It's no secret that 2014 holds several promising opportunities for inbound marketers. The industry is projected to see a lot of continued growth aided by increased budgets for the year. Earlier this year, Cyrus wrote a post announcing the Moz Industry survey results. According to that survey, there seem to be a few slight shifts in demand for certain marketing activities, which ultimately has an effect on where marketers are allocating most of their time.
Though some of the data in this post includes data from the Industry survey, most of what you will find is a collection of information from 12 other sources. For more granular details, you can dive into the Slideshare embed at the end of the post. Let's dig in!
Marketers reported that demand for content creation increased by 70.94% in 2013, falling in line with most projections from early 2013. This trend is also expected to continue throughout 2014. Analytics was the second highest in demand, with an increase of 64.46%.
Link Building saw the biggest decrease in demand at 20.2%, followed by Email Marketing at 12.06%, Keyword Research at 11.03% and Link Removal at 10.87%.
When comparing demand vs. the percent of what Marketers are spending their time doing, the matchup is very similar. It makes sense. The biggest demands go hand in hand with where Marketers are allocating their time—Analytics, Content Creation, Social Media Marketing, and Keyword Research.
The Inbound Marketing industry is constantly changing and sees a ton of new, useful information on the regular. Keeping up on the latest industry knowledge is key; but what are the most popular avenues to stay up to date on the latest industry trends?
Surprise! (Not really.) 93.97% of Marketers use blogs as their go-to source to keep up with the latest industry shifts. Not too far behind were Social Media at 74.01% and Online Guides at 73.37%.
Of those surveyed, 45% say they spend more than 2 days per month researching and learning about the latest trends in SEO—more than any other area of digital marketing. I think it's fair to say SEOs are like a bunch of sponges soaking up water. Except in this case, the water is actually knowledge. SEOs = Content Carnivores!
SEO
Key takeaway: Budget increases are helping companies implement more marketing automation.
The results from the Moz Industry Survey reveal that Digital Marketers will have increased budgets in 2014, if projections stand correct. That's great news for the industry as a whole and shows the SEO industry continues to grow.
According to ExactTarget, 73% of those surveyed are currently using SEO/SEM in their marketing efforts and 71% are using some form of Content Management platform. The current and projected similarities between the two are across the board, due to the fact that both go hand in hand with one another, though Content is projected to grow slightly more than SEO/SEM in 2014.
Marketing Automation tops the list for where most Marketers plan to increase budgets, according to ExactTarget. It is clearly one of the most popular avenues for increase budgets this year, but it is imperative to understand that it helps scale your efforts; not actually do marketing for you. Once you've determined that it's time to invest in marketing automation, consider the platform that best suits your goals. HubSpot has a great learning guide that does a fantastic job explaining everything you need to know before making the financial commitment, and I strongly encourage you to read it; even if you aren't planning on adding it to your mix of tools this year.
Content
Key takeaway: Create a strategy so you have time for the king.
It is clear that Content is, and will continue to be, king of 2014. A large percentage of B2B Marketers are or plan to spend a decent amount of their budgets on Content this year, but it looks like there is still plenty of room for improvement. Data from CMI indicates 49.5% of Marketers don't have a documented content strategy and are challenged with producing engaging content.
Not having enough time is also a common thing we hear when it comes to content creation. The first step in the right direction is coming up with a strategy. Once there is a plan in place and you have nailed down your target market, you are one step closer to writing content specifically tailored to the group you want to reach. Creating a list of topics and a schedule for the posts is the next vital step. Believe it or not, schedules do help save time; it's just a matter of putting in the time to save time.
Social
Key takeaway: Use the network your target demographic is using.
Facebook continues to be the Social network of choice for most internet users, though some suggest it has reached its peak usage from the younger demographic. Despite those claims, Facebook continues to have the highest frequency of Social Media site use with 63% daily visits, according to PEW Research Center. With the highest number AND the most engaged users, Facebook continues to dominate the social landscape.
The key takeaway with Social Networks boils down to what channel your target market happens to be using. For example, if you are primarily targeting a female audience, consider focusing on Pinterest. According to a survey from Pew Research Center, one third of women in the U.S. use Pinterest. If you are able to focus on multiple Social Networks, look at the cross tabulation of Social Platforms for your target demographic to help determine where you should allocate your time and effort.
Mobile
Key takeaway: Put responsive design in your 2014 roadmap!
