SearchFuel Banner

Google Launches Google+ Pages: Insight From GroupM into Why Strategy is Critical; Immediate Steps to Take For Your Business

by ~ November 9th, 2011

If you think a brand’s strategy for the Google+ social network platform is a simple as cranking out a Twitter strategy or driving likes and engagement on Facebook, think again.

100 days after kicking off brands who jumped on the Google+ bandwagon at launch, Google has rolled out Google+ Pages, re-opening the door for businesses to move onto their social network platform. At first glance, Google+ may appear to some as just another social network.  However, Google+ represents a different type of social platform and carries greater meaning for a brand’s potential across the entire Google network. It has been placed at the center of all Google initiatives and, as such, the strategy necessary for success is unique – but critical – for brands.

In recent months, GroupM Search CEO Chris Copeland sat down with Google’s product and social execs, including Vic Gundotra, Bradley Horowitz and Christian Oestlien, to discuss the company’s vision for Google+. Drawing from these conversations and identifying the significance and potential for brands long-term via Google+ Pages, Copeland has developed keen perspective on the platform itself, why strategy is critical for brands, and important actions brands and marketers can take today to set course for success on Google+ and across the Google network.

Read more about these insights in the GroupM white paper shared below. If you want to chat more about it with Chris, follow him on Twitter at @SearchBoss.

Google Launches Google+ Pages for Businesses: Insight from GroupM Into Why A Google +Pages Strategy Is Crit…


Google's Unhealthy Obsession With Speed

by ~ June 30th, 2011

At the recent Google Inside Search event, the online advertising and search giant introduced several new features specific to mobile and desktop search. Google product events always have a curious cadence and this event was no different. Between raucous employees in the crowd and the painstaking effort to explain the smart technology behind the innovation, Google events can often obscure the real potential of the new features. One brief and obscure event element was Google’s definition of search. Bing has positioned itself as a decision engine and Google has stepped forward and proclaimed that search is about removing barriers from what you seek, preventing your train of thought from being derailed.

One newly announced feature designed to do just that is Google Instant Pages. Instant Pages takes the Google Instant feature (launched last year) and moves the concept forward by anticipating the most popular searches and producing cached entry points with no page load delay. Not since Tom Cruise and Anthony Edwards proclaimed their undying need for speed in “Top Gun” has a duo seemed so singularly focused as Larry Page and Sergey Brin are with improving the speed of searching on Google.

Google Instant pages is the latest advancement designed to shorten the amount of time an individual user spends on a single query. There are billions of queries every month on Google, so the idea that a vast majority could be impacted for the faster is a compelling feature for Google and a technological advancement worth trumpeting. The problem is that Google is inexplicably obsessed with the immediate gratification moment of the individual search rather than viewing the lifecycle of a search journey.

Apparently, the way Google feels it can best assist in this manner is to speed up the search process for a user. That is helpful if what I am seeking is of a nature that one query or even one session is enough. But what happens when I need multiple data points from different sources to further my decision? Or when the realities of life, work, family, etc. interfere with my ability to drill into a topic. As I’ve said before, search is an output that comes from a personal desire to either discover new information or to reach a destination in our decision-making process. Either way, search is often a process or journey, and three seconds saved here and there are nothing to dismiss, but it is not what people ultimately will reward with future behavior and usage.

What people want is a search service that enables them to store and accumulate knowledge as they progress through the process. When conducting our latest Search and Social in the Purchase Pathway research, we found that consumers say they use search for pricing and product research. We also found that the average purchase in high consideration categories such as consumer electronics and cellphones had nine to 11 touchpoints between search and social media. This suggests that consumers will repeatedly search and use the channel for refinement as they become more educated.

Our findings also revealed that in the abovementioned categories, it was taking on average two months to reach a final purchase. And that data point is the one that suggests what Google is trying to do with Instant and now Instant Pages are short-term responses when consumers need long-term solutions. What users of search engines need is the ability to catalog their knowledge as they accumulate it. As people move from search to search over the course of weeks, not seconds, the ability to reference what they have found previously and what they clicked on can enable a more fluid and positive experience.

