Adobe Target Review
November 13, 2019
Adobe Target Review
Score 7 out of 10
Overall Satisfaction with Adobe Target
We are leveraging Adobe Target to constantly optimize our website experience for our users. We are in the process of building an optimization focused center of excellence, and while Adobe Target is only one tool in our stack, it is probably the most important one to get us to where we want to be.
- Robust targeting - Not just within the targeting/audience capabilities, but even using the profile script functions for more complex tests or when desired targeting is not "out-of-the-box."
- Integrates extremely well with Adobe Analytics, which is to be expected - Being while both were not initially developed by Adobe, they now own each and has made drastic strides over the last few years to improve that integration through Analytics for Target (A4T).
- Form-based editor has a bit of a learning curve, but very intuitive once you become familiar with it.
- This is something a lot of testing tools struggle with, but I think the WYSIWYG ("What you see is what you get") editor - or Visual Experience Composer (VEC) in Adobe terminology - could definitely use some work. It's a struggle to execute many tests beyond simple copy, color, placement changes, and even the features that do exist are often clunky if not altogether broken.
- The interface itself can be a bit counterintuitive in certain parts. If you are familiar with other tools, it's likely middle of the road in this respect; think much easier to understand than Monetate for instance, but a far cry from the simplicity of an Optimizely.
- It can be a bit buggy from time to time. The worst example is the frequency at which the tool will fail to save due to an error, but not inform you of this until you try to save, at which point your only option is to log out, log back in, and make all of your updates once again. It can become an extreme pain point at times, and I personally have just gotten into the habit of saving every couple of minutes to avoid a massive loss of productivity.
- 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.
In my personal opinion, Optimizely is a clear choice here while Google Optimize is for the low-budget minded decision-makers and Evergage for the COE more geared toward personalization; however, in our case we were already locked into using Target prior to my arrival. I don't want to say it's all bad - just, in my opinion, lacks in comparison to Optimizely, especially in the customer service you receive from them vs. Adobe (night and day in my experience).
Adobe rarely responds before the 3rd or 4th time you attempt to get up with them, and when they do there are many delays, transfers, that typically lead to us solving the issue ourselves in the meantime before they can.
Do you think Adobe Target delivers good value for the price?
Are you happy with Adobe Target's feature set?
Did Adobe Target live up to sales and marketing promises?
I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process
Did implementation of Adobe Target go as expected?
Would you buy Adobe Target again?
Adobe Target is best suited if you have or desire to have the rest of the Adobe stack (Adobe Launch, Adobe Analytics, Adobe AAM, etc.), although analytics itself can be relatively easily integrated with just about any major testing tool. If your testing program is more advanced, and you'd like to get into heavy personalization, I'd say Target has some features that could definitely be beneficial (e.g. Auto Target, Auto Allocation), but another tool like Evergage or Dynamic Yield is probably a better bet.