9 Replies Latest reply on Jul 15, 2016 2:35 AM by 0bd96454cafdd2dfa70a171bfa7b79b53384cf2a

    Are there issues in using munchkin code with Sitecore?

      I am working on a big transformation project and part of it is a complete redo of the corporate website. The situation is that the company is using an agency to develop the website and they are using Sitecore to do this. The agency is threatened by the company's take-on of Marketo so are not being open regarding integration. I have used Marketo for many customers with various CMS systems, but have never been involved in the integration as it has always been in place when they brought me in.


      1. Are there any difficulties with using munchkin code on Sitecore managed pages?  Is it as easy as including the munchkin code in the header of the pages?

      2.  Are there any issues with embedding forms (2.0) on Sitecore pages?


      I've researched on here and know that there are many users using both systems together, but I can't find the beginning of anyone's experience here, so would appreciate some insight. Dan Stevens. you seem to be the person to ask here?


      Many thanks -


        • Re: Are there issues in using munchkin code with Sitecore?
          Dan Stevens.

          Hi Erica - We've been on Sitecore as our website's CMS for a couple years now.  Munchkin is placed on every page of our site (in the footer, using Google Tag Manager) and we use embedded Marketo forms for every form on our site.  That's the easy part. As part of our phase 2 personalization effort, we're facing some challenges and uncertainties as we try to identify the most efficient and effective approach to integrate Marketo data into Sitecore:


          • First of all, one of the reasons we migrated our website CMS to Sitecore – above and beyond our partner status with Sitecore – is the ability to offer relevant visitor experiences on our site.  Therefore, leveraging Marketo RTP would be overkill.
          • We already have the DemandBase Sitecore Connector in place that allows us to retrieve real-time demographic/company attributes for those anonymous visitors who are identifiable by company (non-ISP, etc.).  We’ll be using attributes like INDUSTRY to enable us to serve up industry-related content when visitors first hit our site.
          • We also want to leverage behavioral data in Marketo. Ideally both anonymous and known.  But unfortunately, Marketo doesn’t make the anonymous data accessible via the API.  And since there’s nothing in the users’ cookies to determine whether or not a cookied user is known or not, we’re going to be making a lot of meaningless API calls just to identify those known leads (and then additional calls using the lead ID to get that additional behavioral data).  Especially since the % of known users to overall visitors will be really small.  And that’s really where our team doesn’t have the experience on how best to do this.  One thought is - whenever we're able to identify a known lead and obtain their leadID (when making an API call based on cookie ID - is to store that value in a field within the users' Sitecore profile record.  And then when future visits are made, we can eliminate that initial call and retrieve activity data using the leadID right away. 


          We're still in the early stages of this and are having daily meetings with our AppDev teams to figure out the best approach for all of this.  Once we do figure it out, I'll be sure to share our solution to others on the community.

          • Re: Are there issues in using munchkin code with Sitecore?
            Geoff Krajeski

            I will also concur with Dan Stevens..


            Coming from a former employer who used Sitecore for 7+ years, the easy part is surely the addition of Munchkin and embedding forms.


            Personalization was definitely on the roadmap, and the ability to leverage Sitecore's engine for personalization (including anonymous useage) coupled with enriched/ing data and pulling/pushing to and from Marketo once a lead is known was a definite plus.