Web Moves Blog

Introduction
In search marketing, there are many more questions than answers, particularly when it comes to how people search. We know how we search and we assume everybody searches in a similar way. Also, because searching has become such an intuitive function, we tend not to really give the actual search process much thought. If many of us actually looked at what we did in a search process, we’d probably surprise ourselves.

At Enquiro, we decided to try to peel back the shroud that covers common search behavior. We wanted to see just how people searched, and ask them what went through their minds during the search process. It was a fascinating study, and resulted in a 30 page white paper which you can download from www.enquiro.com. Today, I want to cover just a few of the things we uncovered.

What We Did
First, we decided that we’d invite people to visit our computer lab, give them a couple typical search scenarios, and record their actual search behavior. Then, we sat down with them, reviewed their search activity and asked them questions about how they interacted with the search results. We recorded their comments and then compiled them for analysis. We had 24 participants, with a fairly broad representation from different age groups, income and education levels and backgrounds.

There’s No Such Thing as an Average Searcher
First, the assumption that everyone searches in a similar way quickly proved to be false. We saw marked differences in the way people searched. These differences could be due to gender (yes, men do search differently than women), age, education or experience with the internet. In same cases, the differences were dramatic and could have a major impact on an advertisers search strategies. For instance, women tended to scan all organic results and read titles and descriptions more carefully than men. An organic listing in the number 8 position on Google might not have been seen by almost half the men in the group, but would have been seen by the majority of the women. This is just one example of how one search marketing strategy won’t fit all prospective customers.

How They Saw a Search Results Page
One of the foremost questions on our mind was how people react with a search page. Do they scan all the listings, or just a few? How important is position versus the title and description? Do all users see sponsored listings?

It seems that people have already mentally divided the results page from their favorite engine into sections. These sections tend to be sponsored listings (in some cases, both at the top and along the side of the page), above the fold organic results (free listings that appear without the user having to scroll down), below the fold organic results (free listings that require scrolling down) and other features (such as Google’s news and shopping feed results, just above the organic results). Not all these sections are treated equally by the user. Some, particularly the sponsored listings, are often skipped over by many users (over half the group) to go directly to the organic listings. Depending on the type of searcher and what they find in the organic results, they may or may not come back to sponsored listings after looking at the organic ones.

The above the fold organic results proved to be the prime real estate on the search engine results page, with all users making sure they looked at the top few listings. The eyes started to drop off as we moved to below the fold organic results and the sponsored results, with only 16.6% of users saying they check out sponsored listings, regardless of what they find in the organic results. 50% of users said they’d check out sponsored listings if they didn’t find anything relevant in organic results.

Searching is more Complex than we Imagined
As marketers, we tend to think of the search process as a linear one. A person searches, chooses a results, visits a site, and hopefully converts. In reality, we see the typical search pattern is quite different

A typical search is a circular and complex process, with multiple interactions with sites and search engine results pages. The average online research interaction can involve 5 to 6 different queries and interactions with 15 to 20 different sites. Often, the actual contents of a search results page can cause the searcher to take the search in a totally different direction, launching a new query that is at best somewhat divergent from the original purpose of the search. Dead ends are common and the browser back button is used extensively to navigate through the search process. For this reason, the search engine results page is actually used as a navigation aid in negotiating the online research interaction, as people continually refer back to it and launch another online exploration from this starting point.

While difficult to strategize for, search marketers have to understand that a search interaction is a complex process and that the searchers mindset evolves as they move through it.

Building the Search Query: The Funnel Approach
Over 70% of participants indicated they like to start with a generic, inclusive keyphrase and narrow it down from there. Reasons for this included:

* Not wanting to exclude potential quality sites by being too exclusive in the original search
* By being broader, the searcher may find other options to help take the search in new directions by looking at the results
* Being able to judge relevancy of the original findings and selectively increase relevancy by adding qualifying keyphrases
* It’s easier and quicker to type in a broad, short phrase at the beginning

In this type of search pattern, looking at search volumes and typical conversion metrics can be misleading to many marketers.

