Should we really stop treating SEO as an isolated discipline?

What does Google mean by a “holistic approach” to SEO?

Google suggests to stop compartmentalizing organic search as an isolated technical task. The underlying idea is that a site that ranks well but converts poorly is of no use, just as a high-performing paid campaign that drives traffic to slow and poorly structured pages fails.

This statement is part of a logic where user experience becomes the common thread. SEO should no longer be the exclusive domain of a technical provider optimizing tags in isolation. It must be integrated into considerations about the customer journey, loading speed, conversion architecture, and even advertising messages that set user expectations.

Why is Google emphasizing this point now?

Because behavioral signals are playing an increasingly important role in the algorithm. A user who clicks on a result, immediately goes back (pogo-sticking), and then clicks on a competitor sends a negative signal. Google wants sites that fully meet search intent: relevant content, smooth navigation, and easy conversion.

Specifically, this means that your on-page optimization work must consider what happens after the click. A page perfectly optimized for “buy running shoes” displaying a contact form instead of a product catalog will be penalized, no matter how impeccable your title tags are.

Does this fundamentally change our working method?

Yes and no. The technical fundamentals remain essential: crawlability, indexing, semantic architecture. However, Google encourages not treating them as objectives in themselves. Your internal linking strategy should facilitate user navigation, not just push PageRank to your priority pages.

The real change concerns interdepartmental collaboration. A senior SEO can no longer ignore what the CRO team is doing, nor dismiss the insights from Google Ads campaigns on terms that really convert. The holistic approach requires reconciling often fragmented data: Search Console, Analytics, heatmaps, conversion data.

• Technical SEO is still the foundation: without proper crawl and controlled indexing, nothing works.
• User experience becomes an indirect ranking factor through behavioral signals.
• The convergence of SEO-CRO-Marketing is no longer an option, it’s a strategic necessity.
• KPIs must evolve: beyond organic traffic, measure conversion rates from SEO and the generated value.
• Google blurs the line between SEO, UX, and marketing performance to align its interests with those of advertisers.

Is this statement consistent with what we observe on the ground?

Partially. Sites that offer a poor user experience indeed struggle to maintain their positions, even with a strong link profile. We see technically flawless pages losing ground to competitors that convert better and retain visitors longer. The Core Web Vitals exemplify this most clearly: Google has officially recognized a UX criterion as a ranking factor.

But to be honest: the impact remains moderate compared to quality backlinks. A site with low domain authority will not surpass an established competitor just because it has a lower bounce rate. Google's statement simplifies a more nuanced reality where topical authority and links remain predominant for competitive queries. [To be verified]: Google does not provide any numerical weighting between these different criteria.

What risks does this “holistic” approach pose to SEO?

The main danger is dilution of responsibility. When everyone is responsible for everything, no one really leads. SEO risks becoming a cross-cutting concern without a dedicated budget, without specialized expertise, drowned in interdepartmental committees where everyone defends their turf.

In practice, I have seen marketing teams impose disastrous UX choices for SEO (infinite scrolling, content hidden by default in accordions, non-crawlable AJAX architecture) under the guise of user experience. Without a senior SEO who influences strategic decisions, the holistic approach becomes an excuse to ignore the technical constraints of search engine optimization. Google recommends integration but does not specify who should arbitrate when SEO and conversion come into conflict.

In what cases does this rule not fully apply?

For pure informational sites (media, blogs, wikis), conversion in the classic sense does not exist. The objective is time spent, pages viewed, engagement. The holistic approach remains relevant, but the criteria change: it's about optimizing for session depth, not for a purchase funnel.

Similarly, in B2B sectors with long sales cycles, the link between SEO and direct conversion is tenuous. A visitor who reads three technical articles may only convert six months later after a sales demo. Measuring the impact of SEO solely through immediate conversion KPIs is reductive. The holistic approach must integrate influence indicators (awareness, recall, consideration) that go beyond the usual scope of technical SEO.

What concrete steps should be taken to adopt this approach?

Start by mapping the user journey from the Google query to conversion (or the final goal). Identify friction points: slow pages, content that does not meet intent, broken conversion funnels. Cross-reference Search Console data with Analytics to identify pages generating SEO traffic but showing an abnormal bounce rate or ridiculous session duration.

Then, establish collaboration rituals with the CRO, UX, and marketing teams. An SEO audit can no longer be limited to crawling the site: it must include an analysis of heatmaps, session recordings (Hotjar, Clarity), and user testing. Conversely, each UX redesign must incorporate an SEO aspect from the wireframing phase, not at the end of the project when everything is set in stone.

What mistakes should be avoided in this transition?

Never sacrifice technical fundamentals in the name of supposed user experience. I have seen sites convert entirely to AJAX for smooth navigation, making 80% of the content invisible to Googlebot. Another classic: removing the breadcrumb trail because “it looks old,” while it's a semantic signal and a reassurance element for the user.

Also avoid diluting your KPIs to the point of failing to measure anything clearly. The holistic approach does not mean mixing everything into an incomprehensible dashboard. Keep specific SEO indicators (qualified organic traffic, positions on strategic queries, technical health) while linking them to business metrics (SEO conversion rates, revenue per organic visit, lifetime value of organic visitors).

How can you verify that your site adheres to this integrated logic?

Audit your SEO landing pages with an eye on UX/CRO. For every page that generates significant organic traffic, check that the content meets search intent, that the loading speed is acceptable (LCP < 2.5s), and that the CTAs are visible and relevant. Use Search Console to identify pages with a good CTR but a poor conversion rate: that’s where the potential for holistic optimization lies.

Also test the consistency between your paid campaigns and your SEO. If your Google Ads promise free delivery but this information is absent on the corresponding organic page, you create unnecessary friction. The holistic approach demands that the message, tone, and promises align across all acquisition channels.

• Cross-reference Search Console + Analytics data to identify SEO pages with high traffic but low engagement or conversion.
• Integrate a UX/CRO audit into every SEO analysis of strategic pages (heatmaps, recordings, user tests).
• Ensure that every technical redesign (migration, new architecture) includes an SEO aspect from conception, not post-production.
• Measure hybrid KPIs: conversion rates from organic traffic, revenue per organic session, lifetime value by SEO segment.
• Test the message/promises consistency between paid campaigns and corresponding organic pages.
• Train your non-SEO teams on crawl and indexing constraints to avoid catastrophic UX decisions for SEO.