Web sites

Homepage

Site Banners: To Rotate or Not to Rotate?

Posted by Mike McLaughlin on Mar 13, 2017, in Thoughts , tagged with , , ,

We’re working with a client to develop a plan to revitalize their Web sites. In a discussion focused on homepages, a specific topic came up: banners. More specifically, there was a straightforward question: what’s better, static or rotating homepage banners?

JH Banner

It’s a tactical question but an important one given the importance of engaging users via the homepage experience. And while many have personal opinions, let’s start with a simple analysis.

What Does the Industry Do?

First off, almost every firm presents some type of banner, though there are a few exceptions. So I examined the homepages of 20 firms’ advisor sites. Here’s what I saw:

Banner Data

By roughly a 2:1 margin, firms utilize rotating banners. The rotating banners vary in terms of execution; static banners do as well, with approaches roughly evenly split between promoting product and highlighting thought leadership.

Does it Matter?

The effectiveness of any banner depends upon numerous factors – size, visual design, specific text – so there’s no absolute clarity on if a static or rotating approach is categorically better. That said, I think there are two issues that tip the scales toward static presentation:

  • The Data: if you review all the studies done on the success rates (i.e., clicks, conversions) associated with static v. rotating banners, you’ll get a somewhat mixed picture but one that I’d argue slightly favors static. That, plus the fact that 2nd/3rd/4th panels in a rotating banner generate poor response rates, supports a static approach.
  • Usability: rotating banners bring some baggage relative to their static counterparts. The motion is distracting; auto-rotation lessens users’ control of the site experience; and timing the rotation can be a tricky proposition (i.e., too fast and users can’t fully digest the message, too slow and they won’t wait for the next message to appear).

Still, this is far from a clear-cut issue or one that is specific to asset management. The same variation in banner delivery is seen in the pharma industry, for example, where the top 10 firms’ sites are evenly split on static v. rotating banners. So while I expect firms will continue to execute differently, it will be interesting to see if a stronger consensus (or an entirely new approach) develops.

Examining Industry Web Site Log-In and Registration

Posted by Anu Heda on Sep 12, 2016, in Thoughts , tagged with , , , , ,

We’re frequently asked for an opinion on financial advisor site authentication. In turn, we often ask if any content absolutely requires a log-in. FAs do not like to register and maintain an additional ID/Password, so securing as little content as possible is a sound initial mindset.

Yet, we understand that broker-dealer only materials require authentication. So what are today’s industry log-in and registration options? I examined how 19 firms enable advisors access to secure content and found two interesting conclusions.

Log-In / Authentication

Of the 19 firms, 8 firms try to authenticate the FA through an e-mail match against the firm’s CRM. Eaton Vance showcases that approach; when the FA tries to access secure content, eatonvance.com asks only for an e-mail address (see below). So an advisor with an e-mail already captured in the CRM does not need to register. That means 12 of the remaining firms make log-in harder than necessary for known FAs to access the content they want.

Eaton Vance Registration

Matching first against CRM will become status quo and firms without that capability are digital laggards.

FA Registration

Firms present registration in one of two forms:

  • 6 of 19 firms require a clear affiliation with a broker-dealer, either through a CRD number, dealer number (via Franklin Templeton), or valid broker-dealer e-mail address (via Legg Mason). This is typically a short form registration requiring only 4 or 5 data fields.
  • The 13 remaining firms present a single or multi-step process (via TIAA) that requests typical online registration information with 10 or more data fields, but without a CRD or Dealer number.

In parallel to these two registration approaches, 4 of the 19 firms also allow FAs to bypass on-site registration via social sign up. All four authenticate via LinkedIn and two also allow authentication via Facebook and Google. Royce (example) uses the LinkedIn approach with an “authorize” window popping up for user acknowledgement.

An abbreviated registration form with a required CRD or Dealer number is more straightforward than long-format registration.

What NBC (Olympics Coverage) Can Learn From Asset Managers?

