tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18012046.post8988925229089708888..comments2024-03-25T23:56:43.770-07:00Comments on Digital Marketing and Analytics by Anil Batra: Engagement, is it a metric or an excuse?Anil Batrahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10987449618439416854noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18012046.post-74715123874872667362009-03-15T22:58:00.000-08:002009-03-15T22:58:00.000-08:00I don't think a "changing" engagement metrics is a...I don't think a "changing" engagement metrics is a bad idea. You begin with few inputs that your think, based on your goals and customer goals, are critical and then modify the metrics from there. I have done that for few customers. If you would like to discuss more email me and we can discuss it offline.Anil Batrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10987449618439416854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18012046.post-56243270052032907752009-03-03T13:56:00.000-08:002009-03-03T13:56:00.000-08:00Hi Anil,Talking about engagement and the challenge...Hi Anil,<BR/><BR/>Talking about engagement and the challenges of calculating it. I agree the metric should be site specific. However I have a question more related to the process of finding the right engagement metric.<BR/><BR/>It would be great to come up right away with the perfect engagement metric for a given site. However sometimes it is not possible, maybe because there is something that we are not tracking or because key stakeholders are reluctant to accept a new metric. <BR/><BR/>In such an environment, what do you think of having some sort of an "evolving" engagement metric. Let's say that you start with a simple definition of engagement. Then step by step you modified to be more comprehensive. <BR/><BR/>From your experience, does it sound like a good idea? Or is a better approach to come up with the best metric that we can and just stick to it?<BR/><BR/>Will the fact that the metric definition is "changing" reduce its value?<BR/><BR/>(Eric: if you are still around, please feel free to jump in). <BR/><BR/>Thanks,<BR/><BR/>JoseAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18012046.post-3088061694980103462007-10-02T16:26:00.000-07:002007-10-02T16:26:00.000-07:00Hey Jacques, come to my "Web Analytics 2.0" presen...Hey Jacques, come to my "Web Analytics 2.0" presentation at Emetrics in two weeks and hear my update on calculating engagement.<BR/><BR/>E.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10350328790948103403noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18012046.post-46028291769863801002007-10-02T16:25:00.000-07:002007-10-02T16:25:00.000-07:00Anil,Great points, all, and I don't think you were...Anil,<BR/><BR/>Great points, all, and I don't think you were missing anything. Nobody said that calculating engagement was easy, but nobody should have said that web analytics was easy in the first place. <BR/><BR/>I personally think that one of the most exciting things about Web Analytics 2.0 is that the predictive nature of engagement calculations becomes even easier to vet and validate against more qualitative data (for example, "Would you describe yourself as well-engaged with this web site and/or brand?") <BR/><BR/>Some have called my own engagement calculation "the mother of all key performance indicators" (you can read about my calculation at <A HREF="http://blog.webanalyticsdemystified.com/weblog/category/engagement/" REL="nofollow">http://blog.webanalyticsdemystified.com/weblog/category/engagement/</A>) But I'm inclined to agree with you --- a good engagement score is less of a backward-looking KPI and more of a forward-looking indicator of business health.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, great post!<BR/><BR/>Eric T. Peterson<BR/><A HREF="http://www.webanalyticsdemystified.com/" REL="nofollow">http://www.webanalyticsdemystified.com/</A>Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10350328790948103403noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18012046.post-9925286653852548072007-10-02T16:17:00.000-07:002007-10-02T16:17:00.000-07:00Hi Anil,I very much agree with you. Obviously, the...Hi Anil,<BR/><BR/>I very much agree with you. Obviously, the notion of engagement (if we can't call it a metric) is something quite unique to each business. I very much liked what Eric Peterson was doing about that concept back in his Visual Sciences days, and I think this would be a good opportunity for him to grab the baton again, and pursue his reflection on the matter. <BR/><BR/>What I like with engagement is the multi-metric nature of it, even though that makes it a bit hard on 1) definition (and agreement, which is always hard in a company), 2) operationalisation (what d'ya do with its variations), and 3) its segmentation (which of the various metric combinations determine so and so segment). <BR/><BR/>Engagement forces us to put more stuff into the bucket, which in principle should account better for the richness of the user experience,attitude, needs, and behavior. Not an easy thing to do, mind you.<BR/><BR/>This is why I am very much interested in the visitor index WebTrends is pushing, and I know both you and I will be asking them tons of questions next week!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com