Google Instant Pages further enhance the destination phase of a searching pattern. I want to know the weather or events taking place in London next week and it will help me. But, the discovery phase that exists in an overwhelming majority of searches is still being underserved. Google states that it wants to help avoid the derailing of your train of thought, but it is building the track for the set with a short attention span and need for instant gratification. Enabling the track with a run long enough to serve this multi-step, multi-session journey consumers are taking to a conversion decision would be a truly ground-breaking effort worth speeding up development on for the market.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and published in Instant Insights on ClickZ, Tuesday, June 21, 2011. Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.


Um, No, Search Is Not The ‘Worst’ Form of Advertising

by ~ April 29th, 2011

GroupM Search Chief Says Branded Search Plays A Bigger Role In Purchase Decisions Than You Think

I don’t know Josh Shatkin-Margolis (author of “Search is the Worst Form of Advertising,” AdAge, 4/26/11), but I know his argument. The sales pitch is simple: search is not real advertising, and in his mind, is a small and over-credited piece of the purchase process when compared to a channel of real influence and persuasion, display. Keep in mind Mr. Shatkin-Margolis apparently works at a display media retargeting firm—a business built on the foundation of search and consumer intent. So I’m surprised he’d use such a tired argument to denigrate search to prove his point.

In his article, Mr. Shatkin-Margolis contends search lacks persuasion and is wasted on convincing consumers that they are making the right decision. He also suggests an awkward analogy that you would never credit a checkout clerk for persuading someone to buy Coke over Pepsi.

Yet there are copious amounts of data available proving the role search plays in influencing a purchase decisions. Branded search is more closely associated with in-store product placement than the checkout clerk; and yes, brands often examine sales impact in their overall marketing efforts. And that ignores the impact of generic search and SEO which apparently did not warrant consideration.

In recent research published by GroupM Search, titled The Virtuous Circle – The Role of Search and Social Media in the Purchase Pathway, we found that 86 percent of all consumers found search to be somewhat or very important in their purchase pathway. The research which was designed to explore the impact of two channels together, not push one at the expense of another, also found that more than one-third of all buyers said search helped them decide what brands to buy.

That suggests a decision had to be made by the consumer and search played a role in a significant numbers of instances. Not bad for a channel where Mr. Shatkin-Margolis contends people only spend two percent of their time and do not have the advantage of pretty pictures in the form of graphical ads. Anyone paying attention to the evolution of Rich Ad formats in search could argue the search experience is more robust than ever before.

What bothers me the most is why this is even the basis for an argument in 2011. Mary Meeker, while at Morgan Stanley before moving to Kleiner Perkins, estimated that $50 billion had yet to transition from traditional advertising to digital. Rather than building a case for extending the proven performance of search with retargeting that takes some of the better characteristics into the display environment, Mr. Shatkin-Margolis wants to discuss credit. It is an argument that cross-channel attribution advocates tout – search gets too much credit and display plays a larger role than is recognized.

As a guy who has spent his career squarely in search, I’ve heard this argument time and again. There is no doubt that search is the beneficiary of being the touchdown maker. Likewise, there is absolutely no dispute from this perspective that when aligned with TV, display and every other media type, search works better and the dollars work smarter. Ironically I have never seen a TV buyer suggest search was taking from their pocket and not properly attributing credit back. Yet it is an all too frequent display and search occurrence. And if you think that’s something, wait until we start to see discussion around Facebook/display/search attribution modeling and who really is doing the lifting.

It fascinates me – whenever the display versus search argument is made, it rarely has anything to do with true attribution and shared impact for better performance. Instead, it is a thinly-veiled money grab from what should be the desired partner, not the enemy.

The mentality that to in order advance one sector you have to put down another is not helping the digital industry. Many businesses are being built that use consumer intent and signals combined with data and buying algorithms. Those businesses will truly elevate all sectors of digital without suggesting any one area is so deficient it should be decried to the masses. Every search advertiser should be engaged in search retargeting, just as they should be exploring how to leverage real time auctions, audience based buying and where social media is going to take them.

If you want to make a case for a sound communications strategy built with proper mix models and allocations that complement and maximize investments to reach a more productive ROI, then I’m in. If you want to take your shot at search as a channel in an effort to elevate display advertising as if search is not truly advertising, then you need more data and conviction than this old argument.

