Tonight I'm continuing with our headsmacking tips theme (see #1 from June) with a piece of SEO advice that's been around the industry for longer than Google but still doesn't get the traction it deserves.
When it comes to top-level menu navigation, most of us are thinking about which broad subject areas best encompass the content we have to share with users. We're considering usability and user experience and ease-of-navigation, all of which are excellent. But sometimes, in this process, we forget about SEO and how perfectly it can tie in with these other goals.
Just think - if you have broad subject areas under which many niche topics, products, articles, etc. fall, chances are there are some fairly competitive, high search-volume keyword terms and phrases you could target with those top-level navigation pages. Here's an example:
British Petrol's got this nice micro-site on their alternative energy program, and in it they have a number of top-level navigation links like "Who we are," "What we do," "Where we are," etc. The sad part is, while many visitors might want to learn about "who they are," not very many are performing searches around those topics. Instead, they might be looking for things like "renewable energy," "climate change," "low-emission fuel," "fuel alternatives," etc., many of which BP could be targeting in their top-level menu.
The thing is - top level menus exist throughout a site, and when you name a section of your website something, that's how it get referred to across the web in link anchor text and blog mentions and directory listings. All that external reference, combined with your internal focus, can produce some pretty terrific results. Not convinced? Go check out a few of the sites you work on or their competitors and see how well they rank for the names of their top-level menu items. It's uncanny, right? If your domain is generally strong, those top-level pages are almost always in the top 20 for the names you've given them.
Here's an example of a site generally sticking to this advice:
Their reward? Try searches for car reviews, car buying guides, road tests, even the incredibly competitive used cars. They're in the top 10 across the board. That's not to say they're doing everything perfectly, but they are a testament to the power of top-level nav menu naming.
So, next time you've got an opportunity to re-design the top level menu or launch a new site, consider the searcher. They're telling you what they want through keywords, both broad and specific. If you can find ways to get creative with your naming while remaining usable and user-friendly, you've got a big win.
p.s. Notice how SEOmoz names our SEO Tools section and our SEO Services Marketplace (just moved into position. Imagine if we had been really smart and called one of our top level tabs "Buy Viagra... AKA How Blackhat SEO Works." 
I think you've got a good point here, but I'm going to stick my neck out and say that you're comparing completely different site models...
The BP top nav in my opinion is friendly and intuitive for a non-ecommerce site like this, especially as part of a friendly public image approach. There's no hard sell keywords.
However I'd like to see a secondary nav (perhaps a column) with deeper links and targetted anchor text such as "renewable energy," "climate change," "low-emission fuel," "fuel alternatives," etc. and super-targetted pages in the next level down.
The car site however is looking to convert visitors wherever possible, either to earn a commission or to sell finance options. For this model it's vital they get their nav anchor text as succinct and targetted as possible.
I think as SEOs we're often blinkered into disregarding other important elements of web design (after all, our job is to rank a site) but I think in this example it's important to understand the full purpose of the site.
I agree completely. However, for the sake of discussion say that the BP site is pure public relations, with no conversion goal. Even then they need to pull in visitors or it's all for nothing.
On second thought Public Relations IS a conversion goal.
I kind of agree - if nothing else, on sites like the BP one (which stands for British Petroleum btw Rand), the site will almost certainly have been designed by a PR/Marketing team who often don't want to use the phrases that an SEO would suggest.
When this is the case we've used brad-crumbs, or other secondary navigations, although I tend to agree that it would be best to have them in the top-level one - I don't actually think it would be too hard-sell for BP to have a top-nav including phrases like solar, etc.. leading to pages explaining what they do in those areas.
What happens when you run out of brad?
We tend to replace them with angelina...
Genius!
I'm embarassed to say this really isn't something which I had thought of before.
We're in the begining stages of revamping our site at the moment and have very generic options such as Services / About Us / Contact Us / Resources - in our navigation.
Time for a rethink!
Keywords in the top-level navigation is one of the first things I look for in reviewing a website for SEO. Too many companies use generic, empty links like "Our Products" in their main navigation, and it is a missed opportunity.
"Who we are" is frankly cliche to the point of being meaningless. I'd be surprised to learn that people are visiting the BP website with the question in mind, "who is BP?"
In the case of Edmunds.com, I agree that we're seeing keywords in the main and sub nav, but I think even disregarding SEO these links make sense. I have a hard time imaging how Edmunds could have avoided using keywords in their navigation.
What else do you call a link to the buying guides section but "Buying Guides?"
Mike - you should see how horribly creative and non-intuitive many menu navigation systems can get. Instead of "car reviews" they'll say "reviews" and instead of "buying guides" they'll say "choosing the right car." :)
That said, I recognize these aren't the absolute best examples out there, but hopefully they still convey the message.
I see your point. I do see plenty of lame navigation systems on a daily basis.
It's interesting to think of how search usage might suggestthings about site usability.