More and more people are purchasing smartphones these days, and the trend continues to climb the charts. On top of that, sales of tablets are also taking off—outperforming both PCs and laptops in the last quarter of 2014, according to IDC. Consumers have over 100 tablets to choose from these days, and the number of options continues to increase. Pew Research Center says that 90% of all Americans own a phone; 58% of which are smartphones. Of those, 63% mostly use their phone to access the internet. If your website isn't responsive, it is highly likely that you are missing out on an ever growing user-base.
With location-based services on mobile devices, we can connect in ways that were unimaginable only four years ago. Most people don't let their mobile out of their sight— 44% of cell owners have slept with their phone next to their bed because they wanted to make sure they didn't miss any calls, text messages, or other updates during the night. We have the ability to know where our customers are and what their schedule looks like (through their calendar). Are we far off from walking into a store and automagically receiving special offers on our phone without using foursquare to check-in? The sky is the limit!
Whether you decide to make a mobile app or create a responsive website, 2014 is the year to get mobile on your roadmap.
Local
Key takeaway: Local mobile searches convert, so make sure you're the one that shows up.
The evolution of local has rapidly improved over the past year and will continue to do so throughout 2014. As mobile usage continues an inevitable upward trend, local searches on mobile devices will also soar. According to LocalVox, 88% of local mobile searches convert to a phone call or visit within 24 hours. It's clear that not keeping up with your local SEO will only help your competitors.
Key takeaway: Email marketing increasingly provides a great value for a low cost.
Email is one traditional marketing channel that continues to show steady growth. According to ExactTarget, "98% of marketers plan to increase or maintain their spend in 2014. Email Marketing was among the top five at 58%." Being among the lowest cost per lead, also producing high quality and quantity of leads, it's no wonder Email Marketing continues to be one of the favorite channels amongst online marketers.
Despite what you may think, email marketing is a channel that continues to grow as marketers fine-tune their message to be more personal and capture the readers' interest. In the past, it was common for email marketing to be impersonal and somewhat spammy. As time has passed, we have learned how to better reach our audiences through video, high quality photos, responsive newsletter templates, and of course, well written content that all comes together to make readers want more.
For a more in-depth look at the data, feel free to take a gander at the slides on SlideShare!
There is so much wrong here.
Okay, so I downloaded the raw data straight from the source ([2013_Moz_Industry_Survey_Raw_Results.xls] file from the bottom of this page: https://moz.com/industry-survey) just to ensure I was checking the numbers.
First of all, the individual response segments (Increased, Stayed the same, Decreased) in the "Demand for the Following Marketing Activities in 2013" results are misrepresented. Here's the first issue:
"Link Building saw the biggest decrease in demand at 20.2%"
No it didn't. Link building demand, according to the survey results, gained a net increase in 2013. The problem with the analysis is that it frames the ~20% responses of "Decreased" as a "decrease in demand." That's incorrect.
Here's the breakdown (*** My percentages seem to be slightly off because the 'n' in the survey data seems to be different than what is listed in the blog post, but in a relative sense, these numbers apply):
So, yes. Roughly 1/5th of survey takers said (hopefully based on their company data in real dollars instead of # of clients, or worse, their general feeling) that link building demand decreased in 2013. BUT... 30% said it increased, while the remainder either said it stayed the same or didn't answer the question. Based on the raw numbers, there was a net increase in link building demand in 2013.
----------
Okay, next.
"When comparing demand vs. the percent of what Marketers are spending their time doing, the matchup is very similar."
The post attempts to make a relationship comparison with the "Demand for the Following Marketing Activities in 2013" and the "% of Time Doing" responses." That would definitely be a useful point in the analysis, except there's a major flaw here. The "Demand for the Following Marketing Activities in 2013" response options are based on relative values, and the "% of Time Doing" options are based on absolute values.
So, say you had 3 activities, and their "% of Time Doing" looked like this over two periods:
2012
2014
continued...
...continued
Suddenly, activities B & C are killing it! They're on the rise! But that's not a good analysis, because they're both relatively smaller (exaggeratedly so in this example). It doesn't make sense to compare those relative results to an absolute "% of Time Doing" and suggest that they could be connected, since activity A is still obviously by far and away the most popular activity, and relative changes are disconnected from that fact.
Here's the whole paragraph I referenced above:
"When comparing demand vs. the percent of what Marketers are spending their time doing, the matchup is very similar. It makes sense. The biggest demands go hand in hand with where Marketers are allocating their time—Analytics, Content Creation, Social Media Marketing, and Keyword Research."
