Cox Automotive: Testing Across Multiple Brands
•
3 j'aime•436 vues
Cox Automotive, the world’s leader in automotive remarketing services, and parent company to such brands as Autotrader, Kelley Blue Book, Manheim, and Dealer.com, has more than 40,000 auto dealer clients across five continents. Cox Auto focuses on continually improving its products to create faster vehicle transactions and enabling consumers to have a seamless online-to-offline experience. Testing has a natural space to play here - as Cox Automotive’s businesses have learned to scale experimentation to optimize the design of its digital experiences. In this webinar, Frances Reyes, Seth Stuck, and Sabrina Ho will discuss how Cox Automotive is building a culture of experimentation and testing across their digital properties. You’ll learn: - The impetus of testing at Cox Automotive - How they leverage and share information across their business units, creating shared goals despite different business priorities - How they created a framework for data-driven decisions across the company
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
Similaire à Cox Automotive: Testing Across Multiple Brands
Similaire à Cox Automotive: Testing Across Multiple Brands (20)
Plus de Optimizely
Plus de Optimizely (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Cox Automotive: Testing Across Multiple Brands
- 1. 1 What it is like to build a testing program across multiple brands Frances Reyes, Seth Stuck, Sabrina Ho & Alli Bordogna +
- 2. 2 Alli Bordogna Strategic Customer Success Manager Frances Reyes Senior Director, Analytics Introductions Seth Stuck Director, Product & Marketing Analytics Sabrina Ho Director, Product & Marketing Analytics
- 3. 3 Housekeeping ● We are recording this webinar ● You’ll receive the recording and slides ● We’ll answer all questions at the end
- 5. 5 Agenda ● Introduction ● About Optimizely ● The Cox Automotive Journey ● Q&A
- 6. Revenue, share of wallet, funnel conversion, risk mitigation, ops efficiency What We Do Next gen “Test and Learn” platform for enterprise- wide digital experience optimization Over 1B impressions daily Replaces Digital Guesswork With Evidence-based Optimization Digital Experimentation SaaS Platform Apply the scientific method to “at-scale” business decision making. 20X increase in Yield
- 7. Experimentation: Testing variations of digital experiences with real users and deploying what wins +21 % -5%
- 8. Frontend UI Backend Business Logic & Data The anatomy of an experience i.e. navigation, search location & visual treatment Copy Images & Colors Layout Search algorithms Personalize content based on previous behavior Recommendations Make your headlines more personal
- 9. “Our success is a function of how many experiments we do per year, per month, per week, per day.” Jeff Bezos “Our aim is to create the best product for our customers, and we do that through constant innovation and testing.” Gillan Tans, CEO “Our company culture encourages experimentation and free flow of ideas.” Larry Page “We use experimentation and testing to inform as much of the business as we possibly can” - Gregory Peters, CPO Today’s Digital Leaders Win By Using Experimentation At-Scale
- 10. Spent with Digital Media 19 hr week 2018 Digital-Centric Customer Spent with Digital Media 41 $396m Mobile commerce Mobile commerce $1 8t. 2008 Digital-Convenient Customer hr week Your customer has fundamentally changed how they engage
- 11. What We Enable 1500+ +51% +$21M +19% +28% Improved subscription acquisition Users Scale and agility of experiments; users incremental in revenue Improved Driver Acquisition increase in cross-sell performance
- 13. 13
- 14. 14
- 15. 15
- 16. 16
- 17. 17
- 18. 18
- 19. 19
- 20. 20
- 23. 23 How We Embrace Agile
- 24. Optimizely Maturity Model BUSINESS VALUE LEVEL 1 Executional Start LEVEL 2 Foundational Growth LEVEL 3 Cross-Functional Advancement LEVEL 4 Operational Excellence LEVEL 5 Culture of Experimentation
- 25. BUSINESS VALUE LEVEL 1 31% LEVEL 2 48% LEVEL 3 20% LEVELS 4 & 5 1% Optimizely Customers
- 26. BUSINESS VALUE Cox Automotive’s Scores
