Tuesday, February 2, 2016

Client-Based Or Task-Based? Structuring Your Link Team

team-round-table-ss

For the past several years, I’ve been responsible for overseeing the work of link teams large, medium and small. I’ve experimented with both client-based and task-based assignments and am currently managing a very small group that utilizes both client-based and task-based projects.

That system works for us right now. It might not if we grew again, but I’m content with the way we’re all working together. I can see everything that my team does, from the sites they are thinking about contacting to the full negotiation emails, and I like being able to personally sign off on everything that goes out our door.

Today, I’d like to talk about the major pros and cons of structuring link-building teams based on clients versus tasks, then discuss some pointers to help you decide which structure might work best for your team.

Client-Based Link Work

Client-based work is exactly what it sounds like: team members mainly work on link development work for one client. They may be responsible for multiple clients, but they’re still doing it all for these clients — from discovering new linking partners to negotiating link placements.

In terms of equality, it’s probably the most equal way of working for link builders, as no one gets stuck with the less fun bits of the process.

Pro: Intense & In-Depth Knowledge

The beauty of working on one client is that you can really get to know them inside and out.

Once you’ve been working with their site for a few months, you (ideally) really can home in on the most relevant link opportunities. You can focus on the breadth and depth of the client’s offerings, and you can gain the confidence of feeling like an expert on what the client does and how you can help them through link development efforts.

When we have had to put a link builder on a new client, it usually takes a week or so before we see anything popping. We’ve had times when a link builder finished a client project and needed new work, so I’d put him on something new for just a few days — and usually realize that all that did was cost us time and money. It takes a while to get really familiar with any site.

Con: Burnout & Boredom

Depending upon your tolerance for working on the same basic thing for a long period of time, burnout is pretty common (though that’s probably true for most facets of link development).

Usually, I can see when a link builder really needs a new challenge, so it’s easy for me to move them to another client. However, if you don’t have that luxury, burnout is definitely a potential issue.

Our most common complaint? “I can’t think of any new ideas for this client.”

Task-Based Link Work

With task-based work, each team member owns a particular facet of link building rather than being responsible for a client. With this type of system, a team member can become an expert in a process like outreach, and that allows for more trial-and-error testing, which is definitely a plus.

Pro: Efficiency

Some people are going to be better at certain tasks than others. With a task-based team, everyone can be more efficient. Once you know a process, you can nail it and do it well. Maybe you’re great at finding new linking partners, but you hate sending the emails. Maybe you are amazing at negotiation or content writing, but you have trouble finding the right sites to contact.

If a task-based team is structured well, those weaknesses won’t be a problem because someone else will pick up the slack on the areas where you aren’t as efficient.

Con: Lack Of Challenge

In many ways, this is a nicer form of burnout. It’s hard to move forward when you’re doing the same thing over and over, even if you’re really good at it. Your brain kind of stagnates.

If all you’re doing is sending outreach emails based on a list of sites that you were given, for example, you’re going to end up being very unhappy very soon — unless you’re one of those rare types that really enjoys doing the same thing over and over.

2 Major Factors To Consider

When determining which structure is right for your link-building team, you should take the following into account:

  • Individual Personality. You really have to take each link builder’s personality, goals and work performance into account. For example, our three main link builders all have very different strengths and weaknesses. One prefers to focus on one specific client at a time. One keeps his eyes out for all clients, all the time. One does best when given very specific tasks like updating old links or contacting a list of sites he’s been given. Since we’re small, this all works out very well.
  • Ultimate Responsibility. Someone has to be the end of the line, the one to say yes or no, the one to make the final call on the link and justify it to the client. In our case, that someone is me. If a client hates a link that we built, I’m the one who has to answer for it and fix the issue, so I like knowing what’s going on from the discovery stage to the negotiations. Always make sure you have someone who calls the shots, no matter what type of structure you have.

end of line

However you structure your team, it is critical to make sure that you’re working as efficiently as possible while still keeping everyone happy. Happiness isn’t a typical goal for link builders all the time, and I think that’s quite a shame, as it can be extremely tedious work. It can be amazing, too, but I do really believe in doing as much as possible to keep my team happy while getting all the work done.

