Through over 20 years of experience in varying SEO roles, I’ve witnessed a recurring theme: the root of SEO performance issues often stems from organizational factors, not technical glitches.
Many times, problems manifest through decision rights, lack of ownership, and insufficient processes. These often precede noticeable traffic dips, obfuscating the real issues beneath the surface.
The technical fixes may expose symptoms but rarely uncover why progress has stalled.
No governance
The real limitations become apparent much earlier, rooted in reporting structures and decision-making authority. When SEO stumbles, governance—or lack thereof—is often to blame.
I discovered that when ownership of CMS templates was unclear or when cross-departmental priorities conflicted, SEO suffered. It wasn’t until I understood governance that the underlying issues became clear.
Only two companies in my career had the right conditions, with clear ownership and structured release pathways. Leaders recognized the importance of deliberately managing visibility, rather than reacting post-traffic drops.
Elsewhere, metadata and schema often didn’t limit performance. Organizational behavior did.
Beware of drift
Quarterly sales pressures often lead to sites making numerous small, seemingly innocuous changes that accumulate over time. These can range from navigation alterations by a new UX hire to content wording tweaks.
Individually, these shifts may not seem detrimental; however, collectively, they contribute to a decline in performance. This is something industry commentary often glosses over—while tangible technical fixes are more teachable, they aren’t where SEO outcomes are typically determined.
SEO loses power when it lives in the wrong place
I’ve observed how such drift can negatively impact rankings, with SEO unjustly taking the fall. Often, the actual cause was a lack of governance, which became apparent when outside agencies confirmed conclusions I had already reached.
The placement of SEO within an organization’s structure profoundly influences whether potential issues are identified early or only discovered post-launch. It affects whether changes are implemented promptly or languish for months.
SEO embedded under marketing, product, or IT each faces a unique set of challenges, restricting its effectiveness when placed too low on the organizational hierarchy.
Changes by engineering, product, or marketing often ship without SEO input, leading to misalignments that can reduce the efficacy of SEO strategies.
Positioning the SEO function
When SEO lacks proper placement within the organizational framework, it devolves into a reactive, cleanup role. The best results come when SEO is sufficiently integrated to influence early decision-making processes.
Organizations where SEO achieved significant success had the SEO function near leadership, ensuring visibility into upcoming changes and the ability to coordinate across departments.
The most favorable outcomes arose in environments where SEO acted as an integrated part of the infrastructure, reinforcing its importance as a contributor to long-term visibility and consistency.
Inspired by this post on Search Engine Land.
Leave a Reply