What’s the future hold for Web Analytics in 2008?  Here are a few predictions:

• Google Analytics releases a real API for getting (and perhaps setting) data.  As you know, I think GA is a fine tool for web analytics, but has severe limitations when you want to control over your data or to feed data into other systems.  Thus, I predict Google Analytics will go beyond the “Tracking API” and release a real API that allows you to at least get data out of the tool (if not set data as well).  Think of what Feedburner does with their REST-based Awareness API.  Wouldn’t that be nice to have with GA?!
• HBX Analytics goes away.  I’d be more than a bit nervous if I were an HBX customer because Omniture is going to sunset HBX and migrate everyone to SiteCatalyst, then try to aggressively sell them the rest of the suite. 
• Long live Visual Sciences.  VS is a powerful tool quite superior in some regards and very different than anything else Omniture offers.  It’s also real in-house software, not some blackbox.  VS’ extensible schema, flexibility in reporting, scalability, and performance is quite unparalleled in the industry.  I can’t envision Omniture killing it (unless they peel it apart in order to create Discover 3), like they will HBX. 
• WebTrends rebrands.  I’m not sure if you agree, but imho WebTrends Marketing Lab was an attempt to rebrand WebTrends.  I expect that interim management will continue attempting to differentiate WebTrends by rebranding products and perhaps the entire company.
• New and updated standards are released.  As a member of the IAB’s Measurement Council I can tell you that the IAB is getting ready to release the IAB Audience Measurement Reach Guidelines, which attempt to clarify and take a stand on various aspects of server/client-side analytics and audience measurement.  I also envision the WAA increasing the number of terms they define.  But standards are just dandy and quite meaningless unless they are adopted… thus…
• Standards enforcement is attempted in order to propel adoption. Existing and forthcoming standards will be enforced in 2008.  Enforcement from the WAA will probably come in the form of a publication of a matrix or documentation citing which vendors adhere to the standards and to what degree, what’s missing, what’s different, and so on.  If decision-makers who control budgets believe in standards, this type of document will cause the question ”do you adhere?” to be asked.  If vendors start losing deals because the answer is “no, not at all,” vendors will adopt the standards. 
• Internal data integration becomes more important for companies and problematic for ASP’s.  When we talk about “integration” I often think people can be a bit shortsighted.  They want to integrate data from other third-party services and tools (like Salesforce.com and their ad server).  While there is certainly real value in integrating external data with web analytics data, significant value comes from integrating web analytics with internal data, such as data residing in internally-hosted CRM systems, finance, subscription, and lead generation databases. Most vendors have barely figured out how to deal with detail-level external data integration in 2007, even though many customers are demanding it.  I expect that in 2008, internal data integration will be more commonly demanded and even more problematic for ASP’s. 
• BI tools provide better support for and integration with Web Analytics tools.  The current allotment of “enterprise” level web analytics tools are inferior to the capabilities provided by business intelligence tools from companies like Business Objects or Cognos.  Expect these BI vendors to create features for dealing with web analytics data in 2008.  Either that, or these web analytics tools need to grow up and learn a few things from BI. 
• Web Analytics as performance management.  KPI-based site optimization means using data to guide the modification of user experience to deliver on goals.   Since goals are measurable and can be plotted against performance, it’s totally logical to use web analytics as a performance management tool.  Expect to see that gestalt in tool usage come into vogue and be discussed more in 2008. 
• Web Analytics as part of business process automation.  Having the marketing department fielding page tags with campaign codes may work for some (small) companies, but when you work for an enterprise with thousands of clients and simultaneous campaigns across multiple channels, endemic tagging and subsequent tool configuration becomes challeging.  As part of the web analytics process, I expect to see tools support some level of business process automation enabling web analytics.
• Features for measuring the Mobile Web.  Right now, with a log file based tool, I can segment out Mobile traffic based on user agent.  If I want to use a page tag, I have to consider js limitations.  The mobile web is the next frontier, and I only know of one web analytics vendor who is doing a decent job measuring it right now, so I expect to see more features released this year for measuring Mobile.  

So that’s that.  Like a band named PIL once said in the song called Rise “I could be wrong, could be right!”  Am I off-base, misguided, accurate, do you disagree, agree, then let me know… I’d love to hear your thoughts and your predictions for Web Analytics 2008…

Every month I write column for MediaPost.  This month I wrote  a short summary piece I thought I’d share with you in case you missed it.  Here it is:

As 2007 ends, I thought it worth looking back, from the practitioner perspective, at just a few of the issues that have shaped Internet measurement and thus online metrics over the last year:

• The Page View is Dead, Long Live the Page View.  During 2007, technologies like AJAX and Flash continued to erode the construct of the page view.  These technologies render content in a browser but do not always make requests to the server to do so.  If the technology you are using to measure behavior requires the page request and you do not have a page request, what do you measure?  The major vendors of online metrics tried to answer that question. 

Various audience measurement companies claimed “total minutes” and other time-based derivatives were better alternatives to measuring the page view.  Web Analytics companies rolled out features for measuring “events” subordinate or equal to the page view (and highlighted already existing time-based metrics).  Ad serving companies made inroads in reconciling view-through to assist advertisers in understanding the latent effect of ad exposure on the purchasing lifecycle.  Yet all these technologies still count and report page views.

