BrandSavant

Gaining Insight From Social Media Data

The Influence Game

by Tom Webster on March 22, 2012

We are all being scored, all the time–for our credit, our hire-ability, and now our influence. Whether you believe in online influence measures like Klout and Kred or not will ultimately have little effect–VC’s believe in them, and some marketers believe in them, so get used to having a number by your name. That’s the reality, as Mark Schaefer’s fine new book Return On Influence lays out in some detail.

In this space, I’ve always tried to maintain a constructive skepticism about these measures, without descending into “Klout-bashing.” These services are iterating; let’s allow them to iterate.

So, in that spirit…

Yesterday, I saw lots of people promoting this:

Klout

…which reminded me of a similar promotion run by Kred last month that Shelly Kramer brought to my attention.

Now, “Agency Insanity” looks like good silly fun. A lot like my Klout topics page, actually, which continues to feature my areas of online expertise, including Groundhog Day, Nausea, Pregnancy, Jersey Shore, NFL, and (thanks to Jason Keath) “Electric Housewares and Fans (Wall and Baseboard Heating Units for Permanent Installation) (Industry).”

It’s good fun. It’s a game. When Klout runs a promotion that specifically instructs us to “Vote to decide the nation’s most influential agency professional,” they are, in essence, telling us it’s a game, and instructing us how to play it.

It’s gamification, however, that ultimately may kill these things dead. Asking us to vote on who is most influential is essentially equating influence and popularity, a dangerous mistake. But it also says something I believe quite damaging about the influence measures themselves.

Consider if Google asked you to “vote on the best search result” for a given keyword. Do you really think you’d get the right one? Is a Twitter popularity contest the best “algorithm” to find “Best NYC Hotel?” Would you trust those search results? (Don’t get me started on “social search.”)

Now, I know that Klout and Kred, et al, have actual activity-based algorithms, and–again –this promotion is just silly fun. But it’s silly fun that dings their brand halo, and reminds us all that yes, this is a game. You are not being scored on your influence; you are being scored on your ability to play that game, and no, that’s not nothing.

The game is what keeps these services alive. They need us to play the game–if we don’t “play along” by giving them access to our online social graph (allowing them to explicitly link our online identities, which they couldn’t do unless we grant them authorization and tie our profiles together) they don’t have any grist for their mills. So the “game” is necessary. We give them our profile information so that we can play along and try to get a better number than the next guy. Without the public game, the ego-driven need to acquire social proof, we don’t authorize them to pull from our social accounts. And if we don’t do that, social scoring falls apart.

So they need to be games, and they need us to play those games. But those games devalue what they are doing. It’s a real catch-22 for these services.

What do you think? Is the “game” damaging to brands like Klout and Kred? Or just part of the new reality of the social web? A shiny +K to everyone who comments, and a copy of Mark Schaefer’s Return On Influence to the comment with the most likes.

See what I did there?

Note: there is some fine “prior art” on this from Sean McGinnis – do read his take as well.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • http://www.312digital.com Sean McGinnis

    We’re of like mind on this. :)   http://seanmcginnis.me/2011/12/26/klout/

  • http://www.edisonresearch.com Tom Webster

    I liked your point of view, Sean – the only problem with “going dark,” as you put it, is that removes the incentive for social proof-seekers (i.e., people with high Klout scores) to connect their social accounts. They have *NO* way to tie me to my Twitter AND Facebook accounts that way – they can’t create an influencer profile, in other words, only score tied to a Twitter handle. And if they can’t tie our services and profiles together, they’ll never be the “standard” they aspire to be. I’ll give you a “like” on this one :)

  • http://www.312digital.com Sean McGinnis

    Could Klout not cut deals directly with Facebook and the other platforms to gain access to that data? If they gained access en mass, there would be no need to incentive individual users to connect their various accounts.

  • http://www.convinceandconvert.com/ jaybaer

    Good for awareness, bad for credibility. But if you’re looking to get sold for a huge multiple, you’re playing a short-term game that favors the former – even at the expense of the latter.

  • http://www.312digital.com Sean McGinnis

     Of course, I realize I’m living in a dreamworld and none of this is likely to happen. Marketers like shortcuts. People like games to play. VCs like new toys to invest in. These tools will get better and better with time.

    They are clearly here to stay.

    Regardless, loved your post.

  • http://twitter.com/webby2001 Tom Webster

    I’m giving you +K for Idealism Busting.

  • http://dbthomas.com David B. Thomas

    This is the worst electric housewares and fans blog I’ve ever seen.

  • http://www.edisonresearch.com Tom Webster

    Yeah, don’t you wish you could give -K?

  • http://stoplookingswan.blogspot.com Eric S.

    Screw Klout.  I want Whuffie. 
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whuffie

  • http://twitter.com/webby2001 Tom Webster

    This is a family blog, Swayne.

    Err…no it isn’t.

  • http://www.thestudyofsocial.com Matt Hixson

    You make a great point here Tom.  Maybe early on the intention was good but it has turned into a game.  The game mechanics they employ only get people to want to hook up more services wich gives Klout and the others the ability to unify your identify and see you activity across streams.  Sounds like valuable data.  They are solving no real problems for businesses in how they get intelligent about approaching the social networks they are trying to reach.  Nice post.  

  • http://www.businessesgrow.com Mark W. Schaefer

    It’s mystifying. They are spending milliions of dollars on technical development and PhD level thinking and we get this? I honestly respect the vision of Joe Fernandez but as a marketing strategy I don’t see why they need McDonald’s-style games that turn business professionals into game pieces. They can have a very successful business without goony engagement. Maybe I’m missing something. I usually do : )

    And thanks for the shout-out Tom. I would be hapy to up the ante by contributing a *signed* copy of the book to your winner unless he/she thinks it would be somehow more valuable to keep me out of it : )  

  • http://www.edisonresearch.com Tom Webster

    If you click Armano, you get a shamrock shake.

    Yeah, this one mystifies me, as well. As you say – they are spending a pantload on *actual* algorithms, but this really dings their brand. They probably won’t suffer from it, and they’ve shrewdly chosen agencies, who will feel the need to compete if only for agency bragging rights, even if they personally find it distasteful. But baffling nonetheless.
    And thanks for offering the signed book. Actual BrandSavant Swag! I’m in the big leagues now.

  • http://twitter.com/Jodange Larry Levy

    Tom – Great post. As you well know we at Appinions are trying to stay above this fracas of gamifying the Influencer space.  But it creates noise and confusion,  and education is 
    therefore necessarily to ensure people fully understand the issues. We stick by our approach that just measuring  social activity does not define topic based influence. As this space matures,  so practitioners will realize this and begin to gravitate to those Influencer management platforms that cover all types of networks and base their analysis not on popularity but on the impact their opinions on a topic have on others. Larry

  • R E “Buzz” Brindle

    Your social influence post reminds me of the conundrum I encountered as a broadcast radio programmer. For the industry and its advertising agency clients, the ratings generated by Arbitron became reality rather than a source of insight into trends. As one’s effectiveness and job security migrated from results generated quarterly, to monthly, to weekly and, now, to minute-by-minute, the pressure to game the system for short-term success increased. However, by doing so, one sacrifices the opportunity to learn how the audience is really responding to the product being offered so as to make improvements which benefit the brand in the long term.

Previous post:

Next post: