Google’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 Facebook had cataloged through their Like button system.  While this relationship is an advantage for Bing, there is still concern for Bing that it is using a third party’s data, rather than home-grown data – information Google is now trying to acquire.  Bing does not have the same cache as Google in the hearts, minds and wallets of most marketers, and as such, Microsoft may have missed a trick by resting on the laurels of their relationship with Facebook as their data source.  While Facebook is certainly currently the “industry standard” social network, there would definitely be an opportunity for Bing to leverage its Windows Live network in a similar way to Google’s current +1 proposition; though they have not yet made this move and may suffer for it in the long run.

How Does +1 Work?

When users are logged into their Google Accounts and searching on Google, they will see a “+1” button beside each link – both paid and organic – in the Google results page. The buttons are greyed out until clicked by the user as a sign of their recommendation of a good or relevant website.  Once they have clicked on the link, this recommendation will be shared by Google with the user’s network – so if someone in your “Google +1 Network” (i.e.: Gmail contacts) makes a similar search, then you will see an endorsement for that particular ad or link on your page (assuming you are also signed in to your Google account).  On the paid search side, it is not yet clear how Google will deal with those ads that are both endorsed and have met their daily budget – something of high value to both Google and the networked consumer.  If Google is truly interested in the best user experience, then it seems that they should continue to show the ad, but naturally, there would be outcry from advertisers if their ads were being shown beyond their daily budgets, even if conversions were occurring.

The final, yet-to-be-launched part of this equation is the on-site +1 button that would be placed by webmasters on websites.  This gives consumers the chance to “+1” a website or certain pages, and as such, recommend it to their network as a relevant and recommended website.  If there have been a large number of +1’s outside of your network, then Google may also highlight how many +1’s that specific entry has received as an indicator if it’s relevancy. Also, according to Danny Sullivan from SearchEngineLand.com, anyone registered with Google’s Webmaster Central will be able to see the +1 stats for their organic search listings.

How Google defines your network

According to Search Engine Land, Google’s definition of your network includes Gmail and Google Talk chat lists, people in your contacts list, and people you follow on Google reader or Google Buzz.  We have certainly seen people that have been emailed from Gmail be added to a Google chat list, which means that your network could stretch to a lot of people that you don’t actually know or that you don’t know well enough to determine if you trust their opinions, which could certainly be a flaw in Google’s model.  Time will tell if Google will allow users to link their various social profiles (Facebook, Flicker, LinkedIn, Quora, Twitter, Yelp, etc.) to their Google +1 profiles as they have previously done with their “Google Social Search” profile to help define their social network.

What +1 means for brands

For brands, this will seem like a big change – and a potential threat.  It gives a lot of opportunity for competitors to positively influence their own websites (if not negatively affecting your brand site), but the same could be said for SEO as a whole – it’s an opportunity to improve the relevance and visibility of your website.  There is not yet any clarity on how this change will affect pharmaceutical, financial and other government-regulated industries.

Here are some recommendations for brands as +1 is rolled out:

1.     Generating incremental +1’s may deliver better business results. If so, brands should utilize social media activity and, potentially, incentives to help drive increased +1’s.

2.     Monitor your +1’s in the Google Webmaster tools, along with any resulting traffic trends to identify opportunities or threats to your brand’s properties

3.     Google’s +1 button for placing on your website is not yet released, but in the meantime, brands should consider the pros and cons of adoption, in concert with the Facebook Like button, if not already implemented.

What +1 means for users

The hope is that users will be delivered more relevant results, but from a webmaster’s perspective, it is likely to mean that a new “+1” button will be added to the site, possibly alongside a Facebook Like button, in the hope that it will help to make their online marketing efforts deliver more leads.  Search engines are continuously testing and implementing new ranking signals and result-page layouts to provide the best search results for user queries.  Because of the overwhelming popularity of social platforms that enable users to connect and interact with each other in near real-time, search engines have new signals they are incorporating into their ranking algorithms and new content they are including in their search results.  In this case, Google is looking to create their own data-set to give them more control over the data that will become a large part of their ranking algorithm in the coming months and years.  All of this data is going to come – voluntarily and for free – from Google’s loyal user-base.

