The core index of network marketing effect measurement and what kind of logical thinking we use (3)

Intermediary transaction SEO diagnosis Taobao guest Cloud host technology Hall

Objective】

The birth of this article is simply an ill-fated one.

Generally speaking, blog articles are now always on the subway in the time of the gradual completion. This third article, after a good more than 10 times the subway (now take the subway commute is not so much, so this more than 10 times the subway, but also spent more than a month time), is nearing completion of the time, I was not careful to install the system after completely deleted.

You reader, if you have a similar encounter, you will understand what kind of frustration this is. However, a series from the birth to the end of the final must be an article slowly, so, since already have the opening of one or 22 articles, it must let it continue, can not become a rotten tail of the series.

So I got back on my feet and realized that if I wrote again, I might be able to write better than the first time I lost, so I was happy to start over.

Body】

In the previous article we talked about what indicators engagement,engagement contain, how they are defined, and how they are monitored in a technical way. In this article we have to consider some deeper problems. Part of the problem is that I know that measuring indicators is very valuable, but which business areas should be used for such a measure? That is, the applicability of indicators. Other problems are the extension of the previous question, that is, what specific methods should be adopted in the field of applying indicators? That is, the indicators method logic. A lot of friends ask me questions like this, almost every indicators specific indicators have been asked, this is not known by what kind of indicators to analyze the business, or in the face of indicators do not know how to apply the overwhelmed I feel, and my work has been trying to connect them, This makes me feel that in this series of articles on core indicators, it is of great importance to work together to solve this problem.

What problems can the application of indicators solve?

Because of the flexibility of indicators, it has very high research value in at least three fields. First, it helps to measure the overall (macro) effect; second, in the knowledge of the quality of the flow, it measures the extent of the site to affect the user (that is, the quality of the site we call it), and its third, in the knowledge of the quality of the site, it measures the quality of the site traffic.

These three questions are almost the core area of our marketing analysis. Let's take a look at the first question: How to measure the overall (macro) effect through the indicators index.

Indicators three ways to measure overall (macro) effects

The indicators measure of macro-effects is based on the assumption that a large number of users appear to be chaotic behaviors that actually reflect the extent to which the site affects the user (attraction). The greater the amount and degree of user behavior, the more strongly the Web site affects users. This is not difficult to understand, the same two news stations, a station average per user visit to see 10 news, B station only 5 news, it is clear that a station to attract more users. Indicators is essentially used to describe the chaotic behavior of various users, so the number and intensity of indicators is equivalent to the ability of the site to affect users.

So how do you measure the amount and intensity of indicators?

There are usually three simple ways to measure macro indicators. The first approach is to observe global indicators metrics that can be either standard or custom. The second method is to sum up the individual indicators index according to the degree of importance of the custom, and form indicators index to measure it. The third method is to define the importance of each index according to the mathematical relationship between user behavior and marketing target, then the weighted sum into indicators index. As long as the monitoring of user behavior is appropriate (for the monitoring of indicators specific indicators, see the second article in this series: The core indicators of network marketing effectiveness measurement and what kind of logical thinking we use (2)), three methods are not difficult to operate.

Method One: Analysis of global Indicators index

The first approach, looking at the overall indicators metric, is the most common observation of bounce rate,pv/v, or time on Site. With regard to bounce Rate, we have the most problems. In almost all classes, when I explain Bounce rate related knowledge, there will be students ask--bounce rate how high is good? I can simply reply, if your Bounce rate no more than 65%, then it is really worth celebrating. But this answer is not what I like (all the one-size-fits-all approach is questionable, such as the absolute good or absolute evil that was determined from the top down a few decades ago), if Jingdong's bounce rate is 65%, then they will Tong pain. However, if in the marketing campaign, the site's bounce rate is really above 80%, then we should draw what kind of conclusion?

Conclusion A: Damn, this is a total failure of the activity, traffic sucks, the site is also pulpy.

Conclusion B: The website is successful, but the traffic has a huge problem.

Conclusion C: Traffic is sure to be okay, but the website is bad.

Which of the three conclusions would be correct? The answer is, it's possible. However, in specific cases there must be only one possibility. How do we judge bounce rate?

