I read a very thoughtful post from Stephan Spencer's Scatterings that raises an incredibly important point and suggests even more insights. The money quote:

The problem I have with conversion optimization services [all company names deleted] is less that they could be misconstrued as spam, but rather the fact that they don’t take the potential SEO impact into account. So, for example, a conversion optimization test of the home page might show a clear winner as far as the the best converting variation. However...

when that variation is then implemented as the new permanent home page, the rankings and search traffic may tank. The likelihood for unforseen consequences is great because [they] do not understand SEO deeply at all.

I can only speak for my company, but we have only the deepest respect for SEO specialists and firmly believe that any company that is not investing in SEO should strongly examine their commitment to online marketing. It is not an elective.

Offermatica was the pioneer in using Web2.0 techniques for optimization starting in 2003, and the primary reason for our choice of approach is that we were committed to "do no harm" to SEO.

But Stephan has opened an interesting discussion, so lets see what we can find.

Let's assume that SEO is valuable, and I know that optimizing the experience to benefit the visitor is critical. What now?

Here are a few things to think about:
1. Offermatica is not touching four of the 5 most important SEO elements
1. inbound links
2. title tags
3. description tags
4. URL
We only alter content on the page and links off the page.

2. A Web2.0 approach gives you a big range to learn before you "commit" the change to the default content. BTW, we have spoken with Google on a number of occasions and they have confirmed our approach. If you find a manifestly better version, you should look to understand why. Is it the product? The offer? Simplicity? Copy?

3. Allowing your home page to calcify because you are terrified to make changes will kill you. Even Google has changed elements on their home page and it is far more likely that your business (and mine) is not like Google than that it is. For a publisher, changes are the difference between engagement and dismissal. For a retailer, change may be the only constant.

4. Some of your "home pages" are actually product pages, articles, or reviews that are essential to optimize for natural search. Showing up high on personal finance words is very valuable. But testing layout, product shots, navigation, and other elements can have massive impacts on revenue with minimal impact on search ranking.

5. In many, many cases, optimization is an ongoing process, not a search for a "perfect page".

Think of optimization as buying a very low-cost option. You gain information at a shockingly low cost, and you are then in a better position to make a decision that could have very positive return.

The basic advice I would offer to companies that are testing pages that are highly tuned for SEO is this: Understand what helps your visitor using optimization, then consult with your SEO team or specialist to understand the impact and potential. If you are using testing correctly, you should be gaining insights that can be shaped by expert SEO to maximize benefit both for your listing and for your visitor.

It’s important to keep the end goal in mind – marketers should be trying to find the optimal mix of programs and initiatives to: 1) maximize profit and 2) improve brand perception among their target market to increase sales. Some combination of SEO best practices and site optimization is likely necessary to meet marketing objectives.

This post originally appeared in Matthew Roche's Landing Page Optimization blog, The Site Is Dead.