- 28. 28 Workflow and RACI Overview Test Stages Description Responsible Who will do the work for this step? Accountable Who validates this work and pushes the test into the next stage of the workflow? Consulted Who will likely need to help the Responsible person(s) Informed Who needs to be informed about the progress of this work? Requirements Idea has all relevant test details to move forward and has been scored by necessary stakeholders (identified in "Consulted" column). Whomever is ideating the test - can be anyone RTEs (to accept for scoring), Testing Analytics (to validate test details) UX, Product, Engineering, Product Analytics RTEs, Leadership Creative Assets for experiment variants are received and are attached to the idea. UX UX Product Analytics, UX, Product, Engineering, Testing Analytics RTEs Development Variants for experiment have been built UX / UI / Front-end Engineering, Engineering, and/or Architecture UX UX / UI / Front-end Engineering, Engineering, and/or Architecture, Testing Analytics RTEs, Product Analytics Setup and QA Experiment has been configured in Optimizely and QA’ed and accepted by necessary stakeholders. UX, Engineering, Testing Analytics, Product Analytics Testing Analytics UX / UI / Front-end Engineering, Product, Engineering, and/or Architecture Product, RTEs Testing Experiment has been deployed and is actively running Product Analytics, Testing Analytics Product Analytics UX, Product, RTEs, Testing Analytics Leadership Analysis Experiment has concluded and success is being determined (usually requires some off-site validation) Product Analytics, Testing Analytics Product Analytics UX, Product, RTEs, Testing Analytics Leadership, Stakeholders Completed Experiment learnings and next steps are distributed to rest of the organization. Product, Product Analytics, Testing Analytics RTEs UX, Product, RTEs, Testing Analytics Leadership
- 29. 29 Optimizely Program Management Democratizing Test Ideas, Streamlining Prioritization
- 30. 30 Optimizely Program Management Managing Test Ideas, Decentralizing Test Management
- 31. 31 Optimizely Program Management Managing a Robust Testing Program
- 32. 32 Date Range: 11/30/18 through 4/30/19 Velocity (week) Conclusive Rate Win Rate Cox Automotive 2.2 25% 18% All Customers (Web + Full Stack) 0.4 27% 17% All Web 0.5 25% 15% Top 90% All Web 1.7 31% 24% Top 90% Retail Web 3.0 33% 20% Top 90% Media Web 2.4 36% 26% Top 5 Marketplace Web 2.9 34% 21%
- 34. 34 Socializing the Plan Multiple touchpoints include Slack, email, and intranet
- 35. 35 Socializing the Live Results Depending on test, we leverage Adobe and/or Optimizely Dashboards
- 36. 36 Socializing the Live Results Depending on test, we leverage Adobe and/or Optimizely Dashboards
- 37. 37 Socializing the Final Analysis and Recommendations We share results in a variety of ways: Slack, PowerPoint, Intranet and in meetings
- 39. 39 Knowing When to Test When the clarity of a pre/post just won’t be enough 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Page Conversion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Page Conversion Week 1 Week 2 Pre Post Experiment w/ concurrent control and test groups
- 42. 42 Knowing When to Test Types of Tests Discovery and Light- Weight Prototyping • Used to very quickly answer whether an idea has legs – or to help size up the opportunity • Common types of tests include: Fake door, A/B, Usability, Focus Group Optimization • Used to compare multiple design variants to determine which has optimal performance towards a given goal • Common types of tests include: A/B or A/B/n tests De-risking or Validation • Used to determine how functionality that has already been developed will perform – generally as a means for ensuring that the new product or design performs as expected • Also helpful for retrospectives (looking back over a given time period to assess what has had the most impact) • Common types of tests include: A/B or Multi- variate tests Blue Sky • Used to answer heavy business questions – often, the thing being tested would never be deployed • Intended to help shape up hypotheticals and limit speculation in strategy
