There are three things that really irritate me about A/B testing. The first is where people fool themselves by drawing conclusions from too little data. The second is the myth that small changes frequently result in large improvements and the final one is when A/B tests are used to predict an actual percentage improvement when the data just isn’t there.

You Need a Lot of Data

Instructions for WhatClinic.com

The proposed improvement

We do a lot of A/B testing at WhatClinic.com and we like to think we know a little bit about the topic. We recently ran A/B test where we put a section of instructional text at the top right hand side of the page. After 11,000 tests and 400 conversions it clearly showed that the instructions made a 30% difference. It would have been so easy for us to stop there and pop open the champagne and boast about how changing one little thing improved our bottom line by 30%.

Things look Great - 30% Improvement

But we didn’t, we kept the test running, because experience has told us not to draw conclusions too quickly.  We let the test run on for another 90,000 people and 3,000 conversion and you know what. In the end it turns out that there was no substantial difference between the two. That’s right no difference.

The whole point of A/B testing is to learn. Learn what works and what doesn’t work. If you don’t run your tests over a large enough sample size then there is a good chance you are going to learn a fallacy. Not only won’t you be moving forward but you will actually be moving backwards and decreasing the value of your company.

Where did my 30% improvement go?

So what if you don’t have the traffic to do A/B tests? Well don’t do them. Do user testing. Get people in and ask them to use your product. You’re going to get a lot more information a lot faster and have a higher degree of confidence in the results.

Small Tweaks rarely makes Substantial Differences

I read about these all the time. You know the type of story – “I changed the colour of a button and increased conversion by 25%”. They read great and play into a pleasant dream that riches and fortunes are just a colour change away. However, in my experience small tweaks have never made a substantial difference to conversion.

It should come as no surprise to you that in order to substantially change user behaviour you need a substantial change to the site. This doesn’t mean that it never happens. However, I suspect that it happens rarely and the bulk of the time it is reported on blog and forums that it is the result of drawing conclusions from too little data or just plain old link baiting. Unfortunately the truth is normally all too boring.

A/B test don’t tell you how much better one page will be over another page

A really common misconception is to think that A/B testing can show you how much better one version of a page will perform over a different version of the page. IT CANNOT. A/B testing can only give you a confidence rate of whether one page is better than another and the observed historic improvement.

Highly advanced A/B testing can tell you a confidence rating of whether there will be a 5% improvement or a 10% improvement, etc, but it cannot tell you what the actual improvement will be. Too often people are fooled into thinking that just because they have observed a 30% improvement during the test that there will be a 30% improvement in the future. Whereas the actual results of the test is that version A has a 93% chance of being better than version B – note no prediction of how much better

Let me know of any examples you have where A/B test have first shown one thing then the other.  I know James Kennedy from voiceover Ireland has one on his blog here

Correction

It has been pointed out to me that the above example only shows a 20% improvement, not a 30% improvement.  Sorry for the mistake

 

I decided a couple of days ago to add Facebook’s like button to this blog and then to our website’s homepage. Seeing as how it’s part of Facebook’s vision of the future of the web I thought it’d be really straightforward to do. It turns out it is, but the documentation on Facebook itself is really unclear so I made a lot of mistakes along the way. Read on and learn from mine so you don’t waste your own time too.

Here are the steps you need to take to get ready to add a Facebook like button to one of your pages, be it a web application, a blog, or something else.

1. Decide who is going to administrate your page

You need a Facebook ID to get this working. Since Facebook’s terms and conditions mean you can only have one account yourself, you either need to use your existing account, or set up a new one for someone in your office who doesn’t have one already. Otherwise you run the risk of having the account with administrator privileges deleted unexpectedly.

Bear in mind that the person who administrates your page may not work for you forever, so be careful who you choose, and ideally you should have more than one administrator.

To get your Facebook ID go to your own profile and click on your Facebook profile picture. Your ID will be at the end of the URL in your browser’s address box.

