Scientific Ink

Author: Dunrie

  • Test Web Forms Frequently

    Test Web Forms Frequently

    OK when something happens twice in the span of a week, it’s officially a theme. Test web forms frequently. Your leads are hard won and too important. Don’t let your tech to get in the way.

    Even if you’ve made no changes to the form, other changes can interfere. Over the span of the last week, I’ve seen personnel changes in the business and scripts elsewhere on the website cause problems. Watch your step: double check that your forms are working well and going to the right place, at least monthly.

    Why Use Forms?

    What do you want people to do when they visit your website? If you want them to get in touch, you need to give them a way to do it.

    Sometimes small businesses like to post an email address on a website as a contact method. Yet, email addresses on websites are hard to track. Your analytics script will only track whether the person clicked the email address (to open a message to you). It will not track the actual email being sent, because the message is sent from the visitor’s email program, not from the website.

    I also personally dislike pop-ups, where a link opens in another program (such as a PDF or email app). I find the context shift jarring.

    Web forms are trackable. Your web analytics can track the form submission as an event or can track visits to a “thank you” page.

    Web forms are easy to deploy. Although I happen to like Contact Form 7 for WordPress, there are lots of options, free and paid.

    Why Test Web Forms

    Yet, like everything internet marketing, web forms are not set and forget. It’s basic quality control to check the forms at the site’s or the form’s launch. While it may seem redundant to keep verifying that all is well in the weeks and months after the form has been published, it’s a critical business process.

    Cautionary Tale #1 – Personnel Change

    A few months after the launch of a website, a team member moved on to another role with a different company. His email address was where the web form submissions went, and so became, unintentionally, a dead letter box. A prospect contacted this company after not receiving a reply from the company.

    Lessons Learned

    • Clean up your email accounts at personnel transitions. Don’t let untended email accounts cause communication bottlenecks.
    • Use role-based rather than “personal” email addresses for critical business processes such as leads and communications.
    • Avoid having a single point of failure in a key business process.

    Cautionary Tale #2 – Script Conflict

    Yesterday, someone contacted me via LinkedIn and let me know that she had tried to use the form on this site and it had not worked. Although the form did work, her message stayed on the screen after she hit “submit”. So she got in touch another way and let me know. I was able to debug the issue and the form gives useful feedback again.

    How to Test Web Forms

    • Inspect their settings – review where the form contents go (to a database? to a person?)
    • Send a test email and verify it is received by all parties and systems.
    • Check that the form provides useful feedback/confirmation.
    • Do this monthly. I set a repeating reminder in my task manager.

    Happy prospecting.

  • Just Good Enough Websites

    Just Good Enough Websites

    The tools we use to create websites have changed during my marketing career. In the beginning, you had to know a little about coding. Today’s services allow the non-coder to create a more than just good enough website.

    Web Dev back in the Day

    In the early 2000s, my employer had a small site designed by a professional. The designer handed off images to our team that one of the software developers turned into HTML. Our homepage was a cut-apart image, its pieces reassembled and held in an invisible table. Different parts of that image were hyperlinked to different pages on the site. I edited that website’s content by editing individual HTML pages in a text editor.

    Today's tools and services help businesses make just good enough websites

    Just Good Enough Websites 2016

    We have come a long way since then.

    Services like WordPress, Wix, Weebly, and Squarespace offer simple ways for non-programmers and non-designers to have lovely and functional websites, beyond just good enough. If you subscribe to any podcasts, you’ll hear persistent ads for drag and drop website-making platforms.

    I have opinions on platforms (this site is in WordPress and has been since 2006).  Yet all these content management systems make things pretty easy for the non-technical user.

    I still use my HTML and jump into the text pane of these platforms if the WYSIWYG editor refuses to format things as I want, but generally these platforms work just fine.

    I’ve consulted on several homegrown websites created and operated by entrepreneurs and small businesses. Here’s how to make sure the website is good enough:

    Content Optimization Tips

    • Do keyword research, use the words that other people use often, and write to topics in demand that are relevant to your business
    • Before you publish, use a tool to review your content for keyword optimization. On WordPress, Yoast SEO is my go-to, and its free version is very full-featured

    Technical Optimization Tips

    Cultivate your Connections

    • Interconnect all of your business social profiles with your website. You should be able to move easily between all of your web properties. Make sure there’s a link from every social profile back to your website and be sure to link to all of your relevant, active profiles from your website.
    • Add social sharing to your website. Yes, people can copy any link from your site and share to any of their chosen social sites. Yet, a visual prompt to Pin it, Share it, Tweet it, whatever it helps remind them and makes it easy. In WordPress, plugins like AddtoAny Share buttons automate social sharing.

