Community Discussion: Do you agree that brand recognition has an empirical impact on organic search rankings?
-
And could hard metrics — such as search queries, citations, traffic, and click-through rates — influence organic search rankings? Tom Coad “StickyEyes” tackles both these questions in this post for YouMoz. Take a peek at his research, and let us know how it compares to your own findings.
If you haven't done any research yourself along these lines, I'd love to hear your answers to these same questions based on your more casual observations and analysis of the brands you monitor in the SERPs.
-
Big showoff!
Just kidding, well done!
Robert
-
In addition to EGOL and Robert's insights, we also see Google behavior like this in a couple of other areas.
In search changes around News results when real-time feeds based appear in parallel with search query volume and page changes across the web we see news items gaining a boost. If a new brand is gaining similar traction on both sides of search (both press and searcher interest) it's not a small leap to think that Google will respond with providing users more results around that brand.
Another good parallel comes from the Google patent for "Using concepts as contexts for query term substitutions" ( https://www.google.com/patents/US9104750 ). Being a patent around context and similar terminology, its Claim #1 is broken down as First Term + Second Term + Third Term = something different than any one of those terms used alone. Their example further on in the patent is especially telling...
During state (I), the substitution engine 206 analyzes the aggregated query term substitution data, and determines whether one or more substitution rules may be generated from the analysis. For one example, the substitution engine 206 may determine from the query term substitution data 231 that the term “Crossword” is frequently a substitute term for the term “Puzzle” in the context of the concept “New York Times,” as indicated by a positive indication 237. In some implementations, the indication 237 may be a quantitative score assigned to the query term substitution data 231 in the query log 209, and the quantitative score can be analyzed by one or more criteria in the substitution engine's evaluation of a potential substitute term. For another example, the substitution engine 206 may determine from the query term substitution data 233 that the term “Subscription” is not frequently a substitute term for the term “Puzzle” in the context of the concept “New York Times,” as indicated by a negative indication 238. Here, the substitution engine 206 determines that the term “Crossword” is frequently a substitute term for the term “Puzzle” in the context of “New York Times”, and sends an indication 239 to the collection 210 of substitution rules to add the substitution rule “Puzzle→Crossword (New York Times :)” to the collection 210. For subsequent user queries that contain original query terms “New York Times Puzzles”, the substitution engine 206 may then apply the substitution rule “Puzzle→Crossword (New York Times :)” and communicate with the query reviser engine 205 to include the substitute term “Crossword” in the revised query.
While the example above goes into the similarities between the terms "Puzzle" and "Crossword" the same machine learning can recognize and attribute values to the brand itself, "New York Times".
-
I am a firm believer that domain queries, domains typed into the Chrome address window, "domain + keyword" typed into search, domain mentions, etc. are among the most potent drivers of rankings that you can find.... and if they don't drive rankings they certainly drive business. What could be more potent than people asking for your website by name?
If Google isn't using this they need to have their heads examined. It's a nobrainer.
And, those SEOs who say that this stuff isn't important, and even those googlers who say this stuff isn't important.... don't believe 'em. You gotta be real careful who you listen to.
-
Christy,
This is a very good discussion question. I think we have to look at the test Tom Coad did and ask is it more about Brand Awareness or more about a longer-term test of "pogo-sticking?" Tom is careful to explain the limits on any test like this and his data is certainly quite interesting. The fact Tom is looking in this direction says a lot about his thinking and I like it. For me, I just don't see it as a branding awareness experiment.
I would see that type of experiment as more where we take a branded product and see how their click through rate is for non-branded searches around their products. Once you had a baseline, you would do television and radio or print, etc. over a week in a given market. Then measure two or three weeks later to see if there is an increase in searches on the branded product or an increase in click through choices of the branded product (assuming the SERPs were the same as pre test). So, having been exposed to the brand over a limited amount of time, were people more likely to now choose that brand when it appeared in non-branded searches? Note: we are not even asking did they purchase it; simply, did they choose it in search more frequently than it was being chosen prior to the brand awareness campaign?