My method is very simple--according to the Flow source subdivision bounce Rate, and then determine whether the traffic in addition to the problem, or the site out of the problem. To solve this problem I will introduce the concept of reference frame, that is, flow can be used as a reference standard flow source. We all know that Web site traffic sources are diverse, where the quality of the best flow is the natural search flow (organic). Perhaps you will be disappointed to ask why it is not direct (directly flow), because direct is not really directly traffic, but for this web analytics tool all the traffic that cannot be judged, so Direct may be mixing a lot of traffic (see this article for details: direct Is traffic really a direct flow? How do you identify real traffic sources? The quality of these flows is almost certainly less than the natural search traffic. You ask, why organic is the best quality, in fact very simple, organic traffic is not cheating traffic, but also reflects the real user access needs. If a website does not have what organic traffic, then the traffic quality second good flow is the paid search engine traffic. These two kinds of traffic can be used as reference for us to measure bounce rate. Now, let's look at a few of the following, and what do you conclude separately:

Situation a:organic flow of bounce rate good, only about 40%, but the overall site bounce rate is 80%.

Situation b:organic flow of bounce rate and site overall bounce rate almost as high as 80%.

I believe you have seen both of these situations. A situation, that the site for those who are really interested in the attractiveness of the user is good, 40% bounce rate standard, but the site still has up to 80% bounce rate, indicating that other traffic is probably not the people you want to get. b situation, if even organic flow have extremely unsatisfactory bounce rate, then explain this website really do almost meaning. Flow reference system gives us a very clear judgement is the flow or site problems, but the use of this method has a prerequisite, that is, organic flow can not be too little, if organic traffic is very small, can do the replacement of the flow is paid Search. But if you don't have any search traffic, find the sources of traffic that you think are reliable. However, regardless of the performance of the reference frame flow, a marketing campaign, if the overall bounce rate higher than 80%, it is certainly not a particularly ideal situation, either traffic or site problems, or there is a waste of marketing costs.

Pv/v and time on site are more difficult to benchmark than bounce rate. However, as far as I can see, it is almost certain that the higher the pv/v and time on site of a website, the more the marketing audience is affected by the site. I used to think that there were some sites pv/v or time on site too big to be bad--such as government service websites, too high pv/v, or when on site that people might not find what they were looking for. But tracking too many sites, I found that people's patience is very limited, if a site is not easy to find the content they need, even important sites, they will turn to Baidu, rather than in the experience of the bad site crazy pursuit. The average pv/v is greater than 3, or the average time on site is greater than 2 minutes to show that the site itself has a minimum of appeal to the user.

Observe global, custom indicators indicators are more commonly used here, for example, to view the number of clicks on a promotional item (or the number of times to open a promotional item page) in a promotional event as a global indicators. and compare the actual quantity that is finally reached with the predetermined target to observe whether the marketing effect is achieved. This method is very quick, but also very extensive. If bounce rate is above 90%, but fortunately, the number of clicks on promotional items is more than twice times the pre-set target, is this marketing campaign good or bad? A single view of each indicator, there will always be some uncomfortable trade-offs, and always difficult to really take care of the overall. Then we have to consider other new methods.

Method Two: Weighted summary of single indicators index

The second method--the single indicators index is weighted according to the degree of importance of the custom, to make up for the part of the first method, after all, the macroscopic indicators is the result of a specific one indicators index synthesis. This method has three steps, first, lists all the indicators specific index, then according to you "in the mind" each indicator's importance degree, assigns each indicator the weight, finally puts each indicator times the weight, adds total. Add total value, that is, indicators Index. This method in my early article has a special discussion, see: Website Analysis of the most basic measurement (8)--engagement. In addition to this article's page partitioning method, you can also according to the type of behavior of the indicator weight calculation, for example, registration Success page A PV is 10 weights, shopping cart Add success page for 20 weights.

Different types of marketing choice of specific indicators and the weight of the arrangement is certainly not the same. The following two examples, respectively, correspond to effect marketing and brand Marketing:

The second method is more comprehensive than the first method, but the allocation of weights is very subjective, and some commonly used global indicators, such as bounce rate,pv/v, or time on Site, can not be included, have to become two sets of parallel measures. The latter is not a big problem, but the weight of the challenge seems easy to be boss and customers. However, in fact, this approach is currently the most adopted method, because it is relatively simple, and for an advertiser, fixed some common behavior of the weight value has a lot of benefits, it is clear that the marketing campaign should be the direction of effort, It also helps to campaign the horizontal comparisons between different stages or similar campaign.