And remember this, always: If your link builders aren’t confident enough to work on their own — whether it’s with a client or on a task — make sure they have a point of contact for support.

Even my employees who have been with us for years still have questions and still get stuck. I myself go through periods of burnout and find that by simply sitting down and having a conversation with someone else about it, I feel so much better and refreshed. Your team will always be better off if they’re supported.

The post Client-Based Or Task-Based? Structuring Your Link Team appeared first on Search Engine Land.

SearchCap: Yandex Mobilegeddon & Google Shopping Campaigns

searchcap-header-v2-scap

Below is what happened in search today, as reported on Search Engine Land and from other places across the web.

From Search Engine Land:

Recent Headlines From Marketing Land, Our Sister Site Dedicated To Internet Marketing:

Search News From Around The Web:

Local & Maps

Link Building

Searching

SEO

SEM / Paid Search

Search Marketing

The post SearchCap: Yandex Mobilegeddon & Google Shopping Campaigns appeared first on Search Engine Land.

Get Your Priorities Straight: Structuring Google Shopping Campaigns

google-adwords-bigA2-1920-800x450

I’m a big fan of Google Shopping. As a user, it provides an easy-to-use platform for comparing products and prices at a glance. Instead of clicking through to eight different websites to find the item I want at the right price, I could make my choice before I even leave the search results page.

Shopping campaigns are invaluable for any e-commerce retailer. At my employer (Periscopix, a Merkle Company), we consistently see them outperform generic search in terms of revenue and cost of sales.

Shopping campaigns have taken many shapes over the years, as Google has responded to demand and made improvements. Many of you may remember Product Listing Ad (PLA) campaigns, Shopping’s previous incarnation.

While creating a campaign structure based on your feed was possible, it certainly wasn’t as simple and intuitive as it became when Shopping campaigns were launched in spring 2014. Also, a brand-new feature was the ability to use campaign priority settings in order to preferentially serve particular products over others, without the need to increase bids.

While at first, the more complex options at your disposal with Shopping seemed daunting in comparison to relatively simple PLAs, we soon found that they enabled us to create campaigns that reflected our clients’ needs, were easier to optimize and performed significantly better.

There are a variety of ways you could choose to structure your Shopping campaigns, but how do you know which one is right for you?

With our diverse range of retail clients, we’ve had the chance to try out dozens of different structures and analyze performance. Here, I’ve collected some of the best and hope to provide inspiration for anyone who’s struggling with deciding which structure is right for them.

Campaign Prioritization

One of the most exciting new possibilities with Shopping campaigns was the ability to assign different priority levels to campaigns, in order to favor certain products over others. We’ve explored several ways of prioritizing our campaigns to achieve the best results. There are a few that we’ve found to be highly successful.

1. Promotions/Generics/Brand

This is a structure based on the need to (a) promote sale products over those offered at full price; and (b) to report on generics and brand separately. Adding a “Sale” custom label to any products on offer within the feed allows us to add those products to a high-priority Shopping campaign.

This means if someone searches with a term that could apply to two products, one on sale and one at full price, the sale item will be favored. We know a discounted item is more likely to encourage someone to buy, so we’ve found this helps boost conversion rates.

The medium- and low-priority campaigns are then divided by generics and brand respectively. Adding all brand terms as campaign-level negative keywords to a medium-priority campaign filters brand traffic down to low priority. This gives the ability to optimize towards different KPIs for brand and generics, and it makes reporting more transparent.

2. Promotions/Best Performers/All Products

This structure has proved useful when pushing best-performing products is a top priority. The high-priority campaign is the same as above, created using custom labels applied to sale or promotional items.

Then the medium-priority campaign is built by splitting products with the strongest performance down to item ID level and leaving everything else to filter into the low-priority “all products” campaign.

