Influence is Not a Number
Here I go again:
Klout does not equal Clout.
And while it may in the future, it certainly does not right now.
Yesterday Klout introduced “the new Klout.com.”
I saw a tweet about it, and I can’t remember whose stream it was in, so I went across to check it out.
My initial reaction (and it’s also in the comment that I left over on the Klout blog post, since I didn’t think it fair to simply write about it here and not comment there as well) is …
that it’s very pretty.
But if Klout is going to bill itself as “the standard for online influence,” it’s got to do more than score people based on how frenetically active they are on Twitter and Facebook.
Case in point, yesterday was a day I was particularly active on Twitter, which I haven’t been recently.
We had our bi-weekly #measurePR Twitter chat, which I moderate, and later in the evening I participated for a short while in the #pr20chat, moderated by Heather Whaling and Justin Goldsborough (it’s terrific, you should check it out).
All of a sudden, my Klout score, which has remained static over the last month, went up by one point.
I commented on only two blogs yesterday (and on one of them, my comment was more along the lines of baby babble), didn’t do anything on LinkedIn, shared a couple of posts via Google Reader, and on Facebook, just sent out some birthday wishes and posted in a couple of secret Facebook groups.
So it’s pretty clear that my increased volume of tweets yesterday is the result of this change.
I’ve written before about why Klout should not be a synonym for influence, and on influence in public relations and social media … so I’m sorry if I’m boring you.
But this is important, which is why I’m saying it again.
Far too many organizations are starting to reduce people to numbers in their quest to reach “influencers.” And what service are they factoring into their calculations?
Klout.
Again, for the record, I have nothing against Klout per se. In fact, my friend Tinu Abayomi-Paul put it best:
“I desperately want to love Klout.
“I expected it to be a tool that would help me sort the posers and the popular, and help me find people who were of like mind. But it spends too much time trying to flatter me and tell me how great I am, and not enough time being an actual analytical tool that measures things that actually matter to me.”
I mean, look at how Katie Paine and I stack up against each other, according to Klout’s new version.
It’s ridiculous.
We’re talking about a woman, admittedly very dear to me, who’s literally written the book on PR measurement, and who’s forgotten more about measurement than I will ever know.
If I click through to see who is apparently influencing me, she doesn’t even show up on the list.
You know why? Because she and I don’t spend a lot of time gabbing with each other on Twitter.
But who do you think is one of the top people on my list to call, email, DM, Facebook or Skype when I’m thinking/need help with measurement, not to mention a whole bunch of other stuff as well?
Whose book (there’s a terrific newer version out now) has been required reading for my students at Johns Hopkins for the third year now?
Katie.
And she has a lower Klout score than me, when she is extremely active online, and trying to find a measurement-related conversation that didn’t reference her would be like trying to find the animal living on Donald Trump’s head?
Ridiculous.
Is Klout useful in some respects?
Yes. If you’re trying to put together an outreach list for an online campaign, for example, it can be one of the factors you use to determine whom to reach out to.
I said one.
It shouldn’t be the only one. You still have to do your legwork (in the old days they called it research) and actually pay attention to the community you’re trying to reach, figure out who’s talking and who’s driving action.
That’s the most important part.
This is why I like Traackr more than Klout (disclosure: Tracckr has given me free access to its system for a couple of months), because at least it tries to include as wide a range of digital properties as possible when trying to identify people who might be influential online, and in a certain area.
So you can get a better sense of where people are online, what they’re talking about, what they’re interested in, and so on … not just what they’re saying on Twitter.
I also like that they don’t “score” people, but I should probably stop talking about Traackr for now, since it deserves at least one post of its own.
But would I use only Traackr, when doing the research for an online campaign?
No.
I’d look at Klout, Traackr (for now, while I have access to the system), perhaps MyMediaInfo (I’m currently a subscriber), Technorati (I know, I know), maybe PostRank … and I’d also be doing good old-fashioned searching, reading and listening.
If I could, I’d also look at the client’s analytics and data, and try to figure out what has helped them historically. And I’d ask the client for who they considered influential … not just in terms of perception, but in terms of actually driving action.
I would spend a lot of time—a lot!—doing all this.
And then I’d decide who the most appropriate people would be to reach out to.
Influence is not a number.
So please don’t fall into the trap of thinking that it is.
