[Estimated read time: 6 minutes]
What would you say if I told you that the average SEO at a big company has been waiting over six months for their highest priority technical change and doesn’t anticipate seeing it deployed for at least another six months? (40+% have been waiting over a year).
If you work in that kind of environment, there’s a good chance you’re not surprised, and if you’ve worked as a consultant and your experience is anything like mine, you might even be asking yourself “is that all?” It’s such a common challenge, and it’s so core to our fundamental goal of making a real difference for our clients, that the ability to effect change has even made it into Distilled’s core values.
Challenges in this area are a growing problem for big companies. As startups in particular come to grips with continuous deployment and similar approaches that bring agility to their processes, big companies risk being left behind on an aging technology stack.
The stats I opened with came from surveying a range of SEOs at big companies — a couple of dozen people responsible for billions of pageviews/month. I put together a survey form, sought out suitable people to respond — from mine and Distilled’s extended network — and then focused in on those managing big sites.
I’m still very interested in hearing more thoughts on this topic by the way, so if you haven’t shared your experiences with me, you can still go ahead and do that:
Take the Enterprise SEO Survey
If I get tons of new data, I’ll happily return to update this post.
My goal was to hear more about the real problems faced by enterprise SEOs and to collate that information for all of you so that we can all become more effective. To do this, I asked:
- What is the technical change you are most desperate to make to your site that's been difficult to get done?
- How long have you been waiting for this change?
- When do you anticipate you will finally see it live?
- What is holding it up?
- How big of a problem is this kind of thing for your organization?
Breakdown of the responses
Here’s how long people have been waiting for the technical change they are most desperate to get implemented (42% have been waiting longer than a year):
And most (58%) don’t anticipate seeing that change live for at least another 6 months:
Why does this happen?
The most common reasons given for the inability to get their top priority changes made were:
- Marketing team priorities fall behind those of other teams (53%)
- The change they want is “not possible” with current platform (37%)
- Every change has to pass through a long dev backlog (32%)
The full range of answers can be mainly bucketed into two big reasons:
- Difficulty in proving the value in advance or making the business case
- Legacy technology or outdated processes hampering progress
Is it a big deal?
While the most common response was that it was “just” a serious frustration, almost half of the people I spoke to (47%) reported that inability to make these kinds of changes is stopping their team hitting their objectives or cramping the performance of the whole company:
Given the scale of company we are talking about here, this is incredible — especially for the fifth of people who said it’s cramping the performance of the whole company. That turns it from some geek thing into a burning issue for senior leadership.
What should we do about it?
1. Get better at consulting (even in-house)
The quickest win (which can feel like cheating) is to improve our personal consulting, persuasion, and communication skills. Getting things done sometimes comes down to making our case more effectively — either with more data or with a better argument. Some resources that you might find useful here include:
- Our consulting skills module in DistilledU (warning: paywall)
- Other things we’ve written:
- The section on structuring business writing in my SEO due diligence post
- 50 things you should learn about your client (by @robousbey)
- Bestselling books:
- Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini
- Selling to Win by Richard Denny (everything is a sale!)
- How To Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie
2. Make better business cases
One specific part of consulting skills that is particularly important in getting things done in big orgs is the ability to build a business case. This requires financial/data analysis skills, but it’s important to remember that it’s not enough to make an Excel model — you also need to tell the story (see some of the resources above).
I spoke on this subject a couple of years ago at our San Diego SearchLove conference in 2013 in a talk about technical (slides here, video here [behind a paywall — if you don’t have a DistilledU account, you can use this link to get access to that video for free]). I talked about:
- Winning hearts as well as minds — with descriptions of your vision, competitor comparisons, proof that customers care etc.
- Preparing like you are going to have to go into a meeting with Jeff Bezos (I love some of the stories here and you should particularly read about Steve Yegge’s experiences)
We’re getting really excited about the kinds of business cases we are able to build with split-testing. When you can present data like this, it gets way easier to get things done:
(That’s a screenshot from our new tool — ODN — by the way. If you’d like a demo, you can register your interest here).
3. Make things better over time
All of the problems I’ve talked about here are compounded by technical debt. A great goal for enterprise/in-house folks is to build the flywheels and to do the things now that will make all of this easier in the future. Upgrading core infrastructure, getting towards continuous integration and fast deployment, and improving slow processes all have long-term ROI.