Regular analysis of the low-priority campaign helps identify items that are performing well, which can then be moved up into the Best Performers, ensuring products to which we know users respond well are appearing in the Shopping results most.

3. Long Tail/Short Tail/Brand

This structure was thought up as a way of increasing impression share on generic terms without wasting spend on users too far up the purchase funnel. The high-priority campaign was designed to capture people who’d already done their research and knew exactly which product they wanted to buy (e.g., someone searching for “size 8 red striped maxi dress” rather than “dress”).

This was achieved by excluding short-tail search terms and maintained by regularly checking search query reports to ensure just long-tail search terms were being captured.

Short-tail queries then filtered down into the medium-priority campaign to capture users who were still in their research phase. Brand terms were added as negative keywords to both the high- and medium-priority campaigns to allow brand traffic to trickle down into low priority.

By segmenting search queries in this way, the team was able to prioritise long-tail search queries and increase generic impression share specifically for those terms, where they knew they were more likely to lead to a conversion.

Once you’ve decided how to use campaign prioritization, you need to think about what structure you’re going to use within each campaign.

Ad Group Or Product Group?

Whereas in a traditional search campaign, you would build your structure on ad groups and keywords, in Shopping, you’ll find ad groups and product groups. However, that doesn’t mean product groups are the same as keywords.Product or Ad Group

Product groups let you carve your feed into smaller segments to allow for more granular optimization. If you didn’t add any keywords to a campaign, you’d be targeting nothing, whereas your Shopping campaign would target everything within your feed without product groups in place. They allow you to build a logical structure that is easier to manage and optimise and to exclude any products you don’t want included.

While you can set bids at both product group and ad group level, there are several instances where you may need to use ad groups. Mobile bid adjustments, promotional text and negative keywords are all applied at this level, so it’s a good idea to group different product ranges into different ad groups to allow for relevant promotional text and easy exclusion of irrelevant traffic.

Subdivide All Products By… What?

Once you’ve created your first ad group within a Shopping campaign, you’re given the choice to subdivide “All products” into separate product groups, which you certainly should do. While an “All products” ad group is useful as a catch-all tool to ensure complete Shopping coverage, relying on it entirely leaves you with no ability to analyze performance and optimize.

Shopping Segmentation

So which option do you choose for subdividing your products?

  • Category. This is probably our most commonly used option. It allows you to divide your campaigns by the Product Category attribute within your feed. The picture below is an example of what a typical product category structure could look like for an online clothes retailer. So in order to create a product group for maxi dresses, you would need to subdivide into Womenswear > Dresses > Maxi Dresses. This relies on a healthy feed with logical Product Categories in place, so if this type of subdivision isn’t working for you, it could be time to make some improvements to your feed.

Product Category

  • Brand. This is particularly useful for retailers that sell multiple brands and want to bid or report on them separately.
  • Item ID. This is the most granular you can get. Unless you have a very small selection of products, subdividing to item ID level certainly isn’t necessary for all of them. However, it can be useful once a campaign has been running long enough to gather data, if you notice particularly strong or poor performance from specific items.
  • Condition. Condition is relevant for retailers selling both new and second-hand/used products.
  • Product type. This allows for more granular categorization of products within your feed, if the options within the Product Category attribute aren’t specific enough for your needs. With a similar hierarchical structure, you can subdivide by Product Type in the same way as with Category.
  • Custom labels. These labels can be applied to products within the feed in order to separate them within Shopping when it isn’t possible using any of the options above.

Finding the campaign, ad group and product group structure that works best for you should provide you with highly granular Shopping campaigns which are easy to manage, analyze and improve.

Final Thoughts

There is no “right” way to structure your Shopping campaigns. It depends entirely on your business’s reporting needs and KPIs.

The great thing is that there are so many options at your disposal now that with a little consideration, you should be able to find the perfect one.

The post Get Your Priorities Straight: Structuring Google Shopping Campaigns appeared first on Search Engine Land.