Image: Leo Reynolds via Flickr, CC 2.0
I agree that Klout's metrics seem flawed. If you have to gauge influence by number, I use Peerindex.com which offers much more (and accurate, relevant) detail. Check my Klout @ptaylor98 as well as my friend @vincenthunt, who is far more inluential than I am, and you'll see the difference.
ptaylor98 I did look at PeerIndex a while back, but not recently. And thank you for pointing me to both your as well as vincenthunt profiles, that will really help to contrast & compare.
What... almost everyone said, think I liked all the comments. I'm with you Shonali, you can't ignore Klout as a popular benchmark but you have to look at that number more closely, along with others you mentioned. Then that good old fashioned research, the real work. As to measuring influence, check out some of soulati posts lately on this.. good discussions on what 'influence' is and the issues trying to quantify it, when it's often a qualitative issue. FWIW.
Brava! And thanks for quoting me. Hadn't realized that you did that- catching up on my reading today. With Klout, it seems like there's a couple of simple ways to include some online metrics that can show offline impact. You said, for instance, that your friend has written a benchmark publication on PR measurement. Seems like Amazon would have at least a hint of how much that book is referenced. They could even look at things like the number and quality of terms that come up for a person in Google. Where they've spoken. Reviews if they have a physical location they operate from -- of course, none of them, again should be taken as an isolated number that represents the bottom line context of influence, that would be just as crazy as the status quo. It bugs me, too, that people far more brilliant than I aren't showing up on some of these radars. Not because I think I'm so great (I am. That's just not the reason *brushes off shoulder* lol!). But because it's frustrating to have all this data available, and no truly superior tools to manage it.
Tinu "Not because I think I'm so great (I am. That's just not the reason *brushes off shoulder* lol!)." I particularly like that part! :p
Re: Amazon, etc... exactly. I think what troubles a lot of us is the marketing of Klout as "the standard..." etc. when it really isn't right now. Like you said in your post, I too want desperately to love Klout. I just can't right now.
Another problem with Klout is its stats measures appear wrong, making you doubt the credibility of the overall assessment. My Klout usually is between 49 and 53. I'm O.K. with that. I have a reasonable, but not huge, amount of followers. According to Klout, however, I have 100 list memberships. As you can see in my profile at @CyberlandGal, I actually have 291. Klout also says I have 250 total retweets, 100 unique messages retweeted, and have had a message retweeted 10 times. Just one of the posts on my blog (see http://www.eventuresincyberland.com/2011/03/7-ways...) was retweeted 269 times and almost all 79 posts (except the early ones) have been retweeted at least once, usually a lot more. When you consider that less than 10% of my tweets link to my blog, you can see that those numbers don't make sense. Also, I generally don't read (or make any effort to read) the tweets of the people who supposedly influence me, except @Mashable. There are a few people, such as @Shonali, whose tweets I do check and retweet regularly. Why are they not listed as influencing me? I can't figure it out. Again, I'm not bothered by my Klout score. I just don't take it seriously.
Here's the link again without "was" on the end: http://www.eventuresincyberland.com/2011/03/7-ways...
CyberlandGal A lot of those stats on my profile are wrong too. That I can give them a little leeway on, maybe it takes time to update the data. But not too much leeway, because some of those numbers have been static forever, especially things like list memberships, which are clearly way outdated.
"Again, I'm not bothered by my Klout score. I just don't take it seriously." Amen!
Funny thing: I'm not convinced sheer # of tweets necessarily drives a meaningful part of a Klout score. Being RTed/mentioned however does--and that certainly does happen if you're in a chat. Your tweets are almost sure to generate more activity if you participate in a chat, and that really is the definition of influence.
But you make an excellent point re: not getting carried away by Klout scores. Seriously, who thinks that Justin Bieber actually is more influential than President Obama?
ed_han LOL! I guess... Justin Bieber's mom? :p
a) Amen and b) I had to laugh because I clicked through to see the "new" Klout 2 days ago too, and then spent the time between then and now tweeting WAY more than usual at a conference. When I read how your score went up after some heavier-than-usual tweeting, I checked mine and--shocker--mine went up a point as well. Seriously? Because I tweeted a bunch of stuff from an ASAE marketing conference?
Hey Shonali,
I'm the Marketing Manager here at Klout and just wanted to chime in. First, we always love feedback and appreciate you writing the post. Second, you rightfully pointed out some limitations -- Klout measures influence across the social web -- we don't measure offline influence or publishing influence. If you use it in the sense that it's intended it is a very useful shorthand for a certain kind of influence.
