Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

12819Re: Why do web analysts switch packages?

Expand Messages
  • metronomelabs
    Sep 4, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      In 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.

      Doug Watt

      --- In webanalytics@yahoogroups.com, "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
      analysis in
      > 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.
      > Sincerely,
      > Daniel W. Shields
      > Analyst
      > CableOrganizer.com
      > http://danalytics.blogspot.com
      > --- In webanalytics@yahoogroups.com, "robbinsteif" <steif@> wrote:
      > >
      > > I have read (maybe in the 2002 Marketing Sherpa WA report? I
      must be
      > > 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
      > >
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic