Dear Social Media and Digital Marketing Professionals,

I'm writing to you today to say I was wrong. Not wrong in my push to make the influencer identification process rigorous. Not wrong in my criticism of those who over-emphasize the value of free and paid influencer tools. Not wrong about those lazy professionals who think influencer lists should be treated like traditional media lists (read: downloaded and put into an Excel grid, only to collect dust over time).

No, what I was wrong about was the value Klout provides to the marketplace. It isn't the demon seed of influencer identification. It isn't even the worst thing to hit social media in the last few years. NOT. EVEN. CLOSE. Now, before you start calling me a flip-flopper let me clarify a couple of points following my meeting with the team yesterday:

  • I still don't think tools should be relied upon as much as they are. You can't just use PeerIndex, Klout or any of the tools available on the market and call it a day. There MUST be a heavy qualitative component to your influencer ID and analysis.
  • I still have some questions about the "science." Because the algorithm isn't made available, I can never be truly confident in the results. I can guess what the metrics might be, but we know how effective guessing can be. 
  • I still think the score is a vanity exercise. I know what my score is, and I'm betting you do as well. Don't come here and feed me a line about how you've never checked. You're curious. You may disagree, but you want to know. We all want to know how we stack up.
  • I still have concerns about trying to calculate relevancy, but they are launching topic pages, which should help mitigate that.

I stand by all of those points even after meeting the Klout team yesterday. However, I was wrong on several fronts:

  • The Klout team is expanding and Joe Fernandez is, rightfully so in my view, investing in the science and tech teams. The algorithm (what we know of it) can likely be improved, and with new platforms coming into the fold the formula will have to be tweaked.
  • One of my biggest fears was not looking at Facebook versus Facebook, before trying to mashup the scores. I did learn, however, that scores are calculated for each platform and then brought together for the final score. Think what you want about the final score (and I think plenty), but this approach makes sense to me.
  • They don't view themselves as replacing humans. Ever. They understand fully that influencer analysis is a mixture of quant and qual, and that no matter how sophisticated they make the algorithm there still needs to be a human interacting with the data.
  • We all have our questions about the targeting with Klout Perks programs, but what I can tell you is that I've seen the results of some recent programs and they are compelling. And, for the record, not just superficially compelling either. REAL results.
  • Some of the new stuff coming (not going to share specifics as I want to keep the information confidential out of respect for Joe and the team) to Perks and the tool will make it more useful for brands. Trust me. I do this kind of research for a living and have literally seen hundreds of tools. What they are adding makes sense. 
  • I'd like to see the algorithm, but I also know they don't owe that to us. That's their secret sauce. If you don't want to use the tool because you can't see the science behind it, that's entirely your decision. Can't say I'd blame you either. But, they don't *need* to share it with us.
  • Klout isn't responsible for lazy marketers. As much as we'd like to blame them for feeding the social media vanity beast, they aren't responsible for you taking their data and treating it as gospel. Spend the time vetting their scores. 

So, there you have it sports fans. I was wrong on a lot of levels. Is Klout the holy grail of influence? No. Does it have a role in influencer programs? I think so. Where depends on what your program entails.

Now, feel free to come here and bash me for flip-flopping. I'm a big boy. I can take it.