Guest Blogger

From #BWELA: Giving substance to online influence: metrics, relevance and applications

This post is by Bridget Jewell, public relations manager for Mall of America. She focuses on pitching stories to the media, project management, crisis communication, community management and serves as co-editor for the Mall of America blog.

Metrics and measurement are the hottest topic in social media right now. Thought leaders in the analytics industry are struggling to decide if there are — or can be — standard analytics for social media and if so, what are they? Among the analytic buzz words commonly discussed is the term “influence,” which has proven to be a very polarizing topic.

Chuck Hemann, vice president of digital analytics for Edelman Digital, and Matt Ridings, consultant at Xplane and founder of MSR Consulting, spoke at the BlogWorld & New Media Expo in Los Angeles regarding metrics in social media and how to get at the numbers that really matter.

Hemann said that we are now privy to more information than we ever have been in the past — and it’s this new data that we should be leveraging. He also stressed that it’s not just about the reach of a social presence, but also its relevance.

He went on to show the three important components of influence, broken down by outlet and author.

  1. Reach
  2. Syndication
  3. Relevance

Ridings agreed with what Hemann said, but went on to talk about a new way in which he has started to think about influence. Ridings said, “We don’t surf the Web anymore, we shape the Web. We let our influencers dictate what we see. It’s us and the people around us that are shaping our experience on the Web.”

He went on to discuss what he likes to call “awareness versus action” with four main points.

  1. We are all equals, we represent the same potential.
  2. Context is relative and fluid. Context is king.
  3. A campaign, by definition, is planned in advance and influence scores are trailing indicators.
  4. We need a new approach — to focus on the influenced and not the influencer. We need to find and create advocacy.

Ridings pointed out that this is a bit of a mental shift because this is about building relationships and increasing the customer lifetime value, because trust is what drives conversion.

After the presentation there was a lot conversation and a ton of questions revolving around the difference between advocates and influencers and activating campaigns versus building relationships. The conclusion from the presenters was that these are truly squishy topics without clear definitions at this point in time.

What are your thoughts on building advocates or influencers? Do you think that brands should focus on building advocates and that that will lead to more sales or conversions? Or should it be about having someone who has a high “influence” promote their product or service in hopes that they will convert a higher number of people?

Image credit: studiocasper, via iStockphoto

Related Posts:

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Categories: Events
Permalink

Responses

  • Posted by @karirippetoe on November 7th, 2011 at 4:19 pm

    Why can't it be a bit of both? Why can't we have programs that build relationships from 2 different angles: advocates to build customer loyalty and retention, and influencers to drive awareness and new sales? If we take a holistic approach, then who knows – we can make influencers out of advocates and advocates out of influencers!
    My recent post Presentation from “Doing More With Less: Social Media Tips and Trends for 2012″

  • Posted by @techguerilla on November 7th, 2011 at 11:35 pm

    It definitely should be a bit of both, and thanks for bringing that up. The point of my presentation was to get precisely that point hammered home. Essentially, it's distinguishing the difference in the objectives (awareness vs. action) and the types of activities one undertakes to accomplish them. In my opinion, there has been far too much attention placed on 'mass influencers' which impact awareness, but much less in the way of relationship driven influence programs (I prefere 'advocate' programs).

    Cheers,

    Matt Ridings – @techguerilla
    My recent post BlogWorld LA 2011 – Online Influence With Matt Ridings and Chuck Hemann

  • Posted by Paul Brinkman on November 8th, 2011 at 2:47 am

    Advocates versus influencers. A real and a virtual world debate. Well-framed. Thank you for going deeper into SM, the new web and all that we’re just beginning to understand.

  • Posted by Jean L. Serio on November 12th, 2011 at 11:53 am

    We should do both. While focusing on building advocates, who eventually convert is important, if the influencers who have continuously followed the brand, and virally promoted them were ignored, a company stands to lose an excellent marketer. Plus could also lose the many clients the influencer developed. And in this day of fervent followers a backlash of the influencers followers might follow.