel incentives, and heavy advertising. Rather than concentrate on delivering real value that earns an attractive price from customers, they have pursued indirect revenues from sources such as advertising and click through fees from Internet commerce partners. Rather than make trade-offs, they have rushed to offer every conceivable product, service, or type of information. Rather than tailor the value chain in a unique way, they have aped the activities of rivals. Rather than build and maintain control over proprietary assets and marketing channels, they have entered into a rash of partnerships and outsourcing relationships, further eroding their own distinctiveness. While it is true that some companies have avoided these mistakes, they are exceptions to the rule.”
My sentiments exactly… and I’m no Harvard Business School professor.
