Compromise: The Lost SEO Skillset

This week’s #SEOForLunch is sponsored by North Star Inbound and Profound. Thanks to these sponsors, the newsletter remains free each week. Please support them when possible.

Textbook implementation is always ideal. It’s not an all-or-nothing ultimatum.

I’ll never forget my first in-person client meeting.

I was prepared. I’d audited the hell out of their site and walked in with a full laundry list of recommendations.

Halfway through, the client asked a totally reasonable question:“What if we can’t do all of this? What would you prioritize?”

And I, in all my early-career confidence, replied:“If you’re not going to do it all, you probably shouldn’t bother with SEO.”

As soon as they walked out, the owner pulled me aside and absolutely lit me up. Fair. I deserved it. And I’ve never forgotten that moment.

That mistake is probably why, today, I still ask for the moon… but I plan for reality.

Thank you to this week’s #SEOForLunch sponsor: Profound

New Profound Agents: WordPress and Sanity

Profound Agents can now publish, update, and coordinate work that improves how customers find your brand, products, and services across AI Search.

• Update content when visibility shifts

• Publish net-new pages for emerging prompts

• Coordinate approvals and reviews across teams

Pitch Perfection and Take Steps Back

I swear I heard this from Tom Critchlow, but I can’t find the original source.

Either way, this line has guided my career:

If it’s Tom’s, I want to credit it properly. If it’s not, someone please call me out so I can attribute it to the right person.

Regardless of who said it first, it’s one of the most accurate reminders I’ve ever heard in SEO, and it’s worth keeping top of mind.

Compromise is Prioritization

My early client mistake wasn’t the recommendations. Nine out of ten SEOs would agree with them.

The problem was me. I had no flexibility and no appreciation for budget, bandwidth, or how companies actually get work done.

Compromise in SEO is prioritization. It’s taking the “ideal” list, sorting by level of effort vs expected return, and fighting for the best outcome within real constraints.

The Audit Trap

This is where marketers get in trouble. We assume “more” means “better.”

Ever seen a 100-page SEO audit? It’s ugly, and it usually dies in a shared drive.

Executives don’t care how hard you worked. They care what to do next.

So the first pages should always answer:

• What’s wrong?

• What matters most?

• What’s the effort and payoff?

You still do the deep work. You just present it in layers:

• Leadership gets the 1,000-foot view fast

• Details are there if anyone wants to drill down

That clarity is what enables compromise.

Mini Exercise

Rank these from 1 (least effort / highest impact) to 5 (most effort / lowest impact):

• Update URLs to include hyphens and utilize keywords

• Address the indexation of a lower dev environment

• Move the blog from a subdomain to a folder

• Optimize Core Web Vitals to “pass” PageSpeed Insights

• Update pagination from lazy load to sequential pagination

Here’s my list:

1. Update pagination: lazy load → sequentialLow effort / high impact

2. Fix dev environment indexationLow effort / medium impact

3. Move blog: subdomain → folderMedium effort / medium impact

4. CWV: “pass” PageSpeedExtremely high effort / low impact (in most cases)

5. URL rewrites for keywords/hyphensMedium effort / little to no impact

LOE varies by stack, but the bigger point is unavoidable: trade-offs exist.Reality + Impact > Best Practices

Reality + Impact Beats Best Practices

I’ve gotten pretty aggressive about calling out “checkbox SEO.”

You know the type: a giant best-practices list with zero thought given to impact, effort, or what the business is sacrificing to do it.

Look at the first two items above. Those aren’t nice-to-haves. Crawl and indexation issues can make content effectively invisible.

No discovery = no visibility = no ROI.

Everything after that gets murkier.

I’m generally team “folder,” but treating subdomain-to-folder like a universal law is lazy. Sometimes the blog is on a subdomain for legitimate reasons: platform constraints, ownership, technical debt, politics, or migration risk.

Same with CWV and URL rewrites. CWV can eat a disgusting amount of engineering time for marginal gains unless performance is truly broken. And URL “cleanup” often triggers redirects, extra work, and new ways to screw up signals across internal links, sitemaps, canonicals, and crawl directives.

None of that gets solved by yelling “best practices” louder.

Business Priorities over SEO Checkboxes

SEOs think:Move content → redirects → sitemaps → ping Google.

Leaders think:Opportunity cost → platform constraints → resourcing and risk → then the SEO checklist.

That’s why compromise is a skill.

Your job isn’t to “win” an SEO argument. It’s to help the business make the best trade-off with the time, money, and political capital it actually has.

So instead of: “We need to move the blog because best practices,” try:

• “We can do it, but it’s medium effort with real risk and opportunity cost.”

• “Before we do this, we should fix critical crawl/indexation blockers.”

• “If we still want the migration, here’s the lowest-risk version, plus what we’ll delay to make it happen.”

That’s compromise. Not lowering the bar, just negotiating reality.

And if you want to be taken seriously by leadership, this is the shift: talk in trade-offs, not tactics.

If your recommendations can’t survive a budget meeting, they’re not real recommendations.

~ Nick

Please support this week's sponsor: North Star Inbound