It makes sense? Again -- "The biggest demands go hand in hand with where Marketers are allocating their time" -- That's great, but you aren't analyzing the "biggest demands." You're analyzing the demand delta.
----------
"The key takeaway with Social Networks boils down to what channel your target market happens to be using."
Okay, I agree, but how does that apply to the data shown in the 'Social' analysis section? The section opens with explaining how much Facebook is dominating (the data visualization shows the same thing), and then the key takeaway is that you should target networks based on your target demographics? There's a small mention of that cliché social stat (the 'women love Pinterest!' stat), which is good, but it still seems like this is another disconnect between the data collected and the 'key takeaway' given. I think a better takeaway would be "Facebook still dominates, but supplement your strategy with targeted effort based on audience (such as Pinterest for women or Instagram for young peeps)."
----------
"Email marketing increasingly provides a great value for a low cost."
Okay, this is an honest question. Where are these delta numbers coming from to make that relative statement? The numbers I see in the 'Email' section are just % stats on how well certain campaigns are doing in 2014. I have looked through the Moz 2014 data and the Moz 2012 data, and I don't see any questions in the 2014 survey that ask about email success vs. past years, nor do I see matching absolute questions 2014 vs. 2012 on email success in order to make the comparison.
Traditionally, email has been a channel that has had decreasing returns as marketers continue to beat it into the ground and customers fine tune their blinders to email marketing… so that's why I'm skeptical. The key takeaway here states that the "great value:low cost" element is increasing. I didn't open the ExactTarget study because of the lead gen wall, so maybe the numbers are in there.
The post also says: "Despite what you may think, email marketing is a channel that continues to grow…" That might be true, although I don't know the numbers. But growth in demand, dollars spent, time spent, etc. does not equal increasing value for the cost. It just equals marketers driving the channel into the ground. Again, hopefully I'm wrong here and there's more data that I'm not seeing.
----------
I'll stop now.
(Please, someone show me what I'm missing because I hope I'm wrong about some of this, but on first look these things just don't add up for me.)
Applaud your efforts but you're not supposed to take these things seriously. This isn't a dig at Moz, you, or anyone who turns data into content but all pieces such as this can be scrutinized at length, and should never be accepted on face as being both valid AND reliable. The question should be whether or not their findings reflect your experiences [Debate]. /I've probably missed the point anyway!
I think it's more the validity of the analysis of the data rather than the data itself he is picking up on. The findings in the data don't match up with the findings of the narrative in the original piece.
^^^^ Yes, this.
I think the data here is cool to look at, but pretty useless when it boils down. The fact is link building is still a major factor, and the wrong kind of link building can still bring your website tumbling down like a ton of bricks. As far as saying Facebook is still the dominate social network....that's not really going out on a limb. IMO, a good article, but not very actionable. As far as a content marketing calendar...very good idea for a B2B blog, not really necessary for a B2C blog.
Ryan... surely you paid a lot of attention... but it seems you jumped directly onto the data shared and substantially passed the introduction of the post itself, where you can find this:
most of what you will find is a collection of information from 12 other sources.
So... the Industry Survey is not the only source, therefore debunking what Kurtis wrote basing all the counter-analysis only on 1 of 12 sources... well, it seems wasted time to me.
Said that, a good exercise yours :)
Hi Gianluca! I don't think you understood what I was saying. Please read again. I'm using specific examples where the post author made connections between specific data and his conclusions (despite where it came from).
Also, in the case where I believe I was missing some data, I specifically said so.
I'd be glad to continue this conversation if you can specifically show me where my objections are incorrect.
Ryan, while I certainly appreciate your critique of the analysis, I'm not sure your objections are very helpful or ultimately lead to different conclusions, i.e.
Let's not lose the forest through the trees!
If you want to dismiss everything because you disagree with semantics or analysis, fine, but I think you risk losing out on the larger picture. The data and the conclusions we can draw from it are invaluable.
If you disagree with the conclusions, I'd love to see you take this wealth of data to construct counter-points. (i.e. demand for link building services is actually outpacing other services)
That's a post I'd love to publish!
Hi Cyrus - Thanks for chiming in! I'm a little confused by your response, though. Can you let me know where I indicated that I was wanting to "dismiss everything" or that I disagree with the conclusions?
At multiple points I stated that I agree with (some of) the conclusions or point out that they may be true, but explained that the analysis of the data is weak and/or incorrect. I don't believe any of my comments were direct objections about the conclusions or implications of them.