2. Add Open Graph meta tags

If you want people to like a webpage that isn’t a Facebook page itself then you’ll need to add Open Graph meta tags to its <head> section. The tags you need can be found on the like button page on Facebook. Here are the tags for our blog’s homepage:

<meta property="og:title" content="WhatClinic.com Blog Homepage"/>
<meta property="og:type" content="blog"/>
<meta property="og:image" content="http://blog.whatclinic.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/facebook-logo.png"/>
<meta property="og:url" content="http://blog.whatclinic.com/"/>
<meta property="og:site_name" content="WhatClinic.com Blog"/>
<meta property="fb:admins" content="587106975"/>

Go back to the like button page and use their widget to generate the code you need to add the button to your page. There are a few basic choices for font, colour scheme, size and so on, but you’re probably best off sticking with the defaults (except for width, which you should adjust for the width of the page you’re adding the button to).

The iframe version of the code for our blog homepage looks like this:

<iframe src="http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.whatclinic.com%2F&layout=standard&show_faces=true&width=292&action=like&colorscheme=light&height=80" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border:none; overflow:hidden; width:600px; height:80px;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>

There is also what is called the XFBML version of the code which is much simpler but requires you to use the Javascript SDK. The XFBML version would look like this:

<fb:like href="http://blog.whatclinic.com/" width="292"></fb:like>

Once you’ve added the meta tags (including the Facebook ID of your administrator), and added the iframe or XFBML code to your page you should be ready to go.

Adding like buttons to a WordPress blog

Getting the Facebook like button onto every page of your WordPress blog is easy – you could just paste the code you’ve created above into one of your template files or a sidebar widget. There are potential problems with this though, in that you need to specify the URL of the page to be liked, and if you include the like buttons for posts on the homepage that gets a little complicated.

What I’ve done is put the overall like button for the blog in a widget on the right hand side of the page and used a WordPress plugin called WP Facebook Like to add the like button to the bottom of the content on individual posts’ pages.

The only problem with this is that the plugin (and the other one I tested) only added two of the Open Graph meta tags needed. I added the missing (generic) meta tags using the All in One SEO plugin.

Problems

When I set about doing this I found a lot of the Facebook pages were unclear about what was needed to get started. I kept seeing references to having a Facebook App ID. This isn’t necessary to get started with Facebook like buttons. You just need your Facebook user ID as described above.

As an aside, if you are building an app go to the Facebook app setup page on developers.facebook.com and fill in your details. Every time I used it I ended up getting an error page, so I thought it hadn’t worked. By accident I ended up on another developers page at www.facebook.com/developers/ and it turned out that even though I’d received an error message each time I used the previous page, it had actually setup the apps and given them IDs and so on.

I had also just set up a Facebook page for WhatClinic.com just before I started looking into the like buttons. This added a certain amount of confusion to the process too. I added a like button to the website’s homepage, including adding the required meta tags, and without telling me anything Facebook created a new WhatClinic.com Homepage page, which I was the administrator of. I thought this would be confusing for people who had already liked WhatClinic.com, so I deleted this new page and pointed the like button at the original Facebook page for WhatClinic.com instead.

Nothing too difficult in that, but it leaves me with one unanswered question: seeing as I setup the like button for blog.whatclinic.com I should be the admin for it too, but I’m not. This might have something to do with trying to set it up with a Facebook app ID the first time I tried, but now I have no idea who is the administrator of that page (or even if a page exists for it!). I’ll be contacting Facebook support about this and asking them but I’m not holding out much hope for a fast response…

Have your say

Have you added Facebook like buttons to your own app or site? Did it all go smoothly or did you run into some of the same problems? Let us know in the comments below.

New Prices And Reviews Pages

WhatClinic.com navigation tabs

We’ve just added a new set of navigation tabs to our search results pages after A/B testing them for a week. They didn’t improve conversion by any significant amount but by adding them we give ourselves the flexibility to add new ways of slicing our data, and hopefully capturing more traffic.

