SEO Smackdown: Information Architecture vs. Technical Architecture
Which architecture is more important for online findability?
Since 1995, the costliest search engine optimization (SEO) mistake we encountered is poor information architecture. And when weI tell clients that the core issue with findability is the website's information architecture, our findings are immediately passed to the technical team.
Inevitably, someone on the technical team kindly points out that the content is crawlable, and the architecture is fine. And since we don't know Google's algorithm, we must be wrong.
Result? A whirlwind series of conversations that yielded bruised egos, a poorly architected website with little or no search engine visibility, and frustrated clients.
How did that happen? Where were the disconnections and miscommunication?
Believe it or not, many SEO professionals, developers and other IT professionals do not understand the role of information architecture (IA) in the SEO process. In fact, this group often does not understand the role of IA in the web development process.
These misunderstandings and misconceptions lead to bruised egos and frustrated clients. To get all web professionals on the proverbial same page, let's review some of the differences and sources of confusion.
Understanding Information Architecture
We believe the simplest and clearest definition of information architecture comes from the Information Architecture Institute website. Information architecture is organizing, labeling, and connecting website content to support usability and findability.
4 words you want to hear when you work on an information architecture project:
The determination of a website's information architecture should occur long before a site is coded and programmed.
In fact, if we read or hear the following geek-speak, we are reasonably sure that we are not talking to a qualified information architect:
All of these aforementioned terms are parts of technical architecture, NOT information architecture.
Web professionals constantly confuse information architecture with technical architecture. Because of that, technical architects end up making information architecture decisions…and that is a critical mistake. I believe user-centered design (UCD) and architecture is far more cost- and time-effective than technology-centered design.
There are many ways to organize content including, but not limited to:
Why did an information architect choose to organize and label content on a website via facets or by target audience? Did the information architect iteratively test the organization and content labels with participants who fit the primary personas? That's what information architects do. They do not determine content organization based on crawlability or the flowage of "link juice."
Even though information architecture is not site navigation, IA should guide site navigation. Therefore, here are some site navigation items to know during a website development project:
Notice that in this list, we did not once mention canonicalization, 301 redirects, NOFOLLOW attributes, and so forth.
Even though it might seem as if we are dismissing technical architecture, we are not. Technical considerations are not important for accessibility and the searcher experience. We understand the importance of providing access to content via browsing, searching, and asking. Technical considerations are critical for online findability.
Technical Architecture & Findability
Peter Morville stated in his book, Ambient Findability (2007, Wiley), "You can't use what you can't find."
We agree. Many technical architects agree with Morville…but with blinders on. A perfectly architected and usable website might not be accessible to search engine spiders. Therefore, website owners should implement technical SEO without comprimising the user experience.
As a web developers, we have to make many technology decisions for clients such as:
Even if we don't make final technology decisions, we are often asked to consult about those decisions from the perspective of searchers and search engines. We do not make a technology decision purely based on how a search engine interprets navigation systems and content. We look at the big picture.
First, we want to know what the IA, marketing, and usability teams have determined. Then we make technology decisions. Information architecture should not only guide site navigation. Information architecture should also guide technical architecture.
Duplicate content delivery, for example, can limit direct access to desired content via the commercial web search engines. Duplicate content delivery (often found on sites with user-generated tagging and sites with a faceted classification architecture) can annoy and frustrate users.
So if we or other qualified information architects determine that a website's content is best organized using faceted classification or user-generated tagging? We know that we will need to get a technical architect involved early in the development process to minimize the negative SEO impact.
Here is another example: menus. We read about the pros and cons of using various menu layouts for navigation systems. As an SEOs, we understand why the technical team might want to implement menus:
As information architects and usability professionals, We have to consider the failure rate of different menus (fly-out menus are more error prone than drop-down menus), the paradox of choice, and the technology used to access content. (Please see Jared Spool 's article, 6 Epic Forces Battling Your Mega Menus.)
Information architects don't need to know Google's algorithm or the latest URL workaround to provide labeling and accessibility advice to a technical team. Information architects don't need a degree in computer science. Technology teams dismiss should not information architecture and usability guidance because it "might harm rankings."
In reality, the clear organization and labeling of information cam increase sales, conversions, and search engine visibility. "It's high time to put the 'I' back in IT," said Louis Rosenfeld.
Smackdown: Which Is More Important?
I believe that a successful website architecture is a combination of an effective information architecture and corresponding technical architecture. I do not believe that technical architecture trumps information architecture. I do not believe that information architecture trumps technical architecture. I believe that technical architects and information architects must listen to and support each other.
"Information architecture is concerned with the structure and arrangement of the content and a great deal of it can be done without knowing anything about the implementation," said Dorian Taylor, researcher, consultant and former board member of the Information Architecture Institute. "Technical architecture is concerned with the implementation of the system and a great deal of it can be done without knowing anything about the content."
"In some ways we can say that SEO is about creating structures that are meaningful to machines—in this case, search engines—so that those machines can in turn generate structures that are meaningful to people," Taylor continued.
We need to listen to each other instead of dismissing information architects with, "I think you are more of a UX person than an SEO," as if their contributions to findability is less important than technical implementation. I know plenty of information architects with superb technical skills. They might know more about findability and SEO than you realize.
You can also read our articles from other online publications.
If you have any questions about Omni Marketing Interactive's search engine optimization (SEO), website usability, information architecture (IA), or web design services, please call us at 847-426-4256.