In particular, getting in place tools like tag management move many kinds of change directly into the hands of the marketing team. This is again our thinking behind building our ODN tool — in addition to building business cases, it’s designed to get changes live in the interim until they can be fully built-out into the back-end.
I think my best general recommendations in this area are to start with the lean startup — I had read some articles about it, but it was only when I saw Eric Ries speak (before I’d read the book) that I truly “got it” about what he was calling an MVP which is actually closer to what Rand called marketing first than it is to building an ugly prototype. This image explains it well:
Great illustration explaining Minimum Viable Product: Build a slice across, instead of one layer at a time #UX pic.twitter.com/7FShBZ9rHe
— Scott Kerr (@scott_kerr) 28 October 2014
Some more resources:
- HBR on the lean startup
- The lean enterprise (lean principles within a big company)
- Lean startup applied to SEO by @the_timallen
I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments — and don’t forget that if you are in charge of search for a big site, I’d still love to hear your experiences in the survey:
Really appreciate that you put this together Will. I agree it's an insanely challenging and frustrating problem for a lot of in-house SEOs at enterprises (and even many SMBs).
I actually recently received a question on a similar topic via email and thought I'd paste my response here, as it seems relevant. The SEO basically asked me "I'm having trouble convincing my team/manager/execs/devs to invest in any SEO projects; what do you recommend that can get their attention and help push things through?"
I replied:
Unfortunately, this is an all-too-common problem. The solutions I've seen work best (keep in mind, I'm at a software business and don't do much client convincing directly these days) are the following:
You can try combining these, too :-)
I think Rand, making a SEO campaign especially for SMB’s by giving them freedom to choose the budget at first is a good option. It will build a good trust and faith on our services but the campaign period must not be so long.
In case of highlighting the results of competitors for specific keyword is little bit riskier cos if one is already ranking well then will start arguing. And only one mistake of ours will make us in a riskier situation.
What I've had to do in house is show proof of concept with a relatively small budget to produce SEO campaigns and content, I found that with a small initial investment on producing a hero content piece (and calling in a favour to get it made on the cheap), I was able to show some solid growth in a number of areas, domain authority, incoming links, increase in rankings for head terms, mentions in trade and wider press.
Using this as a base, I've been able to make the case for the next piece (launching soon) so getting buy in is getting easier with each campaign.
Hi Rand,
We have tried all tricks with our clients to make them take right SEO / Digital marketing decisions in time. The best trick that works for most of them is when they get scared by some upcoming Google algo update, we are able to get them to make quick decisions .
Add this trick to your bag of client servicing tricks. ;)
Thanks,
Vijay
Will - thank you for this post. It's fantastic research that I think sheds a lot of light on the challenges of both being inhouse (and directly responsible for the health of the business from an organic perspective yet having to deal with internal politics and processes) and working at an agency where you are trying to help your client get things done (and therefore move the numbers and retain that client longterm).
As someone who has worked inhouse on huge websites, agency-side for Distilled on huge (and smaller) websites, and now working with agencies to help them get things done better for their clients (which helps them grow their agencies as well), I've seen this from multiple sides. It's definitely a huge and complicated problem that has many different solutions and the solutions will vary based on the existing team and their skillsets (or gaps in skillsets).
From what I've seen, there are a few huge areas that keep things from getting done:
This is an important topic that needs more light shed on it and this is a great start. I'd love to hear what the inhouse SEOs are doing that does not seem to be working for them, or what SEOs who are very effective internally with getting things done are doing that may set them apart.
As an in-house SEO at a large financial institution, I agree, especially with #4. I think the most important part is to have a SEO strategy for the upcoming quarters and a roadmap with a nice chart that can be presented to the stakeholders who decide about budget, resources, priorities, etc.
For stakeholder briefs, it's also important to focus not just on the visits that SEO will generate, but on the extra revenue is can potentially generate. If we increased organic search by X %, conversion rate by Y % then we propose Z % increase in revenue.
It's all about ROI. If the ROI looks good, SEO will get more attention, more resources, more budget, etc.
For technical SEO implementations, I think it's critical to prioritise each change request. Create a list, e.g. high/medium/low impact VS high/medium/low effort changes, so you can make a list what to implement this quarter, next quarter or next year.