To quote Omar Little from HBO’s ‘The Wire,’ “If you come at the King, you better not miss.” Distinguishing your line of business by denigrating search is a bullet fired far from the mark.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and was  published in AdAge, Monday, April 29, 2011.  Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.


How Google +1 Could Impact Your SEO

by ~ April 1st, 2011

This article offers perspective from GroupM Search on the SEO implications of Google’s +1 feature. It is a follow up to a POV published by GroupM Search on 3/31/2011 about the strategic implications of +1 and its meaning for brands and the digital marketplace.

Google +1 buttonGoogle’s “+1” (pronounced, “plus one”) is a type of social media sharing and recommendation feature released this week by Google to help them improve their website ranking system and improve the relevancy of their search engine results. This is a positive system for highlighting websites that you, as a consumer, think are good or deserve special consideration by your network.  There is no “-1” in this system, although, Google does already have a ‘negative’ endorsement tool in their “Block all domain.com results” function.

Google’s launch of +1 is being broadly compared with the Facebook “Like” button, and it appears to be a similar system.  Indeed, we would suggest that Google is piggy-backing on the simplicity and success of the “Like” button that so many web users are familiar and comfortable with.  The other side of “+1” that is still under development is their website button – a widget, which, as with Facebook’s Like button, can soon be embedded into any page on a website and will allow users to pass their approval – through Google – to others in their Google +1 Network.  Don’t underestimate the value of this part of the equation – if there is one thing that most websites want, it is the #1 rank in Google. If this button can help elevate your website to number one (at least for those in the networks of those who have “+1’d” it), then adoption of the widget is a no-brainer.  This does not negate the need for search engine optimization (SEO) – there is still a baseline that Google (and Bing) need to take to let their algorithms do their work, so an optimized website is always going to help you rank for key terms. But if this widget makes the difference between #5 and #1, then expect to see broad adoption, and quickly.

Why Is Google Doing this?

This move is a fairly natural extension from Google’s existing social search product that has been around for the last couple of years.  It is also designed to help improve search result quality, which has recently been called into question.  Last year, Microsoft’s Bing search engine beat Google to the punch in signing a deal with Facebook to provide them with access to data from Facebook’s ubiquitous social network.  Access to this data meant that Bing was able to – when users were signed in to Facebook – deliver recommendations based on the data from their network that Continue reading >>


Google +1: The Strategy Behind the Latest Search Innovation

by ~ March 31st, 2011

On Wednesday, March 29, Google rolled out a new search product innovation called “+1.” +1 is designed to allow users an opportunity to recommend ads and pages they have found to be useful. Doing this will enable other Google users to see pages and ads that have been “+1’d” (Google’s newest attempt at verb creation).

The Wall Street Journal has an extensive write-up on the specifics of the topic in an article titled “Google Wants To Be More Social,” as does the official Google blog.

Google +1 Examples

In launching +1, Google appears to be making a direct challenge to the well-established “Like” functionality of Facebook. The move continues a recent shift in the way Google approaches its own algorithm and rankings, which have come under substantial scrutiny in the past three to four months.

Google product manager Christian Oestlien acknowledged, “Recommendations play a vital role in our decision-making process.” Google supported this with additional statistics that suggest 90% of consumers trust recommendations from people they know, while 71% say reviews from family members or friends influence purchase decisions. These figures align with recent research published by GroupM Search which indicates that more than 50% of all consumers had their perceptions changed about brands based on social influences.

At present, there seems to be three central questions to consider about the broader plan behind such a move by Google. There is also the discussion of what opportunity this presents to marketers. Continue reading >>


+1 – Google’s Answer to Facebook’s Like Button

by ~ March 30th, 2011

Today we received the announcement from Google about the release of “+1”.  At the tail end of 2010, I wrote a post highlighting the inclusion of social data into the search mix, in which I stated that Google, while behind Bing in terms of true social search integration, would not be far away from (yet another) attempt to build their own social data set.  And here it is.

Google has made various forays into the social world with some more successful (in Brazil anyway) than others.  However, it is clear that through their Profiles pages, and their less invasive tactics like the Google Places pages, that gathering social data from its users is high on Google’s list of things to do.

