I have been and continue to be a skeptic of influence measuring.
From physics we all know about the “observer effect” – that the act of measuring impacts the phenomenon being measured. Surely this effect should be even more powerful in the social realm, with thinking and emotional actors, than when analyzing inanimate particles. In an earlier post I stated that from the principles Mark Schaefer outlines in Chapter 10 of his new book, ROI, these seven steps should be effective at raising a Klout score:
- Post more often,
- Post on trending or popular topics,
- Post when your important followers are online,
- Follow people with high Klout scores,
- Don’t follow people with low Klout scores,
- Unfollow followers who have become inactive or have had their Klout score fall below a cutoff level,
- Do whatever you can to engage people with high Klout scores.
Six weeks ago I started focusing on steps #5 and #6, both of which I feel are a bit anti-social. My content is actually down over the period because we are at the end of the semester with grading and projects and committee wrap-ups…
Sure enough my Klout score has slowly risen from 48/49 to 53 over that period. [I will never do all seven steps as I write about what I am interested in and cannot be a sycophant…but if you REALLY care about your Klout score do them all!]
I encourage people to look at the Klout alternatives, PeerIndex and Kred. Because of the observer effect it is important to have more than one scorer. I examined relative scores on the three services. I consider @ckburgess @markwschaefer and @kenthuffman to be my three mentors on social media, so I looked at how the four of us score by the three measures. Two observations: (1) there is some diversity in the scoring (2) they are probably all wrong because all three mentors should probably score higher than me.
SM Participants KloutTM Score PeerIndexTM Score KredTM Score
@markwschaefer 71 64 922
@ckburgess 55 60 843
@ProfessorGary 53 65 789
@Kenthuffman 49 52 783
According to figures from www.klout.com, www.peerindex.com, and www.kred.com
More on influence measuring?
Mark Schaefer in a 9-minute interview talks about the power of influence marketing:
Azeem Azhar, founder of PeerIndex is interviewed by Mark. An interesting insight into the power of the mighty middle (scores of 35-65):
this is a valuable process you are going through. Perhaps I should behave like Klout et. al want me, but in the end, I don’t take instruction well. All the best.
Thanks for your thoughts, Albert. I thought about experimenting and using all seven – say for the summer – but it would mess up my enjoyment of social media.
And that is precisely my concern about the growing influence of the influence measurers! – Gary
Agreed! My worry is that too many will follow the steps and that social media will be coarsened by SEO-like behaviors.
Thanks for your comment, Albert!
Hi, this is Shawn from Kred. Thanks for including Kred in your post.
There are a couple of reasons you might find differences in your score across influence measures. In the case of Kred, our scoring algorithm is completely transparent and published at http://kred.com/rules. ‘Follower quality’ is not part of our score; almost all of the scoring factors consider who has acted on your content and how you have shared others’ content.
Another couple of elements that may be creating a difference is our deeper data (1,000 days of social posts) and real time updates.
Thanks again for your support!
Interesting comparison. Hard to know what it means. : )
I was sure the YOU were the one who could make sense of it… Just another mystery of the universe then.
Thanks for your insight! I like the transparent calculation model over the secret algorithm approach.
And appreciate your input!
Pingback: How Much Do Social Scores Matter To You Today? « Claude Oggier – Go4bigpoints Blog