According to the MarketingSherpa 2012 Lead Generation Benchmark Report, capturing a higher quantity of qualified leads is of one of the most important goals in the minds of marketers. So how can we capture more leads across our Web forms without significantly reducing the quality of those leads? In our next clinic, the MECLABS research team will walk you through a scientifically validated case study in which one company radically redesigned its Web form without significantly reducing form fields. The marketers' approach generated a 226% higher rate of lead capture. You’ll learn: • The exact changes the company made to its form with before and after versions • How those changes affected conversion on the page • Examples and case studies on Web form optimization from our library • How to apply everything you learn to your own pages through live optimization

1. Educational funding provided by:
Optimizing Web Forms
How one company generated 226% more leads from a
complex Web form (without significantly reducing fields)

2. Educational funding provided by:
We’re sharing on Twitter!
#WebClinic

3. Educational funding provided by:
Today’s speakers
Ben Huppertz
Senior Research Manager
MECLABS
Austin McCraw
Director
Content Production
MECLABS
Ben Filip
Senior Manager
Data Sciences
MECLABS

4. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Background
Background: A large news syndication company.
Goal: To increase the overall number of leads on a “request more information” form.
Research Question: Which form design will result in the highest number of new
member sign-ups?
Test Design: A/B split test
Experiment ID: TP1636
Record Location: MECLABS Research Library
Research Partner: (Protected)

5. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Control
• The control features 11
form fields (10 required).
• The page has side
navigation and three
additional calls-to-action
at the end of the page.

6. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Treatment A
• Treatment A adds four more
form fields for a total of 15
fields (nine required).
• The treatment eliminates
navigation and additional
CTAs at the bottom of the
page.

7. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Treatment B
• Treatment B reduces form
fields by one for a total of
10 fields (all required).
• The treatment eliminates
navigation and additional
CTAs at the bottom of the
page.

8. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Side by side
Treatment BTreatment A
109%
In Lead Rate
87%
In Lead Rate
What You Need to Understand: By eliminating the navigation elements and additional CTAs on the page,
both treatments were able to double the performance of the control.!
Control

9. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Side by side
Treatment BTreatment A
109%
In Lead Rate
87%
In Lead Rate
What You Need to Understand: By eliminating the navigation elements and additional CTAs on the page,
both treatments were able to double the performance of the control.!
Control
While both treatments were an astonishing success,
when we dove deeper into the metrics of the test, we
found two connected, yet very puzzling, anomalies.

10. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Anomalies
Treatment BTreatment AControl
109%
In Lead Rate
87%
In Lead Rate
What You Need to Understand: By eliminating the navigation elements and additional CTAs on the page,
both treatments were able to double the performance of the control.!

11. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Anomalies
Treatment BTreatment A
Anomaly #1: While Treatment A
had six optional form fields,
every prospect that landed on
the page filled in every field –
without exception.
Anomaly #2: Even though both
treatments outperformed the
control, there was no
statistically significant
difference when we compared
just Treatment A to Treatment
B.
1
2
3
4
5
6
No DifferenceIn Marketing Leads

12. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Anomalies
Treatment BTreatment A
Anomaly #1: While Treatment A
had six optional form fields,
every prospect that landed on
the page filled in every field –
without exception.
Anomaly #2: Even though both
treatments outperformed the
control, there was no
statistically significant
difference when we compared
just Treatment A to Treatment
B.

13. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Anomalies
Treatment A
• In other words, the same
relative percentage of
customers were
completing both forms.
• But because Treatment A
had five more fields than
Treatment B, the company
was receiving a much
higher-quality lead.

14. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Anomalies
Treatment A
Why?
• In other words, the same
relative percentage of
customers were
completing both forms.
• But because Treatment A
had five more fields than
Treatment B, the company
was receiving a much
higher-quality lead.

15. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Anomalies
Treatment A
Why did everyone who saw this form fill
out every field – even the optional ones?
Why did the higher number of fields
(more friction) not affect conversion rate?

16. Educational funding provided by:
Let’s take a closer look at Treatment A.

17. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Anomalies
Treatment A
Treatment A (Form)

18. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Hypothesis
Treatment A (Form)
• When we considered the
objective of the page, our
analysts hypothesized that by
helping the customer through
the form, we could set the
expectation for a productive in-
person conversation.

19. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Discovery
Treatment A (Form)
Conversational Elements in the Form:
With whom will we be speaking?
(We collect your general information so we
know with whom we will be speaking and
how best to reach you.)
Where are you located?
(We collect information about your
location in order to route you to the
appropriate [company] representative.)
What information are you interested in
discussing?
(In order to make our conversation as
productive as possible, we would like to
know a couple of pieces of relevant
information.)

20. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Discovery
Treatment A (Form)
• Treatment A also added a
testimonial near the form to
increase credibility and
reduce any anxiety that
arose in the form.

21. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Value force vs. cost force
Treatment BTreatment AControl
Cost ForceValue Force Cost ForceValue Force Cost ForceValue Force

22. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Value force vs. cost force
Treatment BTreatment AControl
Cost ForceValue Force Cost ForceValue Force Cost ForceValue Force

23. Educational funding provided by:
Experiment: Value force vs. cost force
Treatment BTreatment AControl
Cost ForceValue Force Cost ForceValue Force Cost ForceValue Force
What you need to understand: By guiding the visitor
through the form (increasing the process-level value
proposition), we were able to counterbalance the
additional friction in the form – capturing higher-
quality leads without sacrificing quantity.
!

24. Educational funding provided by:
Treatment A
Experiment: Interpretation
226%
In Lead Rate
• We took the discovery
we made in the
“request more
information” form, and
were able to export it to
another part of the site.
• With only one testing
cycle, we were able to
achieve a 226% lift in
lead rate.
Primary
Membership Form

25. Educational funding provided by:
What we discovered
FKey Principles
1. First, we must understand that every action a customer is asked to take (even
completing a form field) creates a psychological question in the mind of the
customer: Is this really worth it?
2. Thus, optimizing Web forms transcends simply reducing the number fields.
We must ensure the right amount of value for the right amount of cost.
Sometimes, the right “ask” at the right time can actually imply value.
3. Finally, we must see through our customers’ eyes. Our prospects personify our
forms. They give it a tone, a voice, a personality. It is more than a transaction;
it is a conversation – a conversation that the marketer must guide.

26. Educational funding provided by:
7 questions to ask about your Web forms
 Does my form gather the information my company needs?
 Can I reduce the number of required fields?
 Should I increase the number of required fields for a higher-quality lead?
 Can I group similar form fields and reduce the perceived length of my form?
 Is there a justification (direct or implied) for why each field is presented?
 How can I increase the perceived value of every field in my form?
 Does the form logically guide the visitor through the process of filling it out?

27. Educational funding provided by:
Help with Web form data validation
The email address you entered is invalid. Please enter a valid
email address.
First Name Bob
Last Name Smith
Email Bob.smith@typo
Phone 904-555-1212
Address Line 1 123 Anywhere
Address Line 2 Suite 32
City Anytown
State NY
Postal Code 01101
Learn how data validation can increase your form conversion by 10% - 30%
With data validation, you can:
• Catch invalid information at the point
of acquisition
• Prompt users to correct their
information in real time
Mecla.bs/StrikeIron

28. Educational funding provided by:
Live Optimization: AAA East Central
http://bit.ly/SYibHm

29. Educational funding provided by:
Live Optimization: SEI
http://bit.ly/1jnYU7f

30. Educational funding provided by:
Live Optimization: AB Moving
http://bit.ly/1oovA8r

31. Educational funding provided by:
Live Optimization: Resolution Research
http://bit.ly/1uZmfpi

32. Educational funding provided by:
Live Optimization: Dangerous Goods
http://bit.ly/1oLtRHH

33. Educational funding provided by:
Live Optimization: LegalHelpRightNow.org
http://bit.ly/RMeTpY

34. Educational funding provided by:
Next Clinic: Background
Background: A mid-sized furniture company selling mattresses.
Goal: To increase the overall number of mattress purchases.
Research Question: Which credibility approach will produce the highest rate of
mattress purchases?
Test Design: A/B variable cluster split test
Experiment ID: TP11009
Record Location: MECLABS Research Library
Research Partner: (Protected)

35. Educational funding provided by:
Next Clinic: Version A

36. Educational funding provided by:
Next Clinic: Version B

37. Educational funding provided by:
Next Clinic: Side by side
Version A Version B

38. Educational funding provided by:
Live May 28th at 4:00 p.m. EDT
• Which marketing approach won
• How “green” marketing can affect your own marketing
• How we can think about green marketing in a way that helps us
tap into the desires of our customers
Join the next live 35-minute Web clinic
to discover:
Next Clinic: Green marketing tested
To join live, register at the link below:
MarketingExperiments.com/GreenMarketing

39. Educational funding provided by:

40. Educational funding provided by:
See how you can conduct research with us
MECLABS conducts rigorous experiments in the new science of optimization. We apply our
discoveries to help leaders optimize the financial performance of their sales and
marketing programs.
Learn more about how you may be a fit for
a MECLABS Research Partnership:
• Select Research Partnership
Opportunities on the post-webinar
survey
• Contact us directly
info@MECLABS.com
1-877-635-0565
x