12819Re: Why do web analysts switch packages?
- Sep 4, 2007In my expereince, it is either:
a) because they outgrow the starter package
b) because the features they were sold did not work as expected and
eventually became a show-stopper.
c) Marketing wanted more detail but IT baulked at more and more
custom tagging and replaced the data colelction with packet sniffing
emulating the tag server feeding the same analytics package.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "romanojon" <daniel@...> wrote:
> Hey Robbin,
> As you know, we use the Omniture grouping of products. We've had it
> for a year now and dealt with the shifting and changing. I admit it
> doesn't surprise me that analysts would switch. It does surprise
> that you infer that this is much more frequently than I
> For some reason it just doesn't seem likely in the age of much more
> sophisticated tag-based and hybrid solutions. Maybe you have some
> stats on that. :)
> Omniture SiteCatalyst does exhibit some limitations which we would
> like to overcome, but, in all, I think Paul and I agree that the
> adoption of a new solution is not in our best interest. Here my
> reasons for this:
> 1. Costs of a new solution, implementation, interface training,
> adaptation and re-centering of data is exorbitant and prohibitive.
> see it as completely unnecessary in the absence of the promise of a
> superior insight driving crystal ball.
> 2. The ability to really nurture something like predictive
> your process relies on the ability to seamlessly compare data in an
> apples to apples environment and to isolate events which cause
> movement in your trend lines and prepare for them. Package-hopping
> removes that necessary aggregate reporting. There is no way around
> this without taking enormous steps at the integrated dashboard
> to accommodate the transition.
> 3. On the macro scale of this topic, constant solution-hopping from
> analysts everywhere only leads to an abundance of underdeveloped
> wrought from the impetuous complaints of half-baked analytics
> programs. Think of this one most...if at every advent of a new KPI
> metric of relative importance we switched to the vendor who had
> packaged or offered some better-marketed version of something we
> already have but are unaware of, the true structure of what we're
> operating in is made of sticks and rice-paper.
> In the interest of this becoming an exhaustive work for Saturday
> I'll quit there, but, I will say, if the trend and propensity of
> analysts to switch tools is occurring with the frequency which you
> describe, I would become critical of it and pay very close
> to the solution-vendor market tectonics. Watch as the innovations
> stagnate to meet the impulsive demands of a consumer and not the
> comprehensive needs of the practitioner.
> Daniel W. Shields
> --- In email@example.com, "robbinsteif" <steif@> wrote:
> > I have read (maybe in the 2002 Marketing Sherpa WA report? I
> > an elephant) that the average live of a WA package is 18 months -
> > companies switch a *lot*
> > Why? Hosted analytics are so popular, and every time we switch,
> > lose all our data. It's true that now we have GA and a free
> > to benchmark all our data and keep even when we switch a second
> > package, but this was the trend (I believe) way back before GA.
> > So why do analysts switch so much?
> > Robbin
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>