Just because the conclusions may be correct, doesn't mean that the means to get there were the right ones. I'll clarify: I love the fact that the data has been collected and find it valuable (and, of course, give big props to Dr. Pete). The biggest problem I see here is that the analysis is done without rhyme or reason, and many less experienced entry-level marketers & SMB owners look up to Moz for direction and the formation of their own thought process on these things. In my opinion, that creates a responsibility to correctly analyze the data -- instead of taking the data and the conclusions that many online marketers hold as true and randomly drawing lines between them.
It's really easy to do that in this case and with these conclusions, but what happens when we're tackling tougher issues with more gray areas? With your involvement in Moz Academy I'm sure you can understand the concern of teaching incorrect practices, especially when later down the line they can influence major budget and decisions about marketing direction for many companies.
I think it would be more effective if you showed me where you disagree with my commentary on the **data analysis**, because that is what my comment was about. If my attempt at holding a standard for correct data analysis is unhelpful, I'd love to have you show me what would be more helpful to the community. I'd also be open to tabling this until we can discuss in person at MozCon. Let me know!
Ryan, I totally see your point, and Moz should hold itself to high standards of data analysis.
Sometimes your analysis drives like a Cadillac, but sometimes a Ford Pinto that only makes left turns and gets lost once in awhile will still get you to your destination. This isn't an excuse for poor analysis - I just want to get to the mall. For me, it's simply a different priority.
Regardless, I do appreciate you contributing to the conversation and holding us to a higher standard. Definitely something we can learn from.
Hey Cyrus - Thanks for the follow up. It's all in a good effort to be more successful together. I'm looking forward to doing my part and contributing where I can, and I know you are too. Cheers.
Jumping in, since I was heavily involved in the original analysis. The link-building question is complex, and I think this is an issue of points of view more than a single right or wrong answer. It is fair to say that the question does not prove an overall drop in link-building demand. Demand did not drop 20%. Being as precise as possible, the survey indicates that 20% of our respondents who provided information about link-building demand indicated that they saw less demand for those services in the previous year.
It is true that, across the services where people reported demand trends, link-building had the highest number of respondents reporting a drop in demand. This is a real and useful number, and while it doesn't tell the whole story, combining this drop with the increase is also insufficient.
Here's the problem, generally speaking. Every other service reported some increase in demand as well, in part because inbound marketers are generally seeing increased demand for all services. In a sense, though, this isn't what we want to know. We want to know is, relative to that general increase, which services are moving which direction. Relativistically, it is fair to say that link-building demand fell for more consultants/companies/etc. than demand for other services fell. Again, this isn't the whole picture (and your overall point in that regard is fair), but it is a valid observation - if we don't over-interpret it.
I would also argue that we're seeing similar trends not only in this survey but anecdotally across the industry. Right or wrong, Google's actions over the past two years have hampered link-builders, especially people who don't do it particularly well. More importantly, Google's actions have scared potential customers, and that has and will impact demand.
It's of course important to note that, even if our survey were flawless (and no survey is), what we're noting is an average trend. Any given company could have seen a dramatic uptick in link-building demand, and none of this indicates that link-building is dead. However, I think it is important - especially for agencies - to be aware of the trend and how Google's actions may be impacting demand for services.
Yo Dr. Pete! First and foremost, thank you so much for everything that you do helping us gather more data as an industry and understand more about the online marketing landscape. My comments (as you could probably figure) aren't an objection to the data collected, your process, etc. They are merely objections for how the data was analyzed in this post.
You're correct that there are legitimate observations that can be made here. I agree. The only thing I have an issue with is teaching the wrong analytical thought process to the entry-level marketers and SMB owners that may not understand how to properly analyze this type of data.
I think there's one more big question here, if we can simplify the equation to just link building and content marketing. I would argue that link building is different than content marketing in that the desired result is very specific (increase in number of quality links), while content marketing can have many different desired results and KPIs that are used to track its success. At the same time, I believe more agencies are replacing their link building offering with "content marketing + outreach", meaning that even if a client asks for links, if the agency uses a content marketing project to get them, how is it categorized? Is that an actual change in demand from the clients or is it just being framed differently by the agencies? I don't know these answers, I just think they're good things to think about.
(Edit: Misspeled a word)
I think it can definitely be hard to separate out industry changes over time. For example, if, as a content producer, we shift from link-building posts to content-marketing posts, then naturally our audience and survey respondents will shift as well. Looking across all of the data and what I see in the industry, I don't think that explains away what we're seeing, but those forces are certainly jumbled together in a way that makes analysis over time difficult.