The inclusion of social signals into the search algorithms, coupled with the insertion of social content into search results pages, is a natural, but significant evolution in the search landscape.

Stephen Hall is Sr. Partner and Director of Organic Search at GroupM Search. Follow him on Twitter: @SearchBloke

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.

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.

Q1: Is +1 a real threat to Facebook and the “Like” ecosystem?

The initial reaction in the digital community to Google’s motivation can be summed up in the headline from Danny Sullivan’s Search Engine Land website, “Meet +1: Google’s Answer to the Facebook Like Button.” For the past year, pundits have observed with great interest the potential war to come between Google and Facebook. The present and past internet darlings continue to circle in their efforts to curry both advertising and consumer favor. The launch of +1 would, on the surface, appear to signal yet another effort by Google to make social media part of their DNA.

That theory, however, is limited by the means by which users will come onto +1 listings. There are 600 million Facebook users today, and users have the ability to connect to their graph and expose or find content beyond that graph based on privacy settings. In contrast, in the beginning +1 will only be accessible to people in their Google social circle and eventually to those in other social circles, such as Twitter, Flickr and Quora. Obviously, missing from that list is Facebook. In fact, one could contend that the manifestations of social influence on Bing and engine start-up Blekko already provide much of what Google now has to recreate on its own. To do this, Google has to convince users that there is an altruistic benefit in sharing via +1 what the Like feature has come to signify.

Google is going to lean heavily on the potential upside for brands to gain traction. It is clear that brands have a fairly sizable opportunity if the program takes hold and gains traction – but it remains a big if. The greatest difference in the Like environment of Facebook to the +1 of Google is that liking something has the potential for collaboration beyond the action. If a user likes a page then they can either connect with people of similar interest or start dialogue inside Facebook around a page or other content asset. The model for Google +1 is simply to improve the experience and influence others. That model, in fact, makes this move less about Facebook and more about the next topic – social search and the important of relevance.

Q2: What does this do for Google’s “social search” efforts?

First off, what is social search? Google defines their efforts in this space as the ability to help “you discover relevant content from your social connections, a set of your online friends and contacts.” They rightfully acknowledge that there are times when content from people you know is more beneficial than content from random people, or, specific to Google, their own algorithm, without further direction.

The challenge with this belief is that to truly create a social search experience you must combine two conflicting ideas. Search is the expression of explicit intent, but done anonymously; while social is often an implied intent with public visibility of varying degrees ranging from your closely-defined social graph to the entire web. To make social search a reality, people must remove their anonymity and embrace, via Likes or +1’s, a more open ecosystem than previously established. It remains to be seen if that is truly attainable inside a search environment like Google.

More important in the short term, than what it does in redefining Google as a social platform or a social search company, is what +1 does for Google, the search company. In the past four months Google has been hit from all sides over a decrease in quality rankings. The most vocal of critiques include Coding Horror’s “Trouble in the House of Google” and our own summations on our blog, SearchFuel, as part of the on-going battle between Google and Bing.

Google’s response to criticism was fairly quick with an update known as Panda, designed to eliminate duplicate content and the work of content farms that exist solely to rank well and subsequently profit from the click traffic by selling ads encasing such content. In March, Stephen Hall, GroupM Search Sr. Partner, Director, Organic Search (Twitter: @SearchBloke) penned a summary which explored those changes, titled “Google Changes Algorithm to Clean Up Clutter.”

The reality of the situation was that with more companies honing in on the ranking criteria, which are key to the black box algorithm that makes up Google’s organic listings, there was a downward satisfaction (both perceived and real) with results and overall experience. Google’s +1 is another step towards improvement. Google can now take click data associated with listings and pair it with positive signals coming directly from consumers in the active +1’ing of a page to improve rankings. Likewise, the ability to alter rankings at a very personal level based on a user being signed in and exposed to both random and personal associates in their social graph will shift perception.