- 43. 43 Knowing When to Test Types of Tests Discovery and Light- Weight Prototyping • Used to very quickly answer whether an idea has legs – or to help size up the opportunity • Common types of tests include: Fake door, A/B, Usability, Focus Group Optimization • Used to compare multiple design variants to determine which has optimal performance towards a given goal • Common types of tests include: A/B or A/B/n tests De-risking or Validation • Used to determine how functionality that has already been developed will perform – generally as a means for ensuring that the new product or design performs as expected • Also helpful for retrospectives (looking back over a given time period to assess what has had the most impact) • Common types of tests include: A/B or Multi- variate tests Blue Sky • Used to answer heavy business questions – often, the thing being tested would never be deployed • Intended to help shape up hypotheticals and limit speculation in strategy
- 44. 44 Knowing When to Test Types of Tests Discovery and Light- Weight Prototyping • Used to very quickly answer whether an idea has legs – or to help size up the opportunity • Common types of tests include: Fake door, A/B, Usability, Focus Group Optimization • Used to compare multiple design variants to determine which has optimal performance towards a given goal • Common types of tests include: A/B or A/B/n tests De-risking or Validation • Used to determine how functionality that has already been developed will perform – generally as a means for ensuring that the new product or design performs as expected • Also helpful for retrospectives (looking back over a given time period to assess what has had the most impact) • Common types of tests include: A/B or Multi- variate tests Blue Sky • Used to answer heavy business questions – often, the thing being tested would never be deployed • Intended to help shape up hypotheticals and limit speculation in strategy
- 45. 45 Example of a Product Validation Test Vehicles priced below Fair Market Range saw a 7% increase in overall value
- 46. 46 De-risking Control Responsive Adaptive Challenger Overall conversion rate increased 2 PP on responsive adaptive redesign
- 47. 47 De-risking to Blue Sky A/B Test #1 HP Redesign: Control Challenger A A/B Test #2 HP Redesign: Control Challenger A Test creative based on User Testing Live site results differed from User Testing Redesigned Hero section Clicks to main KPI increased +7%
- 48. 48 Knowing When to Test Types of Tests Discovery and Light- Weight Prototyping • Used to very quickly answer whether an idea has legs – or to help size up the opportunity • Common types of tests include: Fake door, A/B, Usability, Focus Group Optimization • Used to compare multiple design variants to determine which has optimal performance towards a given goal • Common types of tests include: A/B or A/B/n tests De-risking or Validation • Used to determine how functionality that has already been developed will perform – generally as a means for ensuring that the new product or design performs as expected • Also helpful for retrospectives (looking back over a given time period to assess what has had the most impact) • Common types of tests include: A/B or Multi- variate tests Blue Sky • Used to answer heavy business questions – often, the thing being tested would never be deployed • Intended to help shape up hypotheticals and limit speculation in strategy
- 49. 49 Example of a Blue Sky Sponsored Search Links Sponsorships Sponsored Hero Image and Search Links Advertisement Removing ads from the site created a 15.1% lift in both value events and VDPs
- 50. 50 Knowing When to Test When the (un)certainty of a pre/post just won’t be enough Uncertainty Certainty High Level of Effort Low Level of Effort “Just do” launch with no Pre/Post Analysis “Just do” launch with Pre/Post Analysis Optimization A/B Tests Blue Sky Testing with Iterative Learning Plan De-Risking and Validation Testing Discovery and Light-Weight Prototyping
- 51. CONCLUSION 51
- 52. 52 Creating an Enterprise Testing Program High-Level Learnings What HAS Worked? • Leveraging larger, more experienced testing programs and personnel • Funding • Workflows and RACI • Pro-bono Support • Comparing depth and breadth of test results and analysis to what’s possible in a pre/post • Transparency of test plans and results • Quarterly Summit for enterprise-wide insights and partnership • Partnership with Optimizely What HAS NOT Worked? • Federating access to Individual teams who don’t embrace basic best practices • Over-reliance on Analytics to support all aspects of the test • Jumping straight to cross-brand testing • Skipping testing in favor of “just do” mentality
- 53. QUESTIONS? 53