First of all, we’ve moved the map link which was on the top right hand side of the page into one of the tabs. This has already increased usage of the maps pages on the site. Secondly, we added two new types of pages, one which pulls together all the reviews for the clinics in the search results, the other all the prices.

These two tabs are brand new pages with their own URLs and are SEO’d to capture traffic relating to reviews and ratings of clinics and treatment prices. This is an SEO experiment in itself. All of the data on these pages exists on other pages. For instance, all the reviews of each clinic exist in their own profile, but these new pages pull together what we think are a useful set of reviews so they can be compared in one place. The same goes for the prices.

Here’s what a normal search results page looks like: Dentists in Dublin

Here’s the reviews page: Reviews of Dentists in Dublin

And here’s the prices page: Prices of Dentists in Dublin

Time will tell whether or not the search engines think these pages are useful, but we’ll be keeping a close eye on how their traffic and usage grows in the coming months.

Have you any experience with re-slicing your own data? How did it work out for you? Leave us a comment below.

Tagged with:  

Worst. Feature. Ever.

Worst. Feature. Ever.

Sometimes you just get it wrong, and in this instance by God were we wrong.

Letting visitors create a shortlist of clinics they were interested in comparing and contacting was a feature we’d been discussing almost since the beginning of the company. It would come up for discussion every couple of months and eventually we got so fed up talking about it we decided to just try it out.

As features go it was pretty simple. All we needed was a link added to each clinic’s search result, one in their profile, and a page to display the visitor’s chosen shortlist. We thought it was a good idea that would be useful to our visitors.

This obviously wasn’t an original idea, and there were plenty of sites that had implemented similar features we could look to for some inspiration. Kayak.com and HostelWorld.com both had directly comparable features, and we also looked at shopping carts on ecommerce sites as well as light boxes on photograph websites.

We planned and rolled out the feature within a week and sat back waiting to see a truckload of visitors happily creating shortlists and coming back to them to compare their options.

That wasn’t exactly what happened.

The Result

We were able to get a pretty good picture in a very short space of time as we have a lot of traffic coming to site. Things weren’t looking good after an hour, and after a full day it became clear that close to no one was using the feature.

We’d had 22,000 visitors over the course of that 24 hour period and only 80 people (0.3%) had added any clinics to their short list. To make matters worse only 17 of those people (0.08%) had subsequently gone back and viewed their short list.

We decided to enter EMERGENCY FEATURE RESCUE MODE. Everyone in the office had their own opinion as to why it wasn’t working. These included:

  • The call to action – ‘Add to Shortlist’ wasn’t immediately understandable
  • People could not see the call to action link
  • It was a crap feature

We changed the call to action text to “Save this Clinic”, pushed it out and waited…

101 people added a clinic to their shortlist on day two. Now normally an uplift of 25% in usage is a cause for celebration. However, when only 0.4% of your visitors want to use a feature it can only mean one thing: turn it off.

So that’s what we did. Two days after launching a feature that we had great hopes for it ended up in the trash can.

Sometimes you just have to work harder on a feature, refining it over time to increase its usage, and other times you just have to accept that you were wrong in the first place and bin the idea. In this instance we figured that no end of finessing was going to create a feature that resonated with our visitors.

Not All In Vain

Over the last three years we’ve gotten pretty used to the idea of launching features that don’t get adopted. A lot of people would look at the effort that we put into these feature as a waste of time but that is not the way we think about it.

Every feature that we decide to develop we regard as a learning exercise. The purpose isn’t to create a fantastic feature; the purpose is to learn something new about our visitors. If you build something and it doesn’t add to the overall knowledge of the company then you’ve missed the lion’s share of the value.

