Fed-Up with Validation & Accessibility, Let's talk ROI!

[greeneagle]

Let's get a grip here!

I am fed-up with all the threads here and every where else in so called webmaster and SEO forums that proclaim that validation and accessibility is where it is at!

At best, that is a myopic view... Client after Client wants immediate through Long Term ROI (Return on Investment) - That is at the core. That's all they really want!

I can post example after example, Here's one:
http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=66767

Most of the time they come to us, 6 feet under pushing lillies, pleading; "Help me please"!

They don't give a rat's ass whether their site is validated at W3C or "Bobbied"...and at this point in time, neither do I!

We need to deal right out on the front line with "IMMEDIATE ROI", and long term ROI, (Return on investment)! That's the game we are playing here..

Let's try and refocus our posts here a bit, alligned with our client's needs.

Does anyone, anywhere do serious due-diligence and really review a new client's competitive position with a competitive analysis from the "get-go" here, or am I living in some kind of a fantasy dream world?

Forget the "crap" and get to the "meat"!

Sure the SE's play alg games and so on and more "yada-yada" - LOL

Cut it clean and neat - ROI is where the game is played!

Ken

[Tubby]

Ken. Are you suggesting that we should actually be able to make a living from our website ?

Ken you are SOOOOO cruel. Next you will offer up a suggestion that web design should be something more than prestigious tax deduction.

Ken I have watched you get close to the boundary before. I can only presume that working with gundogs on a recent assignment has rubbed off and now you expect to sell us 'reward for effort'
WOOF! WOOF! to you ken . . (humour)

[greeneagle]

Oh yes Tubby - I am "pointing" - best I can!

WOOF - WOOF - My boys have taught me well!

LOL

Ken

[Dcrux]

really review a new client's competitive position with a competitive analysis

Few people know how to do a competitive analysis. One designer of a site explained he used "best practices," and what that meant to him was eyeballing a few sites and cherrypicking what he liked. Many designers have nothing more to go on than two or three sites the client "likes," for some obscure reason. Picking the right reference competitors for the analysis is crucial for success.

Take this Digital Web article on the subject. The problem is that words like "best practices" aren't well defined -- to put it mildly. What you don't want to get out of competitive analysis is common practices. The word is competitive, many times the process degenerates into an imitative analysis.

The objective is competitive advantage, not similarity with everyone else.

The Path To ROI
That would be better offer, better copywriting, visual merchandising, more targeted traffic. And much more testing basic assumptions. (...With user testing, if that wasn't clear)

Visual merchandising is not graphic design. You can have a great looking layout which doesn't convert traffic into customers. Most sites are a layout, database and a logo. And they only support the transaction at the end, not the shopping cycle.

Copywriting is not about filler content. The generic boilerplate dropped into layouts often isn't even writing -- it's typing. Keyword stuffers need not apply.

Offers are not gimmicks. Most sites don't need a redesign to improve their image; they need to improve their substance. And most sites do not provide a compelling reason to buy or provide basic information. This doesn't require a futile hunt for the next technical gimmick or SE trick, it requires a shift in perspective.

It's vintage Drucker, "Because its purpose is to create a customer, the business has two basic functions: marketing and innovation. Marketing and innovation produce results, all the rest are costs."

To clarify, innovation isn't CSS, AJAX, or the latest scheme to rig rank. Start thinking about what it would take to qualify for rank and you'll have the right mind set to start your competitive analysis.

[jawn_tech]

From experience I've seen what Ken is talking about.

that proclaim that validation and accessibility is where it is at!

For the minority of designers, in the big picture. Not saying that's good or bad. The fate of accessibility, in my opinion, lies with the technology makers themselves, be it browsers or other devices. I've never bought into standards being on the shoulders of web designers. Give us a standard to design to, and we'll do it, but only when all the browsers and devices are on the same page. Until then, ROI is the driving force pushing to get things done.

[Orion]

Accessibility is about ROI..

It's about designing a website that is 'accessible' to a greater audience. That's all.

Creating code that validates only means that the site renders faster (especially on dialup).

I took one client's site a while back that had no DTD and the coding wasn't very clean... mostly looked like HTML 4.01 with some proprietary stuff thrown in there. We updated the code only and the site loaded in less than half the time as before. Browsers don't have to do as much guess work when the code is valid.