Using your "how to choose the right car" vs. "buying guides" example - there are a lot more searches for "buying guides" than there are for the former keyword. I don't think it's much of a stretch to then assume that most visitors will find the link text "buying guides" more intuitive.
Thus, it seems to me that studying search usage before creating your navigation structure will not only result in better term targeting for search but may also improve usability as a natural result.
Exactly! I was trying to say just that, but perhaps the message didn't come across as clearly as it could have.
My mistake - I think I was realizing just then something you've probably recognized for some time. I simply hadn't thought about it in that way before.
Show me a site that does not desire promotion, and I will give you a a shiny silver dollar. Yes, the focus might not be on the engines, but most are not apposed to improving their rankings/traffic by the push of a few buttons.
Whether in print, tv, billboards, or online- businesses, organizations, and individuals are constantly balancing accessability versus authenticity. We all think in keywords now anyway.
Amazing how often this is overlooked.
We go through a navigational ontology review and recommendation on nearly every client project. It is that critical.
Even super savvy clients can often find some area where they are missing the mark, and at the very least, it may reaffirm the navigational structure that is already there.
Depending on the size of the site or the hiearchical structure, this can be extended down a level or two. Fortunately, beyond that, most of the navigation is either too broad to matter, or so specific that it is naturally on target.
This is one area where targeting the broader, more competitive phrases makes a lot of sense. Even if a site isn't strong enough to pull on a broad generic phrase, it may help strengthen that phrase with any modifiers.
Now you tell me! With my new site that just launched in April I have top level nav items such as services, programs, contact. I think of much better alternatives now. Since the site is still new I will try renaming them and see what happens. Thanks!
Amazing, what a no-brainer. I've over looked this a few times in my own work. Thanks Rand!
Great post. I was currently going over site structure so this really came in handy. I see so many sites with generic navigation so I wasn't sure this really helped with SEO.
This post came just at the right time. I'm trying to push through a tidy up of our menu items and this is great ammunition!
The practise of doing this has really increased over the past year, it would appear as though posts like this one really did bring it people's attention.
It may be worth suggesting that people don't go too overboard though and end up with a menu like this:
personal injury claim
personal injury claim solicitor
personal injury claim advice
personal injury claim process
as that could lead to google thinking your a little, well spammy!
I know this might be a little late, but do bots judge navigational elements by exact match, or will they judge per word. For example, if I were to be naming a page about a page about oak wood slats and 'wood slats' has a lot of searches, but 'oak wood' also has a good amount of searches, would both of them come up if I call the page 'Oak Wood Slats'?
Is it OK (from a crawler perspective) to randomly rotate anchor text of entries of the top level navigation ? For instance, let's say I want to rank well for "Home prices" and "House prices". If i put aside the user experience, is it OK to implement a menu that changes the anchor text in a random way?
Thanks,
J.
When I prepare SEO requirements for a new site, I always make sure that the top-level menus are defined with keywords in mind, but I will admit that I don't always think about it when I'm working on an existing site ...
The main problem with webmasters is that so many of them just don't know enough (if anything) about SEO. I've come across webmasters who do really beautiful work, but make the most basic of SEO errors. And if I had a $ for each time I've had to explain the meta tag description, I would be rich !!!
Impressive..
This truly works.. As mentioned, I analysed a few of my competitors site and voila.. They've done pretty much the same..
Headsmacking series is really headsmacking!
It also surprises me how many sites have been designed where the navigation buttons are just images....with Alt Tags attached if they're lucky.
In the Edmund's website, the subnavigation bar that appears after you click the top navigation, is a result of a javascript. I was under impression that javacript is a BIG NO NO, when it comes to SEO. This website uses static subnavigation instead of fancy drop down subnavigation on mouse over. Absolutely, something to think about! And also, for this big a site, their main content pages are not dynamic!
Totally agree with this, make a target keyord a menu item....then the next step is build the page out with information that falls under the category...even if it takes a few months to develop the section, google will see a growing information resource for "used cars" or "car reviews" or however you structure the site.
once again Rand, you're right on it. A very easy way to improve your SEO through the entire site. but as you mentionned too, it is sometimes more difficult to improve an existing menu with some companies who like better "who we are" " what we do" and so on... I guess I'll let my clients do the research on keywords, to show them what they can gain doing that!
The sad part is, while manuy visitors might want to learn about
TYPO
Rand - did you forget to use word file to write this or firefox? or did you use a .txt file? hehehe
This bad navigation thing is because many web designers do not care so much about Seo.
It's not about caring, it's about the knowledge that they don't have about SEO.
Thanks for a very helpful post and reminder. Your example "edmunds.com" uses "carreviews, autofinance" in there url's. Would there be any benefit to seperate the keywords in the url's with dashes "car-reviews, auto-finance"? Shorter url's seem to be the norm but in most cases are not very intuitive.
Love this post. It's a great reminder (and timely!) as we are just about to rework our top level menus.
Great Post Rand. I have found that this works great for sites I managed in our companies!! Not to be missed in the development of a new site.