Absolutely. This is great advice. After doing an in-depth audit and creating a list of things to be done, I (or eventually my SEO manager) then went through and put impact against effort and tried to balance the two in partnership with the engineering teams. This was definitely the way to get things done.
We'd ask the engineering team to estimate the effort and then over time learned how much we'd be able to get done in a sprint with the available engineers and their time.
Definitely not easy and always a moving target, but boy did it help get things done.
I just had a chance to dig into the new responses that came through after I posted this. The big picture hasn't changed, but with roughly twice as many respondents, the biggest movements in the headline stats were:
A Proprietary Software View -
Coming from a proprietary software background, I understand the frustration that big company level SEO's go through but it only makes them stronger. This is why they are big level SEO's, they can overcome challenges. What would you do if you were working with a CMS that had 50% of the SEO features and functionality as say, WordPress... It would be a nightmare, right? Well, kinda, yeah... it is.
Programing changes and platform changes don't happen overnight with proprietary software and it is easy to understand why. Many of them are startups and only have budget scaled for certain areas.
My experience in waiting -
I worked with a proprietary software for about 7 years and in that time, we achieved about 30% of what we truly needed for SEO features. It was rough! But again, it only made me stronger and better at SEO.
Either go with Rands approach, run a test on distilled and make the switch or stop complaining and get creative.
Thanks Will, also some great tools over there. Very impressive.
This is absolutely true. I've had a varied experience with this at every place I've worked. I found that one of the advantages to working in an agency was that I had great leadership that could interface well with C levels to build a business case for SEO. They had already done the leg work, so I could get my work done. Once I moved on to being the sole marketer in-house, I came up on the obstacle of having to present a business case to leaders and tech teams that didn't place high value on SEO and didn't understand the relevance of the nuances.
However, technology teams can get a bad rap sometimes. The stereotype is that the added functionality of their projects is more important to the business than the added exposure generated by SEO, so the marketing piece is always put on the back burner. I worked for a company that was trying to recover from a penguin penalty, and they had such a talented technology team that was so, so receptive to knocking out marketing tasks. It seemed like their leadership would gamify how quickly they could knock the projects back in our court. It was awesome.
Hi Will
A quick change can never bring effective change. Plus it could be a mess for many brands ...
It is conceive those small changes as a gradual and constant part we should get to know
I think every time companies are more aware and have more information that is SEO, so these companies know that the results need time and work, maybe 1 year. Explain and inform businesses of how the SEO is a good strategy.
Sadly it is so true. When consulting we find it almost impossible to get information we need. Getting a change made at all is a victory. Often what we are asking for would take less than 20 minutes to do if we had access.
Good article! We are working on it! Thanks a million.
In my present Agency, almost every single project I worked on was hampered by delays. However, whenever management complained about results I just told them: 'Hey, if the dev team had implemented my recommendations we would be doing loads better. NMFP. In the meantime, give me more money for PPC to fill the hole(s)'!
Worked like a charm and had the benefit of being true.
After doing this 4 or 5 times, the project manager learned that it was wise to jump on my requests immediately, lest management give him a roasting. SEO now has P1 status in the workflow, And guess what? Results are being achieved quicker, and everyone is happier because ROI is up.
I did have to buy the PM a few beers and have a heart to heart about it, but we're good now. And I think my Machiavellian scheming actually engendered some respect from the dev team who usually think anyone outside their team is a moron - especially anyone in marketing (although it also helped that I won the monthly poker tournament twice in a row - man, devs are so bad at bluffing. Maths is no help if you can't look people in the eye or talk swag).
This is great stuff, Will! I work on the agency side in a highly regulated industry, so this post hits very close to home. Your article was great, and I'm even more excited about some of the resources you referenced. Thanks again!
Tylor
SEO is very useful because it is the average of a great company and a great experience in your company.
great article. very useful for the business startups.
Tons of value here. Thank you!
Like group therapy for abused SEOs! Thanks Will.
Thanks Will for this analysis. 6 months is really big and not easy to have some companies to go with... priorities are always to immediate ROI. I also think to show the competitors results ahead might help in further investissment into SEO projects.