I think Google does take into account click-throughs to sites and if being a known brand on some level is possible, one should certainly work to that. I don’t want to get into an argument on CTR and ranking here as it is not the point, but if suddenly thousands of people are searching on a given subject and going to a specific site in that search, that site page does increase in the rankings for that search query. The ranking changes even if the increase happens in a day or period of hours in the case of news events, etc. IMO.
Working in a marketing firm that does branding work, etc. along with SEO and other digital marketing I am still amazed at how few companies understand or care about branding. For me this says a lot about how aware and forward-thinking Tom Coad's research is. It would be great if more SEO firms pushed companies beyond SEO or SEO and PPC. Many companies, if not most, would rather throw large sums at PPC, etc. and mechanisms that provide an immediately measurable return than to worry about tomorrow and what having a strong brand can provide. Coming from an area years ago that was all direct marketing, I fully understand why it is difficult to want to focus on branding. I have come full circle and we constantly push more and more of our clients to consider their brand and what it means in the marketplace.
For those who might be less about general marketing, when I say the client’s brand I mean more than name, tagline, and logo. What does Nike mean? What does Jaguar mean? What does Chase mean? What emotional connection does it create when people here it? Frankly, even if I am not a fan of Chase, (assuming I have no past experience with them) if I am in a new town and looking for a bank and the only familiar name I see is Chase, I have to believe I would be inclined to at least check them out (click on their result in the SERP).
To me, building brand awareness is not unlike SEO; it is longer term, but the dividends pay off over time and can be considerable. They are both a hedge against less active advertising times, etc.
This is certainly a great question and I look forward to other discussion on it.
Best
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
What exactly "monthly searches" from Google Adwords teach us?
I have noticed that monthly searches of our "brand" in last five years is almost same. But I can see our competitors have increased their brand searched for monthly in last few years. They are gaining popularity slowly where we are not. What are the other things we can learn when users searching for our brand are not increasing? Thanks
Branding | | vtmoz2 -
Brand Name Cratering - possible N-SEO or Black Hat Attacks
Hello to the Moz Community, Let me start by saying, we are not an SEO company. We are the in-house agency for our parent corp, and the 7 companies in their portfolio. We manage their PPC and other digital items. None of the companies use an SEO company. Their "SEO strategy" is to not have one. They internally post on their own Social Media account, their own Blog, and send out their own Press Releases (which we help write the copy sometimes). One of the accounts encountered a very bizarre, and serious ranking problem around Dec 25th-30th. In the past when you Googled the company's brand name you would get 5-6 pages of internal content show up at the very Top of the results. Pages like Home Page, Blog Home, Contact Us, About Us, Client Reviews Page, etc. (core pages). There were then several other non core pages that would show up in the Top 20 results (my recollection is they controlled about 12-14 of the Top 20 results for the brand name). Unfortunately, around Dec. 25th this all cratered. And the only internal page that would display when you Googled the brand name was the Home Page (totally gone; even checking 100 rankings deep). So the question we have spend weeks trying to figure out is, what in the heck happened? We got together with the company to find out any and all possible changes or things could of happened since the first of December, which could have contributed to this cratering. Here is what we found: #1 The company made an acquisition of a smaller competitor in 2014. Around Dec. 10th they sent out a great press release announcing the acquisition. Since the press release was involving someone in the TV/radio advertising agency industry it was very popular (the best release they ever put out). The release was picked up by over 100 high page rank local TV stations, all across the U.S. (along with the normal companies that pick up online releases). The headline of the release was "Brand Name Reviews Assets of TV Ad Agency Competitor." Most of the stations that picked it up placed "Do not follow" links, but it was still an amazingly successful release. #2 Around Dec. 15th this 8 year old company received their first negative "client review." The review was not from a real client though, it was posted on Rip-Off report by a fake client, the Internet Mafia (reputation management co.) or a former employee/contractor. The posting was deliberately optimized. The URL and the Title Tag contained all sort of