Much of December was spent struggling with the List Processing language. I believed I could use genetic algorithms, similar to what I had done for advanced pattern recognition, and apply that technique to an emerging field called ‘website morphing’, which is coming up in a forthcoming paper. A ‘morphing’ website is one that actively changes itself in response to a user input. I’m not talking about changing which pages are displayed based on a series of clicked links as is the case with Web 1.0, but rather, how a user is interacting with the site. It’s a direct use of web analytics to enhance the user experience in real time (if we take the notion of morphing to its extreme).[…]
Category: Uncategorized
Marketing Sherpa released an interesting chart of the week that I figured is worth sharing because it raises an important problem – how should you signal to a company that you don’t want what they’re sending you? So often, one signs up for an email with an expectation that you’re going to get what you’re signing up for, and I’ll admit – when I invite Air Canada into my mailbox for airfair specials, I expect to only get airfair specials. Only. I don’t want to be cross-promoted with their latest Aeroplan offering, and on and on. Or about any sort of “courir pour la poutine” fun run and bar-b-q that they’re having in support of the Heart and Stroke Association.[…]
Inflexion points in a career are really quite interesting things. There’s a certain something about pushing yourself outside the base comfort zone – like the first time you do a SEM campaign, or code in jQuery, or do your first applied linear regression to awful, awful data. (But you do it). And then there are points where you push yourself well beyond that comfort zone. There’s a bit of a cycle to it, that I’ll compare to trying to swim. First, you get out of the hottub and you walk around the pool and assess the situation. You see a shallow end, and a deep end. You know it would be far more safer to jump into the shallow end[…]
Hamel got things started with “Conversion is King” blog post: So I was talking with my co-worker Patrick Glinski about my notion of conversions being the only metric that matters and he brought up an interesting problem with it. If you have a business, and your only concern is sales (conversions) then over time you will lose because you are ignoring the other parts of your business. To continue with my Rolex example, if Rolex only focused on the sale, the conversion, and not on the aspiration, eventually everyone who could buy one, would have then Rolex wouldn’t have any new potential customers. To which, Sukmanowski replied: Take one of mine and Novo’s favourite metrics for example – recency. The[…]
Remember this equation? Y = mx + b The dependent variable, Y, responds to a change in the slope (m) times an independent variable (x), plus the intercept point or constant (b). Typically, we strip out the letters and replace them with words to make it nice and readable. (Number of Conversions) = (conversionRate)(PageViews) + constant What’s the constant? The best way I can describe it simply is “left over unexplained stuff”. Ideally, you’d have an equation that intercepts the Y-axis at 0 (the origin), but, that’s fairly rare, because there are other factors involved, and it’s really rare, at least in marketing science, to get an equation that completely explains everything, perfectly. (Though, it’s not impossible, as the above[…]
Trolling time! The customer journey, from becoming aware of a consumable good / experience, to engaging, to buying in, becoming loyal (or forming habit), and then disloyal as their trust is repeatedly betrayed and eroded, (or as habits drift) isn’t linear. In fact, it’s probably fraught with step-functions (tipping points in pop lit), and circuitous. Most disturbingly, modeling it all out would be some sort of euclidean n-space matrix. (Oh Noes!) There was a Forrester report on engagement that portrayed the journey as being more like a series of pipes, with distinct outputs. For instance, it might be perfectly possible for somebody to become a champion for a brand without ever having purchased it – The Nintendo Wii during the[…]
Marshall Sponder over at the Web Analytics Guru Blog, certainly said what many of us were thinking. I was thinking about this glitzy presentation that is going around explaining Social Media – I usually find myself getting brain freeze when I look at this kind of stuff because it’s good, but it doesn’t really tell you how to adapt those ideas to your purposes (not that it’s meant to do that) or how to measure the effect of it (Social Media)…I vowed that when I present at SES and XChange next month – I won’t fall into that (The “Glitzy” type of presentation) – I will give information that tells someone how I measure Social Media Marketing scientists have been[…]
David Hamel, passionately holds high the banner of “the only metric that matters is if somebody buys something”. It’s a hyper-simplistic approach, but I think it serves to remind us that the real dependent variable we’re all trying to explain, in part through the Engagement Wars, is conversion. Let’s do the Web Analytics thing and define conversion. “TERM: Conversion Type: Dimension (same term is also used for count)Universe: Aggregate, Segmented, Individual Definition/Calculation:A visitor completing a target action. Definition/Calculation:This is a method of segmenting behavior as visitors interact with a web property. Theevent represents a transition in the visitor state that may indicate 1) potential forfuture behavior such as clicking on an advertisement, or registering for moreinformation, or starting a check[…]
A response to the Dialogue going on over at Petersen’s Demystified Blog. I read the entire dialogue, and believe that I understood 80% of it, and misunderstood 20%. Much of what I’ve read, well, I’ve experienced first hand…such as watching LifeCycles appear in my data and recognizing what’s going on. Some of it, I have no experience. Yet, all you can do is try. Here’s a response of Joseph Carrabis’ thread. Thanks Joseph for the citation and the dialogue. I continue to be in awe of Jim Novo’s ability to speak both Sciencese and Businessese. I’ll echo the power of the “R” in RFM. Recency. The notion that a human in habit tends to stay in habit resonates. “Anchor and[…]
I’ve taken to watching “The News Hour” with Jim Leher when I manage to get home at, or before, 7pm. Wednesday night, they had two fairly intelligent people talking about the dangers of data collection practices in an unregulated environment. There was some sensationalist fear being spouted about, you know, “Oh No! They can track everything you’re doing with cookies”, and so on. I find it intensely sad that some politicians want us to obsess about how Nike might be using data to target anonymous people with specific ads, while they pass a bill that gives them the right to wiretap anybody. Distraction in action. The truth of the matter is that most companies don’t even have the capability for[…]