Calendar
Network
Feeds
- 49
- Sphinn It!
The Gray Area Between SEO Consulting & SEO Implementing
Went Hot: May 23, 2008 - 9:36 am
Posted By: dedmond29 62 days ago
Topic Type: Discussion
Category: Search Marketing
Do you think a company should actually implement recommendations delivered (or be prepared to provide this service)
- or provide a project plan for implementation (to then be budgeted or carried out separately)
- or just simply provide the recommendation with the expectation the client is responsible to implement (and let's assume that the latter responsibility is known)?
For my part, I find it a challenge to actually get a client to implement (not all the time, but it's not out of the ordinary) - which means either implementing in general or not implementing to the extent that was expected. That being said, your success as a consultant is usually tied to the results of a recommendation, which doesn't go anywhere if no one implements.
I also feel that good SEO consultants are paid for their intellectual property. So the cost associated with having top-notch SEO's implementing recommendations can get extremely expensive. A smart business owner knows they can pay a lower rate/hour for almost any technical skill (web design, programming, copywriting etc etc)
But it's also easier for the client to simply have the SEO implement the rec, assuming there is a good relationship. And in some cases, it would turn out to be less time intensive for an SEO simply to just "do it" versus writing it all out for someone else.
I'd love to hear your thoughts and opinions on this. For purposes of the discussion, I'm thinking this deals primarily with on-site recommendations (versus link building) but it's really up to anyone who wants to provide comment.
9 Comments
Comments
An SEO firm could charge one rate for the high priced talent and intellectual property and another rate for the staff that will implement the tactics. This may prevent the client from feeling that they need to employ two firms to get the best value and allow you to keep the customer and have the oversite to see that the work is completed in the time and of the quality specified.
There's no either/or situation here. I think that one-person consulting firms probably tend to do more along the recommendations line, as there's only so much work one person can do. They'd either have to work with very few clients or just provide recommendations. (I found that's what happened when I was working without a team for me.)
But now we offer both things. We tend to do more along the consulting (recommendations) side because that's what clients want, but if they're willing to pay for full implementation (and even then we don't actually go on their server and make any changes), we have the in-house capabilities of doing this as well.
I do think it's unfortunate that more companies don't actually implement the recommendations provided by their clients, and I'm not sure exactly why it is that they don't. My best guess is that they think the fixes will be easier/quicker than they are and when they realize how much time/expense is involved they just never get around to it.
I also think that if companies budgeted more for SEO to begin with, they could afford to hire companies who would make the recommendations and do the implementations and it would be more apt to get done that way. Of course, as we all know, even then the client can mess things up by not providing timely approvals, etc., essentially making things STILL not get done!
@JimSpencer - I tend to agree with that but wonder how many employ a tiered pricing schedule. In similar fashion, I would guess that you may have an expansive partner network and simply add a management fee on the top - but I would guess that gets into issues with outsourcing work and the transparencies around that (whole other topic worth exploring of course).
@Jill - agreed as well - I tend to feel clients understand that "why" of an important SEO recommendation, they just don't always have the "how" for how it gets implemented. That's one of the reasons I would say an intermediary step is the "plan of action" which is tailored to their website environment.
To be honest - we offer implementation of recommendations to many of the businesses we work with, but I feel it's a more appropriate solution for clients when an established relationship and trust has been gained. I don't know if it's appropriate for an SEO consultant to come in and offer implementation (on the site side) when they may not know the site environment well.
Just throwing that last part out there for discussion.
It just depends on the client. Enterprise level clients don't usually give you access. Usually you have to interface with an IT team which is why the discovery process in any engagement is so important. One cool way to deliver proposed content changes is to do mockups with Firebug.
@jim spencer wrote: An SEO firm could charge one rate for the high priced talent and intellectual property and another rate for the staff that will implement the tactics.
I agree. I'll add this:
Business Owners will always be mindful of expenses. But, smart business owners know how to value their own time and when to outsource. The customer needs to be educated on the value of SEO and the value of getting it done right. You want the customer that is looking to invest in SEO and to outsource that function. These are the customers you want—as you will eventually be judged on the your customers' search engine success.
The trouble with offering a partial solution is that SBOs will probably never experience the SEO benefits, as they will fail to implement the recommendations due to the primary demands of their business. The SEO firm that offers a full solution, is likely to be the one to get the best accounts and experience the most success.
I think the clear consensus is "it depends". But there is definitely value in at least offering the implementation service, even if it just means outsourcing it to a trusted 3rd party (for a small markup, or maybe even none at all), so that you know that it will get done correctly, and help you look good.
I think you hit it right on the head when you mentioned the problems with client implementation and the tie to the results of the recommendations. Most companies don't know where to go once they have an action plan for SEO success and the implementation falls to the wayside.
In my experience I think ideally companies prefer the "one stop shop" approach. They don't want to deal with multiple parties to achieve a single goal. They don't want to play middle man to the consultant and the party implementing the recommendations. They want to see what your recommendations are, and then once they know what you have in mind they would prefer for it just to be implemented and done and over with.
This is probably the most beneficial route for an SEO. You oversee the implementation, and you are able to make sure all of the changes are in place. You have full control over the process from day 1, and in the end have a way to measure the success of your efforts. By overseeing the followthrough of the changes you help your reputation as an SEO as well. You can actually show potential clients your success stories, whereas a site with little or no implementation makes for a poor example.
most of our clients are somewhat small so we almost always do the implimentation. i have a few right now that i am providing recommendations to and i feel like it is taking more work to provide clear instructions on what needs to be done.
i totally prefer to impliment the changes myself and skip the detailed explanations that usually result in confusing the client having numerous questions to answer. it's definitely more time and work for me to only provide the recommendations and not the implimentation.
plus, i love the implimentation part of SEO, so doing it makes me happy.
I think it's important to consider the legal aspects of such a relationship. I'm going to make the assumption that SEO projects of this size and scope all have a well-written agreement back them up... so that said, the potential for entanglement varies widely. A contract which says "I will provide you with a road map to SEO success" is very different from "I'll provide the roadmap and make it happen." It's the SEO company's responsibility to draw up that document, but those costs tend to just get built into the fees and trickle down to the client anyway. So this is a situation where a good SEO will put on his/her salesperson's hat and say, look client, if you've got someone of your own
who can implement our recommendations, you'll end up paying a lot less for the same level of quality.