Recently, there was a renewed disturbance in the force around Search Engine Optimization and whether it is a legitimate endeavor. On its face, this seems like a peculiar thing for Internet professionals to be fighting about, still, in 2009. People turn to search engines—and for 65% of searches, Google specifically—as the first step to solving a problem they don’t already have the answer to. If you are in the business of providing something to people on the Web, you ought to be doing everything you can to make sure these people find what you are offering.

Of course it isn’t so simple. In the wake of search engine dominance, a lot of “consultants” popped up making unrealistic claims about guaranteed high search rankings using questionable or downright deceptive techniques. [See: the current rush to redirect all the links pointing to over 7 million defunct Geocities URLs]. This harmed the overall search experience, and damaged the experience of using the Web in general.

The snake oil salespersons still exist, but the situation overall is getting better. Businesses are learning the difference between bad tactics and unrealistic expectations about ranking (“black hat” SEO) and better tactics connected to longer-term strategies (“white hat” SEO, social media marketing, etc). Search engines are constantly adjusting their algorithms. People are getting better at sifting through the results.

We see optimizing websites for findability as a genuine distinct practice and a good thing. SEO is merely a tool. Specifically, SEO is a marketing tool. And the moral value of marketing flows from the mission and values of an organization (adjusted for ineptitude and greed on the part of individual participants conducting the marketing activities).

Also, SEO is not necessarily obvious. Everyone involved in design and development could be doing everything “right” in terms of their craft, and you might still be hiding your offering under a bushel. The set of things we consider to be “search engines” and the range of techniques that count as “optimization” change on a daily basis.

We happily join the chorus recommending that you make something awesome. But if your product is merely legitimate and useful, you probably won’t be social media linkbait without a lot of thought and work. (Apple products are awesome, right? And their marketing is at least as good.)

So, to solve the philosophical debate, the moral dilemma as it were, around this term, we propose rallying around user-centered SEO.

User-centered SEO starts with considering who you want to find your business online and how you need them to interact with it to succeed. You also have to consider the landscape: from your target customer’s point of view, where else might they turn to solve the problem you want to solve for them? How will they articulate this need and where will they turn to fill it? This should inform how you approach your entire strategy, including your SEO. There is no one-size-fits-all solution.

Most of our business here at Mule Design comes through referral. Our new clients typically don’t find us through keyword search on Google. For a business like ours, the big search engines come into play in terms of reputation management. When someone searches for us specifically, we want them to find only good, and possibly amusing, things.

However, for an e-commerce retailer, or advertising-supported editorial site, or Web-based product, it’s a whole different picture. They should do everything ethical and effective to make sure that potential customers find them instead of their competitors. And that benefits the end-user, too.

As a potential customer, the sooner I find something substantive that matches my query, the sooner I’ve fulfilled step 1 of a goal. In many cases, people can articulate very specific personal needs. They then turn to search engines to translate personal needs into sources of solutions. For example, Zappo’s is awesome and customer-centered. They communicate directly to their customers through social media, and they have a huge base of evangelists. And they are using every SEO tactic they can get away with, sub-domains, brand category pages. This can be a huge user benefit if it helps the person trying to find a particular type of shoe find it faster.

On the question of whether independent SEO consultants are necessary, it’s a matter of goals, complexity, and scale. Just as everyone designing and developing websites should know the basic principles of usability and user research, sometimes you need a dedicated specialist. The same goes for SEO, and many, many other practices.

Besides, it’s 2009. Time to move on and start hating the Twitter consultants.

Written by Erika Hall on November 12, 2009 |