In this way, we may see the most meaningful short-term benefit to Google. A direct and potentially significant shift towards a social signal factored into its own algorithm of relevancy. Google will be making the +1 icon available for brands to deploy across web properties, and in this regard, it behooves brands to stimulate engagement with the icon.

In a separate piece associated with this POV, we explore the search engine optimization (SEO) implications for brands, and why, whether they want to or not, the potential upside or risk for utilizing the +1 feature will be a key shift in a brand’s SEO strategy moving forward.

Q3: Is this a game-changing innovation or more of the same?

“Historically, Google has struggled to get the social play right. From YouTube to Orkut to Knol, Google has swung for the fences or come late to the game, and has failed to deliver to outside expectations – either as a true social platform or financially to market expectations.”

That paragraph comes from a piece we published in Fall 2009 describing a new product innovation called SideWiki. It would not be surprising if you’ve never heard of SideWiki, as it failed to live up to expectations as an extension into a social context for Google. That innovation predates Google Buzz, Wave, and most recently, HotPot, which to-date have all failed to live up to any form of measurable traction in the social space.

So, what’s the likelihood for success with +1? This is a development that all brands engaged in SEO will have to wrestle with. It will require implementation, but could have a meaningful upside. If brands push the feature forward, then consumers may adapt and adopt. The challenge is going to be the public’s willingness to self-create and utilize a second social network. You must sign up and be logged into your Google Profile to use the +1 system. You can see aggregated +1 data without being logged in, but to take the action of +1-ing a page, you must have a profile. Further, to see personalized +1 results, you must be signed in to your Google account with or without having a Profile.

Whether you consider this enhancement gaming changing probably requires a definition of what game it is changing. If the game is true threat to the Like ecosystem and the Facebook social platform’s stronghold, then scale must be attained – and that does not play to a historically strong area for Google.

However, if the game is improve search experiences through new signals which incorporate user responses post-click, then the game may be changing for the better. It is much easier to envision an enhanced search experience with less noise and more signal through this feature without substantial individual adoption. There are billions of searches done monthly and more than 30% of the queries done on Google result in no click whatsoever. Any enhancement to the experience through better insights will produce greater engagement and help fend off the challenges coming from Bing and others around the world.

What should marketers be doing to position themselves for potential gains?

As is customary when discussing search, implications must be explored in terms of paid and organic opportunities. As this appears to have measurable influence on the signals coming into Google via the +1 function and the likelihood of a reordering of sites as a result, we have developed a second POV on the topic addressing SEO implications.

As we explore the implications for paid search, here are a few key takeaways:

• All ads will default to having the +1 on the listing. Expectations, and early beta testing, suggest that ads with +1’s will see improved click-through rate (CTR). It will be important for brand marketers to understand where users are likely to interact with the +1 icon.
• It feels highly unnatural that someone would click the +1 icon on the SERP before actually visiting the site being advertised. Nor would they be apt to click +1 if they have to come back to the SERP to do so. Once again this puts the onus on a brand to make the +1 icon available on entry points and throughout their site. Bear in mind that people are not “liking” brands here, they are putting their stamp on a specific page.
• The scale of +1 for ads will be important. If people are not registered and/or signed in to their Google account, what they will see is a cumulative number of +1 clicks. This may start to have an impact on overall rankings, CPCs required to remain in desired position, and user perception of where to start. If Site A is in 3rd position but has 30 +1’s, while Site B is first position and only shows 5 +1’s, then it may become common place for the first click to be less tied to position and more to influence. That remains to be seen, but it is now a new, non-traditional factor for search marketers and brand owners to consider as they develop tactical plans in the space.