words like "Reviews" "Complaints" the "Domain Name," and the Company Brand Name (whoever did it, knew what they were doing). #3 Towards the end of December and into January the company received 6-8 bizarre root domain links. The links show to of come from domains that were just registered in November/December. Yet the domain name was already voluntarily forfeited by the beginning of January. Google Webmaster Tools is still showing the links, but when you go to the domain "all it shows is "cannot be found." WHOIS has screenshots of all of them though. Here is one: http://www.domaintools.com/research/screenshot-history/lizardeyephoto.com/ The domains themselves had nothing to do with the type of business this client account operates in, but the information after the / contained partial pieces of the company brand name. Here is an example: http://www.martygraveyard.com/buying-inexpensive-vehicles-at-on-line-community-automobile-auctions/ I personally don't think 6-8 new root domains could crater a website with 290 root domains (and 1500 links), but maybe those domains/sites are somehow "cloaked;" and they are actually showing bad information to the bots/spiders, but us humans can't see it? I honestly am not educated enough on the subject to know... #4 In mid January, three of the brand name pages returned: Home Page, About Us, Blog Home. However, the other pages are nowhere to be found. The companies Contact Us page, Client Reviews page (which used to rank 2nd), and all of the other Top 20 pages are totally gone. They are still indexed if you do a "site:brandname.com" search, but they won't show up when you Google the brand name. #5 Search results are almost identical with Bing and Google. So, here is the million dollar question: was our client's Brand Name deliberately attacked via an N-SEO Black Hat attack, in an effort to get it their internal pages to drop out of the rankings? Or did Google and Bing incorrectly issue some sort of partial penalty on certain pages due to the amazing success (and them believing it was some sort of link buying scheme) of the Press Release that was sent out at the beginning of December? If you read to the bottom of this, I am grateful for you doing so. Thanks in advance for anyone who tries to help us and our in-house client. Jake
Branding | | SBIM-Jake0 -
Is there Schema Markup for "brand name"?
Hi Mozzers, I've been trying desperately for months to get my domain to rank #1 for its brand name in Google. This is made hard by the fact that the brand name is also a combination of two keywords, one of them being "Hire". I've actioned everything I can think of, setting up and maintaining social networks (including g+), adding the site to lots of high quality business directories, internal and external linking. I even asked right here. The site continuously rises in the ranks until it hits top of page 2 and then starts falling again. When searching [Brand name] +[Town of HQ] we get the open graph info displayed, and the g+ pin, but still only rank 3rd! My Question: Is there a schema.org markup for brand names? and would it make any difference adding this? I feel like I'm clutching at straws now... Oh were in the UK if that helps. I'd also be happy to share the domain via PM if anyone is willing to help!
Branding | | Silkstream0 -
Renaming of Link within Site Links - Brand Issues
Hi, We welcome your thoughts on the current problem we are experiencing: When searching for our client's brand name, their previous sponsors name is shown within the Site Links to a very important page. We are keen to change this reference within the Site Link but keep the link itself. We have untaken the following without any change to the words used within this particular Site Link: 1) Removal of previous-sponsors name sitewide: Title tags Alt attribute Anchors Page names Image names 2) Removal of sponsors name from 200+ sister sites: Title tags Alt attribute Anchors Page names Image names 3) Modification of [previous-sponsor + client] within Wikipedia:
Branding | | PhilYarrow
There were 250+ mentions of the sponsor + client within Wikipedia. References have either been deleted or changed to past tense. (Google has been extremely slow at indexing these changes.) 4) Removal of off-site mentions:
After using Advanced Filters within OSE, we extracted all links that included the previous-sponsors name. We filtered these by DA and approached these sites and requested they update their links/on-site content to include the up-to-date name. This included large news organisations and reference sources. We also used Google operators (inurl, inanchor, intitle) to search for references mentions of [previous-sponsor + client]. We used Buzzstream to collate this data and contacted hundreds of sites sorted by DA. 5) We have twice requested demotion of the Site Link via GWT without success. Google clearly see's the Site Link as too important to remove it. The following is useful background information:
The [client + previous-sponsor] worked together for 5+ years. Our client is known by it's own brand, but it was also called in certain arenas as [client + previous-sponsor].
