Among the article's many interesting points is this statement:
“The technology reaches beyond the personalization familiar on sites like Amazon.com, which uses its own in-house data on its customers to show them new items they might like.”
The statement is important because it is positioned in a way that suggests consumers are okay with targeting and understand its value. Taking it a step further, most companies aren’t using in-house data to drive content relevance on their sites to unauthenticated visitors. The general acceptance combined with the technological know-how creates opportunity for onsite targeting to continue its growth trend in use and adoption.
As with the rest of the industry, there is a great deal of nuance in how onsite targeting is done. The key difference between the way Knotice primarily does onsite targeting and a company like [x+1], which is featured in the WSJ article, is [x+1]’s algorithmic-based approach and Knotice’s rules-based approach. Algorithms are important and they definitely serve a market need. But it is important to note that the complexity and lack of basic controls with algorithms are not for every business or every audience type. When that truth is uncovered the value of a rules-based approach comes into focus.
The lesson: Onsite targeting is important, but make sure to investigate which method works best for your business. It is easy to overbuy because of the bells and whistles. But, don’t lose focus of the marketing goals and the audience’s needs.
This article from The Wall Street Journal is excellent. It may surprise some consumers, but it gives clarity to how mainstream targeting techniques are, making them less alarming and increasing market opportunity.