Conclusion

As with most new product and innovation launches from Google, the questions outnumber the answers in the early days.  If your brand has already embraced social media tagging via Like buttons or other, then it is appropriate to begin a conversation on the requirements to place +1 icons around your site.

If your brand has not done this previously, then the conversation right now should center around the SEO implications as a starting point, and an assessment can be made specific to your brand and category as to the potential reward versus risk, depending on whether +1 becomes a part of the site or not.

Our expectation is that the on-site availability will determine the true reach and influence of the+1 program. Therefore, brands are going to have to monitor the shifts other companies are making as well to determine proper future developments.

Chris Copeland is CEO of GroupM Search. Follow him on Twitter: @SearchBoss

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

Financial Implications of the Yahoo and Microsoft Search Alliance

The analysts in our Predictive Insights unit here at GroupM Search have been busy researching the financial implications the Yahoo and Microsoft Search Alliance will have on advertisers in order to help our clients prepare for the upcoming transition.  The study revealed cost-per-click implications and how increased competition will impact CPCs as paid search advertisers move to one platform. Our analysts also identified a window of volatility advertisers will experience post-transition before the marketplace settles.  Below is our press release on the topic; you may also download the white paper for a deeper look into the study.

Advertisers could see a cost-per-click (CPC) increase up to 78 percent above current Bing CPCs as a surge of competitors move to one platform with the Yahoo and Microsoft Search Alliance transition, a study completed by GroupM Search revealed.

Based on the impact two industry milestones had on advertisers – Yahoo’s introduction in 2007 of Panama and Microsoft’s transition in 2009 from MSN Live to Bing, GroupM Search projects a three-week period of volatility post-transition before costs begin to settle. At the campaign level, advertisers can expect an average increase of 64 percent over current Bing CPCs for unbranded keywords and 78-percent for branded keywords during this time. Once the marketplace settles, CPCs on Bing will rest at 13 to 23 percent above current Bing CPCs for unbranded and branded keywords, respectively.

“Any time you interject change into the auction you invite pricing pressure,” said Chris Copeland, chief executive officer of GroupM Search. “In this case, we see historical evidence that suggests regardless of the bid tools and the preparation, a period of short-term volatility will exist.”

The study was completed by GroupM Search’s Predictive Insights unit, a team comprised of econometric statisticians and mathematicians with expertise cultivated in the area of search marketing. GroupM Search looked at current and historical paid search campaign data to estimate cost implications and how long it will take advertisers to return to equilibrium after this shock to the market. The study included campaign data of 12 market-leading clients who have maintained a steady presence on both Yahoo and Microsoft’s search networks dating back to 2007.

The insights from this study are important for advertisers because it allows advanced preparation for what to expect from this transition.

“If three-week volatility and CPC increases can be countered through better understanding of competitive sets, sophistication of those advertisers and what strategies they use today, then this research will have served our client base well,” said Copeland.

One of the most important insights from the study is the understanding of the number of advertisers with paid search campaigns unique to Yahoo that potentially will now be running on the Microsoft adCenter platform. Within the search marketing campaigns analyzed, on average only 27 percent of the advertisers’ competition for branded and unbranded keywords were running on both Yahoo and Bing. GroupM Search projects that advertisers unique to Yahoo moving to adCenter could lead to a 74-percent increase in competition levels on Bing than exist at present.

This increased competition will be the greatest factor for the amplification in paid search costs, the study revealed. In a pay-per-click auction system, such as paid search, the number of competitors matters greatly in the final price of the item because each competitor vies for its desired position.

“The industry has long known the variances of performance between Yahoo and Bing. What we found and what we believe has the biggest material impact for advertisers are the vastly different competitive sets between the two,” said Copeland. “When you put such a large set of new advertisers of varying sophistication into the mix, you are going to see a less stable CPC marketplace.”

On the heels of the Yahoo and Microsoft Search Alliance transition, however, comes the peak of the holiday season when paid search sees its greatest surge in advertisers and CPCs. With this unique timing, the marketplace could experience bidding variables it hasn’t seen before and it could be early 2011 before everything settles and the “new CPC” is realized.

