…din alta perspectiva

failure.. the key to evolution

fail at something spectacular and you may design the leaning tower of Pisa

Filed under: Fără categorie

Why designers fail: the report

Last week I announced a study on why designers fail – exploring the reasons why designers, and people who work with designers, believe designers don’t achieve the results they desire. I presented the results as UIE 13 last week, and as promised here is a summary. Prize winners will be announced soon.

Top line summary

The survey consisted of 41 issues, divided into three categories: Psychological, Skill and Organizational. Each participant ranked each issue on a scale from 1 to 5, with 5 meaning the issue was highly significant in explaining why designers fail, and 1 meaning least significant (3 was identified as a neutral value).

The 389 survey respondents self identified as:

Designer 33.7%
Project manager 16.5%
Programmer / Tester 11.8%
Usability engineer 9.5%
Group manager 6.9%
Business / Marketing 3.9%
Documentation 1.3%
Other 16.5%

The top 15 issues, ranked by average scores were:

People in non-design roles making design decisions 4.18
Managers making design decisions w/o design training 4.14
Designers don’t seek enough data before designing 3.92
No time is provided for long term thinking 3.81
Not receptive to critical feedback 3.69
Lack of awareness of the business fundamentals 3.66
Only lip-service is paid to “User centered design” 3.64
It’s never made safe to fail or experiment 3.62
Designer’s power diluted by too many cooks 3.60
Over-reliance on one kind of design style 3.54
Poor collaboration skills 3.51
Poor persuasion / idea pitching skills 3.49
Poor communication skills 3.49
Poor understanding of domain 3.48
Pressure to use first solution, not a good solution 3.45
Big Ego / Expects others to cater to their whims 3.41

Average scores per grouping

The average scores for groupings showed little different in weightings: there was no single grouping of issues that proved to be significantly more important in explaining why designers fail.

Organizational issues: 3.37
Skill issues: 3.15
Psychological issues: 3.11

Managers vs. Individual contributors

(Note: these charts are quick and dirty. If you have a pretty design stick and know how to use it, happy to share the data so you can make better charts).

One research question of the study was to see how individual contributors and managers varied in their thinking on failure. 49% of those surveyed identified as playing a lead or management role.

Designers vs. non-designers

Another research question was how designers and non-designers results would compare. The results showed only minor variance in how designers and non-designers view causes of failure.


  • Many top reasons for failure are not typically considered design issues, such as collaboration skills, persuasion skills, and receiving critical feedback.
  • General consensus on top issues: managers, non-managers, designers and non-designers all had highly similar scores.
  • Nearly half of all respondents took time to write in additional issues and thoughts. There was a great deal of interest in discussing this topic further.

Background and Disclosures

  • This survey was designed primarily for qualitative use and as a basis for further discussion and research. I’m sure there are flaws and bias in the study design but I believe this study is valuable anyway.
  • The issue list was based on 3 things: my own experiences managing UX design training for Microsoft from 1999-2002, many years of debating this question at drunken design conference receptions, and this discussion on a previous blog post.
  • The issue descriptions listed above were modified to fit in the post – see the actual survey if you’re suspicious of leading questions or other survey bias issues.
  • The survey was distributed via this blog, the iXda mailing list and the pmclinic list.
  • A PDF version (95k) of the actual survey can be downloaded.

Here is a PDF version of the full UIE 13 talk on Why designers fail (6MB PDF).


Filed under: Fără categorie

take notice

Filed under: Fără categorie

User friendlyness paradox

Prea multa tehnologie, prea mult software ne integrat.. globalizare.

Cine va intelege mecanismele de monetizare a userului frustrat va deveni urmatorul Bill Gates.

“I know one guy who spent $4,000 just on Photoshop over the years. Software companies make 35% of their revenue from just these software upgrades. I call it the software upgrade paradox, which is, if you improve a piece of software enough times, you eventually ruin it.”

David Pogue

Filed under: Fără categorie

great advice

If you are running a design agency, your job is very likely to combine business development, graphic design, technology and user experience design: a basketful of very different fields. When dealing with clients, one faces the challenge of clearly and effectively communicating the goals and results of the work done in these areas. In this post, we’ll provide you with some ideas on sharing information and knowledge with developers and clients — a couple of tips and tricks we’ve learned from our own experience.


Filed under: Fără categorie

unleash your creativity!

