Analytics Is King

So, this is what a blog looks like? You'll have to forgive the fact that I have not written anything here in almost two months (that's terrible). I've been busy saving the world (slight exaggeration) from misguided social analytics practices, and of course writing a lot for Edelman Digital. Just because I've been busy does not mean I haven't been thinking about what's next for the practice of social (or digital if you prefer) analytics.

Over the course of 2011 we've debated any number of social analytics topics including Klout and online influence more broadly, social media measurement and the role of listening within the large enterprise. Innovative things are happening in all three areas. Maybe not at the same rate of change as the broader social media ecosystem, but change is definitely happening.

I have a feeling we're going to see significant carry over in topics from 2011 to 2012, but I thought I would take a stab at five things you might not be thinking of from a social data perspective that we're likely to be talking about in 2012.

• This is the year Facebook, YouTube and Twitter get serious about its insights platforms. On December 15th, Facebook launched its new Insights platform, which should give brand page owners a better sense for how pages are performing. If you wanted to learn more about those changes, check out the video below from Stephanie Wonderlin of Tweetheart TV. We've also heard in recent weeks that Twitter is going to be launching brand pages, which will most likely be accompanied by an analytics dashboard. YouTube has also recently made changes to its platform as well. One of the reasons we've seen so many analytics tools pop up is because the big three social networks have been awful in keeping up with data needs. I think 2012 is the year we start to see that change.

• A real challenger to Klout will emerge - Lets be honest for a second... Klout isn't doing anything revolutionary, really, with its algorithm. It just so happens that it has greater mindshare than some of the other tools on the market. I think this is the year that we see a true challenger step up that combines a more rigorous approach to online influencer analysis and a user interface that is just as sexy.
• Integrated measurement will start to become a reality - It amazes me that for as much as we talk about integrated communications, we don't talk nearly enough about integrated measurement approaches. I think in 2012 companies are going to be really keen on developing an integrated scorecard approach that brings together all elements of communications.
• Primary research will be a key component of measurement strategies - There are just some elements of a program that we will not be able to measure through free tools. We need surveys. We need focus groups. Surveying online communities and using digital focus groups are going to be big in 2012. If you're not using them right now, you should be. Trust me, my friend Tom Webster will thank you for it. 
• Listening FINALLY goes beyond PR and marketing - More than two years ago, Ken Burbary and I wrote about how social data transcends PR and marketing. The reality is that social data has application to strategic planning, product development and HR as well. Unfortunately, we've not seen this trend really explode as of yet. The progressive brands are starting to use the data in this way. However, I think 2012 is the year we start to more widespread adoption of this idea.

These are just five of the things I'm watching for this year. What about you? What's on your radar?

 

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.

Is the discussion around/practice of online influence actually regressing? Identifying and then activating influencers is an important topic that deserves informed debate and the implementation of only the best tools. I actually think we have quite a bit of the former, and the latter is the gigantic black hole that we're all getting sucked into.

David Armano wrote an excellent post examining Klout, followed by Rebecca Dennison writing her own review of some of Klout's new features. Rebecca also wrote a great post looking at mPACT that you should check out. I'm not being critical of Rebecca or David because both of their reviews are great, and obviously very helpful to the person that is coming to this space for the first time.

Before we launch into the meat of the post, lets debunk a few influencer misconceptions

1. The process can be automated - The extent of the possibilities around automation begin and end with identifying outlets and writers. The actual number crunching/qualitative analysis should not be eliminated. In my experience, clients feel better about the final output when it has been scrubbed by a human.
2. Influencers are bloggers - I can't tell you how many times I see examples of "influencer lists" that are comprised entirely of bloggers. As if the entire social web centered around blogs? Have we forgotten YouTube? Forum users? Twitter users? Mainstream press? Your influencer list needs to be all encompassing otherwise you have an incomplete list.
3. Because someone has written negatively about my brand they shouldn't be in my list - This one causes a bit of a headache for me. You can learn just as much from the negative comments as the positive ones. In fact, probably more. Why eliminate these people?
4. I have to reach out to everyone on my list - One of the things I advocate all of the time is trying to come up with a list that includes people you might only listen too. Another segment that you'd be reaching out to directly, and still another that might be receiving a mass pitch. A mass pitch?! In social media?! The horror! It can work. Trust me.

There are others, but I don't want to get bogged down in the misconceptions. Rather, I'd prefer to tell you what tools I'd use if I were starting to build an influencer list from scratch. And no, just to get it out of the way, the process would not involve Klout, PeerIndex, mPACT or any tool like it. So where do I begin?

