Ask Enquiro » microsoft http://ask.enquiro.com B2B Marketing Blog Focusing on the Online Space Wed, 05 Oct 2011 15:41:33 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 Changing the Game of Search http://ask.enquiro.com/2009/changing-the-game-of-search/ http://ask.enquiro.com/2009/changing-the-game-of-search/#comments Fri, 31 Jul 2009 21:23:19 +0000 admin http://ask.enquiro.com/?p=398

Enquiro’s CEO, Gord Hotchkiss, was recently interviewed about the evolution of Search by Byron Gordon of SEO-PR. The video interview had very convenient timing as it was released just days before the official announcement of the Yahoo/Microsoft search deal.

A regular speaker at industry events and contributor to Media Post, Search Engine Land, and AskEnquiro, Gord has not shied away from voicing his opinions on the need for another dominant search engine. He challenges the engines to rely less on static technological advances to gain market share, and points out how neurology, psychology, and usability affects habits related to choosing a search engine.

“We need an arms race in search,” Gord states. “Search habits only change if there is a huge reason to do so.”
Gord goes on to discuss Microsoft’s attempt to acquire more of the search engine market share with the release of Bing. “The bar must be raised to a point where someone would never think of going back to Google [when performing a search] because the experience was so much better.” He questions Microsoft’s current advertising campaign as promising something that has not quite been attained, “If you use Bing you’ll have a good search experience, but you won’t have an amazing search experience that will make you go ‘Wow, I’m never going to use Google again’ and that’s what it’s going to take to change the game of search.”

]]> http://ask.enquiro.com/2009/changing-the-game-of-search/feed/ 0 Microsoft’s Talk vs. Microsoft’s Walk http://ask.enquiro.com/2009/microsoft%e2%80%99s-talk-vs-microsoft%e2%80%99s-walk/ http://ask.enquiro.com/2009/microsoft%e2%80%99s-talk-vs-microsoft%e2%80%99s-walk/#comments Thu, 09 Apr 2009 21:01:56 +0000 Gord Hotchkiss http://ask.enquiro.com/2009/microsoft%e2%80%99s-talk-vs-microsoft%e2%80%99s-walk/ Not so many columns ago, I urged Microsoft to do something amazing in search. Last week, they did. But it wasn’t in a good way. I was on the road last week, and I saw three different things land in my in box about Microsoft and their search efforts. With each email, my frustration mounted. Finally, Friday as I was sitting in Seattle airport I couldn’t contain myself any more. I sent an email to the most senior person I knew at Microsoft Search. The gist of the email was “don’t do it”. Yesterday, I got an email back thanking me for my “honest” feedback. Yet somehow, I don’t think it will make a difference.

Here were the three email delivered articles I saw:
 
 
“Google does have to be all things to all people. Our search does not need to be all things to all people.” – Steve Ballmer
 
“Being the underdog in the Internet- search market has one advantage for Microsoft Corp. Chief Executive Officer Steve Ballmer: He says his company can experiment, while rival Google Inc. plays it safe. – Bloomberg.com
 
I believe Ballmer is right here, in theory. What’s happening in reality is something very different. But let’s hold that thought for a moment.
 
 
"We’re not at where we’d like to be," Weitz began, and then dove in to explain that people are generally happy with how their search engine is working, until the data shows that they are not” – Stefan Weitz, Microsoft Web Search Team, Arstechnica.com
 
Nobody is arguing that the 10 blue links is the pinnacle of search, especially Google. So it’s hard to disagree here. We judge relative to what we know, but we’re on the brink of blowing that away.
 
So far, Microsoft is saying all the right things.
 
 
“Industry executives expect JWT, part of WPP, to unveil an estimated $80 million to $100 million push for the new search engine in June, with online, TV, print and radio executions.” – Adage.com
 
What? This was the email that drove me over the edge. $100 Million? On Kumo..or Kiev or what ever they call this? This is wrong on so many levels, I scarcely know where to start.
 
I’m not going to pass judgment on a search interface I haven’t got my hands on. I don’t think it’s fair to make a call on a few leaked screenshots. But I will say that I’ve seen nothing revolutionary about this. And that’s the point. As I’ve said over and over and over, Google is a habit. You don’t break a habit with $100 Million in advertising. You don’t break it with promises of search usage kickbacks. And you certainly don’t break it with a marginal and incremental change in the search experience. Microsoft is right to introduce categorized search. They’re right to explore changing the search interface. No arguments there. But this is not the time to draw $100 million in attention to it. Best case scenario: no improvement to market share. Worst case, the biggest drop yet, if the usability aspects haven’t been fully thought out.
 
If you accept the message in the first two emails, Microsoft needs to be a search start up: bold, nimble, visionary, passionate and rebellious. And there’s no way in hell that will happen on the Redmond campus. Bold, nimble, visionary, passionate rebels are nowhere to be seen.
 
The First Step is admitting the Problem
 
So accept what you are, and more importantly, accept what you’re not. Tweak your search product to improve experience, catch up and try to stem the market share bleeding. There’s nothing wrong with that. And stop with the rebranding. Every time you do that, you’re breaking the established habits of your own users and giving them the chance to go elsewhere. It will blow up in your face.
 
At the same time, stop worrying about winning the 10 blue link search war and start planning for the next battle. That’s when the Google Habit will be broken and where you have a chance to change the game. Here are the things you need to start thinking about:
 
-          Stop worrying about relevance and start worrying about usefulness.
-          Understand that search patterns represent a complex system and look at ways to discover emergent behavior from that system. Use your findings to improve everyone’s search experience (this is an element in Stephen Wolfram’s Alpha project)
-          Use every signal at your disposal to interpret user intent in an implicit way. Embrace personalization, behavioral patterns, the social graph, task context and anything else that helps uncover what’s in a person’s mind.
-          Reinvent the interface. Embrace how humans follow information scent. Use more intuitive interface tools to allow us to choose, filter and drill into promising paths. And make it workable in much less real estate.
-          Make a better search experience personal and portable, seamlessly transferring from the desktop to the mobile device.
-          Hold Google’s feet to the fire. Follow your own advice and innovate faster and better than they do. Because you’re right, it’s difficult for them to innovate and risk alienating their user base. But here’s the flipside to that. It’s easier for them to take that risk when there’s no strong alternative to go to.
 
Before You Say No, Just Listen…
 
If Microsoft really wants to spend $100 million on Search, here’s my suggested plan. Take $20 million and fund 10 start-ups for $2 million each. Give them a 1 year mandate to reinvent search. Take the remaining $80 million and use it to develop it into a Reality TV series. Call it Google Killer. Get Steve Ballmer to host. He can throw chairs, do the Monkey Dance and lead the audience in a chant of Developers, Developers, Developers. I guarantee you’ll get a better return on your investment.
 
And if someone at Microsoft is listening, I’m free to discuss the development deal for the series. Hell, I’ll even be one of the contestants. Call me anytime.
 
 
 
]]> http://ask.enquiro.com/2009/microsoft%e2%80%99s-talk-vs-microsoft%e2%80%99s-walk/feed/ 0