To make this possible we have learned code as lightweight as possible and our processes are now fairly efficient. When we roll out a new feature now we try to expend as little effort as possible getting it to the stage that we can test whether the basic premise is viable or not. Once we decide it is viable we go ahead and refine and improve it.

What was the worst feature you ever rolled out, and how long did you leave it run for? Share your experiences in the comments below.

Tagged with:  

Maps Of Clinics Accepting NHS Patients

We’re always looking for ways to get our information out in front of more people, and one of the ways we’ve been doing that recently is by letting other sites add maps of our clinics to their own websites. In the UK some websites didn’t want to show private clinics, so we’ve developed new maps that only show NHS. Here are some examples.

NHS Dentists in Manchester

NHS Dentists in Manchester data provided by RevaHealth.com

NHS Doctors in Liverpool

NHS Dentists in Manchester data provided by RevaHealth.com

If you want to use these maps on your own website you just need to paste the following html into the content source code of one of your pages.

<iframe src=’http://www.revahealth.com/dentists/uk/lancashire/manchester/nhs/externalmap’ width=’600′ height=’400′ frameborder=’0′></iframe> <span><a title=’NHS Dentists Manchester’ href=’http://www.revahealth.com/dentists/uk/lancashire/manchester/nhs’>NHS Dentists in Manchester</a> data provided by RevaHealth.com<span>

Obviously the code needs to be adapted to which map on RevaHealth.com you want to use. The code above points at the NHS dentists in Manachester page, but every search result on our site has a corresponding map that you can use on your site. If you have any trouble making it work just leave a comment below and I’ll help you get it up and running on your site.

Tagged with:  

The Speed Of Irish Websites

We spend a lot of time optimising our page load times because we have found a direct correlation between how fast a page displays in a browser and its bounce rate. There are still plenty of improvements left to roll out here, but I was interested in seeing how other Irish websites are faring at optimising their page load times.

I took the companies on the ISEQ 20 Index and added the top 5 indigenous Irish websites based on their traffic from Ireland according to Alexa and tested them for speed.  All tests were run using webpagetest.org and were run from Gloucester in the UK 5 times consecutively. The test emulated IE7 running over a 1.5 Mb/sec DSL connection.  For interest’s sake we also ran it on our own site and saw that we had several areas where we could improve.

A quick caveat: these results were run during just one period of one day and it could easily have been during a bad/busy period for one or more of the sites in question. If you’re interested in making a definitive list of the fastest and slowest Irish sites you should run the test again at various times of the day and on different days of the week.

The Fastest
Unsurprisingly the fastest sites are dominated by relatively simple sites that have largely static content. The page size is relatively low in all cases, maxing out at 250 KB with C&C Group.

  1. Greencore 2.0s
  2. Grafton PLC 2.1s
  3. Kerry Group 2.2s
  4. BOI 2.6s
  5. C&C Group 2.8s

The Slowest

  1. The Independent 15.9s, requiring 165 files and 1,500 KB
  2. RTE 9.8s, requiring 100 files and 478 KB
  3. Irish Times 8.7s, requiring 127 files and 866 KB
  4. Kingspan 9.3s, requiring 91 files and 1,316 KB
  5. FDB 9.1s, requiring 72 files and 613 KB

Full Results

In general the results were pretty disappointing with an average full page load time of over six seconds. Some very obvious improvements can be made. Text compression was not enabled on 18 of the 25 sites. There really is no excuse for a website not to have compression enabled these days as it is simple, well understood and implemented on every web server. This can reduce  bandwidth requirements by up to 70%.

The second major area for improvement is the sheer number of files that many of these sites require users to download. Each file has it own overhead and browsers can only download a certain number of files in parallel. On average each of the sites required 57 separate files to be downloaded, with The Independent requiring a truly massive 165 different files. This could largely be resolved by using CSS sprites and combining javascript & CSS files.

