I qualify out more work than I acceptand I often pass on this sort of advice, or recommend smaller agencies (http://www.puresystems.co.uk/ for example) so yes, you are right.
Of course it does depend on the size of the work, the dependency on web and the abilities of the individuals available - if you have to hire someone to do the work then we are back in small agency territory again.
The aim of any engagement is to provide the best solution for a client - sometimes that is micro managing their campaigns, but on the flip side even some larger clients (particularly within traditional press) only really require a technical review, with recommendations and some training.
(Of course it does depend on the size of the work, the dependency on web and the abilities of the individuals available - if you have to hire someone to do the work then we are back in small agency territory again.
The aim of any engagement is to provide the best solution for a client - sometimes that is micro managing their campaigns, but on the flip side even some larger clients (particularly within traditional press) only really require a technical review, with recommendations and some training.
LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Wed 23 Jun 2010, 9:12,
archived)
What's the main differencein skill set required by a client you think needs an expert and one you think just needs some training?
Also, with so many inconsistent variables to consider, do SEOs you trust actually do proper testing, or are the ones that say they do just bullshitting to people? I'd have thought that an SEO who is aware of the impossibility of testing and admits to working on likely theory is far more knowledgeable than someone who claims to do tests, or even does tests which I cannot see have scientific value.
(Also, with so many inconsistent variables to consider, do SEOs you trust actually do proper testing, or are the ones that say they do just bullshitting to people? I'd have thought that an SEO who is aware of the impossibility of testing and admits to working on likely theory is far more knowledgeable than someone who claims to do tests, or even does tests which I cannot see have scientific value.
monkeon schmonkeon,
Wed 23 Jun 2010, 10:04,
archived)
Oh, there are some tests which are valid.The results may be short term and one can never prove a negative, but there are valid experiments.
( LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Wed 23 Jun 2010, 11:01,
archived)
Please give an example of a valid experiment.I really can't imagine one.
( monkeon schmonkeon,
Wed 23 Jun 2010, 14:28,
archived)
Okay, really basic stuff and not real example, but:I want to know if a Search Engine follows plain text links, so I write www.somesite.co.uk/manleys-new-test/ and then I link to that page once with a plain text link from an unused but indexed page.
After that I know if it does.
Of course I can never know if it doesn't.
(After that I know if it does.
Of course I can never know if it doesn't.
LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Fri 25 Jun 2010, 10:44,
archived)
I'm sure you're going to say "bad seo"but so many companies claim to test all of the small theories as part of their skill base.
eg testing for keyword density
There are so many variables to keep constant that I think it would be impossible to prove anything about this from any test.
Your test makes sense for the job, but when I worked for a company whose SEO team who passed all their work onto the developers, we were never once asked to build any sort of testing sites or tools. I'm sure the root of my cynicism comes down to that!
Ultimately, I'd have thought that an expert would know the limits of what is testable, though I suspect many SEOs get work by saying "we know this through testing...", rather than "no one can know this but it makes logical sense in theory because..."
(eg testing for keyword density
There are so many variables to keep constant that I think it would be impossible to prove anything about this from any test.
Your test makes sense for the job, but when I worked for a company whose SEO team who passed all their work onto the developers, we were never once asked to build any sort of testing sites or tools. I'm sure the root of my cynicism comes down to that!
Ultimately, I'd have thought that an expert would know the limits of what is testable, though I suspect many SEOs get work by saying "we know this through testing...", rather than "no one can know this but it makes logical sense in theory because..."
monkeon schmonkeon,
Fri 25 Jun 2010, 17:32,
archived)