Construction Digital Census: Scoring Rationale

Construction Digital Census: Scoring Rationale

Explore how our research team carried out their research and testing to uncover the digital maturity of the UK’s top 100 construction companies 2018.

The top 100 construction companies have been chosen for this report based on sales figures in The Construction Index “Top 100 Construction Companies 2018” report.

To measure the digital effectiveness of UK construction companies, we looked at the organisations’ websites. A minority of organisations did not have their own UK focused website. Some organisations have a section within a parent company website or no website at all. A full list of websites tested can be seen below. For further details about the research methodology please see the full rationale or get in touch at info@bekagool.com

Aim

For Kagool to understand the digital maturity of UK construction companies, a wide range of data was captured using a plethora of third-party tools. The data was then reviewed by our team of digital marketing analysts. The data for this report was collated in October 2019 and tested in November 2019, and all information is accurate to the research period.

Our aim was to collate and analyse information on each of the UK’s top 10 construction companies to learn how each performs digitally. By measuring key metrics in 8 core aspects of the organisations’ digital marketing activity, we were able to calculate an overall digital maturity score (%).

The categories measured include:

  • Content
  • Website speed
  • Search marketing
  • Email Marketing
  • Mobile optimisation
  • Social media
  • Video
  • Investors

Each company was given a score for each category. The scores were then aggregated. This is then converted into a percentage to give an overall view of how digitally mature the organisation is.

The key digital marketing aspects included within the scope of this work were:

1. Content

Each organisation was awarded a score out of 12.5 based on what was found clearly on the website. They were given 2.5 points for each of the following:

  • News content – Do they have dedicated news or press release pages where news content/articles are provided?
  • Blog content – Do they have a dedicated blog or insight section  (separate to news)?
  • Anchor links – Are there links in news or blog content to other sections of the website within the main body of the text?
  • Projects – Does the site have a dedicated projects page?
  • About us – Does the site have an about us section telling their story

2. Website Speed

Google’s website speed tool was used to test the mobile website speed of each website on a 4G connection. Each company’s home page was tested twice, and the speeds averaged. Each company started with a score of 12.5 and one point was taken off for every second a site took to load. For example, if a site took 7 seconds to load they would be scored 5.5. Any site which took 12.5 seconds or more to load was given 0 points and their time noted down to provide accurate ranking.

3. Search Marketing

We used SEMrush, a competitive intelligence suite for online marketing, to look at 9 different variables which would affect an organisation’s search marketing.

  • Google UK organic traffic
  • Google UK keywords
  • Organic traffic cost
  • Google UK paid traffic
  • Google UK paid keywords
  • Paid traffic cost
  • Total domain backlinks
  • Referring domains
  • Referring IPs

For each variable we scored the companies that ranked in the top 1st -2nd positions 1 point. The 3rd-4th positioned companies received 0.75 points, the 5th-6th companies scored 0.50 points, the 7th-8th companies scored 0.25 points and the 9th -10th companies scored 0.

The points for each company’s variables were then added up to a possible score of 9. The top company overall was given a score of 3.5 points.

4. Email Marketing

Each organisation was awarded points up to a maximum of 12.5. They were awarded points for following:

  • 6.25 points if there was a newsletter / email sign up or subscription listed clearly on the website
  • 6.25 points if you could customise / customise your subscription (i.e. the types of content you could subscribe for or chose the amount of emails you received).

5. Mobile optimisation

We used Google’s, ‘Mobile-friendly test’ tool to test how easily a visitor can use a web page on a mobile device.  Each website was given a score based on the Google test results:

0 errors = 12.5 points

1 error = 8 points

2 errors = 6 points

3 errors = 4 points

4+ errors = 0 points

6. Social Media

We looked at how each organisation uses 4 social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn). For each social platform an organisation was given 1 point if they used the channel (we used the channels the organisations linked to from their sites).

The top 2 companies with the highest following received 1 point per channel, the next 2 were awarded 0.75 points, the third 2 received 0.50 points, fourth two were awarded 0.25 points and the final two were awarded 0 points. Companies that had 0 followers or had not posted in the last month also received 0 points.

Each company was awarded points up to a maximum of 1 per channel for content frequency. Our research identified the following recommended post frequency. They were awarded points for following:

  • 10 – 15 posts per month = 1 points
  • 6 – 9 posts per month = 0.5 points
  • 1 – 6 posts per month = 0 points

Companies were also awarded 0.5 points for having one verified social media account. Verification confirms to followers that the social platform is an official channel and trustworthy.

There is a maximum of 12.5 points available per company.

7. Video

Organisations were scored on video content, for each variable was scored on:

  • 5 points were awarded if they have a dedicated YouTube channel (Where possible this was by using a link form the organisations website)
  • The number of subscribers they had was counted. The list was split with the top 5 channels who had the most subscribers getting 2.5 points and the least 5 getting 0 points.
  • How many videos a month they posted. The list was split with the top 5 channels who had the most video content getting 2.5 points and the least 5 getting 0 points.
  • Using YouTube’s own search engine, the organisations was searched. 2.5 points were awarded if the organisations own content was first. 1 point if branded content shared by another user was top and 0 if the content was unrelated to the organisation.

A maximum of 12.5 points was available for Video.

8. Investors

Organisations were scored:

  • 7.5 points were awarded if they have an investors area on the website
  • 2.5 points were awarded if they included their share price
  • 2.5 points were awarded if they offered an annual report

A maximum of 12.5 points was available. Organisations could score full marks (12.5 points) which is a combination of all scoring three criteria’s.

Additional information

Maturity percentages were worked out to three decimal places and then rounded up. This means that while two companies may appear to have the same score their maturity rank may be different.  For example, both companies with a maturity % of 68.125 and 67.5 will show as 68% but one will rank above the other.

The websites tested in this report are gathered from the first result in Google affiliated to the organisation names.  A small number of companies had multiple sites under the same brand. The website chosen to test was the first to appear in the Google search results which was UK facing when searching for the organisation.

We have acted to ensure that the data is as accurate as possible. To ensure that the results were accurate we followed a rigorous and scientific process throughout the study. This included secondary individuals following the same rationale for a selection of organisations to ensure that the same score was reached upon re-testing.

Please note, this is a research piece. Not all of the top 10 Construction organisations have been designed and developed by Kagool. Any imagery taken from the websites and used as part of the report was taken in November 2019.

Two website URL’s were identified for Morgan Sindall: https://www.morgansindall.com/ and https://construction.morgansindall.com/. Following the rationale, we picked the URL who ranked the highest in SERPs. The second URL had more relevance to the report, however, as the construction URL is a subdomain of the first URL, this made it difficult and unfair to test in certain testing tools.

Two website URL’s were identified for Skanska:  https://www.skanska.co.uk/ and https://group.skanska.com/. Following our rationale, we tested the first URL which ranked the highest in SERPs.

List of websites tested:

  1. https://www.balfourbeatty.com/
  2. https://www.kier.co.uk/
  3. https://www.interserve.com/
  4. https://www.gallifordtry.co.uk/
  5. https://www.morgansindall.com/
  6. https://www.amey.co.uk/
  7. https://www.keller.co.uk/
  8. https://www.macegroup.com/
  9. http://www.laingorourke.com/
  10. https://www.skanska.co.uk/