Start Rendering Sooner

Of course total download time doesn’t tell the whole story. Sometimes a good user experience can be achieved even if your page takes a long time to finish loading. The way to do this is to get the page to start rendering before the final files are down. The average start to render time for our sample list was 2.7 seconds and this is where some of the Irish web companies shine. For example, Paddy Power and boards.ie, despite being complex sites, start to render after just 1.5 seconds each giving their users a very acceptable experience.

So how does RevaHealth.com compare? Pretty well actually, but with  some obvious room for improvement. We had the fastest overall load time at 1.4 seconds, however our start to render time of 1.1 seconds was 300ms off of the mark. This comparison of home pages may be slightly unfair as RevaHealth.com’s home page is relatively simple compared to one of our typical landing pages. I reran the tests on Dentists in Manchester and we had a full loading time of 5 seconds which isn’t great and needs to be improved. Happily our start to render time was 1.5 seconds which I am pretty pleased with.

Let me know if I’ve made any mistakes in my analysis here. How does your site compare? Post your results in the comments

Tagged with:  

An iPad For Your Thoughts…

You all know the saying “A penny for your thoughts?”. Well it was coined a long time ago and inflation hasn’t really been taken into account so we decide to do something about it. How about “An iPad for your thoughts?”.

We’d really like to know what you think about our main website RevaHealth.com, so we’ve set up a short survey about the site. If you take a look at the top right hand corner of your screen you should see a small banner that says “Take Our Survey“. Just click on it and away you go.

One lucky respondent will become the proud owner of a brand new Apple iPad!

Apple iPad

Win one of these!

We’ll announce the winner here in June and please feel free to pass on a link to this post to anyone else you know who has used RevaHealth.com in the past. There is one important thing to remember though:

If you want to win the iPad, you have to fill in your email address in the last question of the survey.

You need to give us permission to email you or else we can’t tell you that you’ve won!

Best of luck, and thanks in advance for the feedback.

Tagged with:  

Google Gets More Colourful And More Local

small new look google.co.uk SERP

There’s a new look to the search results on Google.co.uk, on my computer at least, and it points the way to potential new look for their search results in general. Compare the new look above to the current look on Google.ie below:

small old style google serp ie

The most obvious changes are:

  • Search text is bolded
  • The Google logo is bigger and brighter
  • The search options on the left have icons now
  • SERP’s are permanently indented by the search options
  • Search: The Web / Pages from Ireland has been replaced by Set Location

The search button also gets a new look and is integrated into the search box:

new google search box

The new look is certainly clean, and the icons do help identify the different search options much better that the text only links of old. The most notable new feature to me is the “Set Location”, which says to me the Google are clearly going after even more the of the Local Business market, a point which is backed up by the inclusion of Maps in the search options.

The last Google test that we noticed here in the office involved breadcrumbs in the search results, and that has since been rolled back, at least for now, so there’s no telling how long this new look will be around for, but in general I’m in favour of the changes.

Are you seeing this new look on any of Google’s sites? What are your thoughts on the design changes? Let us know in the comments below.

Tagged with:  

Ordnance Survey UK Improve Their Open Data

When the UK’s data sharing website data.gov.uk launched I was pretty unimpressed. I mentioned a few things that annoyed me: Where were the examples? What were the ontologies used? Without this information the provision of a sparql endpoint is fairly meaningless.

Well it turns out that one section of the government is getting stuck in. Maybe I should have remembered that the marketeers love a launch without a product, and that the people doing the real work are up late, slaving away cursing their managers, trying to get the stuff out the door. Just saying; it’s not like I’ve ever seen anything like that in my job :)

Anyway…, I already liked the efforts the UK’s ordinance survey were making and, defying the normal stereotype of public sector computing, they have not been content with their first or even their second stab at presenting a linked data interface to their info-sets.

http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ presents examples, a sparql endpoint, and the ontologies used, including the use of standard ontologies like foaf.  Nice!

Now what can you do with any of this?