Anyway forget all the other benefits of valid and accessible code and it boils down to simply, faster loading pages, less errors, viewable to a wider audience = ROI. But definitely not something you want to get hung up on.

It's one of the things I discuss with potential clients. They say they want position number 1. I say are you sure? or would you prefer more sales?... Never confuse the two!

Great topic!

[jawn_tech]

Great points!

Of all the things discussed around the scene, I think there's a consensus that we want to aim for:

1. Faster loading pages
2. Accessible as broadly as possible
3. Highest potential of conversions
4. Reduce design time

So I'd actually differ with the notion that "the newest thing is where it's at, because it accomplishes all those things." Even when the argument is CSS purism, I differ. (Did I say that out loud?) For a vast market currently, it's about hybrid code. Whatever it takes.

[RegDCP]

Does anyone, anywhere do serious due-diligence and really review a new client's competitive position with a competitive analysis from the "get-go" here, or am I living in some kind of a fantasy dream world?

If you are, so am I.
IMO:

Due-diligence includes investigation of the markets and search terms used in relation to the client's products and services.
Researching the terms and the competitors using the terms is part of the due-diligence.

Building a site around their most searched for keyword phrases and longtail terms.
Offering cross sell, upsell, to visitors on the site so purchasing and getting more product info is easy.

Straight forward navigation.

Reasonable validation and excellent cross browser compatibility.

Tell a friend, user reviews, and wish lists recommended.

Customer management, affiliate management (if needed), news and article management included.

Marketing of course includes SEO and inbound link building. Tracking of all ads, digital or print, use of metrics to track user patterns. Other forms of marketing are discussed, and examples of ROI from past campaigns with other clients can be brought to the table.

Peripheral content, like TOS, privacy, and contact information should be easily accessed. A built in contact form is preferred for email contact to reduce email address harvesting as well as offering the user a contact method that does not need a new program opened.

I also feel that detailed "About Us" info is required to build confidence in the site owner or their business. This page should be about the staff, not about what the company does.

In short, everything that goes into ROI.
The site has to be able to sell effectively and have well defined calls to action.
It has to get listed well for qualified search phrases. (Excluding PPC).
It has to be interesting and/or give the user a reason to keep visitors returning.
It HAS to present the information searched for in a way that captures the visitor's attention.
It should adhere to heat map and eye tracking study results to prioritize the way the information is presented.

"What's in it for me" has to be answered up front immediately.

Reg

[Skywoolf]

I see some good advice here. I have built some very successful sites in the past and agree 100% with RegDCP.

SEO is of course very important but I see grabbing the visitors attention and getting him to look at more pages as being just as critical, if not more so.

I concentrate of getting people to the site (SEO etc), then grabbing their attention, then giving them a reason to keep coming back.

In this part of the world (Asia) on line sales are extremely difficult and often impossible due to local banking rules or lack of facilities so we need to get revenue through on-site advertising, etc.

[RegDCP]

Originally Posted by Skywoolf

I concentrate of getting people to the site (SEO etc), then grabbing their attention, then giving them a reason to keep coming back.

That is it in a nutshell.

I may take some flack here for this, but I find if I follow those guidelines that the good SE results come naturally.

Reg

[Peter (IMC)]

I am fed-up with all the threads here and every where else in so called webmaster and SEO forums that proclaim that validation and accessibility is where it is at!

History repeats itself, over and over again. Every time "something" is "IT"... :) And its always something on-site.

But "IT" never is "links".

Logically, because "links" are so difficult to get. And often when people do get them, they´re not so smart with the link texts. (more proof that links don't work,. :D )

[edhan]

Originally Posted by RegDCP

In short, everything that goes into ROI.
The site has to be able to sell effectively and have well defined calls to action.
It has to get listed well for qualified search phrases. (Excluding PPC).
It has to be interesting and/or give the user a reason to keep visitors returning.
It HAS to present the information searched for in a way that captures the visitor's attention.
It should adhere to heat map and eye tracking study results to prioritize the way the information is presented.

"What's in it for me" has to be answered up front immediately.

Reg

Right on! I totally agreed with this. It will allow a long term benefit in terms of ROI. Not forgetting to capture visitor's email for your list to keep them updated with your latest products or services. This will be the key for ROI.