Method III: Weighted summary of the indicators index under the transformation relationship

The third approach, which makes some improvements to the second approach, is based on the idea that in a marketing campaign, the behavior of the user in a seemingly chaotic manner is in fact a fairly definite proportion of the ultimate goal of achieving, for example, transformation. Although these ratios do not have the same value for a variety of marketing activities, as well as for individual websites, these ratios are relatively stable for a defined activity or website. For many e-commerce sites, for example, unless there is a major change in the category structure, their "shopping cart to the actual purchase of the conversion probability" is more stable, for example, in 40% of the benchmark floating around. Those who do not need to sell goods brand promotion marketing, actually also applies this kind of relationship, because these marketing almost all have the explicit hope that the user takes the action as the final goal (for example applies for the trial, shares to the friend and so on), these concrete actions and the E-commerce website purchase behavior actually does not have the Now, let's assume that an E-commerce site has the following transformation rules: 4 orders per 100 new registrations, 18 orders per 100 IPV, 100 orders for every 20 items in the favorites ..., we can get one of the following forms:----

In order to compute the relationship in the back, we put each indicators metric to 1 as the benchmark, so we got the following table, although the values are different, but the proportional relationship is exactly the same (year-on-year change):

With this correspondence, we can easily define indicators weights for all important events before the transformation takes place. If we convert 1 to 100, we get the following table:

With the weight, according to the actual value of the different behavior, the indicators index of each index is completely easy to calculate. As shown in the following table:

The third approach looks more scientific than the second, and Google Analytics's page value setting is similar to this one. But this method can not be said to be the reality of the full true feedback, it still has some problems. Since this method is based on the assumption that all actions have a direct contribution to the final transformation, but transformation must be a process in which there is a relationship between the different behaviors of the user at different stages of the transformation (positive promotion or negative interference), which is not covered by this method.

Interestingly, for this approach, you will find that, because the internal transformation of the site is also step-by-step, different processes on the final transformation of the value is not necessarily the same, so it seems to be fully applicable to attribution modeling way, using different modeling (such as linear, or descending, or lower in the middle of both sides of the way, the user's different behavior of the weights are not the same, you can also use the attribution modeling model of the idea of the actual situation to the different indicators indicators to empower, so you can be closer to the business reality you expect. But the difficulty of operation looks rather gloomy. ;)

Although three methods are not 100% of the user's indicators true degree of reproduction (but fully reproduce the reality is only the ideal state), but for our desired quantitative indicators is very helpful. For a marketing campaign, using these methods can tell us from the perspective of the process whether it is moving along the route we expect. The following real case uses the above method.

Case

This is a more long-term marketing campaign that is divided into three stages. In different stages, different landing pages are used. The three phases are generated separately indicators as shown in the following illustration:

The second stage is very good only from the numerical point of view. However, after all, each stage of the purpose and objectives are not the same, and the promotion of the length is different, the use of marketing means may not be the same, so simple comparison of data in fact, it is easy to mislead us. Is the second stage really the best stage?

If this marketing activity each stage has the definite indicators index goal (often this goal before the marketing activity will do the setup, the setting method really is a great learning, but in fact summed up is four words-experience accumulation), then we can see which stage is better:

The second stage seems to be complete with a lot of indicators index, but the expectation for this phase is the highest. The first stage is beyond the target. In this sense, the first stage or the best. However, we sometimes reflect on whether we are not reasonable in setting the target value.

The uncertainty of goal setting does not cause us serious problems, after all, we can use other dimensions to measure whether a marketing activity is "reliable". In this case, careful you will find that in fact, each phase of the length of time is different, and each phase of the flow of input, it is certainly different, then we can compare the same cost of the indicators number of cases, as well as the number of indicators per flow generated.

These two graphs show the efficiency of attracting user indicators when a marketing campaign uses different landing page (LP, landing pages) and marketing methods at different stages. In the first month, each generation of a indicators needs to consume about 0.2 dollars, but the second phase of indicators's acquisition cost has suddenly increased by twice times, the third phase looks similar to the first phase. And from the efficiency of the marketing campaign to attract visitors, the second stage is obviously the worst--in the first stage, each visit can produce more than 2 indicators Index, and the second stage after the replacement landing page, but the fall, eventually in the third phase back on track.

Through the simple calculation and analysis of indicators Index, we can have a quick overall grasp of the marketing activities. However, there may be many possibilities for the performance of the second phase, one of which is that the quality of the flow drops substantially in the second phase, while the other may be the replacement of a rather unsatisfactory landing Page in the second phase. In order to know exactly what is the cause, we need to do further research. (To be Continued ...)

This article introduced the indicators measure of the overall (macro) effect. The next one will go on to introduce two other important roles of indicators: how to measure the extent of the site's impact on users, and how to measure the quality of the site's traffic through indicators, in terms of the quality of the traffic. Please look forward to it. Finally, you are welcome to leave a message, any questions, suggestions and your thinking. :)

The core index of network marketing effect measurement and what kind of logical thinking we use (2)

The core index of network marketing effect measurement what kind of logical thinking do we use?