I also want to add that we are not judging based on your activity but based on your audience's response. Therefore, yes, if you disspear from Twitter and Facebook your score will go down, but it's because your audience has nothing to respond to rather than that our algorithm is scoring activity.
Should you only judge people based on Klout Score? Of coure not. I hope you're not doing that with credit or SAT score either. But like you mention, it can be a very useful metric to look at, and it's definitely more accurate than looking at follower or friend count.
Thanks,
Megan
meganberry
Marketing Manager, Klout
meganberry Hey, Megan, I really appreciate you stopping by and providing Klout's point of view. Interesting clarification re: audience response... but it still seems weird. I can tell you that over the past 30 days, I certainly didn't disappear from Twitter in any way (or Facebook, for that matter). There were some days when I tweeted less, and some when I tweeted more. But I was always around, and "talk" pretty regularly to people. Yesterday was an exceptionally heavy day on Twitter, and the coincidence just seems... more than a coincidence.
However, it really doesn't seem that Klout is measuring influence across the social web, as you put it. Where is the evidence for that? I would really love to know, and I'm not being sarcastic. Seems to me (and I think GautamGhosh made the same comment over at your blog) that rather than releasing a new dashboard right now - which is lovely - it would benefit us all if we could see actual evidence that there is more going into Klout scores than Twitter & Facebook.
That is where I think Traackr is way ahead of Klout, and again, I have no business relationship with them. In fact, I was very skeptical of their service initially, and only after being given a demo did I see what goes into it. We'd love that same clarity from Klout.
Of course a score is a useful metric, that's why people use them. My concern, and that of many others who've commented/written about Klout in the past (and no doubt will do so in the future) is that because of how Klout positions itself - and you/your media relations folk are doing a really good job - they seem to be taken as the be-all and end-all.
Again, I really appreciate you stopping by and your courtesy. The few communications that I've had with you have always been very pleasant, and I do appreciate that.
meganberry Hi Megan :)
Does Klout measure anything beyond Twitter and Facebook? I think saying it measures influence "across the social web" may be a bit of a problem. Facebook and Twitter are important, no question, but there are so many other areas that are also important if not more so (blogs?).
It is ambitious what Klout is trying to do but I think people really struggle with the notion that it is even close to the standard for influence. In general I like Klout and find it useful at times but like many others I think it is more of a measure of activity than influence. I am sure you will get better and I am glad people like Shonali are raising these questions.
It's great to see you weighing in.
Best,
Joe
hackmanj Hey Shonali and Hackmanj,
You guys are right (and we def don't mean to hide that if it's unclear)-- right now we measure influence on Twitter and Facebook with other networks coming soon.
meganberry meganberry Hi, Megan. The problem with Klout isn't really you, or your team, or Joe. I have had the chance to tweet and talk with him in person, and he, like you, is clear that Klout is not an end-all for measuring influence.
The bigger problem is lazy PR and communications pros who are looking for a quick fix (drug analogy intended). They don't want to spend the time doing the research shonali and others advocate for. Instead, they just want a number, no matter if it lacks relevance, so they can pass off some BS metrics to their boss or their friends to make them look good.
That said, despite what I've heard from you and Joe, Klout's marketing approach says something quite different than what the two of you say via social media. And that's ok...you're trying to sell a product. It's business.
But I think if you add together 1) the fact that the communications industry already suffers from being thought of as spin doctors with 2) the fact that people brag about their Klout score online daily and 3) the fact that you all actively market Klout as "the standard for online and Internet influence," what you come up with is a responsibility people like Shonali, donbart and several of us communicators feel to not allow our peers to slack off and take down our credibility in the process.
I have a hard enough time selling the value of strategic communications to corporate America without having to deal with another misleading metric that executives don't understand. Just my two cents. Again, it's more "our" problem than Klout's. I really believe that. But I think we can agree to share the blame, no?
JGoldsborough This comment is yet another example of your thoughtfulness and measured [sic] way of dealing with things, and why I think you're awesome. meganberry Justin is absolutely right - it's not about any of you personally. It's about how Klout is perceived, especially by people not willing to do the additional legwork required.
The one thing I have a slightly different perspective on is the way Klout markets itself, and that, as you've seen from quite a few of the comments, is the concern of many others as well, such as jenzings . Why not market it for what it actually is? If and when Klout gets to the stage of truly being "the standard for online influence," my guess is that all of us will applaud it for being that. But right now it's not, so marketing it as such just doesn't feel right.