Copeland added, “It is essential for all parties to get this right and we support the decision to go forward ahead of the 2010 holiday season. However, this predicted fluctuation, combined with holiday bidding strategies, means it could be three to four months before the new normal is set.”

Many companies have effectively utilized Paid Search and YouTube to respond to issues of Reputation Management. Toyota has done so mechanically, but not in a way that effectively connects to their consumers.

On Google, in response to the search “Toyota Recall,” Toyota has a paid ad that send you to information about the recall:

The wording is not consumer friendly; it actually is a bit alarming. Perhaps “Get the latest Info about the Toyota Recall and your Safety” would connect better with the public and support a message of safety. Also, the page to which this paid search ad directs you to is very straightforward. This is the recall, it happens for this reason and here is what you do. There is no sense of responsibility or concern for the emotional state of the consumer. More on that in a moment….

The competition is, more or less, trying to leverage the recall to increase market share and sales using paid search, but poorly. We scanned the big 3 engines, second tiers and even checked out what was happening on the mobile search front.

Chevy (GMC) has multiple ads high on the page, but the ad copy doesn’t really address the concerns of consumers regarding car safety. Ford and Mazda address “safe” and “reliable” respectively, but they are low on the page and may not be noticed. Again, a lost opportunity. Why go to the trouble if you aren’t going to place the ad where people will notice?

Even on the mobile search front where there’s tremendous automotive growth, there was nothing to be found. Across social media forums? Content from consumers and news outlets dominate. Where are automakers, even Toyota? Seems like a valuable opportunity to strategically and appropriately engage in forums that create a more natural and meaningful – thus valuable – relationship between a brand and those who impact its existence.

And now, the big question. Does everyone remember Jet Blue? When passengers were stuck for six hours on the East Coast and were sending out YouTube complaints by cell phone, Michael Needleman, CEO of JetBlue, sent out a YouTube video apologizing, accepting responsibility.

Toyota has a video on YouTube also. It is an opportunity to view their recent commercial right next to videos by others regarding the recall.

Lost opportunities can’t be regained. Effective reputation management is a strategy that must be considered in advance as sooner or later. Every company needs one.

1. Market Share

2. Improved Metrics

3. Revenue

Market Share

For small service-oriented or e-Commerce businesses, click-through-rate and conversions are paramount. However, for large companies, brand recognition is an equally important component of search marketing. Combining organic search with paid campaigns increases exposure for important branded and non-branded key phrases, ensuring that you are in front of your target audience at critical times. It’s pretty simple math – more listings means more chances someone will see one of your listings and associate your company with the search term. When presented with a viable opportunity to increase exposure and position your company as the industry leader, why wouldn’t you?

Improved Metrics

For those that want a metric-driven reason, I have that covered too. It’s common knowledge that Google uses something called Quality Score as a major factor in their AdWords platform. Quality Score is a numerical gauge of an ad’s relevancy. A low quality score can result in higher cost-per-click, lower positioning, or an ad not being displayed at all. In a nutshell, Google rewards relevant, high-quality ads.

A major factor in determining quality score is the relevancy of an ad’s landing page. For example, Company Z has an AdWords ad for the term “quality aerobic shoes.” When a user clicks on the ad, they are taken to a page that contains very little content and no mention of the phrase “quality aerobic shoes.” Google checks the landing page content against the ad’s content to look for relevancy. The absence of important key phrases from the landing results in a lower quality score. The lower quality score results in higher cost-per-click and/or lower ad positioning. And the merry-go-round continues. Adding keyword rich content that takes into account paid campaign efforts can improve organic visibility and quality scores.

In addition to improved quality score, evidence suggests an increase in click-through-rate when both organic and paid listings are present. A recent study by Sha Yang and Anindya Ghose at New York University’s Leonard N. Stern School of Business found that “combined click-through rates are 5.1% higher when paid and organic listings are present simultaneously than when only the organic listings are present.”

