Leave a comment

In Nov, HubSpot formed a new growth team. This team was just Alex Cook for a while and more recently in Jan he teamed up with one of HubSpot's top engineers, @tpetr.

One of Alex's favorite pieces of advice to new growth teams is from Andy Johns (@ibringtraffic):
"Find an easy win, that’s non-controversial, that adds loads of value"

(via http://www.growtheverywhere.com/andy-johns)

Alex took Andy's advice and pushed what was a really simple change that ended up having a big impact: a 15% lift on our trial landing pages. This change ended up being rolled out company wide and they are seeing similar lifts across the rest of their funnel.

Alex didn't write the above blog post, but he might put together something more detailed soon. For now, he's happy to answer questions here on GrowthHackers.

One thing to clarify. The original test added a 14.75% lift to overall submissions and a 21.3% to new customer rate (basically, new leads submitted at a rate above 14.75%).

  • AC

    Alex Cook

    almost 7 years ago #

    Hey all. I'm Alex and I'm co-leading the new growth team at HubSpot. I executed on this experiment in Dec.

    I didn't realize this was already posted on GH, so I created a separate thread:
    http://growthhackers.com/15-lift-to-hubspot-landing-pages-via-an-easy-win

    Happy to discuss here or there.

    • SE

      Sean Ellis

      almost 7 years ago #

      Hi Alex, I removed the duplicate but replaced the article details here with what you wrote. Thanks for sharing your test and results with the rest us!

  • RG

    Ruben Gamez

    almost 7 years ago #

    I've tested this with both landing pages and even my home page...for me, I always get more conversions whenever I remove the nav.

    Here's an example of a split test for my home page where I removed the top nav:

    http://cl.ly/image/1d1b0R1i240n

    In the table below the funnel, the row starting with "socialsqueeze_" is my home page without the nav. Row below is the exact same but with a nav.

    You can see that more people downloaded a sample (which requires an email) and eventually completed a signup for a trial (which required cc info upfront).

    Here's the same test but from a different perspective:

    http://cl.ly/image/0V1K430y0O0h

    In here, instead of looking at % of people that downloaded the funnel, we look at % of people that looked at the pricing page.

    Interestingly enough, with the nav more people looked at the pricing page -- which makes sense since there was no nav to get there for the other page -- but the page without the nav still ended up converting more paid trials.

  • SE

    Sean Ellis

    almost 7 years ago #

    This is really interesting. In the past micro landing sites have also tested well for me. So it includes links, but only to content tightly associated with the positioning in the advertisement.

  • ET

    Everette Taylor

    almost 7 years ago #

    I agree with Sean this is interesting, I do believe simplicity is best but surprised having completely no links drove a 28% better result.

    • AC

      Alex Cook

      almost 7 years ago #

      One function of this is the volume of links in the HubSpot footer.

      Also, the results from the original test (on our trial landing page) was a 14.75% lift in overall submissions (from both new and existing leads) and a 21.3% lift from non-existent leads.

  • JF

    Jesper Forslund

    almost 7 years ago #

    If you have full website navigation on your landing page some users might get sidetracked and the call to action is lost. Links could work as long as the context remains and call to action always is accessible. But I should do a A/B test on this statement...

    • AC

      Alex Cook

      almost 7 years ago #

      Yes, try it! Another interesting take on this is just navigation simplification. We actually didn't test if it was the header or footer nav causing the leaky bucket and chose to remove them both. But, you could test by just removing one or the other. Or, by removing specific links from the nav.

  • CC

    Chris Conrey

    almost 7 years ago #

    The logic works if you think about it - don't give them an easy exit to get lost in. I think I'd want to see more pages show this before I write it as a "truth" but I can see where it may work in many cases.

    • AC

      Alex Cook

      almost 7 years ago #

      We started with just our trial landing page. Reached statistical significance. Then rolled it out across all landing pages.

  • SC

    Shana Carp

    almost 7 years ago #

    I mean I can see why - but I would test this on an audience by audience basis. I could totally see some groups not converting without the links

    • AC

      Alex Cook

      almost 7 years ago #

      Totally agree. We saw a lift in nearly all sources of traffic. In the cases where we saw a dip or flatline, it was typically a case when the user shouldn't have reached the LP via the path they took. Basically, the funnel needs adjusting or a separate landing page should be created.

SHARE
15
15