Posted by Anu Heda on Aug 23, 2016, in Thoughts , tagged with ,

The Rio 2016 Olympics captivated my family from the opening night to the closing ceremonies. We cheered Team USA from our little corner of Brooklyn whenever possible; that’s usually after dinner. From relishing the Team USA soccer victory over France to lamenting Mara Abbot’s cruel loss cycling (my 11-year old actually began crying), we took in more than our fair share. But it’s been a struggle in some ways.

I know NBC is streaming everything and that works pretty well (though the west coast – east coast tape delay issue seems so odd to me). My biggest complaint is an inability to see a schedule per sport, per nation. This use case seems so straightforward I’ve started questioning my frame of reference. Aren’t others frustrated? For instance, my son has some interest in rugby (presumably from Cal’s annually dominant performance each May). So on day 1, I went to NBCOlympics.com looking to answer when will Team USA men’s rugby play? In my mind, this is akin to where is your mid-cap growth fund’s fact sheet? It’s a typical use case in the asset management industry. Persevering for a few minutes, I found a way, through the Rugby feed to TV listings, but that requires scrolling through days and days of matches to find Team USA’s 3 preliminary matches.

When I visit the Lord Abbett home page (click image below), I’m immediately greeted with “Documents & Forms” to the right-hand side. Two clicks later, I’m downloading that fact sheet. Why can’t I have that experience for the Olympics? Is NBCOlympics.com designed for the Millennial consumer, not a Gen X dad?Lord Abbett Home Page (Olympics comparison)

 

Compacting Sites

Posted by Anu Heda on Oct 07, 2014, in Thoughts , tagged with

There’s an industry trend towards more compact sites via mega menus (below example from American Funds) and contextual content (i.e., a right-hand rail that links up related materials). (The trend is away from breadcrumbs.) While there are pros and cons to any approach, there’s a primary advantage from compacting sites. Flatter sites facilitate firm information, products, and thought leadership becoming more interconnected than ever. Since the user isn’t driven down an ever-narrowing rabbit hole, she can view specific content as it relates products and people. That interconnection leads to a more natural experience for financial advisors and institutional investors/consultants.

americanfunds

Designing a New Site Experience

Posted by Anu Heda on Jul 08, 2014, in Thoughts , tagged with

Last week, I was fortunate to attend the MFEA Digital Council event in Kansas City. I’ll share a few tidbits from our content marketing panel in a subsequent post. Here, I thought to touch on a topic brought up my numerous people. I heard a half-dozen people say we are starting the process to redesign our digital properties (Web site, social media experience, tablet apps). The context was different for each firm (context included timeline, scope of design, and working relationship with a digital agency).

I wanted to touch on the digital agency selection process. Many times our digital strategy engagements end where an agency’s engagement begins (our recommendations become a main component of a detailed creative brief). From those experiences and conversations with clients, I thought to offer two questions to ponder before selecting an agency.

#1 – Are we going to value the capabilities of a large firm? Agencies come in very different sizes; from 2 – 3 person organizations to global advertising agency subsidiaries. Larger agencies often construct large project teams including people with financial services, digital design, content creation, and project management expertise. We’ve seen asset managers appreciate and benefit from having these additional (to account management and execution) resources as working sessions can become more thorough and comprehensive from the additional brainpower. We’ve also seen organizations find the additional headcount frustrating as it can slow down timelines and require additional ramp-up. Think ahead. Will your project team enjoy in-depth initial conversations with an agency team recollecting and including insights from multiple previous experiences? Or will your team want to get down to work and quickly expect mock-ups to select from?

#2 – Is out-of-industry experience genuinely important? Many times Digital Marketers think agencies unencumbered by previous industry engagements will provide a “fresh” or “unique” design? That may be true. Equally true, agencies without asset management or insurance clients will struggle to understand the non-transactional nature of “retail” distribution. There will be some learning curve required for the out-of-industry agency. Are you (or someone on your team) willing to educate the agency?