In terms of a few examples of this, what I love about this example is that I think that the creative is horrible, but it still has an amazing impact, so it just shows that it is the real-time timing rather than what the audience sees visually in front of them. I'm pleased to say that the website has been updated since this screenshot was taken, but I just thought I'd keep the old style.

From this, all it is, is an old style, and I call it that because it was one of the first real-time interactions that really became prevalent in terms of websites, is a pop up box that appears - it was trialled at different delays, 15 seconds, 30 seconds and 60 seconds - based upon someone having a signup form with a commitment to spend some money and looking at the different times for that intervention. Obviously, if it's too early, it's a disruption and it's annoying, if it's too late, than they will have already closed down the browser session and moved on to something else. So, what we found, it was actually longer than expected - before we did the trial, we expected the time period would be 15 seconds, it actually ended up being 60 seconds because of the type of provider it is. People wanted to consider the benefits of the product before they got this wait popup. And you can see the results of using this pop up on screen, which just shows using the right timing makes a real difference. What we found was that if we trialled with a short time period, conversions were actually reduced.

Now I call this one sensitivity, because pop ups aren't always appropriate. You'll see this one is quite discreet, it's the little green bar, but it's quite noticeable in the working environment, where you get a pop up and it tells the user what to do. And that increased sales by 7%, a straight increase, and what happened as part of this was that they made sure that if people didn't want to sign up, they weren't forced into closing multiple windows and stuff like that. However, later in the journey, it was appropriate - so this is the same site, but having a pop up makes sense because this is about the engagement phase, and they wouldn't get as much from the interaction if they weren't forced to do something, so don't feel afraid when you're looking at intent, they've obviously got this far and they've said "we want to use your site to book a babysitter", so actually at this point it's okay to be a bit more forceful and tell the user that if they skip this step, they won't get as much value from this interaction.

And then this one is a real simple case, and it's good you mentioned about social, because one of the things that we've found is that just a simple personalisation which is kind of like a micro site approach where actually you recognise where a person came from to your website, and this could just be a simple overlay to the website, and give them an offer if appropriate, but just declaring the fact that you know that they have come from Pinterest can make a real difference.

Now this one's about real-time abandonment. Now what's interesting about this is that this hotel chain found that actually having this intervention pop up on the site wasn't the best way to go. What was better was actually to have real-time recognition, and detect in the real-time that they had abandoned, but actually that old-style, if you like was email abandonment was more successful. So it's not always something that should be in the same channel, but actually people wanted to consider it afterwards. And you can see the results from this were outstanding.