The funny thing is, there are still marketers out there that don’t “get” local search or why marketing campaigns should be localised.
There are numerous studies and reports that indicate localised display and local search campaigns (on the PC and mobile) outperform “national” or pure brand campaigns – sometimes dramatically. Despite the available weight of evidence, some multi-location brands and marketers still profess confusion or, more commonly, struggle to operationalise “local search” marketing.
A 2013 study, conducted by the CMO Council and sponsored by Balihoo, found similar operational challenges for national marketers considering localising campaigns. Complexity, coordination and confusion over tactics are major challenges. The Balihoo findings reflected competitive advantages for those marketers that had successfully implemented a local strategy.
Perhaps the most interesting finding in the Forrester survey is the basic confusion over what “local search” means. Here’s an excerpt from the report on that point:
We found no accord across our interviewees about what “local search” means or which goals a local search strategy helps marketers achieve. Furthermore, some interviewees confused paid search and SEO, or worse, assumed that “local search” meant advertising in area newspapers. For example, while we discussed the SEO aspects of local search, one brand strategy director had a different definition: “When we say ‘local search,’ we’re not talking about coming up in search results. We’re talking about making sure we’re listed correctly in local directories.”
The rise of mobile search and smartphone usage makes it especially important to be able to localise campaigns. According to past statements from Google, roughly 20% of desktop search carries a local intent. However, the number rises to 40 – 50% in mobile.
To complete our findings, here is a special report from Forrester, “Uncovering The Benefits Of Local Search Marketing – November 2014”. Click here to download the report.