43 replies to this topic

[don1]

1. Do you have a contract that stipulates that you will not provide the same high quality service to your client's competitors?
2. Do you have a contract that stipulates that your present customer cannot use another SEO service while you are providing the service?
3. Have you asked your present customer if they would provide referrals (you did ask for referrals, right?) and did you stipulate they could not refer anyone else in their industry?

If you answered "No" to all of the above questions proceed to the prospect's front door and collect $$$ It would be unethical if you did have these things in your contract and then proceeded to do so anyway.

[GBRD]

 
Personally, I don't think this question has a black and white answer. We have had clients actually refer their competitors (whom they are friendly with) to us. Obviously, there is no real conflict of interest when that happens.   
 
Aside from that, we have chosen to take on clients when we are also working for their competitors. NDA does not apply because we don't give out personal or confidential business information, nor do we use such information in optimizing competitors. Each site usually requires it's own unique solutions. 

 

Having competing clients target unique search phrases does not isolate them from one another as competition even within the search results. This practice is either the product of ignorance regarding search engines or indifference towards the situation.

We can set aside the keyword issue for a minute and just look at connectivity:

Let's take two separate hypothetical campaigns. These clients exist within the same industry, and target unique search phrases. They do however belong to the same topical community and consequently share a common corner of the Internet link graph.

Could it be said that each client's opportunity to thrive within their link graph is limited as you will be unable to utilize all available resources to serve both? Furthermore how do you deal with judgement calls for prized article/link space? Who gets to receive your best efforts?

What is SEO/SEM? What is it to your clients?

Could it be said that your clients contract your services for the purpose of achieving relative success via search engine traffic?

Could it also be said that in order to be successful someone else needs to be unsuccessful (or at least not the most successful)?

Could it be said that a client contracts your services to assist them in being successful? If asked wouldn't your clients say that they contracted you under the assumption that you would be promoting them as opposed to their competitors?

Surely potential clients don't ask you to get them into the top 10 but make sure not to depose #1 because he's a really nice guy?

Could it be said that when targeted search traffic is directed towards a particular website that it diminishes the potential for competing websites to receive that same traffic?

Unless in fact the service for which you are contracted has a "success-cap" in which it is understood by all parties that once the cap is hit you will no longer be specifically supporting them as opposed to their competitors.

More importantly: Would you be willing to tell every one of your client's exactly what you have stated here? Without fear of losing their business?

I think that the practice you describe is lazy and indifferent to the point of being grossly negligent.

[type0]

UPDATE

I called my new prospect yesterday telling him I was currently working with another person in his industry and if that was a problem. He said no, that would be okay and he appreciated me being forthright and honest with him.

I'm hoping we can work together, but he did say that he was still shopping around, so we'll see.

The discussion on this topic has been very educational and I appreciate everyone who took the time to reply. Thank you.

[St0n3y]

Who gets to receive your best efforts?

To assume that you can only give your best effort to on or the other is pretty silly. We give all our clients the best effort. Fact is, we don't compete against ourselves. We don't try and displace one client in favor of another, we simply do whatever is necessary to get each to perform as best as that site possibly can, both in conversions and in rankings.

Would you be willing to tell every one of your client's exactly what you have stated here? Without fear of losing their business?

Yep. and in fact have done so. Typical response is, we would rather not, but I won't deny you the ability to make money. They clients understand what this is about.

1. Do you have a contract that stipulates that you will not provide the same high quality service to your client's competitors?
2. Do you have a contract that stipulates that your present customer cannot use another SEO service while you are providing the service?
3. Have you asked your present customer if they would provide referrals (you did ask for referrals, right?) and did you stipulate they could not refer anyone else in their industry?

Good points.

[Jill]

I think that the practice you describe is lazy and indifferent to the point of being grossly negligent. 

That's pretty harsh GBRD. I don't work on clients in the same industry with the same keyword phrases, but I don't think it's negligent for those who do. Look at a company like Findlaw, that's pretty much all they do.

[type0]

That's pretty harsh GBRD. I don't work on clients in the same industry with the same keyword phrases, but I don't think it's negligent for those who do.  Look at a company like Findlaw, that's pretty much all they do.

Wow Jill! That is amazing that you mentioned Findlaw. A representative contacted one of my clients by email saying their site "does not have good visibility on the Internet". He emphasized that he has helped others in the same industry with the same keywords and can do the same for their company.

It blew me away that I was just asking about my conflict of interest dilemma and low and behold Findlaw shows me how its done.

If I had received this email, I would be wondering who is Findlaw working for? Me? Or me and all my competitors. Seems really fishy.

Edited by type0, 18 March 2006 - 04:46 PM.

[Jill]

Small world, huh?

[GBRD]

To assume that you can only give your best effort to on or the other is pretty silly. We give all our clients the best effort. Fact is, we don't compete against ourselves. We don't try and displace one client in favor of another, we simply do whatever is necessary to get each to perform as best as that site possibly can, both in conversions and in rankings.

Let me clarify:

When confronted with a situation in which two competing clients would both benefit specifically from promotion related to one particular search phrase: Assuming that both clients are relatively equal in regards to strength of site and campaign history.

How do you decide who gets to benefit from that search phrase?

This situation may sound far fetched to readers, but I'm certain that you and I can think of more than one real-life example with which we both have experience.

[GBRD]

That's pretty harsh GBRD. I don't work on clients in the same industry with the same keyword phrases, but I don't think it's negligent for those who do.  Look at a company like Findlaw, that's pretty much all they do.

