There are a lot of tools that automate online influence and reach. The most popular - or at least most talked about - is Klout. Klout calls themselves ..."the standard for influence. We believe that every individual who creates content has influence. Our goal is to accurately measure that influence and provide context around who a person influences and the specific topics they are most influential on." Unfortunately, with this push to determine and exploit "online influence," businesses are beginning to use Klout, and other online influence platforms, as part of their online strategy. I say unfortunately because, in my opinion, services like Klout have very little use in their current state.
The problem with Klout and using it as a guide to gauge who you interact with, as a brand, is flawed. I understand the concept of reaching out to those who a large network. On a pure number basis, it makes sense. And for promotion and awareness, that's fine. But as a brand, simply throwing a bunch of stuff against the wall and hoping something sticks, is poor business.
I think we have a flawed sense of what "influence" really means. Those who live and work in the online space have this assumption that pure volume grants someone influence. And in terms of the social space, it might be true. But how many times have you made a purchasing decision (other than tech, web, social related) based upon the decision of an online marketer? Mr. Social Media Expert/Consultant/Guru might know a little something about the online space, but does he really have any influence on which brand of cereal I'm going to buy? Absolutely not. Keep in mind, outside your little social bubble, the vast majority of people in the real world have no clue who you are, nor do they care about your opinion.
The other week at work, I was going through the stream of Foursquare check-ins I monitor. I have a separate stream filled solely with check-ins, and I use this to monitor both the frequency and volume of check-ins, along with who's checking in. Right now, a lot of the customers who check-in on Foursquare aren't very active on Twitter. In fact, a lot of those who check-in to my locations only have Twitter because of Foursquare. Based on Klout's measurement guidelines, these users have a low Klout score, if any at all. If I were to put value in Klout scores, I'd simply glance over these users. However, the users who simply have Twitter for their check-ins are often more valuable than those active users.
The users who simply have Twitter as a platform for their check-ins are giving me, as a brand, an in-depth look at their purchasing decisions. It's essentially like having a researcher following the consumer charting their behavior. This information is incredibly valuable. I'm not into throwing a bunch of crap against the wall and hoping something sticks. I'm into knowing the likelihood that an individual is going to make a purchase at one of my locations. Give me Johnny, who's broadcasting that he's checking into my location every 4 weeks, over Jimmy, who has 30k followers that may or may not visit my brand.
I understand what Klout is trying to do and I think the big picture concept is valuable. I think Klout can play a small role in building awareness for a brand. However, in the world of engaging with consumers, managing reputation and building loyalty, I think those who use online influence are going down the wrong path.
*Please note, this is solely my opinion and not that of my employer