Designing has always been hard for me. I recall back when I was still in school, I learned to design a poster for a carnival and I had a small sketchbook to draft out ideas that came to me.

In the end, I did not run out of pages to draw on. In fact, I didn’t even finishing drawing on a single page.

Trying to create an original design is not always easy. The flow of ideas can start off slow for most people. But I’ve found that there are some things that have helped me get over creative block, and I want to share them with you here.

Things that Contribute to a Designer’s Creative Block

There are a number of things that leave us uninspired.

1. Perfectionism

Some people see perfectionism as a strength, while others dread it like a disease.

Perfectionism is one of my biggest obstacles, proving to be my Achilles’ heel when it comes to completing projects.


It’s presence is constantly at the back of my mind reminding me to edit, redesign, edit and redesign over and over again.

I want to create the best that I know I’m capable of, but who’s the judge of what “the best” is? Me.

2. Fear

Fear is a relatively huge factor and there is a large range of fears that we have when we put our work out there. Fear of rejection, fear of criticism or even the fear of fear itself.


The vast number of thoughts running through our mind want to be heard, but we do not have the time to listen to all of them.

3. Trust

Do you trust yourself? It can be hard sometimes, I know.

However, trust grows stronger with each design you create. When you are passionate about the work you design and you know the value of your work, trust comes naturally.


If not, keep on designing and trust will surely catch up to you.

4. State of Well-Being

Your mental, emotional and physical conditions are more important than you realize.

State of Well-Being

If you are anxious, impatient or sick, the flow of energy in your body is disrupted, which in turn significantly affects your creative output.

Clear Your Thoughts

Look around. There are many sources of inspiration that you could be receiving if you open up. (See a list of places online for design inspiration.)

Take a deep breath. Think positive thoughts that can channel your internal energy considerably to be your ally.

I have noticed that when I go through a list of positive aspects in my life and start showing gratitude for all the good things that’s happened, my energy shifts and creativity starts flooding in. Everything falls into place.

If you have a lot of thoughts in your mind, pen things down, elucidate your goals and release these thoughts.

9 Simple Ways to Kill Designer’s Block

To completely purge designer’s block from your mind is easier said than done.

There are, however, many simple ways to be free of it that do not require ancient medical recipes to heal yourself.

Here are a few tips and tricks of my own.

1. Be Grateful and Appreciative

As I have mentioned above, gratitude is a very powerful tool to improve your state of mind. When we are in a positive and cheerful mental state, we become more productive. This ultimately has a greater impact on others around us as well.

2. Meditate

Though you may think meditation is just lame, on the contrary, meditation is a great way to relax your mind and channel your focus.

You can even meditate while you are cleaning your room or doing something that allows you to relax your mindset.

Meditation is freeing, giving you the opportunity to reset your brain. It is a great tool for inspiration and mental mending.

Now you know why monks love meditating.

3. Move your Body

If you have not been exercising when you run out of creativity, now is the time to start.

Exercising not only allows blood to flow to your brain, but it also produces adrenaline, which makes you feel better.

After exercising, you will be rejuvenated and more likely to come up with one or several ideas, and it could also help you get rid of the extra pound or two you’ve manufactured from sitting in front of the computer.

4. Watch Your Caffeine Intake

Caffeine—like everything else—has both its good and bad points. The key to this is moderation. Some studies have found that small amounts of caffeine may help prevent cancer due to the antioxidants it contains.

Caffeine intake causes a short-term elevation in your metabolism, giving you a burst of energy.

However, dependence on caffeine will affect your health in the long run.

5. Watch some Videos

Watching some inspirational videos will lift your spirits and provide inspiration for new ideas.

A great video I strongly recommend is “The Secret.” Although it does not teach you about design, it has many pointers that could be beneficial towards your route to success.

6. Be Yourself

It is sad to hide in the shadow of others and it takes a lot of energy to try to be someone else, even in your design work.

Design from your heart and just let loose.

You will be astounded by the results if you keep going at it.

7. Do a Good Deed

Do something nice for someone. Give your friend a gift. Help an elderly person cross the street. Donate to charity. Smile at everyone you meet. Kindness opens up your heart and unleashes your creativity.

What goes around will one day come back to you.

8. Sleep Well

Excluding the amount of time spent sleeping, 24 hours will never be enough for you in a day.

Even so, you still need a considerable amount of rest. Having adequate amounts of sleep will enable you to work longer.

