Adobe Target vs. OpenText Optimost

We recommend this application because it allows us to segment and track the traffic of our domain under an analysis of their behavior, ranging from counting the number of clicks they make on a single element to the most complete action within our page in real time.

Incentivized

The ease of implementation combined with the managed services result in a tool that virtually anyone can use - implementation is less than 10 lines of code added to the relevant pages of the website (we simply added it to our master page template to have it available on any page) and from there the customer can be as involved or not involved as they wish. At BSI we are very hands on with the testing programme - usually developing and designing the tests ourselves and having HP build them, but if we wanted to HP to develop, design and build and limit our role to QA and review that is an option.

• Because the software is established there is lots of online help available and most of the bugs have been worked out
• Adobe has a vast supply of resources if your pockets are deep enough.
• The dashboard is easy to follow and is getting more user-friendly. You no longer have to be an HTML wizard to implement changes.

Incentivized

• Because it is a managed service the need for intervention by our internal IT group was removed. This allowed us to control the pace of the testing programme without being influenced by IT resource allocation
• The client and technical account managers are very good at suggesting tests or potential improvements
• HP regularly holds custom forums which are always informative and provide an opportunity to learn from and network with peers and industry leaders

• There should be some more clarity around what makes a test significant. While this can be decided by the client themselves, some direction from the tool would be helpful.
• Also, if there was an easier way to organize campaigns and search for them it would be helpful. Right now there is just a long list of campaigns and you have to rely on search to find a specific campaign. What if you don't know the name of the test?

• The dashboard interface is difficult to navigate, but I understand that they are currently developing/testing a new much more user friendly interface
• The cost can be a barrier for some organisations, but for us it is worth it. Also they are in the process of releasing a less expensive self authoring testing tool.

Once you get started with your testing program, you realize that it is necessary to continue. You must keep optimizing in order to remain a vital competitor in today's marketing world. Even if you're not using Test & Target or any other user experience testing software, you ought to be performing comparison tests on your own, simply by routing your audience to different experiences and quantifying the aggregate of the results.

We have not only renewed our subscription three years running, but we have added the self authoring tool and are looking to expand the subscription so that we can take advantage of the managed services on a global level.

The recent UI update is a complete mess. It is difficult to navigate and find features that previously existed. The reactiveness of the page depending on window size is also ridiculous and it is absurd that depending on how large your window is, entire columns of functions will disappear with no indication that they are missing. The usability of the tool has fallen off a cliff.

Incentivized

i don't think we use the full functionalities of the tool, but to use the full functions, it's almost impossible (Too hard)

The bottleneck is never the software program

On several occasions, we have had the need to ask for help from the Adobe Target support team, and I must say that they have provided us with an excellent experience, as they take care of solving the problems quickly and with high precision

Incentivized

The instructor that came to train us was awesome and this training was very useful. I would recommend it for anyone who is going to be using this software. I only mark it lower because it is an added expense to an already expensive product, and a lot of the training covered the "Target" portion of the software (which again, we didn't use)

The training was very easy to understand, however it would have been more useful to my development team than me. It was also primarily over-the-phone, which is never as easy to follow as in-person. We ended up scheduling and paying for an in-person training session to supplement the online/phone training because it wasn't helpful enough.

Implement using a global mBox on the page so you can change any and everything over the traditional method. Traditional method is good if you do not have technical web dev resources, do not know Javascript/jQuery, or you have money to blow on mBox calls. Global deployment reduces mBox calls and allows you to touch many parts of the page easily. A lot more customizable

For us, the decision was very straightforward. We chose to invest in the Adobe stack and utilize tools that are developed to integrate together and complement each other. Ex: Adobe Target 'A4T' integration within Adobe Analytics. Optimizely appears to be a great tool, but for us aligning with the Adobe suite, ensuring that future product enhancements and tools would work well together was a very important key factor in our decision

Incentivized

We evaluated Optimost again Adobe's similar offering (Target). The big difference between the two and the reason why BSI choose Autonomy was the managed service aspect. The idea that once the code was deployed on the site IT no longer had to be involved gave my team full ownership of the testing programme. With the Adobe product, the involvement of the internal IT group would have been required to launch each test - and this would have decreased the number of tests we could run each month. Back in the day I also used offermatica/omniture and this too required IT involvement.

• This is something we've been working to improve on, as far as how we're calculating and tracking this, but Target has had a substantial ROI on our business.
• I will say specific to our efforts, we could have probably done similar work if not the same work using a different testing tool (Optimizely for example), but Target has been good for us.

Incentivized

• Use HP Optimost was the primary driver behind a 40% increase in UK classroom training courses booked online read more details here: http://www.autonomy.com/work/news/details/hsx6767d
• HP Optimost testing led to a 9% increase in sales by improving the BSI Shop's checkout funnel in 2012
• HP Optimost is integral to the success of BSI's continuous improvement testing programme