• Engagement, Engagement, Engagement.  One of the hot topics in 2007 was a carryover from 2006.  Definitions for “engagement” emerged from the worlds of advertising, social media, online metrics, and more.  Engagement has been described as “turning on a prospect to a brand idea enhanced by the surrounding context” to “repeated, satisfied interactions that strengthen the emotional connection a customer has with the brand” to “apparent interest” to the more metrical “estimate of the degree and depth of visitor interaction against a clearly defined set of goals.” 

“Engagement” is very specific to the site being measured and full of nuance.  This fact has led agencies, consultants, and various companies to create complex engagement indices consisting of measures of key behaviors.  Behaviors are tallied and segmented in order to calculate an engagement metric, which is then used as the basis for site optimization.  These indices go far beyond often-cited simple time-based measures of engagement.  For a well-thought-of example, see Eric Peterson’s Engagement Metric.

• Cookie Deletion, Again!  Jupiter Research, in 2005, first uncovered and quantified how cookie deletion can affect unique visitor numbers in web analytics systems.  The effect of cookie deletion is not quantifiable in the basic way audience measurement companies want to quantify it in 2007 – by only examining cookie deletion rates from self-selecting panelists who visited one portal site and an ad server. 

Cookie deletion behavior varies greatly by audience segment and by site.  It may be as much of an accuracy problem in web analytics as selection bias and coverage errors are in panel measurement.  It is worth noting that some audience measurement firms use cookies to collect panel data. 

• Black Box Audience Measurement.  Many questions were asked about whether audience measurement companies adequately measure “unique visitors” or “unique users” or just the frame of self-selecting “unique panelists.”  In audience measurement, counts of “unique visitors” are generated using complex, black-box mathematics that project observed metrics to the entire online universe.  The projections are always unequal to the same data provided by other audience measurement companies or web analytics tools.  Panel inconsistencies (across at-home, at-work, at-university, or specific to the geography being measured) may cause some level of bias and error. 

Accounting for the difference between actual, observed panel metrics and projected metrics is perhaps even more challenging to clarify and resolve than the measurable effect of cookie deletion. 

• The Continuing Need for Standards Enforcement.  2007 was the year two significant industry bodies continued working on standards related to online metrics: the Internet Advertising Bureau and the Web Analytics Association.  While each organization serves the needs of different constituencies, they both share the inability to enforce standards.  Both bodies can say what you should do, but not what you “must” do. 

Throughout 2007, these issues (and others) brought increased attention and scrutiny to online metrics.  Corporations are inextricably linking online metrics to site and channel strategy and performance, and thus to overall corporate profitability.  The “numbers” are now more important than ever for managing an online business and maximizing online revenue.  Nevertheless, questions are still being asked about accuracy, precision, usage, and sources of online metrics.  We have a ton of collaborative work to do in 2008 to provide the best answers and numbers we can. 

Happy New Year!

If you’re new to web analytics, or the management of web analytics, it’s always helpful to get advice from someone whose been in the industry.  Here are a couple of simple principles I’ve found helpful:

• Investigate and be skeptical of claims by vendors. Upgrading a tool?  Migrating to a new tool?  Completely replacing one?  Adding a tool to your analytics arsenal?   Someone is then trying to sell you something.  Vendors really want your money.  And when it comes down to it, it seems the bigger the vendor and the smaller you are, the less attention you will get, even when you need their help really badly.  Vendors attempt to have their own, differentiated spin on web analytics - one of the reason the WAA developed standards.  Avoid falling into the mental model of any one vendor… push their envelope… champion for standards.  In doing so, make sure to realize that a good relationship with a vendor based on an understanding of mutual strengths and weaknesses will lead to collaboration important to your success.
• Don’t bias yourself when it comes to data collection.  Page tags are imperfect.  Orchestrating and maintaining comprehensive, deep tagging is never easy.  Log file analysis, while often disdained, has utility for situations where page tags are insufficient (say you want to detect how search bots crawl your site) or when tags are impractical (mobile).  Packet sniffing can be beneficial when you can’t tag or access log files.  In fact, some combination of hybrid data collection, for example page tags and logs, might be the best option for a given situation.  It’s up to you to work with your team to determine what method is most appropriate to use to reach your goals. 
• Realize that your IT department is your ally.  Marketers can’t do web analytics without IT.  Whether they help you include page tags, locate and synch your log files, or monitor the implementation of your packet sniffer, you will need to develop and maintain a relationship with IT.  You, the business marketer, may think quite differently about web analytics than IT, so work toward a mutual understanding that supports business and technology goals.
• Reconcile what it means to you when you hear that “Web Analytics isn’t easy… Web Analytics is hard!”  That’s a quote from Eric T Peterson.  He’s right.  You need people, processes, workflows, dedicated resources, teamwork, teamwork, teamwork.  How do you prepare an organization for something that is hard?  How do you prepare a team?   Training, education, evangelism?  Yes, that helps… You can make it easier by reading the books, checking out the blogs, going to the conferences, taking a UBC course, and participating in industy organizations like the Web Analytics Association.