So stop burning the midnight oil and head to bed early. Your body will thank you for this. Some ideas come to you when you are on your bed and your body is highly relaxed.

Who knows, the fairy godmother of creativity may even pay you a visit in your dreams. Prepare a pen and paper next to your bed so that you won’t miss anything when you wake up.

9. Be Humble

Be humble and accept any criticism that comes your way. Before you brush it aside, analyze what has been said and why they were said in the first place. Reflect on these words and seek to improve yourself.

If you are humble, people are more willing to share and offer constructive advice, and this will eventually open up your window of creativity.

Humility is a useful tool that can get you further.


Filed under: Fără categorie

Antreprenor in devenire

Merita de citit si : Fundamentals of Technology Entrepreneurship

eu nu l-am gasit6 la fel de bun ca acesta din urma si prin urmare am preluat numai “concluziile” enjoy

In my last post I described my approach to one of the three classes I teach at Stanford in the engineering school: Fundamentals of Technology Entrepreneurship.  The key things I want students to take from the class are:

  • Understand that a startup is a temporary organization designed to search for a profitable business model
  • Learn how to put together a business model, not a business plan
  • Understand that a business model is only a series of hypotheses that need to be validated outside the building

Class Logistics
As described in the previous post, this is a hands-on class. The 55 students formed 11 teams, and each team had to come up with an original idea, size the opportunity, propose a Business Model, get out of the building and test their hypotheses and analyze and explain each of the parts of their model.

The class wouldn’t have been possible without lots of hands other than mine.

Teaching Team
Having a teaching partner makes life a lot easier and the class improves. A partner allows me the flexibility to miss a session or two (my job as a California Coastal Commissioner meets three days every month up and down the coast of California.)  But the best benefit is bringing a second set of eyeballs to the curriculum which always makes it better.

This was the year I finally got the “business model versus business plan” concept nailed down. In previous classes I had experimented with moving away from the traditional focus on writing a business plan to a hands-on approach to building a business model.

But it wasn’t until Ann Miura-Ko joined me as a teaching partner that this “teach the model not the plan” idea jelled. Ann who had been my Teaching Assistant while she had finished her PhD at Stanford felt the same frustration about teaching entrepreneurs to assemble a business plan that we knew in the real world wouldn’t survive first contact with customers. After Stanford, Ann joined Mike Maples’ Venture Capital firm Floodgate as a partner. Over the summer we had both been impressed with Alexander Osterwalder’s Business Model Template work. At first we thought of adopting his template for the class, but found that an even more simplified version of a canonical business model that Ann developed worked better.

Teaching Assistants
Teaching at both Stanford and Berkeley I get to see the difference between the resources in a private university and those of a state university. (For the first 5 years at Berkeley, I taught 60 students by myself with no teaching partner or teaching assistant.) As the Stanford entrepreneurship program for the engineering school sits in the Management Science and Engineering Department, most of our TA’s are students in the MS&E PhD program. For this class Daisy Chung and David Hutton were our Teaching Assistants (TA’s.) TA’s make managing 60 students working on cases and team projects manageable.

They set up and keep the class web site updated.  They provide logistical support for guest speakers. They answer enumerable emails about logistics as well as substantive questions about class content. In addition to Ann and my office hours, Daisy and David held their own office hours to provide student support.

Most importantly, while Ann I reviewed all the grades, the TA’s managed the logistics of grading: grading the homework (in this class the case study summaries) and the business model written summary, keeping track of class participation and rolling up all the grades from the formal presentation. And they gave us feedback after each class session letting us know if we were particularly incoherent and kept us abreast of the usual student and team dynamics/crisis.

Finally our TA’s managed the mentors we had supporting the students.

One part of Silicon Valley culture that doesn’t get enough credit is the generosity of entrepreneurs and VC’s who are willing to share their time with students. Ann and I recruited VC’s and entrepreneurs to be mentors for each team. (We’ve never had a problem in getting help for these classes.) Typically we have a mix of new mentors and those who have volunteered their time before.)  I wrote a handbook for the mentors to explain their roles (here.)

Essentially mentors support and coach each team. They typically met once or twice in person with the team, help them network outside the building, answer emails, provide critiques, etc. On average, mentors spent about 6 to 8 hours of time over the quarter with students. Some even came into to class to cheer on their team for their final business model presentations.