    Any basics I have missed? OR How can I answer your questions?

  • What’s in a name? Industry groups differ on life science and biotech terms

    What’s in a name? Industry groups differ on life science and biotech terms

    Last week, I attended the Michigan Bio-Industry Growth Summit. The event bag included reports from sponsoring organizations MichBio, Business Leaders for Michigan, and the University Research Corridor. Attendees also received a report from the national Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO). In these reports, I noticed some variation in names for the life science or biotech industry.

    Life science industry leaders use different names

    Handouts from the Bio-industry growth summit - showing different terms for life science or biotech
    Handouts from the Michigan Bio-industry Growth Summit – showing different terms for life science or biotech

    I imagine that in each report’s editorial meeting, a fair bit of time was spent selecting each noun and verb for the title and section headings. Perhaps MichBio went with Bio-Industry to be more inclusive of activities that broaden the definition of biotech, or to differentiate commercial activities from primary research, I’m not sure. They are the domain experts, so I trust their choice was for a good reason.

    I asked Google which name was “better”

    Yet, for Twitter and for my first post about the event, I opted for biotech. For Twitter, “biotech” was shorter than “bio-industry”, and short and sweet is better in that medium.

    When I got back to the office, I did more research. Google Trends gave me the popularity of these terms in searches. Google Trends aggregates all searches, and therefore emphasizes what the general public calls the industry.

    Worldwide and regional life science searches

    Since I published this post, the embeds no longer work well, so here’s a link to the Google Trends graphs of

    As you can see in the graphs, the terms “biotech” and “biotechnology” are more popular worldwide than life science, bio-industry, or biosciences. When we look only in the United States, life science searches are similarly popular to those for biotechnology, but biotech is consistently higher (except for September in each year when life sciences jumps up to or above biotech’s level). The Michigan data is noisier but appears similar to the US as a whole. In all regions, bio-industry and bioscience lag the other terms. If I keep playing with the terms, plurals matter for life science and biosciences, so I chose the most popular variant for these graphs – life science and biosciences.

    Closing Thoughts – specific vs. popular phrases

    The cross-industry groups, Business Leaders for Michigan and the University Research Corridor, used the more general and more popular term for the industry (life sciences) than did either of the associations with “bio” in their name. Over time, the bio-groups may teach the general population the new terms, search popularity is volatile. Yet, more commonly-used terms (e.g. biotech or life science) should go farther in the near term. Sometimes experts know and use too many words for our own good.

    By using “bio-industry”, MichBio might be limiting the reach of its Roadmap. MichBio’s Roadmap is a call-to-action to its members, it is speaking to other experts. Fine distinctions matter to experts, but they might muddy the communication to regular folks. The association and the Roadmap also needs to speak to non-experts—such as legislators and educators. If I were at that editorial meeting, I would have brought search data like this to the table and argued for the more commonly-used terms in the report title.

    When I tweeted about the event, I picked #biotech, but within Michigan, life science would have been just as popular and I chose that as the focus keyword for this post.

  • Michigan Biotech: MichBio Growth Summit – February 2016

    Michigan Biotech: MichBio Growth Summit – February 2016

    Industry association MichBio organized yesterday’s bio-industry growth summit in Lansing. This Michigan biotech event featured national and regional leaders, including legislators (agenda here).

    Michigan Biotech Roadmap for Success

    Table of Contents - Michigan Biotech Roadmap for Success
    Table of Contents – Michigan Bio-Industry Roadmap for Success

    MichBio also launched their Michigan Bio-Industry Roadmap for Success. This roadmap was developed through interviews, focus group, surveys, and comparison to peer states.

    Event attendees received a print copy of the executive summary for the roadmap (~40 pages), still fragrant from the printer. Director Stephen Rapundalo, Ph.D., presented the highlights to the attendees. The Roadmap provided competitive benchmarking of Michigan in total bio-industry employment, expenditures, grants, patents, and venture capital. For employment, the roadmap breaks the bio-industry category into subcategories, specifically:

    • agri-biosciences,
    • drugs & pharmaceuticals,
    • medical devices & equipment,
    • research, testing & medical laboratories, and
    • bioscience-related distribution (logistics).