Well last week I was in the UK, in Kingham. If I create a sparql query like this:

Construct {
?Place a <http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ontology/50kGazetteer/NamedPlace> .
?Place a ?Type .

?Place <http://http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#broader> ?BiggerPlace .
?BiggerPlace a <http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ontology/50kGazetteer/NamedPlace> .
?BiggerPlace <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> ?BiggerPlaceName .
?BiggerPlace <http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ontology/spatialrelations/contains> ?Place .
}
WHERE
{
?Place <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> ‘Kingham‘ .
?Place <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> ?Type .
?Place <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> ?Type .
?BiggerPlace <http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ontology/spatialrelations/contains> ?Place .
?BiggerPlace <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> ?BiggerPlaceName
}

and enter it on the endpoint page  (http://api.talis.com/stores/ordnance-survey/services/sparql) then I get back a graph of information about the places that say they contain Kingham. I also get an URL for Kingham (http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/id/7000000000008699*) which I can use from now on as a unique identifier in my code for the Civil Parish that is Kingham.

This to me is exactly what government should be lending to the data world. The administrative levels in the ordinance survey data can be linked through to election results, the provision of services, etc. A commitment on the part of an authority to maintain a high level of integrity for such data can provide a genuinely valuable resource.

Technology and governments do not usually go well together. The thing about data though is that it really isn’t about technology. The only criteria for success is availability.

It’s the business of governments to supply services to all their citizens and with a fair degree of equality (hopefully). To assess the success of governance requires a lot of categorization and correlation: the number of doctors per 1,000 people; the average wealth in a given district; employment levels, etc. So the work is already being done. Making it open means we get more value for our taxes, accountability increases and we get a data set that allows us to talk authoritatively of entities within a state.

http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/id/7000000000008699 refers to the Civil Parish of Kingham, not the village, or some other nebulous form. The Kingham link describes the nature of this relationship  by describing its type as a Civil Parish. Another graph might describe the village and also, form a relationship such as:

<http://example.com/ukplaces/villages/Kingham> <http://http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#broader <http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/id/7000000000008699>

letting us know that the village and the civil parish have a strong relationship.

Sure there are things wrong with the OIS data but bucking my usual nature I’m not going to complain about them. Why? Because, I trust them to make their data even better in future. That’s a rare enough thing for me to expect in a commercial product and almost unheard of in the public sector.

Tim (not the other Tim)

*If you don’t have an rdf plugin look at these by prefixing the rdf URLs with http://demo.openlinksw.com/ode/?uri=

Tagged with:  

Geo-Targeted Sitemaps – Update

Do you remember our experiment to split our sitemaps for geo-targeted SEO? Ten weeks ago we implemented multiple sitemaps to geo-target the UK and Ireland sections of our website to their intended audiences. The initial part was easy – it took a few minutes to create separate subfolders and set a target country in the Google’s Webmaster Tools. The harder part was to monitor its influence and measure the results.

We chose a control group of 200 pages and monitored their rankings on Google.com, Google.ie and Google.co.uk. Many competing factors can affect the position of a page in the search results but we were hoping that as a result of geo-targeting the British and Irish pages that they would improve their rankings on Google.co.uk and Google.ie respectively.

Unfortunately that’s not what happened. Our Irish pages dropped in the search results by 1-2 positions on average, both on Google.ie and Google.com. On the other hand, the UK pages improved their rankings by 2-3 positions both on Google.co.uk and Google.com. It’s impossible to draw a valid positive or negative conclusion based on these results. However, we can say it hasn’t been a success and that’s why we’ve stopped the experiment and gone back to the old way.

We’re not very disappointed by these results as everybody knows that SEO-ing a website on a .com domain, all in English, but targeted to audiences in many countries all around the world is not that easy. We keep trying though, testing, experimenting and sharing what we’ve learned with you. Do you have any other ideas we could try out?

Tagged with:  
© 2010 WhatClinic.com Blog