Yandex Rolls Out Mobile Friendly Algorithm In Russia, Code Name Vladivistok

yandex-flag-ss-1920

Yandex has told us they have rolled out their mobile friendly ranking algorithm for their Russian index today. They code named this update, Vladivistok, the name of the largest city in Russian Far East, where the share of mobile internet users is the largest compared to other regions in Russia.

A Yandex spokesperson told us that the new mobile friendly algorithm is currently available only in Russia but will expand to Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Turkey searchers in the coming few months.

In November 2015, Yandex began labeling mobile friendly pages in their index with the goal to release this new algorithm.

This doesn’t mean Yandex will remove pages that are not mobile friendly. They may not rank them as high as mobile friendly pages for mobile searchers. “Vladivostok implementation doesn’t mean web pages not optimized for mobile experience will now disappear from search results, but their position on SERPS may differ depending on whether the user search on their mobile or desktop,” they told us. Adding, “although mobile compatibility is only one of 800 of ranking factors, the needs of our users is our top priority. We want to make sure it’s easy for them to interact with the webpages we deliver on any device.”

How does Yandex define what is mobile friendly? It doesn’t differ much from Google or Bing’s interpretation:

A mobile-friendly webpage is a webpage whose content (text, images, etc) fits the small screen, features vertical, rather than horizontal, scrolling, and is accessible on mobile devices (Java applets, Flash and Silverlight plug-ins are not supported by most of mobile browsers). Flash Video media files, for instance, cannot appear in search results on the mobile version of Yandex’s video search and hosting service, Yandex.Video, which only supports the HTML5 format.

Webmasters can test their pages in the Yandex Webmaster portal to see if their pages are mobile friendly.

yandex-mobile-friendly

Bing just rolled out their mobile -riendly testing tool last year, but had the mobile-friendly label for some time. Google released their mobile tool almost two years ago, with the mobile-friendly label.

The post Yandex Rolls Out Mobile Friendly Algorithm In Russia, Code Name Vladivistok appeared first on Search Engine Land.

Monday, February 1, 2016

SearchCap: Google Presidential Candidate Cards, Valentine’s Day Searches & Locksmith Woes

searchcap-header-v2-scap

Below is what happened in search today, as reported on Search Engine Land and from other places across the web.

From Search Engine Land:

Recent Headlines From Marketing Land, Our Sister Site Dedicated To Internet Marketing:

Search News From Around The Web:

Industry

Local & Maps

Link Building

Searching

SEO

SEM / Paid Search

The post SearchCap: Google Presidential Candidate Cards, Valentine’s Day Searches & Locksmith Woes appeared first on Search Engine Land.

Marketing Land’s SocialPro Coming To Seattle This June; Registration Open

socialpro-1200x800

Sharpen your social media marketing skills by attending Marketing Land’s SocialPro! We’ve moved to an awesome new location: the Bell Harbor Convention Center on the waterfront in Seattle, WA.

Join fellow hard core social media practitioners for cutting-edge paid, earned and owned tactics from leading brands and agencies.

SocialPro is programmed by the Marketing Land editorial team, so you know the agenda will be jam-packed with proven tactics that maximizes results. We guarantee it.

Save $300 With Super Early Bird Rates
Registration is now open! Secure your place at SocialPro for just $1,395 — that’s $300 in savings from on-site rates. Two days of exceptional content, keynotes and career-worthy connections await you!

Come as a team and share in the wealth of knowledge (and savings!) that SocialPro has in store.

Register today!

The post Marketing Land’s SocialPro Coming To Seattle This June; Registration Open appeared first on Search Engine Land.

Beta Rates Expire Next Week. Register For MarTech Today!

Join innovators and main street brands next month pioneering marketing technology at MarTech: The Marketing Tech Conference. Score $350 in savings on All Access Passes by February 13. Register today!

mt_infographic_800w_a

mt_infographic_800w_b

mt_infographic_800w_c

mt_infographic_800w_d

The post Beta Rates Expire Next Week. Register For MarTech Today! appeared first on Search Engine Land.