Hi Will,
Great write up and it was spot on. Moving from a solo shop, to the corporate world and now back again, it is insanely frustrating the amount of red tape an SEO company must go through when dealing with corporate - whether it is an in-house SEO team or agency outside. Between Execs not knowing what to do, not caring, minimal budget, in fighting, and general corporate bull shit, its amazing anything gets done at all.
Luckily for many large corporate brands, they have an automatic win with natural organic links coming in on a daily basis. Those links cover up for a ton of the mis-management going on with the real SEO teams.
Thanks for the data.
Hi, I have "enjoyed" working at a large multinational in the past, with lots of politics involved in getting projects move... My reality today is the opposite. Small business.
In a large company I think it is not just about ROI, but about the agenda of different departments and heads of departments. With this in mind I believe it is very important to be able to put the priority in the head of many people at the same time, in different areas of the organisation, and giving some WIFM (what´s in it for me) to each of them.... Then when a board sits down to allocated budgetyou may get luckier.
Sometimes I humbly believe it it not the project with higher Roi that gets running, but the one with less oposition.
Thanks for doing this study. Very interesting. Now I don't feel bad that some of my projects take a long time to get done.
As followup to this study. It would be interesting to know how many of these major projects jump the tracks before completion and how many actually deliver their hoped-for results.
SEO field more or less but is definitely going through a transition period at present. However, it is the technical changes which it is seeking the most. Technical people involved with the SEO field are a bit under pressure at the moment. Nontechnical people working in this sphere, though may not be facing challenges as such at the moment, but still should try and work to their best possible for keeping any and every sort of calamity at a bay from themselves. People new into the SEO field altogether, whether belonging to its technical or nontechnical aspect, may be having or not having the time to try and learn about it in complete totality.
Hi, Will.
Very interesting this post. In my experience, in a local agency, we realised this. We are a little team work and we find these problems with some our clients. When we notice a technical problem, we report it. The most common answer is “technical department is working in that”. In this way, we spend months and months before we apply the necessary changes. So, we almost have to be ‘psychologists’ to convince to our clients about the importance of its department applying quickly our advices.
Regards!
This is pretty interesting, Will! As an SEO consultant I have had similar frustrations many times over the past several years. This happens when you're either reporting to the CEO who doesn't know much about SEO dynamics or someone in the mid-level management who can take it forever to pass on your SEO advice to the web development team due to some "other priorities" that must be done with. Clearly, your study shows I'm not alone :-P
Thanks Will, I love seeing in-house issues addressed as it feels far too often that this particular angle is overlooked in a lot of industry literature, conferences, etc. For my situation, I would say 6-12 months is pretty standard for big projects. Another factor to consider for companies in highly regulated industries is compliance/legal concerns for some projects, which adds more layers to just dealing with dev backlogs, bandwidth shortages, etc. That adds a whole other layer of meetings, convincing, etc.
I think the human being is by nature conservative. Hence it is always posit 6 months at least to make a change in any system (including SEO), because otherwise we should retrain more often, causing more stress.
It is true that search engines take time to systematize all of your changes , but in a few months the results are already present.
Although as Comrade Ivan says, it is better effective change that rapid and poorly executed change.
Good morning Will,
That's a really well explained post. I think that the reason I can relate most from older experiences is that the marketing needs are always behind the needs of other departments, and I don't think that's fair. I know that, for example, the accountance department is important but, come one, we're trying to impulse the company's sales and without sales there'd be no accountants.
I've also liked the Minimum Viable Product graphic, I had never seen it like this before! Thanks for this post, I think some of us needed some guidance.
I can relate to your frustration of marketing needs being behind the needs of other departments, but I would suggest changing how you're phrasing your requests into a monetary formula.
For page speed load -- Every extra second it takes a page to load on mobile, you'll lose 30% of the people trying to load the page (example numbers, I haven't done a study on it). If we can compress our images and go to a slightly lighter mobile framework, we should be able to increase our viable leads by 60% over current performance.
Money talks in most businesses -- especially if you can put a ROI number with it and have data to back it up.
For paid ads -- For every dollar we spend on paid ads, we make $4.
It's worth a shot and may help keep your priorities from being pushed to the back of the line, department wise.
great article. it was very useful for me
Thank you so much, i studing this data
great post to share, thankyou
Really good Article here, thank you for the data!
Me also... Sheralee Bottali