Subscribe to this Blog

Your email:

Executive Briefing 166w Blue 

Whats Holding You Back Self Assessment 166w Green

OpenView Labs Top 25

Get Connected

Favourite Bloggers

 

Browse by tag

Accelerating Revenue Growth: The Inflexion-Point Blog

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Why stalking your website visitors isn't a very good idea

 

I recently received a LinkedIn message from someone whose profile I had accidently visited, saying something along the lines of “I just noticed that you visited my profile on LinkedIn. Please let me know if there is anything I can help you with.” This is the second time this has happened in the past couple of weeks, and I hope that it doesn’t become a habit, because this feels awfully like stalking.

Stalking website visitorsBy the way, my response was to declare that my purpose in visiting their site was because of my research into the ugliest profile photos on LinkedIn, and to offer my congratulations to them as a short-listed finalist. Which amused me, although it didn’t appear to amuse them ☺

You might want to do something similar if it ever happens to you, because stalking website visitors in this way is clumsy, and discouraging people from adopting it as a habit can only benefit society.

I’ve socialised this with a number of friends and colleagues, and enough of them seem to feel the same way about this overt stalking approach for me to believe that it’s a risky strategy. I believe the same thinking applies to contacting your website visitors. Now, I know that today’s technology allows us to capture tremendously useful information about our website visitors and which pages they have been interested in. All I’m arguing for is a little subtlety about how we use it.

Web visitor stalking is the modern-day equivalent of the hapless shop assistant (or the bored vendor sales person at an exhibition) approaching you with “can I help you?” The question encourages a negative answer, and may provoke negative feelings if you feel that your personal space has just been invaded in an unprompted, unwanted and boorish fashion.

There is a better way, and it’s to rephrase your approach so that’s it’s more likely to promote a positive response. I’m not sure that even having them complete a form means that it’s a good idea to reveal that you’ve been perched on their shoulder all the time they have been browsing your site.

Instead of coming right out with it and telling your prospect that you’ve noticed that they have just visited pages x, y and z on your website, and how can you help them, how about coaching your people to use some variation of the following:

“Thank you for getting in touch. We’ve been working a with a growing number of companies in your space recently, and they often tell us that they are interested in x, y and z - and I wondered if this might be of importance to you as well?”

If yes, great - and even if no, you’ve kept the door open for continuing the conversation in a different and more relevant direction.

There are a couple of things going on here: first, you’ve a better chance of building empathy if you suggest that you understand the issues they are likely to be interested in, and imply that you’ve got relevant customer experience in the area. Second, you’re introducing the topics you know they have visited without clubbing them over the head with the fact that their every movement has been recorded.

It just feels a little more natural, and a lot more likely to evolve into a productive conversation. But for heaven’s sake, be truthful about what you choose to claim. Don’t imply that you’ve got great experience in an area where in truth you know nothing, because you’ll get found out. But then you’d probably be qualifying those enquiries out to work on better ones, wouldn’t you?

What’s your experience? Have you ever felt that you’re being stalked when you visit websites? And have you found ways of using the intelligence that modern web platforms can collect in a less intrusive, more human fashion?

Comments

Oh yes. I hate this. It can be done sensitively and subtly without offending but it's so easy to cross the 'creepy' line. 
 
My least favourite is Fuze Meeting's ad retargeting blitz. It follows me EVERYWHERE on the web -- and I'm already a paying customer! 
 
I won't be when the contract expires.
Posted @ Thursday, February 09, 2012 2:56 AM by Doug Kessler
Bob, 
 
While I get your point, I'm not sure I see much difference between your suggested message and the one you describe as "stalking". To me, the issue is the intention and interests of the visitor to the site. 
 
Also, conflating a LinkedIn profile visit with a visit to your companies website doesn't really work. Casually viewing LinkedIn profiles may reflect no interest in the owner of the profile, while website visits to particular pages, time on age etc can indicate some interest.  
 
My view is that one should interact with a website visitor in a much more robust way then is common on static pages. Ask the visitor if they want to be "kept in touch with" or "updated on developments" - use a pop-up (all auto responders offer this as standard functionality). Then, in B2B settings, the follow up should come from the acct exec involved who covers the acct if it is in a targeted market/acct. The point is to establish a contextually appropriate relationship with the customer that is personal and relevant. 
 
The real problem comes when marketing folks just blast away at a "list" simply measuring success wrt opens, clickthroughs and unsubcribes. It's a brute force approach that only works in B2C markets due to the volumes involved - it is death in B2B settings. 
 
The real question here is does anyone in management have the power/guts to get marketing to stop banging away on "lists"? Witness the recent comments by the JC Penny CEO. He counted 500+ promotional emails a year coming to a stealth account he set up. This drove him to change the corporate strategy away from "promotions" and towards a better store experience (wow, what a novel idea). While this is retail - such practices seem all to common from 'state of the art' marketeers. 
 
My two cents. 
 
Glenn
Posted @ Thursday, February 09, 2012 6:24 AM by Glenn Donovan
Good points, Bob. I've heard the same LinkedIn tactic you experienced suggested as a way to build leads, but it didn't sit well with me so it's not something I've done. On the subject of "stalking" website visitors, I did once receive an email from an SEO consultant who's site I had visited - it was short, pleasant, and complimentary of my website. She closed by asking how I had gotten on her email list - in a very nice way. I had no problem responding to her note, but she used the right approach.
Posted @ Thursday, February 09, 2012 7:55 AM by Kim Gusta
I believe Bob's point is that people don't want to feel they're being watched. I wrote a post expressing the same philosophy. I use the example of a focus group. There's a reason why a mirror is used to shield the observers instead of a window. People act differently when they know they’re being watched. They don’t respond as honestly. When you contact someone and are too blatant with your approach, you might as well conduct a focus group without the mirror. People do not respond well to being told they were watched.
Posted @ Thursday, February 09, 2012 10:55 AM by Nancy Nardin
Thank you for the focus group example, Nancy - that's a perfect analogy.
Posted @ Thursday, February 09, 2012 12:03 PM by Bob Apollo
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics