43 replies to this topic

[Hyperformance]

Quote Pole Position;

"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."

Is this not an ethical business decision?

This is my take on the question. With either answer, haven't you made an ethical decision or not? I think you have.

My 2 cents.

[St0n3y]

Is this not an ethical business decision?

Not really. I mean, it is if you are breaching a contract to do it. But if the contract has expired or is month to month and you simply inform your client that you will no longer be doing business with him, it really does not matter what the reasons are, that's your decision to make.

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

I would argue that if that was the expectation then its the clients duty to make sure this gets in the contract. Don't get me wrong here, I'm not using the "contract" as an excuse to deceive the client in any way. I'm just using my own experiences where my clients don't seem to have that expectation, and those that do make it significantly clear.

[GBRD]

Then take it to the playground afterschool please.

Agreed, but I think that my basic point still stands on its own merit:

The types of practices (such as proposed by Pole Position Web) can and do develop into cautionary tales which reflect poorly upon the industry as a whole.

[St0n3y]

The types of practices (such as proposed by Pole Position Web) can and do develop into cautionary tales which reflect poorly upon the industry as a whole.

I'm secure in our business ethics and the positive nature in which Pole Position reflects within the industry.

[ChipJohns]

Ethics is the application of morals.

Morals is the capability of understanding Right from Wrong.

This forum post has described the situation perfectly.

It has been long established that everyone has their own opinion of what is
right and wrong. That is why there became a need for the CONTRACT.

If everyone had the same sense of Right and Wrong, everyone would have the
same expectations, and, other than misconduct, there would be no need for
contracts to keep expectations in order.

However, everyone does not have the same set of principles due to many factors,
so there is a need to stipulate things and this is why the contratct is so important..

Ethice can be argued until we are all BLUE IN THE FACE. Even by definition, ethics are
subjective, a study of the Bible even proves this, and no matter how strongly I feel
about an issue, there is no way that I am going to get everyone else to agree with
me on every matter.

Why can't I accept that? Mostly, it is out of a self-righteous attitude. Once I get to the
point that I can be comfortable with the way others feel, and understand that they
have reasons for the expectaions and morals (ethical principles) that they have, and
the right to express these principles, and that I can appreciate how another feels, can
I begin to set out a set of guidlines that we will both be comfortable with.

Once I break through my own prejudice about how others feel on ethical issues, only
then can I begin to develop the rules that we are going to work by that will keep both
you and me satisfied.

Definitions of Right and Wrong are not the real isue. Expecting YOU to abide by MY
principles is quite naive and will only lead to problems.

This no two situations are the same. An understanding will need to be met.

In direct realtion with this issue here is the true bottom line.

1) A certain percentage of your clients are going to be ok with it.
2) A certain percentage are going to be dead set againt it.
4) A certain percentage are going to be somewhere in the middle.
5) A certain percentage are going to be indifferent.

It doesn't matter how YOU feel, It doesn't mater how I feel. What matters is that we
communicate with each client so that we both understand each other.

And that is Business Ethics 101...

[St0n3y]

1) A certain percentage of your clients are going to be ok with it.
2) A certain percentage are going to be dead set againt it.
4) A certain percentage are going to be somewhere in the middle.
5) A certain percentage are going to be indifferent.

I agree fully. I think the ultimate issue on this topic is the same issue as to whether black hat SEO is ethical or not: Deception. If it is the intent of any practice to deceive the client or potential client then that itself makes the action unethical. IMO, it doesn't matter if its written in the contract or not (which is why I'm opposed to most SEO guarantees because they carry enough small print to make it void from day one). If I try to hide the fact that I would take on two clients in the same industry then that also is deception. But I don't hide it, not here in public, not from my clients and not from potential clients.

[Hyperformance]

Hi Chip -

While I do agree with you in most of your observations, there still remains the decision of what 'any company' would do in this situation?

I recognize that these are the potential "reactions" that one can receive from any number of prospects, and that "I" will also have feelings one way or the other as well.

I still feel (and maybe it's because I am in the Industry) that there is potential danger in taking on two clients in the same Industry for (my) website marketing and seo services. There IS a conflict (IMO). And yes, it does vary by circumstance and facts.

Morally and Ethically, you are making a decision that affects 3 parties (we'll say they are 2 very similar businesses). Their keyword phrases are identical (for all practical purposes) and they are also local to each other in the marketplace as well.

Now, let's say I disclose to both parties (a must, IMO) - and they will take it one way or another as Chip covered... let's say initially anyway - that neither feels one way or the other...

Do I leave the "actual" ranking results to be defined by their individual content and the engines? This is assuming I have done an equally outstanding job on both sites, of course.

Personally? And this may be where the difference comes in - I or my company is in control (at this time) of what will be...with this decision, given the fact that neither prospect knows enough about what I do to make an argument on equal treatment. However, do not think for one minute that client #1 does not want to know where client #2 Ranks for the same phrase...this happens. And they DO check.

I do not believe and have proven it to myself, that "I" cannot do justice for both firms, there will be conflicts, there will be many on-going discussions with both firms once they know you are working for both (because you DID disclose this fact) - and leaving it up to the engines and the the client's individual content would make their ranking difference... ideally (in theory) this could work.

Let's remember these are people, they have expectations (that you hopefully set correctly) and it is very easy for either client to now feel that they are NOT getting your best work, because someone's website will be a clear winner - and that does leave a loser - both your chosen clients. Now I can also conceive there could be two winners, based on either side's expectations and the results they do get.

I like to win, in this example there would be a "loser" (IMO) - I know it is a strong word, but client number Two will always know where client number One ranks and vice-versa. And you have made yourself responsible for any and all scenario's to come, simply by decided you could do both without any detiment to any of the parties (including yourself).

I believe there is enough work and other professionals to not have to take on this burden, as I have known it to be. I will not however, stand here and say it cannot be done, but I would like to see the actual results of someone who did "this example" successfully.

Every case is different, and I know there are firms who state they specialize in very niche areas and actually expect overlap, but I do not understand how they offer the same promises, or guarantees to each client. Like "We only offer our services to businesses in the legal end of property management in Washington..." I do not understand how they retain more than 3 clients, given the fact that they all know that the same company is doing their SEO. Website Marketing without the seo may be a little different, but straight seo? I believe it creates the conflict.

- Scott

[Randy]

While I don't necessarily disagree with the general thrust of your comments, that's just not the way it works in the real world Scott.

You can't control what other people in the same industry do. To do so is a waste of time and effort.

You can't control what other "SEO's" do any more than GM dealers can control what Ford or Chrysler or Toyota or Honda dealers do. At a certain point you just need to let it all go, do your own thing and tell people who bring things to your attention that what others do is not what you do.

If morals or ethics could ruin and entire industry, surely car salesmen would have been one of the first to go.

[ChipJohns]

I think there is also a perception about doing your best for your "clients."

Is the goal to be NUMBER ONE? It this is the case, we can't win with two clients in
conflict.

Is this really the case however? Can I help a client increase conversions 30 Fold and
be successful? Can I Help another client and be successful? It's not about being
number one. We have learned that the real goal is increased conversinos If I have a
client that I have gotten to the first page and he is doing great, will having another
client on the first page, and I help him increase his conversions by 40 fold going to
hurt the first client. Maybe. Maybe not.

It's not necessarily a WIN/LOSE thing. If that is the case then If your client has the
number one position and there is no way that I am going to get the number one
position, I am doing an injustice by taking on a client that I know is not committed to
getting a first position and never will. But this isn't how it works, is it?

However, this isn't the case. I can help my client to increase his profits. And, I can
help another clilent in the industry increase profits. There are sites that show up on
page TWO, and are making more money than they have before because of this... and
they are happy because they also have better conversion rates because a good seo
has helped them to get it.

When we are talk about optimization there are going to be limits at times, and mot of
the time the limits come from the site owner and not the seo doing the work
(discounting an incompetent seo.)

It it was your business, would you rather have an seo that could get you above
everybody else and make it to NUMBER ONE! Or, would you rather have an seo that
could help you double, triple, your profits (or even more,) by proper seo?

In seo, one person doesn't win and the rest lose, if your goals are where they should
be. It's about making more money.


Will it bother you? It may. I can't make that decision for you. And, you can't make it
for me. There is a bottom line to this conundrum- if I help 2 companies make more
money, you can't say with a blanket statement that I am doing our industry an
injustice..

One seo can effectively, ethically, and confidently help 2 clients in the same industry.

(As I stated in my previous post, other factors MUSt be looked at, but, the above statement holds true)

[Hyperformance]

Thanks Chip - but I agreed - I did not say I could not "help" them, and I thought I made the example as clear as I could with their desires.

Randy - I know I can't change what others do - I am expressing not only how I see it, but how I have experienced it. I was just sharing to show some of the "potential" conflicts of a very specific scenario. I'm just using my freedom of expression, not trying to tell anyone what to do - -they have free will too, and each of us only has to answer to ourselves and our clients. I can disagree, can't I?

and Chip - I agree to disagree with your take...

"It it was your business, would you rather have an seo that could get you above everybody else and make it to NUMBER ONE! Or, would you rather have an seo that could help you double, triple, your profits (or even more,) by proper seo?

