Beware of False Influencers – Its who’s Influenced that matters

A few words on a subject that was discussed in Gabrielle Laine-Peters’ Lunch chat at the recent Like Minds Conference – that old chestnut, Influence – and the talk about whether Klout, PeerIndex or merely personal influence are the key factors in genuinely recognising genuine an `influencer`.

Well here’s the thing in the point I made. Sure – Joe Twitter may have a great numerical following, may get re-tweeted like wildfire, write a well read blog, and may be online buddies with Chris Brogan, Justin Bieber and Stephen Fry; but in a commercial world, does it mean they genuinely influence, in the way that you want them too?

If you are wanting to reach wider audience for your brand or product – then although Joe Twitter’s 15,000 followers seem to create great online reach in numerical terms and presumed amplification – it matters little if those 15,000 followers are simply not relevant to your product, or in truth are filled with `artificially acquired` following.

Surely genuine impact-ful reach is about who is Influenced - not who influences. The measurements should surely relate to the potency of the following consumers to respond intuitively to such an `influencer`, and buy/recommend a product; not just through the bus that took them there. Nice friendly and popular bus it might be; but if it’s carrying the wrong people – then it’s maybe the wrong vehicle.

This goes back to the obvious argument, that influence is personal – and very rarely generic. Often people’s social standing is based on professional relevance, or irrelevance. 

Chris Brogan doesn’t do it for me, for example. (regardless of his minor altercation me on Twitter recently). He will do, to many, many others – but I’m personally ignited by occasional glimmers of brilliance by less frequent or wordy bloggers. That’s merely personal measurement on an `inspirational learning` level, rather than a consumer level. I would imagine the majority of Brogan’s readers are inspired by his inspirational thinking. Does that make him an influencer? On a learning/ideas level – sure. On a consumer level? – surely not so much, right? So when he appeared with pictures of a short succession of branded `eating experiences` on Google+ a while back, was it likely the brands concerned raised sales figures significantly because `Chris Brogan ate it`… well I doubt it.

People don’t follow Brogan for commercial eating guidelines. They want to gain brain food for business brilliance and social effectiveness.

So let’s not assume that numeric following is an automatic indicator of genuine influence. Usually we have subject areas where we can claim or apportion influence – which to be fair to Klout and PeerIndex – within them, there are options for influence checking in specific quarters. i.e. not the number in the big box – but the subjects of genuine influence… well, apart from in my case, my occasional references of expertise in `Mars`, `Russell Brand`, `Tea` and `Biscuits`… (!)

Much of the numbers are an indicator, not a director. As my colleague JJ would say; “I may have over 100,000 website hits per month, but why ask me to endorse Scotch Tape, when I clearly write about London lifestyle…?!”

Basically, my observation is we have to pick our brand advocates and our guiding souls carefully. Surely think about WHO they influence and whether it has an impact on who YOU want to reach.

 

Steve Ward