Although you’ve probably heard it from us ad nauseum that testing is critical to an optimization strategy that converts, I’m here to tell you first-hand that it really does make the difference between delivering a “good” versus a “great” campaign. I want to share some recent results of one such lead generation campaign where I was tempted to run with what “I believed” would convert versus testing traffic to drive increased conversions.
In the marketing department at ion, there is a significant amount of pressure to always challenge status quo and to never make assumptions about page performance. However, like most marketing departments with tight deadlines and multiple marketing initiatives looming, we also find ourselves saying, “Maybe we can just run with what we know has worked in the past”.
In the past, I’ve always loved utilizing segmentation in my landing experiences. I believe it creates a more relevant experience for the visitor – ultimately driving more conversions. So when we sent a targeted e-mail campaign to the DM News Whitepaper of the Day audience, my heart told me to run with the segmentation experience only: it has always delivered, and surely it won’t fail me now. However, my head reminded me that making assumptions can cost me money, leads and ultimately a “great” campaign.
Testing pays off. The landing page outperformed the segmented path by 19.4%. Had I gone with my segmentation assumption, it would have cost me 23.4% of my leads generated, more than a 23% increase in cost-per-lead and, most importantly, significant ridicule in our office. Did I also mention that our over-arching respondent to lead conversion rate was 70.17%?
Here are a few takeaways:
- No matter how much you “think” you know your audience, always challenge what is working.
- Testing can be as easy as a segmented path versus a landing page – and the results can be significant.
- Know your results. They will sometimes surprise you.