The senior editor of Econsultancy contacted me yesterday asking me to provide my thoughts on the use of security logos in the checkout process and on a survey conducted by a large firm in the US who tried gain the publics opinion on security logos in the checkout.
The is full of flaws, and I provide proof as to why in the . The editor of Econsultancy (Graham Charlton) published his article today and has quoted me throughout.
Have a look at Graham's article here.
Most of my comments Graham used are about my views on the flaws behind the study, and how to properly test the hypothesis of security logos influencing conversion in the checkout process.
Below I have added my views on the importance of security logos.
Are Security Logos important?
The brand of the security logo makes no difference (Norton vs McAffe vs Comodo), however the use of a logo definitely helps, but it is one piece of a huge puzzle.
It's important to understand consumer's decision to purchase on a site is greatly influenced by the they have with the retailer.
, the greatest impact to be made is making changes to the site, not the shopping cart.
If the site delivers a fantastic experience to the consumer (usability, content, design, fast loading etc.....) the opportunity to grow conversion is limitless.
A retailer can do a considerable amount of work on the shopping cart, and may only lift conversion by 1% or 2%. This includes the strategic placement of security badges in the checkout.
If a consumer has a great experience leading up to the shopping cart, they will purchase even if the checkout experience is clunky.
Furthermore, making changes to the cart and checkout process is the one part of a retailer's website that is very inflexible because it is core code.
In today's world where consumer expectation grows by the day conversion is influenced more by improving the experience before the cart and checkout.
This article was as tagged as Best Practice