Adobe Target vs. SiteSpect

We recommend this application because it allows us to segment and track the traffic of our domain under an analysis of their behavior, ranging from counting the number of clicks they make on a single element to the most complete action within our page in real time.

Incentivized

SiteSpect is kind of the difference between the space shuttle and a bicycle. They will both get you places. However Sitespect is considerably more complex and more configurable than most other options that I have seen and used (Optimizely, Visual Website Optimizer, etc.). But those other solutions also have a much lower learning curve and [users] are able to do a lot of things with relatively no coding experience or skill, where SiteSpect really does need capable developers to be utilized well.

Incentivized

• Because the software is established there is lots of online help available and most of the bugs have been worked out
• Adobe has a vast supply of resources if your pockets are deep enough.
• The dashboard is easy to follow and is getting more user-friendly. You no longer have to be an HTML wizard to implement changes.

Incentivized

• You can quickly run test campaigns of content and promotions – without burdening valuable IT resources, and without the need for JavaScript tags, code changes, or JavaScript that slow your ability to test, and decrease your site’s speed.

• There should be some more clarity around what makes a test significant. While this can be decided by the client themselves, some direction from the tool would be helpful.
• Also, if there was an easier way to organize campaigns and search for them it would be helpful. Right now there is just a long list of campaigns and you have to rely on search to find a specific campaign. What if you don't know the name of the test?

• One current limitation of Sitespect is that the data it captures is numeric. For example, it will not capture a department name variable such as supplements. The workaround is that a user can create a supplement department value capture that fires as 0 or 1. For companies with very large numbers of departments the workaround can be a time consuming process.

Once you get started with your testing program, you realize that it is necessary to continue. You must keep optimizing in order to remain a vital competitor in today's marketing world. Even if you're not using Test & Target or any other user experience testing software, you ought to be performing comparison tests on your own, simply by routing your audience to different experiences and quantifying the aggregate of the results.

I'm no longer at the company where I used SiteSpect, but based on my 18+ months as the manager responsible for the use of SiteSpect, I'd definitely recommend continuing with the product. I've since recommended it to one other company. SiteSpect has been a great business partner - the level of customer support that I got was outstanding over the time that I used the product.

The recent UI update is a complete mess. It is difficult to navigate and find features that previously existed. The reactiveness of the page depending on window size is also ridiculous and it is absurd that depending on how large your window is, entire columns of functions will disappear with no indication that they are missing. The usability of the tool has fallen off a cliff.

Incentivized

i don't think we use the full functionalities of the tool, but to use the full functions, it's almost impossible (Too hard)

The bottleneck is never the software program

On several occasions, we have had the need to ask for help from the Adobe Target support team, and I must say that they have provided us with an excellent experience, as they take care of solving the problems quickly and with high precision

Incentivized

When we have any questions on how the tool can be utilized for some unique requirements, they always make excellent suggestions.

The instructor that came to train us was awesome and this training was very useful. I would recommend it for anyone who is going to be using this software. I only mark it lower because it is an added expense to an already expensive product, and a lot of the training covered the "Target" portion of the software (which again, we didn't use)

The training was very easy to understand, however it would have been more useful to my development team than me. It was also primarily over-the-phone, which is never as easy to follow as in-person. We ended up scheduling and paying for an in-person training session to supplement the online/phone training because it wasn't helpful enough.

Implement using a global mBox on the page so you can change any and everything over the traditional method. Traditional method is good if you do not have technical web dev resources, do not know Javascript/jQuery, or you have money to blow on mBox calls. Global deployment reduces mBox calls and allows you to touch many parts of the page easily. A lot more customizable

Just need to have your requirements ready such as, what you are expecting from the tool, is there anything specific you want regarding reporting, tracking etc.

For us, the decision was very straightforward. We chose to invest in the Adobe stack and utilize tools that are developed to integrate together and complement each other. Ex: Adobe Target 'A4T' integration within Adobe Analytics. Optimizely appears to be a great tool, but for us aligning with the Adobe suite, ensuring that future product enhancements and tools would work well together was a very important key factor in our decision

Incentivized

We haven't seen any platform deliver the flicker-free performance of SiteSpect. While most platforms have improved their business user facing tools since we originally selected SiteSpect, we've never had any doubt about it's advanced capabilities. Any test we can imagine can be run through SiteSpect, and they have provided the support we required when we didn't have the expertise in-house to realize our vision. At this stage, I feel that SiteSpect's user interface lags behind the competition, but it's feature set can't be argued with.

Incentivized

• This is something we've been working to improve on, as far as how we're calculating and tracking this, but Target has had a substantial ROI on our business.
• I will say specific to our efforts, we could have probably done similar work if not the same work using a different testing tool (Optimizely for example), but Target has been good for us.

Incentivized

• Our clients see large revenue increases
• Insight and better customer service
• Budgetary spending analysis. E.g Do we really need lifestyle photography? etc.