    The roadmap evaluated Michigan’s rank and then provided specific recommendations for industry growth, business climate, innovation, education & talent, and access to capital. Rapundalo announced that a full version of the Roadmap should be released this month. I will post a link to any online documents here if/when they become available.

    Recurring Themes – Michigan Biotech Education and Talent

    A recurring theme from the panel and from attendees was talent. Panelists called for biotech-oriented education for entry-level positions. Panelists discussed having to recruit talent back to Michigan from the coasts for senior/specialized biotech leadership positions.

    Being a digitally-focused person, I did some live-tweeting of the event and made sure to connect in person with others who were tweeting. Here are a few example tweets from my own and others takeaways from the event.

  • Gone Back to School

    Gone Back to School

    I’ve gone back to school, college actually.

    [066/365] Back to School
    Back to School, made available via Creative Commons by Leland Francisco on Flickr
    I’m pulling down the shingle here at Scientific Ink for the next several months. I’ve taken a position at Washtenaw Community College – I will be Interim Executive Director of Marketing & Web Services through January 2016. This new position will keep me busy enough that I will not be taking on client projects.

    Thanks and keep in touch!

  • Gaming the System: have we reached peak customer experience survey?

    Gaming the System: have we reached peak customer experience survey?

    Surveying the customer seems like a good idea to find out ways to improve. Yet, I’ve been on the receiving end of customer experience surveys that show me we’re doing it all wrong.

    Anyone who has purchased a car or who has had their car serviced recently by a car dealership is likely aware of the 10-point customer experience survey that arrives, via email, after the dealership visit. Other interactions with their customer service (say to troubleshoot the connection between said new car and the proprietary little app system that runs the electronics) also trigger a “rate our customer service” email. All these chances to provide feedback are good, right? Nope.

    When each interaction with your service creates more work for me, the customer, I wonder. Also, the sales operation doesn’t feel open to actual feedback, it seems they’re only interested in the goal – getting the top mark. They show this in unsubtle ways. Visual cues for how the dealership would like to be rated are on the back of the salesman’s cubicle and on the wall facing the seats in the service department waiting area.

    Coaching poster about the customer experience survey in the dealership.

    Before I switched to a Chrysler product, I had a car with another brand name. And that dealership sent very emotive letters ahead of the survey, essentially saying if you cannot give us a 10, please let us know so we can correct it before you fill out the survey. Basically, let’s keep this between us, don’t tell Papa Franchise/OEM about any frustration.

    Please give us a "5" rating on the question with a 5-point scale. (The 0-4 scores don't count and we want your rating to count!)
    Please give us a “5” rating on the question with a 5-point scale. (The 0-4 scores don’t count and we want your rating to count!)

    Earlier this year, I got this form stapled to my receipt at the drugstore. It says that I may receive a survey, and if I don’t answer a 5 (top score for them) my response “won’t count”!

    This pharmacy’s assertion that a rating below “5” won’t count cannot be true, and this note is the opposite of customer service. It’s just forcing the customer to be involved in gaming a corporate system. Yuck. With the people who are the subject of the surveys (sales and customer service folk) specifically asking to subvert the intention of the survey….how can we take this data seriously?

    We know from online ratings that people really don’t bother to review a company or an experience unless they’re thrilled or torqued off. Yet, most of the experiences we have with brands, stores, and car dealers are somewhere in the middle of horrid to spectacular. It’s unrealistic to expect they’ll be spectacular 10.0 across the board all of the time. And it’s particularly silly to ask your customer to enable this charade.

    Don’t bother your customers

    Bothering the customer to give you top marks on a survey isn’t a good customer experience.

    I’ve started a new behavior in response to this: I won’t fill these silly things out.

    If I can’t give the customer service top marks, but it isn’t the agent’s fault (e.g. the issue is mechanical or technological) I have a hard time rating the interaction at all. I can’t give it a 10 because I’m still unsatisfied. But the agent was nice and at least sympathetic to the weirdness of the [insert technical or mechanical issue here]. So, should I be honest and say they’re eroding my faith in their brand but they hire friendly people to take the hit? That’s not an option in the survey, so I just delete the customer experience surveys now.