OpenText Optimost vs. SiteSpect

The ease of implementation combined with the managed services result in a tool that virtually anyone can use - implementation is less than 10 lines of code added to the relevant pages of the website (we simply added it to our master page template to have it available on any page) and from there the customer can be as involved or not involved as they wish. At BSI we are very hands on with the testing programme - usually developing and designing the tests ourselves and having HP build them, but if we wanted to HP to develop, design and build and limit our role to QA and review that is an option.

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 it is a managed service the need for intervention by our internal IT group was removed. This allowed us to control the pace of the testing programme without being influenced by IT resource allocation
• The client and technical account managers are very good at suggesting tests or potential improvements
• HP regularly holds custom forums which are always informative and provide an opportunity to learn from and network with peers and industry leaders

• 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.

• The dashboard interface is difficult to navigate, but I understand that they are currently developing/testing a new much more user friendly interface
• The cost can be a barrier for some organisations, but for us it is worth it. Also they are in the process of releasing a less expensive self authoring testing tool.

• 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.

We have not only renewed our subscription three years running, but we have added the self authoring tool and are looking to expand the subscription so that we can take advantage of the managed services on a global level.

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.

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

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.

We evaluated Optimost again Adobe's similar offering (Target). The big difference between the two and the reason why BSI choose Autonomy was the managed service aspect. The idea that once the code was deployed on the site IT no longer had to be involved gave my team full ownership of the testing programme. With the Adobe product, the involvement of the internal IT group would have been required to launch each test - and this would have decreased the number of tests we could run each month. Back in the day I also used offermatica/omniture and this too required IT involvement.

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

• Use HP Optimost was the primary driver behind a 40% increase in UK classroom training courses booked online read more details here: http://www.autonomy.com/work/news/details/hsx6767d
• HP Optimost testing led to a 9% increase in sales by improving the BSI Shop's checkout funnel in 2012
• HP Optimost is integral to the success of BSI's continuous improvement testing programme

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