Testing News Blog

October 2010

Readers: Share Your Testing Success Examples!

Each week, we get an average of about 41 comments from readers. And these are GREAT comments — it’s clear that readers are running their own tests and know what they’re talking about.

Now, we’d like to turn the spotlight on these readers: We’re looking for marketers to share one their own tests and results for our Test of the Week quiz.

Help spread the gospel of testing and inspire your fellow marketers with an example of your own testing success. If you’ve run an interesting test that got conclusive results — preferably a 90% or higher confidence level and at least a 10% lift in conversions — and can share the details publicly, please contact Natalie Myers at nataliem(at)whichtestwon(dot)com.

Can’t wait to see what our community of savvy testers has been testing!

Click here to comment

Category: Uncategorized

New A/B Test for Your Vote: Can Optional Form Fields Increase Leads?

Both versions of this week’s PPC landing page test feature the same offer and lead generation form, except that Version A has four required fields and Version B makes all information optional. Can you guess which one got more form submissions and more qualified leads? Click here and vote to find out.

Traffic to the page came from PPC ads with offer copy that matched the landing page offer copy.

Please tell us why you voted for Version A or B in the comments section after you vote. http://whichtestwon.com/archives/5500

P.S. Thanks to the all the *awesome* people and blogs who linked to us and helped get the word out about WhichTestWon.com this past week, including {web:media}, Aaron Bradley, adamzais, alexandra Gresham, Alexis Antonelli, AllBusiness, André Ryan Gravador, Andrew Valler, Angie Schottmuller, Anne Michelsen, Auke Molendijk, Brenda Stoltz, Capterra, Christina Dick, Consonaute, Conversion Marketing, Crealytics, Crispin Heath, Dan Limb, Darrell Lerner, datinginsider, David Evans, David Hobbs, Debbie Swider, Dennis Decoene, DiamondWebConversion, don rua, Doug Hudiburg, Doug Somerville, E Myth Worldwide, Elastic Path, emyselfandi, E-Myth Worldwide, Eric Haidara, Fav Tweeps, Fit Bloggers fbg guide, Gahlord Dewald, Giovanni Cavalieri, Heidi Miller, Ingrid Lee, Interactive Snack, ion interactive, J3media, Inc., Jack Chang, Jason Buzzell, Jean Gazis, Jeff Pacamana, Jim Williams , Josh Summerhays, Karen Tiede, Karin Iwata, Karina, Karl Philip Lund, Kathryn Griffiths, Ken Horst, Kevin T Vine, Kirsten Knipp, Landing Page Tips, Laura Callow, Laurent Barbat, Lex Sisney, Main Street Chamber, Mark Tisdale, Marketing Filter, Marni Drew, Matías Candal, Matthew BlackMedia and Marketing, Mél, Melody Lentsch, Michael Stickney, Michel Fortin, Mitch Tarr, Naomi Niles, Nirav Ranpuria, Olexandr Prokhorenko, Pat Marcello, Patricia Hader, Patrick Bakker, Philippe Morin, powerspace, Ralph Van Coillie, Raymond Young, Richard Ingersoll, Robert Seres, Ross Schmadebeck, Ryan Sullivan, Ryan Waliany, Sarah DeAtley, Sarah Naeher, Sean Polay, Sébastien Clément, SheilaAtwood, sue Jespersen, Thos003, Tom Adams, vadskaer, Visual Website Optimizer, Will Scully-Power.

Click here to comment

Category: Landing Page Tests, Lead Generation TestsTags: , ,

How To Address Internal Statements About Tests That Get Null Results

When two or more versions of a test page perform the same as or close to the original page and the test does NOT get an 80% or more confidence level, how do you communicate internally that these tests are still valuable?

That’s the question a site testing manager for a major ecommerce retailer recently asked us.

The site manager’s current internal statement regarding these kinds of tests was:

“There was no significant difference in customer behavior to meet a confidence level of 80% that one version outperformed another.”

Our response: “Often the biggest challenge for testing is managing the office politics around it. In this case, your challenge is a copywriting one. You don’t want to make it seem like testing isn’t a worthwhile thing to do. Instead, you can make it look like testing is risk management — a very safe and sane thing to do especially in this economy.

So perhaps revamping your internal statement to start out saying something like:

Good News: Testing shows [company].com is currently safe using either of these options. Neither one should perform significantly worse than the other.

We suggest you run with the option that meets any or several of these guidelines:
- Falls in line better with our branding
- Easier for in-house staff to manage the creative
- Strongly preferred by HIPPO

Notes: this test was measured to XX% conclusiveness. However market and brand conditions will change over time. If warranted, we recommend re-running this test in XX months. Any questions contact the testing team at…”

Click here to comment

Category: Useful Testing Advice