Enter the +1.  Nicely non-invasive and with the ability to help guide search results both from a direct (on the SERP) and indirect (on the website) point of view.  It’s simple, in tradition with Facebook’s “Like” button; and for now, it’s positive — there is no “-1” button…yet. But but the choice of a number makes this nicely scalable for Google, should they Continue reading >>


The Me-Ification Of Search And Social

by ~ March 14th, 2011

Chris Copeland wants to be #1. Correction: Chris Copeland knows that Chris Copeland is already an expert, a search and social marketing guru, but he wants Google to know that he is all of that and for Google to give him the self-glorifying satisfaction that comes with one thing: Chris Copeland ranking #1 in the Google search results for the term Chris Copeland.

I am personally excited because I have my sights set on not just being #1 for me, Chris Copeland, in the engines, but am now turning my focus toward the self-gratification that comes with having the most Twitter followers that hang on my every self-serving and validating 140 burst of brilliance from my @SearchBoss handle.

Actually, the paragraphs above have almost not a word of truth in them, but they do make a point – one that seems to have been lost in the gold rush surrounding the latest digital trend. You see, if you asked me to describe my personal philosophy, it would be more “Act like you have been there” than “I’m a Golden God.” But, apparently somewhere in the last few years, that philosophy came to mean that I wasn’t old-school, just old — at least in our industry.

My job is not about building the brand of Me first. If the adage is true that you can’t take it with you, I have to believe that goes beyond the material possessions to the immaterial of the social sphere. I only need a retweet from St. Peter at the pearly gates when the time comes — not from 1,000 of spambots before I leave this world.

I’m not a rocket scientist or doing brain surgery every day, but what we do in advertising does have a purpose and a meaning. If you care about this business, then you approach your job with a hearty desire to impact the masses – not with your self-fulfilling messages, but rather by connecting consumers with brands and being relevant. It’s not Don Draper sexy 99.44% of the time, but it has its moments. Continue reading >>


Can Impression-Level Data Define A New Click-Through Rate?

by ~ March 2nd, 2011

What is a successful search? For a brand, does it really boil down to a click as we know it today or is there undetermined value at the impression level? GroupM Search CEO Chris Copeland provided commentary today on the notion of “success rate” as defined by Hitwise, and the implications this statistic could have on CTR as we know it. As consumers can get the answers they’re looking for more and more without ever clicking and leaving the SERP, he suggests attention should be redirected to a broader discussion on how engines can help brands measure the true effectiveness of search marketing programs by making impression data available to advertisers.

Check out the article, “Recalculating the Click-Through Rate in Search,” here on ClickZ.

Filed under: Paid Search | No Comments >>

googlemakesachange: Will Anyone Notice?

by ~ January 20th, 2011

When making a list of the opportunities in search advertising, communicating depth and expressing creativity via the content of a listing is sometimes limited. For all of search’s remarkable feats, no one is ever going to mistake core paid search as a “rich” experience. As Google layers richer experiences around the core paid listings, it is becoming more difficult for some advertisers to stand out. Making this potentially impossible now is a new change to Google’s guidelines of ad copy specific to capitalization and display URLs. Continue reading >>

Filed under: Paid Search | 1 Comment >>

Inside the Machine: How Search Is Influencing The Evolution Of Marketing And Beyond For Brands

by ~ January 18th, 2011

Each month, Mediapost provides me an opportunity to offer perspective on the search industry and the evolution I see it going through. To close out 2010, I thought it might be of interest to hear not from me about the importance of search and where it is going to take us, but from some of the brands that are living this change every day. As luck would have it, I moderated a fireside chat at the Search Insider Summit in Utah with marketers from Blackrock, Kimberly Clark and SAP. The following is a portion of the conversation in quote format on a variety of topics.

What struck me during the discussion was just how important the integration of search has become and the increasing smart ways that brands are using the consumer intention expressed in search to not only shape their media buying but the way in which their business will come to market in the near and long term

With that, here are a few quotes from the panelists that I thought help give perspective on search, its place in the broader context of brand marketing and where things are headed. Continue reading >>

Filed under: Paid Search | No Comments >>