I recently read a post by Albert Wenger, partner at Union Square Ventures, on his Continuations blog that sparked a bit of an internal dialogue. The post, “The Unbundling of Product Discovery from Commerce” talked about how Search is not a tool of “discovery.” In other words, if you know exactly what you are looking for, Search is an ideal solution. But, if you aren’t quite sure what you are seeking, Search doesn’t offer much in aiding you to discover.
My rumination stems from a somewhat contrarian view of the relative importance of Search. Don’t get me wrong, I believe Search is an amazing innovation that has unquestionably changed the way we seek information and consume, but does it deserve the exalted position we’ve given it? I’m not so sure.
The rub, consumers don’t really look at Google or other search engines as a trusted source. It’s a tool/utility to help us pinpoint, not a “friend” whose opinion we value. Search plays an important role in the “last mile” leading to a purchase, but there are so many other sources consumers use to discover the things they didn’t realize they needed.
Yet, Search dominated the share of online advertising spent in the US last year, accounting for 45% of online ad sales. No doubt Search deserves much of the value it professes to offer – matching need/want with product/service – but there are many things that lead a consumer to type a word or phrase into the search bar, and that is where I believe Search is taking more credit than it deserves. The problem? Our current spate of metrics aren’t sufficient to truly understand the path to conversion/consumption. Our measurement solutions look at points along the path, but coming from different sources, the data we receive back is disconnected. We can certainly infer from these sources, but I’m highly skeptical of the efficacy and accuracy of sophisticated regression analyses being used to “fuse” these data sources together.
For now, ironically, Search continues to benefit from the one thing it claims to be solving – lack of information. It is this misinformation that enables Search to claim that “last mile” premium value. With no other way to value the various steps along the path, anything measurable becomes that much more valuable, which is where Google is a major beneficiary (and where even paltry 0.2% click-through rates generated $10B last year). High potential words/phrases get bidded up through an auction process that singularly benefits Search without any consideration for how those words might have made their way into consumers’ consciousness. Worse still (and a post for another time), once we figure out how to optimize search, avoiding the need to pay a King’s ransom, the gatekeepers change the rules, preserving their monopolistic stranglehold.
Denizens of Search will unquestionably vilify me for my perspective, but my aim is not to bring down Search. Rather, I’d like to see other forms of advertising achieve their full potential value, much of which is hidden behind inadequate measurement or is blind to advertisers given the glare shining off the exalted orb of Search.