Revenue

Ultimately, all business goals end at the bottom line. So, perhaps the strongest argument for participating in both organic optimization (SEO) and paid search is an increase in conversion rates. Yang and Ghose’s study also demonstrates an increased conversion rate when both organic listings and paid listings are present. In fact, according to Yang and Ghose, “the combined conversion rate increases 11.7% when paid and organic listings are present simultaneously than when organic listings alone are present.”

If that’s not evidence enough, the study also found that “on an average, this positive interdependence leads to an increase in expected profits for [their study subject] ranging from 4.2 % to 6.15% when compared to profits in the absence of either of these.”

So, there you have it; pertinent reasons why your company must be engaged in both organic optimization and paid search strategies include: reaching more people, lowering your costs, getting more people to your web properties and improving revenue. Best of all, this is all measurable. If that’s not enough to convince you, then I’m not sure what will.

Try to synchronize your messaging with search and the other marketing platforms you use.  This tip sounds so simple, yet some advertisers forget this important step. Make sure the messaging is consistent so the consumer can recognize your brand and whatever promotion you have quickly.

But how will I know if I yielded positive results you may ask? Set aside incremental funds and test a small market.  Pull popular converting terms and place them in a geo- targeted campaign to see if you will get a higher conversion rate in those markets. Make sure you are able to obtain data from any marketing vertical (print, TV, social, display, etc.), as well as search conversions.

People may lie, numbers don’t – According to a 2007 survey by Marchex, local search is the second most popular service on the internet, behind email. Yet, only about 5% of the total amount spent on advertising goes to local search. According to The Kelsey’s Group annual forecast of mobile local media (published Feb., 2009), mobile ad revenues will increase from $160 million in 2008 to $3.11 billion by 2013!  If a heavy amount of money is spent on print and newspaper advertising, and in that advertising it points to go online, wouldn’t you want to capture a greater local audience that is familiar with the product? The answer is yes! And search will help you tie the two together.

Take a risk – So you haven’t seen any studies or white papers on what you want to test on your client. Maybe it hasn’t been done before and your test could open up the door for other advertisers! You never know if something will work or not until you try.

Try to synchronize your messaging with search and the other marketing platforms you use.  This tip sounds so simple, yet some advertisers forget this important step. Make sure the messaging is consistent so the consumer can recognize your brand and whatever promotion you have quickly.

But how will I know if I yielded positive results you may ask? Set aside incremental funds and test a small market.  Pull popular converting terms and place them in a geo- targeted campaign to see if you will get a higher conversion rate in those markets. Make sure you are able to obtain data from any marketing vertical (print, TV, social, display, etc.), as well as search conversions.

People may lie, numbers don’t – According to a 2007 survey by Marchex, local search is the second most popular service on the internet, behind email. Yet, only about 5% of the total amount spent on advertising goes to local search. According to The Kelsey’s Group annual forecast of mobile local media (published Feb., 2009), mobile ad revenues will increase from $160 million in 2008 to $3.11 billion by 2013!  If a heavy amount of money is spent on print and newspaper advertising, and in that advertising it points to go online, wouldn’t you want to capture a greater local audience that is familiar with the product? The answer is yes! And search will help you tie the two together.

Take a risk – So you haven’t seen any studies or white papers on what you want to test on your client. Maybe it hasn’t been done before and your test could open up the door for other advertisers! You never know if something will work or not until you try.

Thus far, most accounts chosen for the Beta have been enabling the links for their branded Campaigns.  Branded keywords will most likely trigger the Sitelinks versus non-branded.

An advertiser can log into their AdWords account, choose a Campaign, go to the Campaign Settings tab and post up to 10 Sitelinks.  Once the links are named and assigned landing pages, they may show along with your Paid Search ad in Google’s results.