In seo, one person doesn't win and the rest lose, if your goals are where they should be. It's about making more money."

(my) Answer to part one - Both are the goals - proper seo intact.

(my) Answer to part two - Mine and my client goals are the priority, it is not about making more money to Hyperformance Media - it is about doing the best job we can and winning for our clients. With my exact example - we would decline. We are all responsible for our reputations in what we do and what we say.

Yes, "conversions are king" - when you sell something. However, I do not apply that to my prospects... certainly NOT with the priority being more money for me.

I never meant to imply that anyone would do our Industry an injustice by taking this challenge, just a client or two or four or whatever number you pick in the same field with the same phrases and even the same geographic cities. Someone is not getting the best deal! Oh, and are they charged the same? Since you can do just as good for both? And "what if" you could not obtain similar results to their competitor - you do not think you would be hearing about it? Remember, their goals were the same (phrases, positioning, localization, payments, etc.) Results will not be the same "in Rankings" because they cannot be.

Chip - "One seo can effectively, ethically, and confidently help 2 clients in the same industry.

I agree completely! We have helped "more than one restaurant" but the similarities ended there, and were not that of this example.

(Chip - great paramount blog entry!)

(Randy - I didn't mean it would ruin our indutry - surely we are stronger than that)


- SS

Edited by Hyperformance, 22 March 2006 - 03:57 AM.

[type0]

Hello.

This has been a great discussion. Thanks.

UPDATE: I still haven't heard from my prospect. They said they were still shopping around. I may try again later...we'll see. I informed my current client and she's okay with the situation, one way or another (That's what the prospect said too).

My current client and I are actually doing some tweaking right now. I think by mentioning that a competitor was looking to optimize their site - from us - it kickstarted them into doing some optimizing for themselves (of course they hired me).

A conflict of interest, in the end, turned out to be a good thing. I like that.

Anyhoo...

We also have some older threads on this type of dilemma, which you may be interested in reading.  Unfortunately, I can't seem to find them at the moment!

Jill, I found another thread discussing a similar issue.

Cheers.

P.S. Another client today told me she's "not so concerned about being the #1 site".

[Hyperformance]

- Great point Michael -

Being number one does not ensure success.
(again, depending on the phrase and popularity, etc.)

Being successful is accomplishing or exceeding all your client expectations.
(and that generally covers a lot of different ground - in my experience)

- Good for you Type0 - I am happy to hear you are growing with success!

[Appropriator]

DON'T BUILD COMPETING WEBSITES

I had the same dilemma of being requested to build competing websites in the same geographical area for vacation cabin rentals. All of those request came from my existing clients who had their cabin rentals listed on my website. The success of their rental businesses skyrocketed after I started my site in 1997. Most cabin rental owners in and around Luray, Virginia, began to subscribe to my service when word of mouth spread how beneficial it was to be listed here. Luray is similar to Gatlinburg, Tennesse when it comes to being a tourist destination spot for cabin rentals. Many of those clients began buying up more rental properties and in that process, came to me to build a website for their expanding ventures.

When the second owner approached me I informed him that I already had a local client but I would build his site only if he allowed me to choice the keywords and phrases so as not to conflict with my first client. This seemed to satisfy everyone concerned. Being one of the pioneers in SEO, and pretty good at it, I got both sites ranked high on the 1st page of the SERPs for their specific keywords.

This scenario repeated itself 3 more times, at which point, there were no more viable, non-competing search terms. Additionally, I really was now in a conflict of interest situation, particularly in light of the fact that I was creating websites that competed with my own!! What the hell had I been thinking? Or more to the point, not thinking

The real clincher? Three of those clients took their websites elsewhere, even though they were all doing exceptionally well in the search engines. My brutally enlightened opinion is DON'T BUILD COMPETING WEBSITES. Regardless of how well you maintain separation and how well you get each website to perform, the mere possibility of a conflict of interest, will be damaging.

There was a silver lining, however ironic. They all still have their individual cabins listed with me.

Regards,
Karl L. Baldwin

Edited by Jill, 26 March 2006 - 10:36 PM.

[RisaBB]

Hi, I was going to refer you to my post from last October.

Just to sum it up. After working for my client for 4 years, I really thought he was giving me the boot (especially since I got a call from the new firm asking for help in the transition). Nothing ever came of it, though.

Then I got a call from my client's competitor requesting a proposal for my services. After posting this dilemna here, I told my client about this situation and he told me that if I take on this new job, I'll be history.

Well, to make a long story short, he just signed my contract 1 month ago to re-design his website and do SEO and it's the biggest contract of my career, and he's a pretty well-known guy around here, so it's all good and I played my cards right.

I guess if your existing client is OK with it, then that's the most important thing.

Risa