1. Google - No duh, right? This is where the process usually begins and ends. I'll develop some sort of query (that involves my client's name, some industry keywords and competitors) to start identifying outlets. Ideally, I'll start with at least 6 months worth of results (though I'd prefer 12) and just start clicking through. Yeah, it's a manual process. Yeah, it's time consuming. Yeah, trust me, it'll be worth it in the end. Oh, don't forget running similar searches in Google Groups, and Blogs
2. Listorious/Twitter Search - Both of these are invaluable resources for Twitter users. Check them both out.
3. YouTube/Flickr searches - Self-explanatory, right? But you'd be surprised how few influencer lists actually involve video bloggers. There are ton of them out there with broad reach
4. Compete/Quantcast/Alexa - Several people, including my friend Dave Fleet, have written posts identifying issues with compete data. It's true. However, obtaining traffic data for sites you don't own is generally problematic. All you can do is attempt to verify the data on multiple platforms.
5. Yahoo! Site Explorer - An excellent tool for looking at a site's indexed pages and inbound links. Both excellent barometers of overall reach
6. Microsoft Excel - I'm assuming you have this on your computer, right? Ok, moving on...
7. Blogrolls - Pretty invaluable in identifying other bloggers stemming from your initial Google searches. Use them and use them well.

Anyway, those are the tools I use to start building my lists. Does this take more time? Sure. Are my results likely to be more accurate/relevant to the client? You bet your ass. Don't give in to easy. Conduct your due dilligence.

The world of social media never ceases to amaze me. Just when you think you have things figured out, you come across something that is totally mind blowing. Like, for example, announcing a Christmas party by issuing a release that indicates you are throwing a "first-of-its-kind party" with people specifically chosen by their "social media influence and engagement." Listen, I couldn't care less if someone throws a Christmas party. In fact, I think they should. Being around people during the holidays is important. I'm hoping that we can all agree announcing your Christmas party via release is pretty over the top ridiculous, right? Yikes. I'm not going to spend a lot of time talking about the event, but I have to get a couple of things out of the way. A large network on Facebook means you are influential? Listen, any moron with a dream can create a Facebook page in about 30 seconds. There are over 500,000,000 people on Facebook. If you create a page that's mildly interesting you'll gather fans. If you don't have a fan page how does having a large Facebook presence mean anything other than you have pretty loose standards when accepting Facebook friend requests? Or, better yet, if you've created a Facebook fan page for yourself how ego-maniacal are you? Seriously... get a hobby. Yes, there are legitimate reasons to create a Facebook fan page. A fan page dedicated to your own ego aint one... Twitter and Facebook represent influence on the social web? This is one of those things that drives me nuts over almost anything else. THERE IS MORE TO THE INTERNET THAN FACEBOOK AND TWITTER! Because you have 5,000 followers on Twitter DOESN'T mean you are influential on the Web. It means you could be influential on Twitter! If you really wanted to have an event of the "social media A-listers" how about trying to define influence from participation across a wide variety of channels. Perhaps that's the way it's actually happening and the release is too narrowly written, but it sure doesn't seem that way. Anyway, if you take those two things away, my larger issue is with how these people are being selected. I think my record is pretty clear about off-the-shelf influencer algorithms. Generally speaking, I think they suck (and not just a little). Where do they go wrong?

1. There are so many intricacies of influencer identification that a computer (no matter how smart you make it) can decipher that I'm generally distrusting of the output. Maybe there are some smart humans on the back end of these tools, but how much do they know the brand/topic area? About as much as your dog Fred.
2. The tools that are available typically only measure one channel -- usually Twitter. We have this love affair with defining influence on Twitter. Why? It's a big channel, but it's only one. What does 5,000 followers really get me? The CHANCE to reach 5,000 people? Excellent. Guess what? The first person to talk about "opportunities to view" on Twitter is getting a knuckle sandwich. We don't need the issues of traditional PR measurement seeping into social media, thank you.
3. Similarly, platforms like Klout tend to overvalue the volume of posting. Yes, someone that's relatively inactive on a particular channel would likely not be considered an influencer, however there have been enough analyses by people showing how important frequency is to your Klout score. I'd much rather contribute a smaller amount of content and have it be useful to people then just be a chatter box on Twitter. Check out my man Kasey Skala's post from Monday about the inflated importance of volume on influence if you don't believe me. For the record, I probably post too much on Twitter but it isn't because I'm hoping my Klout score goes up.
4. These are all big concerns, but the biggest has to be relevancy. Now, that's less of an issue here because the folks putting on this event are only looking for people like them, so obviously they are highly relevant. What I worry about, though, is that some unsuspecting brand gets a hold of that release and tries to identify influential people through services like Klout. Instead of taking a list of people who have a lot of followers and dropping them into a service like Klout, how about spending some time with a cup of coffee, a search engine and a list of key terms and try to identify some people who are RELEVANT! I'd never say reach doesn't matter. However, it takes two to tango and reach and relevance go hand-in-hand.

By the way, this isn't a reflection on Klout. Do I think they are one of the better off-the-shelf solutions? Yes. Would I utilize them to define influence in the current form? No. Anyway, I'm hoping these folks have a great time at their "over-the-top" holiday bash. I hope they have a great time in New York City. However, the event only serves to confirm two thing: If these people are influential, it's likely only influential to each other; and their "score" is based on a flawed system of popularity and NOT influence.