For many searchers, the search becomes increasingly specific as they go through the searching process. As this happens, the chances of the searcher finding results that could lead to a conversion becomes greater and greater as the search progresses. However, the direction the search takes can be determined by the results found in the early, generic searches. For instance, in one case where a participant was looking for information on cruises, the searcher didn’t start out looking for either a Panama Canal Cruise or a Princess Cruise, but results found early in the search process led her to refine her search query in these directions. If awareness of these options hadn’t been introduced early in the search process, she would have never refined her search in these directions, leading to a likely conversion for Princess for a Panama Canal Cruise.

Introduction of Brand
This iterative search process introduces the opportunity for a multiple touchpoint approach to search marketing, introducing brand early in the search process and then reintroducing brand throughout the process. Obviously, this process works better if the brand is familiar with the consumer, with the advertiser having built brand equity through other online and offline search channels.

The Anonymity Threshold
In watching the participant’s interactions with a site, we also found that another common trait appears, particularly with the deliberate researchers. We have called it the Anonymity Threshold.

In general, people feel they are relatively anonymous when they are browsing online. And when people are gathering information about a purchasing decision, most prefer to remain anonymous. They don’t want to be exposed to sales pitches at this point, because they’re not ready to engage in the purchase process. They haven’t narrowed down their list of options yet.

In looking at the cruise example used in the buying funnel, it wasn’t until the searcher had found the right destination, type of cruise and cruise line that they were ready to engage in the purchase process. For this reason, they were resistant to purchase process oriented incentives (i.e. discounts) until the very last.

The internet has become very popular as a research tool during the information gathering process because it appears to offer the ability to remain anonymous. Through search engines, you can gather a lot of information quickly and you don’t have to enter into a situation where you surrender your anonymity until you choose to. We believe this is the reason there is a significant drop off between people willing to use the Internet to research a purchase decision and people willing to use it to purchase online. This drop off has been identified by a number of ecommerce studies. The purchase requires people to cross the anonymity threshold and they’re not prepared to do that. They know once they surrender contact information, they will likely be contacted by the vendor and be engaged in a purchase transaction. The consumer wants to do this according to their timing, not the vendors.

An interesting example of a violation of the anonymity threshold was presented by the use of online real time, real person sales chat tools such as HumanClick and Groopz. At first glance, these tools seemed a great answer to the impersonal nature of the Internet. You could watch visitors navigate through your site and if they wished, they could click on a button and initiate a real time chat with a sales person. As long as vendors stayed on this side of the fence, and let the visitor initiate the session, there was no problem. The challenge came when the vendor ‘pushed’ a chat window to visitors, offering assistance. Almost without exception, the visitors left immediately. We, along with a few other vendors we talked to, found that the minute we walked over the threshold and made visitors aware that they were being watched, they quickly left our site.

People won’t cross the threshold until they have no option. If given the choice between getting information and remaining anonymous and getting the information through registering, people will always choose the former. This creates a bit of a dilemma for the marketer, because generally the key metric is measuring against acquired or converted visitors. Almost every definition of an acquisition or conversion requires the visitor to cross the anonymity threshold. Because of the reluctance of the visitor to cross this threshold, the site owner may be building significant brand equity or trust with the visitor but is not giving credit to it because of the anonymity threshold.

In order to entice people to purchase online, the web vendor has to offer at least one significant advantage, whether it’s price, selection or convenience. If all things are equal or even close to equal, people will tend to avoid entering into a purchase process online.

In looking at most search marketing strategies; the emphasis is put on encouraging the purchase, while most people using search engines are more interested in anonymously gathering information. I believe there’s a potential disconnect here that more search marketers have to give some serious thought to.

More to Come
In this article, I’ve just looked at some of the findings from the study. In the next Net Profit, I’ll be looking at the 4 identified types of searchers, and what caught their attention in the search listings. And if you just can”t wait to get all the goodies, please download the full white paper at www.enquiro.com/research.asp.

Yes, despite what I said before, you will have to step over the anonymity threshold long enough to give us your email and name. Ironic, certainly, but like I said at the beginning, I don’t have all the answers. Hopefully we’ve thrown a few more at you.

Author:
Gord Hotchkiss