Guest Speakers
Two important things I learned early on in teaching are: 1) regardless of how good you are, students get sick of hearing you drone on week after week, and 2) hearing a guest make a point you’ve been trying to get across often makes it stick.  So we tried to break up our lectures with guest speakers.

Ideally we attempt to match the guests with the case or class session subject. For example, when we taught the value of getting out of the building and agile development, we had Eric Ries talk about the Lean Startup. When we covered partnerships with the WebTV case, we had Spencer Tall who negotiated the deal with Sony for WebTV come in and explain to the class what really happened. (Ann also kept me in the 21st century by making sure we had several woman entrepreneurs as guest speakers.)

In the last decade, entrepreneurship has become faddish, particularly in college. It’s now “cool” to be an entrepreneur, and every school wants some type of entrepreneurship course. While that’s gratifying, the fact is that most people are ill suited to survive in the wild as founders or early employees.

I taught this introductory undergraduate class without many compromises. If you want to know what being an entrepreneur is going to be like you didn’t get to sit in a classroom listening to lectures for a quarter and then write a business plan. (I also teach a less intense introduction class for engineers called the Spirit of Entrepreneurship and the Customer Development Class at Berkeley which I’ll describe in a future post.) I actually hoped that some students who were curious about entrepreneurship would discover that it is definitely not for them. Better to find it out in a classroom than as a career choice.

While that did happen to a few (some are still in shock that I “cold-call” in class, others can’t handle the team dynamics or complain that there is no “right” answer, or were disoriented that the mentors, professors and customers all had different answers) the class seems to have had the opposite effect on an interesting segment.

Sometimes you get emails like this at the end of class:

“Just want to say thank you for the “big ideas” you brought to us. Thanks to your class, I have been thinking thoroughly about my future career and have decided that I would become an entrepreneur rather than anything else. Actually I made up my mind just on my plane to my final round of interview with the Boston Consulting Group. I flew there and told the partner that I would become an entrepreneur instead.”

Oh, oh.


Coming Soon
In the fall Ann and I are going to develop a new graduate-level class for Stanford that will take this one to the next level. Students will not only have to assemble a team, come up with the idea and leave the classroom to test the business model – they’ll need to come back with real customer orders.  (And if it’s a web-based product, they’ll have to build it.)

I wonder if we can fill the class.


A few more of the final class presentations are here (click on the thumbnails to enlarge):

One last presentation here:

Filed under: Fără categorie

now hear this… bine mai zice domnul steveblank

Turning on your Reality Distortion Field

I was catching up over coffee and a muffin with a student I hadn’t seen for years who’s now CEO of his own struggling startup.  As I listened to him present the problems of matching lithium-ion battery packs to EV powertrains and direct drive motors, I realized that he had a built a product for a segment of the electric vehicle market that possibly could put his company on the right side of a major industry discontinuity.

But he was explaining it like it was his PhD dissertation defense.

Our product is really complicated
After hearing more details about the features of the product (I think he was heading to the level of Quantum electrodynamics) I asked if he could explain to me why I should care. His response was to describe even more features. When I called for a time-out the reaction was one I hear a lot. “Our product is really complicated I need to tell you all about it so you get it.”

I told him I disagreed and pointed out that anyone can make a complicated idea sound complicated. The art is making it sound simple, compelling and inevitable.

Turning on your Reality Distortion Field
The ability to deliver a persuasive elevator pitch and follow it up with a substantive presentation is the difference between a funded entrepreneur and those having coffee complaining that they’re out of cash. It’s a litmus test of how you will behave in front of customers, employees and investors.

The common wisdom is that you need to be able to describe your product/company in 30-seconds. The 30 second elevator pitch is such a common euphemism that people forget its not about the time, it’s about the impact and the objective.  The goal is not to pack in every technical detail about the product. You don’t even need to mention the product. The objective is to get the listener to stop whatever they had planned to do next and instead say, “Tell me more.”

How do you put together a 30-second pitch?

Envision how the world will be different five years after people started using your product. Tell me. Explain to me why it’s a logical conclusion. Quickly show me that it’s possible. And do this in less than 100 words.

The CEOs reaction over his half- finished muffin was, “An elevator pitch is hype. I’m not a sales guy I’m an engineer.”

The reality is that if you are going to be a founding CEO, investors want to understand that you have a vision big enough to address a major opportunity and an investment. Potential employees need to understand your vision of the future to decide whether against all other choices they will join you. Customers need to stop being satisfied with the status quo and queue up for whatever you are going to deliver. Your elevator pitch is a proxy for all of these things.