Another good example is link removal services. Over the past two surveys, demand has grown from nothing to something, which looks massive. To any of us with industry knowledge, though, we know that that's partly because the entire idea didn't really exist two years ago, at least not in any way that mattered to people. To me, what's interesting is that the overall demand for link removal is still fairly small (relative to how much we all talk about it). Yet, someone else could say that this grew "infinity %" survey-over-survey, and they'd essentially be correct. We need more than that data alone to tell the story.
"We need more than that data alone to tell the story."
Exactly. No data will be perfect, but with a focused effort to remove weaknesses in the analysis of the data we do have, we will be much better off. And that pretty much sums up why I left a comment in the first place.
Thanks for spending the time to chat about this :) See ya at the Con of Moz.
#polemic #conspiranoia
I think that a no small percentage is calling now "doing content marketing" what was before "doing link building", the same way a not small percentage has changed his "name" from SEO to Inbound Marketers.
Correlated to this, many of those that were doing not exceptional link building are now doing not exceptional content marketing (and usually being its real purpose to build links).
Some of them also become "social media marketers" and doing same old job. Blasting links to everyone and everywhere, every time.
No wondering why social networks change rules of game too.
From the above graphs I am thrilled to know about social media obsession, I knew the future is social media but I am glad to read the above figures.
I agree that several points raised here do not make sense unless you really experiment them on your site. Like for example, link building for me still is one of the best ways to rank. However, it must also be stressed out that you need to be very careful when it comes to building links. Quality content and links go hand and hand to rank your site well.
I certainly appreciate your critique of the analysis, I'm not sure your objections are very helpful or ultimately lead to different conclusions
Link removal increased - thanks to "cheap and fast SEO companies"...
By far the best discussion on Inbound Marketing !
For the past 18 months, I've been working at a startup running the marketing. I've been using every inbound marketing technique I can find, developing high quality content and getting backlinks from authoritative and relevant sources. Organic traffic was growing steadily for a little over a year. I can say I've been applying many of the techniques told in this post.
I'm really surprised that I cannot see site revamp as ongoing strategy to improve both UX and SEO: ths is very time consuming and should appear in stats !
Thanks for the post Kurtis! You mentioned that Facebook was the Network of choice yet I would say that this statement was to general seeing that each Social Platform offers different tools.
So depending on what you are trying to accomplish, Social networks usually are fitted to your Marketing needs. Facebook would be more popular amongst personal users for keeping in touch or looking at other peoples profiles for leisure. We are talking about Social Media for Marketing purposes. Make sure as a Marketer that you are able to understand which Social Platform offers which tool set and how to use it!
I would also like to add the fact that Email Marketing is the most powerful tool for customer retention, this is something to add to this post!
I agree. Using the correct social network depending upon what you are trying to promote. Most of the content posted on Facebook by business has no reason to be there in the first place. Also see a lot of failed "promoted posts" for the same reason.
Great post! I've been looking for tips like these for our project [link removed] good thing about us is we cater local customers, but still we have big competitors and we need a more unique and lasting online marketing strategy. Currently we revamp our marketing efforts and adapt a more natural way of link building.
I am Inbound Marketer and busy to find out external sources where I can establish my website's presence. I am really happy to read trends for 2014. Because, I am on right track to establish Inbound Marketing campaign for my website.
Generally, I am spending my time to identify good subjects and drafting content on it. Unique content publishing on blog post is helping me to pick new keywords and behavior of searchers with help of Google webmaster tools and Analytics. And, I am 100% agree with all data associated to Email, Responsive Web Design and Social Media marketing. Because, We require these tools to distribute our unique content and get quality visits on website!
Love the post. It would have been helpful and interesting if in the Sources Used to Improve Internet Marketing graph you were able to go deeper and analyze the percent using Twitter as an educational tool.
In addition, why the shift from Link Building, do you think? Is a repulsive action given the penalties Mr. Cutts in company is handing out? If the same SEO guys...and gals are spending the majority of their time soaking up knowledge one might think that they would recognize the value that link building still provides particularly for industries and companies not tied to a geographic location...seems ironic...
Most people were terrible at link building before and now they have no idea what to do with themselves.
As always, Moz has a compiled an impressive amount of information on the subject of link building: https://moz.com/blog/category/link-building