Hi Shonali,
You are right about activity levels being weighted heavily by the (mostly) secret algorithm Klout uses. Maybe a month ago, for my own amusement, I spent an active day on Twitter questioning the Klout score. One of the tweets even went so far as to say, 'my new influencer strategy...increase my Klout score by ripping the Klout score'. At one point someone from Klout jumped in the stream and accused me of trying to game the system. This made me laugh out loud. And guess what - my day of tweeting about the shortcomings of the Klout score increased my Klout score by a point. -Don B @Donbart
donbart That's too funny, Don!
If you really want to show world dominance, next time run the graph w/ my Klout score...........if I even have one.
I want to hear about these secret FB groups; sounds intriguing.
I joke and wouldn't know a Klout score from anything but I know the PR & marketing types use it as a mearuring tool to quantify their effectiveness. All I would add to that is, "did my revenues increase"? That's my measurement tool. But with the 'tools' available this should help you be more efficient and effective with your efforts.
Finally, don't look at your numbers to see who you reach out to; I might become totally invisible..........
Good info and just tried to add some levity; if your readers ask who that nut case is, tell 'em I'm your cousin from down south that just isn't 'quite right'.
Oh yeah, I volunteer for a Men Read's program at the local elementary school. I have five 5th graders. One of the boys is Indian so I said "so, what did you think about the World Cup". Boy did he get animated and was telling me his house was so full and jubilant he couldn't even get upstairs because of all the celebrations. I'm telling, this cricket thing is making me look pretty smart............:)
bdorman264 You want in on the secret FB groups, eh? Well, I might be able to arrange that. :) I can tell you that ginidietrich is part of one, and ericaholt is part of another, so you'll be in good company!
You know PR & marketing types who use Klout to quantify effectiveness? How, exactly? Wow, this I need to learn. I think you're spot on: did your revenues increase, costs decrease, etc... or whatever the goals are that you're trying to accomplish. That's what I try to focus on with clients as well. Simple goals are the best way to go, IMHO.
Re: cricket... waaaayyy cool! Now, the next time you go to the program, ask him if he's a fan of Sachin. You'll be golden in his eyes.
In some ways Klout can be a useful tool, but its really on using their numbers and putting them into a useful formula. For example if you are looking to see how many people a person's Tweet will reach, multiply the true reach by their amplification (or thought on action or sharing as I was told by an employee) and you get how many people would act on said Tweet.
Problem is that it is creating yet another measure that you are relying on a veiled number that as you note has no open rhyme or reason as to why it increases. For it to be taken seriously, they need to define how the numbers are tabulated and how businesses can utilize them beyond a perk that is unrelated to the person's interests.
But the new interface is very user friendly and sleek :)
jeffespo The new interface is VERY sleek and pretty.
In that example that you gave (or that the Klout employee gave you?) - even that is only potential, right? I mean, hundreds of thousands of tweets fly by each of us every day. We don't act on them all. It's just the potential for action... no?
And thank you for stopping by!
Shonali In terms of the number, it was something that I used to discredit a celebrity Tweet a while back. But when looking at it next to something like a Tweetreach in terms of raw Twitter numbers it really heps show either A.) purchase intent of the targeted market or B.) show the true reach and non-inflated reach of a campaign to show true value.
jeffespo Got it.
I agree with hackmanj , you really should be more open and tell us what you really think! LOL at the "animal living on Donald Trump's head". Robin Williams says it's some sort of alien that landed there and took over his body and mind. Either way, nice point.
I love your perspective on this and agree with jenzings in that influence is entirely 'contextual'. If you are very influential in your work or your real life environments, but not even on LinkedIn or Twitter, does that mean you are less influential than someone who is very much 'present' online, tweeting incessantly, but has no real 'influential' measurement in the real world or in their work environment. There does not appear to be a way to measure the 'total package'. Rather, there are bits and pieces that we all use when the mood suits or when the need arises in which to justify a particular angle. Knowing that and understanding that is when the real influence occurs.
Great post, Shonali. Love the way you write! :)
You would think a guy w/ that kind of cash would have a much better 'do' goin' on, wouldn't you?
bdorman264 Seriously.
EricaAllison You're the first person to catch the Trump reference. Gold star! And thank you. :)
Great post. Very enlightening. I like the fact that you are encouraging well-rounded research. It's not that Klout is terrible, it's that you need other measures to get the overall picture of influence.
