I have a catch-phrase. It’s not really sexy, but I say it a lot - “SEO has a different definition depending on where you stand”. This harsh reality makes it really tough to sell to clients, both big and small. Not only does an SEO need to figure out the definition that works for the client, but we have to figure out the misconceptions or expectations the client already has. If you are able to connect with your client on a more informal level, you’re going to have a much better chance at molding this engagement. Still, very few clients across the board seem to fully accept that SEO is not a particular forest, but the entire wilderness. Yes, it is a marketing channel, but it certainly doesn’t live in a box. Understandably, this truth is not what many clients want to hear; they do not want to be told that the best SEO campaigns take time and are differentiated, or that there is a plethora of hits and misses on the way to pure optimization. Many clients often want quick hits. They’ve seen occasional organic traffic streams draw thousands of visits and dollars, and they just want it again… but not by any means necessary. This is direct internet marketing, right? It works for paid search, right? It would obviously work the same for SEO? Right?
This puts a marketing agency in a tough position. They want the business, so many agencies unfortunately feel forced to dig a measurable, generic, safe “acre” out of the wilderness and shape the client’s expectations to it. They call this “SEO”, and commit the client. The client never really knows that all they got was a decade old SEO marketing model. The lift the client receives is scaled from the start, so a positive end-relationship results. The client is none-the-wiser on how much missed SEO opportunity has been sailing by in the interim; enough missed opportunity to retire on.
I’m speaking generally here - I’m not interested in naming names, although I’ve heard my share of agency feedback from clients and online; I certainly don’t think ALL big agencies are in this situation, but I do think all agencies have struggled with the idea of being a multi-facet SEO provider, only to find it a very steep climb. Clients are usually very bureaucratic, time-strapped, and (*gasp*) ROI driven - being a big agency means you are handling many, many accounts. Although big agency SEOs are out in the blogosphere like all of us, and know (and possibly can perform) all the great tactics and strategies that are shared daily, it’s just not in the cards, despite their best intentions. I don’t fault the SEOs in the big agencies.
I do SEO for a lot of clients through the agency I work for, and am proud of our view on SEO. We really push back the typical agency constraints to offer the better SEO, instead of the typical ‘out-of-the-box’ solution. I’ve also been really lucky to work with clients/brands who are very large, but still interested in learning about modern SEO, warts and all. Many of them get the long-run benefits. So fighting the ‘Big Agency SEO Conundrum’ can be done with some blood, sweat, and tears, and a good executive team that can see the long-term benefits. As SEO grows, all agencies have to grow with it if they value their reputations.