While my ex student had been describing the detailed architecture of middleware of electric vehicles I realized what I wanted to understand was how this company was going to change the world.

All he had to say was, “The electric vehicle business is like the automobile business in 1898.  We’re on the cusp of a major transformation. If you believe electric vehicles are going to have a significant share of the truck business in 10 years, we are going to be on the right side of the fault zone.  The heart of these vehicles will be a powertrain controller and propulsion system. We’ve designed, built and installed them. Every electric truck will have to have a product like ours.”

75 words.

That would have been enough to have me say, “Tell me more.”

Lessons Learned

  • Complex products need a simple summary
  • Tell me why I should quit my job to join you
  • Tell me why I should invest in you rather than the line outside my door
  • Tell me why I should buy from you rather than the existing suppliers
  • Do it in 100 words or less.


Filed under: Fără categorie

if I think it’s pretty, then it’ll work.. aproach WRONG!

The multivariate testing phase is ideal for measuring the effect  of specific page changes

As most of us have probably experienced, many web designers (and HiPPOs) seem to take the approach of “if I think it’s pretty, then it’ll work.” Which is terrific when they’re the only ones who will ever visit the site. Unfortunately a firm’s customers don’t always have the same preferences as the developers, and too many times the result is a site experience which is not just hard for visitors to use, but at times simply irrelevant.

So with the idea of “letting the customer drive” in mind, One To One has recently witnessed some amazing long-term potential for our clients in the form of testing of new, dynamic content on landing pages and deeper areas of a site, all through an approach which includes but isn’t limited to the analytic methods commonly referred to as “A/B/N”, and multivariate testing, AKA “MVT”.

Simple Concept with Complex Execution

The process here is simple in concept but vastly more complex in execution: clearly define the objectives of each page, free your designers to come up with the most interesting, varied page designs they can, then use MVT testing  via tools like Optimost or Test & Target to take the winning versions even further. Whatever wins, wins. You’re letting the users of your site elect the winning content through their own behavior.

This simple set of steps has to date resulted in clients results which have been nothing short of fantastic. Honestly, while the success here has been fantastic, the most difficult component has simply been coming up with a good acronym for the practice, so for now we’re just directly referring to it as “Content Testing & Optimization”, or “CTO”. Okay, yes, a CTO is also a Chief Tech Officer, but we’re aiming for that to eventually becomes the secondary reference.

Come to the April 29th Webinar at 11 am and 2 pm

Thanks to an always-amazing creative team, some good uses of the tech, and results from several tests showing ROI in the four digits, we thought we’d share some of our approach and findings via a webinar scheduled for next Thursday, April 29 at 11 am and 2pm Eastern time. The session will discuss how to design and execute a CTO strategy via ongoing integration of A/B/N and multivariate testing, and present case studies to show how to achieve significant successes in maximizing conversions and return on investment through an ongoing process.

We’ll also cover the digital marketing strategy behind the testing and optimization process, explain how A/B/N and multivariate tests are ideally designed and conducted, and use case studies to illustrates how these strategies can be successfully applied across a wide variety of campaigns. Along with measurable lifts in conversion, revenue and ROI, the session will demonstrate how an ongoing content optimization strategy can be managed and evaluated while providing a library of testing and optimization best practices.

Register for the April 29th sessions of Increasing Conversions, Revenue and ROI through Content Testing and Optimization.

Register here for the 11 am webinar session

Register here for the 2 pm webinar session

Live Q&A will be provided after the discussion. Hope to hear you all there!

Filed under: Fără categorie

the SERP

I don’t excel at much. What I do excel at is the ability to spend a whole lot of brain cycles on a SERP Scoring algorithm for my SERP checker that, in the end, will provide, at best, a cursory glance at a ’score’ for all 3 major search engines.
SERP Scoring Algorithm
I need help from the community to code-up a new SERP Score algorithm.  Now at first glance, this problem looks easy, similar to a chemisty experiment where you are given 65 milliliters of a 50% solution and 120 ml of a 30% solution then asked, “What is the strength of the final solution?” It’s a basic algebraic equation.  However, the results/scores are, well, bullshit after page 1, and I need some feedback.

