Enough has been addressed and spoken about the interaction of SEO and CRO, and there are multiple ideas on how?But on paper, both SEO and CRO are working for the same purpose In asking around, I have found that many SEOs do worry about their changes hurting conversion rates, however, few actively mitigate that risk. Interestingly, my engagements with CRO experts show that they also usually worry about SEOs’ work affecting negatively on conversion rates.Let’s see some of the evidenceThere are unquestionably some SEO-centric changes that have a very low risk of harming conversion rates for visitors from other channels. If you believe about modifying meta information, for instance, much of that is invisible to users on the page maybe that is pure
However everything else has a possible influence on both, and our experience has been explicating us that the theoretical risk is real.We have seen SEO changes that have changed conversion rates, and have experience of major CRO-centered innovations that have had dramatic impacts on search performance (however more on that later).The intent is, there is multiple stuff in the intersection of both SEO and CRO:
So throughout this post, I’ve talked about our experiences, and work we have done that has shown various impacts in different directions, from conversion rate-centric changes that change search performance and vice versa. How are we seeing all this?
In the example that follows, we look at the impact on an example business of a series of conversion rate tests conducted during a year and see the resulting improvement we might anticipate as a decision of rolling out winning tests and turning off null and negative ones. We match the revenue we might succeed with the revenue we would have assumed without trial. The case is a little uncomplicated though it serves to prove our point.Most importantly, we wouldn’t just throw away a winning SEO test that reduced conversion rate or a winning conversion rate test that negatively impacted search performance. Both of these tests would have come from underlying hypotheses, and by reaching significance, would have taught us something. We would take that knowledge and take it back as input into the next test to try to capture the good part without the associated downside.All of those details, though, don’t change the underlying calculus that this is an important process and one that I believe we are going to need to do more and more.