Here you can see an example for First Response pregnancy tests:

And here is another example for Arm & Hammer Cat Litter:

While you can set up to 10 links to be included, keep in mind there is no guarantee any or all of them will show.  A maximum of four links can show at any given time.  For example, First Response has four implemented while only two have shown for this query.  Cat Litter also has four implemented and all are showing for the above query.

We have already seen some amazing lifts in CTR for many of our accounts running Beta Sitelinks.  On average, our clients have seen around 75% – 90% increases in CTR.  Some accounts are even lucky enough to see 100%+ lifts in CTR.

While there are obvious improvements to CTR, conversions are another story.  Preliminary results for only a couple clients do not show us an increase to CVR.  I must stress these results are preliminary.  Over the next month, we will be looking at a larger client based opted into Sitelinks and will then be able to determine the affect they’ve had on CVR. 

Sitelinks are good for searchers because they help them find the page they are looking for more easily.  They are also great for Google because a higher CTR means more clicks, and more clicks means more money for the engine.   From what I can tell so far, Sitelinks do not have an affect one way or another for clients tracking to a conversion, however, I hope to find that some clients will see a lift over the next month.  Be sure to check back for Round 2! 

Do you have any results you can share?  Are you seeing the same average lift in CTR as we have?

The Influenced: Social Media, Search and the Interplay of Consideration and Consumption

A study announced today by GroupM Search, comScore and M80, exploring the interplay of search marketing and social media, reveals the dramatic correlation influenced discovery of brands through social media has with search behavior, including more lower-funnel searches and increased paid search click-through-rates (CTR).

The study,“The Influenced: Social Media, Search and the Interplay of Consideration and Consumption,” explored the correlation between social media exposure and search behavior across different verticals, including automotive, consumer packaged goods and telecommunications.

Key findings include:
- Consumers exposed to a brand’s influenced social media and paid search are 2.8x more likely to search for that brand’s products

- There was a 50% CTR increase in paid search when consumers were exposed to both influenced social media and paid search

- There was a 42-point lift in searcher penetration around brand product terms when consumers were exposed to both influenced social media and paid search compared to paid alone

What the study tells us is bigger than correlation, making the topic at large, Discovery. We’ve learned how internet users discover and engage with brands in social media and how that discovery influences search behavior. The findings help us to better understand how the intent expressed by consumers via search is established through social media exposure and the interplay between the two channels.

Of note, it further validates our view that generating upper-funnel awareness and influencing consideration through influenced social media (social media leveraged by a brand advertiser) can produce better down-the-funnel performance with paid media, such as paid search. In our white paper, we expand on the findings and address the value of the synergy between paid, owned and earned media. Additionally, we address the state of media today, challenges advertisers face, and introduce the discussion of Media Delivery and Media Discovery and the new thinking we must consider in making maximizing engagement that drives lower-funnel activity.

As CEO of GroupM Search-The Americas Chris Copeland addresses in the whitepaper,:

“As advertisers come to recognize a need to create greater connections on a one to one level with consumers, they also must acknowledge a shift in their approach to advertising. If they agree with the assessment that media delivery in traditional forms has a limited impact given the threats identified above, then it is equally important to understand the new advertising mandate of media discovery.

Media discovery represents a shift in approach where allowing your brand to be central to the conversation but doing so in a manner that uses your brand, its products and the assets associated with both at the center. Media delivery has been about using buying clout to drive scale and push out paid media to broad swaths of consumers. Media discovery is about using the owned and earned media that a brand can produce to its advantage.”

He later concludes the implications for digital advertising at large:

“At this stage of digital advertising development, the goal has to be investing more intelligently to get people into your brand consideration and drive them through the process to a location well suited for paid media effectiveness, such as paid search.”

On Tuesday, October 6, GroupM Search, comScore and M80 will sharing the findings and implications of the research for the first time publicly. Check it out at SMX East at 1:30 – 2:45 p.m. in Room 1A03.