Perhaps it is harsh, and I must admit that my professional history with the man behind the screen name may have colored my post.

I do however feel very strongly that these types of situations can and do develop into cautionary tales which reflect poorly upon the industry as a whole.

The issues of ethics and best practices are of particular interest to me and comprise a noteworthy portion of my work. I also have formal education in this area and will be the first to admit that my passion for these subjects is occasionally expressed with great zeal . I can also say that if my soap-box has gotten the better of me; that I am quick to apologize if appropriate.

[Jill]

Perhaps it is harsh, and I must admit that my professional history with the man behind the screen name may have colored my post.

Then take it to the playground afterschool please.

[ChipJohns]

I know this has been stated here but I am going to say it in a different way.

Open and honest communication is always the best practice..

ask your curent client how he feels about it.

Let him know your concerns as well.

Now is the time to get things out in the open and discuss your future with each other. He
will appreciate your earnestness, and if he doesn't, you have learned a lot about him,
and this will help you make your decision.

Leaving everything out in the open is alsways the best policy.

Being able to sleep at night is the answer.

[jehochman]

Being able to sleep at night is the answer.

Which is why we're all up after midnight posting comments.

[ChipJohns]

just another thought...

Sometimes we can make more out of something than we need to.

Is it about ETHICS or is it about PERCIEVED ETHICS..?

There are quite a few situations where some of the BIG Marketing firms have worked
on advertising campaigns for a client say like Coca Cola, and a then the very next
year they were hired by say Pepsi. This has happen quite often in the automotive
industry.

What stipulates when it is UNETHICAL? Ethics are relative but there are principles set
in place by society to a degree...

If there is nothing in your contract that keeps you from doing this, consider it. At first
I was on the side of ETHICS, doing what is right- all the way. I still am, don't get me
wrong, but, the product offered has a lot to do with this (IMO.)

Most of us make the rationale on what to do in this situaion based on our own
business. When you charge $500 an hour (and please this isn't directed to any one
but a general scenario) for consultation and charge $8,000 (or more) for a typical
client, it may be easier to make this decision, after all these clients may be due this
consideration. If you offer a product that offers to help a client for 6 months to 1 year
and charge $500 - $ 800 do the rules change? Yes they do. We may feel that ethics
are ethics are ethics but I am sorry none of us really feel this way.

Case in point: If you buy a car for $85,000 you are going to expect better service
when you take your car in for service then when you take your $12,000 car in to be
serviced. And, rightly so! Well does this principle hold true for what we do? It may. If
I have a client that I offer to do their work for them and that's all they want me to do
is the basics, and that's all they want to pay for. They are getting what they pay for.
Do I owe them this no work for competition?

These are a few things to think about however when we ask the question again.
What do I owe my clients? Is it unethical for me to do this?

There are 8 billion answers to this quiestion. Only ONE right answer is my answer (to me.)
and your answer (to you.)

[St0n3y]

One of the questions we get asked quite a bit is if we are or have ever done work for someone in whatever industry. There can be two possible reasons for this question. One, they want to know if we have experience getting results for their industry. In those cases I will often mention other clients that we are working on. In cases where we have signed confidentiality agreements with clients, I always ask them specifically if this bars us from mentioning them in these situations. Almost always not. So a selling point to the prospect is that we have other clients which they can specifically relate to that are very successful through our services. Two, they want to know if we are currently working for any competitors, in which case they will not want to work with us. So far in my years of doing this, the reason for the question has been the first one over 90% of the time.

But is it logical to expect an SEO to always not take on two clients in the same industry at the same time. As for an unstated expectation, I would say no. If that is the expectation, it absolutely must be stated and a part of the agreed contract.

But would you expect a web designer to not work on two websites in the same industry at the same time? Would you expect a copywriter not to write content for to businesses in the same industry at the same time? Does Staples have an obligation not to provide office supplies to two competing businesses? Is a local production company expected not to create commercials for two local auto dealerships, or should the network be obligated not to air commercials for Coke or Pepsi on the same day?

IN all of those cases, it will be specifically what the contract states. Now, I do have clients that have made it known one way or the other that they would not appreciate us working for their competition as well. While the contract does not preclude me from doing so, because these clients have made their wishes known, I would seek their approval first. Of course, if they say no but the new prospect is willing to pay me more, then I have a decision. I can take on the new client and possible lose the first client, or I can tell the new client no and keep the first. That's a business decision, not an ethical one.

I would like to add, that if #1 rankings were the end goal for optimization, then working for multiple companies targeting the same keywords would be unethical IMO, because there is only one #1 spot. But anybody who understands the industry well enough knows that the #1 spot (though desired by the client) may not actually be the most lucrative position for their business. The goal is conversions and ROI. Rankings are merely a means to that end.

[Jill]

One, they want to know if we have experience getting results for their industry.

Yep, that's very true. I get that a lot too and I have to explain that SEO translates to all industries pretty much the same.

But is it logical to expect an SEO to always not take on two clients in the same industry at the same time.

Not necessarily, but if they're competing on the same keyword phrases, then yeah, it kind of is logical to expect that.

But would you expect a web designer to not work on two websites in the same industry at the same time? Would you expect a copywriter not to write content for to businesses in the same industry at the same time? Does Staples have an obligation not to provide office supplies to two competing businesses?

SEO is different from those things though. I really don't think they are a fair comparison.