Betty_Zee Thanks! No, I don't think Klout is terrible at all. But it's not what it's positioning itself as, either. That's my major problem with it.
Yes. Yes. Yes. Perhaps Klout is trying to flatter everyone right now simply because it feels it needs to so it can get a foothold in the SM marketplace. Still, I find it hard to believe I am more influential, or equally influential, as jgoldsborough @mikeschaffer kdpaine and many others. I'd love to believe that, but there's no way on earth it's true.
I do think Klout is doing something important, and if they continue to refine their algorithms and can make its numbers more relevant and accurate it will become a MUCH more valuable tool.
MattLaCasse I don't think Klout is trying to flatter folks per se. When you look at the different "categories" they put one in, they've done it in a smart way.
I do agree that they are trying to make sense of something everyone wants and could be very valuable. My concern with the way it seems to be structured right now is that 1) they bill themselves as the standard for online influence and as far as most of us can tell, that is not an accurate claim, 2) that people looking for a quick fix will take these numbers as is and do no further research, and 3) that such scores are starting to change the way people behave online, simply to get a higher score.
Never underestimate how influential YOU are, Matt!
Also try and check out peerindex You can add blogs to it too
GautamGhosh Yup, johnlovett mentioned that too. But they do the score thing as well, and I find their topic footprint is not always relevant.
All I can say is, "Get outta my head, Shonali!". You pretty much summed up my feelings, though I've been a bit more harsh when it comes to Klout. I've spent some time playing with Klout and plugged in some clearly automated spam accounts which came out with higher rankings than a lot of real people. When you reduce something to just a number, then the system can be gamed very easily.
And while Klout will tell you that it's just a tool to be used and interpreted, it clearly is being positioned as a number that will help you make decisions. And businesses are buying into it and using these Klout numbers as if they are important. Makes my head wanna 'splode!
KenMueller But your head is so comfy. :p I remember you talking about the Klout/spam experiment.
The fact that so many businesses are buying into it is indeed one danger. Also, how is it influencing [sic] people's online activity... how many people are simply tweeting more to get their score up? I suppose if you look at it this way, then it is indeed "the standard for online influence" even though it's not. Makes my head hurt.
Shonali ok wait. This presents a problem. If your head hurts....and you're also in MY head...that means I have a headache now???
KenMueller Hmm. I think if you let me continue to sit in the comfy armchair with an icepack, my headache will go away and then you won't have a headache...
Shonali can i charge rent?
KenMueller Ummm.... no. Because you invited me in in the first place. :p
Shonali oooh. you're good. I think you just made that up. Now I gotta go check your Klout number and see if you're worthy of chillin' in my noggin'
KenMueller Let me know what you find, Smuckerdoodle.
Shonali well, we have the exact same number, even though you seem to kick my little Stoltzfus up and down the block in most categories. We are apparently both "pundits". Maybe you and I could get our own Sunday morning show on TV!
KenMueller Oh boy. Unleash the two of us on the unsuspecting world? Are they ready for us?! And I wish we weren't "pundits." The connotations of that word in English are completely different from Hindi!
Shonali that bad, eh? so I suppose in Hindi the word doesn't mean "incredibly sexy and intelligent beings"?
Conversation from Facebook
#goshonali
Oh goodie!!
Aw, thank you!
brilliant!
[...] today, @shonali had a great post about the new Klout.com which has made this post [...]
[...] the measurement presented tends to focus on weak influence barometers that fail to measure how a community actually interacts with an organization, and through which [...]
[...] trust and credibility, I think context is a major factor here as well. In the social media world, Klout is obviously the major measurement tool for influence. It’s convenient to say Klout [...]
[...] it was just the day before yesterday, when Derek Skaletsky gave me props (aww) for saying I think Traackr is quite a bit more useful—at least as far as I’m concerned—than Klout, if one is trying to find [...]
[...] (Now that’s influence.) [...]
[...] Burke, another big deal in PR as far as I’m concerned, wrote a very telling post on the reality of influence the day after the “new” Klout was [...]
[...] a lot of discussion these days around influencers. With the proliferation of social media, it’s no longer just about generating the [...]
[...] When it comes to social media, don’t just look for people with huge numbers of followers, but people who actively engage (hmm, where have we heard that before?) [...]
[...] I’ve said more than enough about Klout so I won’t say anything more right now! [...]
[...] I mean, come on, people, it’s only a number. [...]