Fresh mentions of [client + previous-sponsor] are frequent. Examples of this are from collectors merchandise and videos that are posted frequently. The page being shown within the Site Links is essential. It cannot be moved. With a PA of mid-70's.
We have changed the Title of the page multiple times, without any change to the Site Link. Thanks
Phil0 -
Facebook page not appearing in search results
Could anyone give a reason as to why a facebook page wouldn't be appearing in search results? - I've setup numerous facebook Pages for businesses and they usually get indexed and start appearing in the SERPs for their respective name/brand name relatively quickly, but have a Page for a business (which has even been quite active recently) and it's nowhere to be seen in Google's results (not even on a search for the complete URL). Any thoughts appreciated, thanks. Greg
Branding | | GregDixson0 -
Product expansion on website. Best practices for Retargeting Interior Pages with a high concern for brand.
For the past year, I've worked on a website that offered one product (Product 1). The homepage targeted both branded terms and the highest volume keywords for the one product. We've built a lot of strong links to the homepage using the natural variations of the targeted Keywords & the homepage ranks very well for these terms. The brand is now expanding its offerings to two products (Product 1 & 2). Thus necessitating the creation of two product subpages. I'm not concerned about ranking of Product 2's page, only Product 1. From a branding perspective, the homepage URL works wonderfully for the expanded offerings. And from an SEO perspective, offering two products allows me to target a very high volume group of keywords on the homepage that now makes more sense given the offerings. This new group of keywords will make even more sense if brand is able to roll out a 3rd product. The profitability of Product 1 & 2 are about the same. The profitability of potential product 3 is far greater 1+2 combined. Product 3 also has the most natural correlation with the group of KWs I plan to target on the homepage, i.e., I care more about the ranking of the homepage once Product 3 has launched. Product 3 will have its own interior product page as there is plenty of search volume for KWs specific to this product. I'm worried about hurting the rankings of the old product and URL confusion between the homepage & the to-be-created Product 1 page. I don't see myself having a lot of options. Options 301 - It does not make sense to 301 redirect the homepage to the Product 1 interior page. The homepage URL has strong branding and will be used in future marketing. I do not believe that I value the maintaining the rankings of Product 1 enough to push for making the new homepage example.com/home or similar to allow for the 301 redirect. Canonical - The content of the homepage will be changing, thus a rel=canonical to the Product 1 page does not make sense, nor does it make sense from a ranking perspective as I also want the homepage to rank for the new set of KWs I will be targeting The only real option I see is attempting to reach out to strong back links with Product 1 anchor text (or context) & asking them the switch the URL to the Product 1 interior page. Combine this with proper site-wide internal linking to the new Product 1 interior page & an anchor text link on the homepage to the new Product 1 interior page. Am I missing something? Am I dismissing either one of the above options too easily. Am I over-thinking this (yes probably)? Would love another set of eyes on this.
Branding | | 2uinc0 -
What is the weight of .pro domains? Will they rank?
.pro Domains have ben out there for a while but seem to as late started to be adopted. Thoughts and opinions welcome.
Branding | | bozzie3110 -
Organic fluctuations after domain migration ?
I'm working on the rebranding of an ecommerce site We're going to do a domain migration and since half of the current traffic is coming from organic searches I'd like to estimate possible fluctuations on this channel. **Do you have any rebranding experience? or can suggest good case studies on this? ** (Technically speaking we know the protocol and also on the communication/strategy side we're covered.. we just need an estimate of the organic drop.. in the worst case scenario)
Branding | | homeonline0