DygiScape

Nielsen scraps Page Views (Or Why You Shouldn’t Measure Success with One Metric)

Nielsen, one of the most respected audience measurement companies, decided page views are no longer relevant in today’s Web. AJAX technology being the primary cause of some provider’s drop in page views has prompted Nielsen to implement tracking of time in front of a Web site. More time generally means more engagement, and thus, more money.

This should come as no surprise. I’ve ranted went on a tangent about how Web 2.0 companies measure success – [sic] page views aren’t everything.

If you think this change is a bullshit move, I introduce call centers. Most call centers measure success based on call time (or SL — service level availability for customers). Well, after several frustrating years, that definition of success has evolved to resolution rate, satisfaction surveys and possibly sales made on contact. Here’s a breakdown of goals and the effects:

The purpose of this image is to explain that in the call center industry, they simply can not focus on one goal (e.g. Call Time, Resolution, Sales); rather a combination of all three elements. You win some, you lose some — it’s business.

I imagine that this theory holds true for the Web. You can’t focus on one element of success, you need to seize all the opportunity you can and balance your goals. Every Web site has different goals and ways to measure them. As a helpful tool, companies can elect to have services like Google Analytics or Omniture to measure their [aggregate] user tracking on their sites. To illustrate what I envision a company being successful online today, it would balance the following attributes:

I conclude with my opinion that Nielsen made a wise choice in measuring Web sites. I believe that other metrics are crucial to measure a Web site’s overall rating — not just the quantity of page views or minutes spent on a particular site.

What are your thoughts?

Tags: Engagement, internet, Metrics, social media, Success, web 2.0

How Does Web 2.0 Define Success?

With the current dynamic landscape of the Web, how does one define success on the Internet? Did the definition of success change when businesses are evolving into the Web 2.0? I aim to find that out.

According to Merriam-Webster, Success is defined as:

suc·cess n.
1 obsolete : OUTCOME, RESULT
2 a : degree or measure of succeeding b : favorable or desired outcome; also : the attainment of wealth, favor, or eminence

But then again, how does that apply to the new Web 2.0? I don’t think it does.

Many online companies believe in measuring their audience merely by page views, formerly known as ‘page hits’. I would honestly say that if a company only measures their success by their PV’s then there is a serious problem. They should be measuring the vibe online communities discuss about them, their online and offline advertising, organic sales, and of course — their own product. I mean I love my blog and the PVs it garners, but more importantly, I mind the discussions online around it.

Let’s take a look at comparing MW’s definition of “Success” to Kevin Rose’s social news and information Web site, Digg. Is that generating wealth? Not organically, they don’t sell products, but they do profit from their advertising, I’m sure it pays the bills and some salaries. Digg is successful because of the network they’ve established in the news. I will guess that in the next five years, Digg will become one of the largest news and information hubs online, akin to CNN of today.

So, from the example of Digg like I mentioned, it appears the definition of Web 2.0 success is the prominence factor. If you are big and in everyone’s face, you can then advertise to that audience. If you sell widgets to a million people, you make a million dollars; if you give news to 800,000 people, sell advertising to that, you now have a flow of income.

Is success the ability to convince others? … Is it the ability to make visitors make a purchase? … Is it the ability to make someone come back again and again, and sell advertising? Linear thinking does not apply to Web 2.0. Success is attributed to many factors including prominence in a niche, how users use your service and how you capitalize on that.

Any Web 2.0 leaders out there want to share your definition of success?

Tags: internet, Metrics, Success, web 2.0