I use some made-up terminology in this piece that you should know:

1.  SERPrint:   Your SERP footprint.  I represent this by displaying your numeric position on each search engine in this order:  Google, Yahoo, Bing.  Example: “1,25,0″ would indicate page 1, position 1 for Google, Page 3, position 5 for Yahoo (#25), and no ranking for The Bingers.  A 1,1,1 would indicate top SERP on all engines.

2.  Search Engine Weight (SEw):  The weight of the search engine corresponding to the usage percentage for all searches as reported by comScore March 2010 U.S. Core Search Rankings.   This is the first piece of the formula.

3. Page Weight (Pw):  Using the AOL SERP CTR Study metrics of “90% Page 1, 10% Page 2″ we can conclude that the pattern repeats past Page 2 into deeper pages.

The Factors

There are 3 factors to consider for a cursory SERP score in the context of the search engine’s given results.

1.  Search Engine Weight:  More volume = more weight.

2.  SERP Position:   From 1-10, where does your listing show?

3.  Page Weight:  How many pages within the search results does your indexed listing appear?

Search Engine Weight (SEw)

SERP Scoring AlgorithmUsing comScore data, we assign the weight of each search engine according to its search volume.

Google:  65.4
Yahoo:  16.8
Bing:  11.5

Observing the Obvious Highlight Moment:  6.3% is spread across the other engines.

SERP Position / Weight (SERPw)

For a given page, how far down in the list is your SERP. Assign weight based on AOL SERP Score data.


We need a big sample to determine the CTR on a given page for a SERP. We’ll be using AOL’s SERP CTR study to get the dispersement %.

Total Searches: 9,038,794
Total Clicks: 4,926,623

% of clicks

    • Click Rank1: 2,075,765 42.13%
    • Click Rank2: 586,100 11.90%
    • Click Rank3: 418,643 8.50%
    • Click Rank4: 298,532 6.06%
    • Click Rank5: 242,169 4.92%
    • Click Rank6: 199,541 4.05%
    • Click Rank7: 168,080 3.41%
    • Click Rank8: 148,489 3.01%
    • Click Rank9: 140,356 2.85%
    • Click Rank10: 147,551 2.99%

Page Weight  (Pw)

How deep within the results does your SERP appear? We use the AOL SERP CTR Study to conclude that it’s 90/10 across the board.

AOL SERP CTR Study – Page Depth

  • 1st page: 4,425,226 89.82%
  • 2nd page: 501,397 10.18%

Based on that, we assign a page-weight coefficient or multiplier (if !1, 10x)
serp page weight coeff
Observing the Obvious:  1 in 100 searches go to Page 3.  1 in 100 million searches go to Page 10?

Sample Scoring

Using different algorithms, here are some sample SERPrints and their corresponding scores.  Which score do you think properly reflects that SERPs rankings?

Algo A = (SEw + SERPw) x Pw

Algo B = SEw x SERPw x Pw

This raw score is then multiplied by a coefficient to produce a 100-point system.   We get the coefficient by first calculating a {1,1,1} SERPrint then by dividing out the raw score by 100 to get the coefficient.  For A, it was 0.45425958 and for B, it was .025331969.

Sample Values

Let’s use the {2,3,15} again.

The first ordinal: 2 on Google

Algo A = (SEw + SERPw) x Pw

SEw = 65.4

SERPw = 11.9

Pw = 1

Total RAW Score For #2 Google (Algo A) = 107.53

Algo B = SEw x SERPw x Pw

Total RAW Score For #2 Google (Algo B) = 778.26

Example 1


Algo A = 47.45
Algo B =  24.78
Example 2


Algo A = 48.86
Algo B =  69.69

Example 3


Algo A = 37.41
Algo B =  17.18


Here are the assumptions that I used for this:

  • The 6.3% left over from other search engines in SEw is irrelevant so discard it.   I teetered on this one and wanted to spread out the 6.3% proportionately across all the 3 to account for the searches but decided against it.
  • People click the same way on any search engine, keyword, regardless of sex, gender, mood, or medium.  This could play a factor since more ‘desperate’ keywords might see deeper checks: “How to cure gonorrhea” or “How to hide a body”
  • People usually display 10 results per page.
  • This score does not factor in ‘keyword volume’.   While this is, by far, one of the most important factors to a true ‘SERP SCORE’, it’s outside the scope of this piece.
  • Who cares about SERP scoring?  It’s just another useless statistic that means nothing. I get it.

What method would you use to calculate a SERP score?  How would you factor in KEYWORD VOLUME?

Filed under: Fără categorie