Tom Redwine submitted a topic idea about how we measure our online influence. I’ve been thinking about this concept for a long time. On the surface, it seems like an easy question. I thought, “Well, this will be another sort of “resource” post.” But the more I thought about it the more I thought that I really didn’t just want to list the expected answers. As I thought about that, I realized that measuring our online influence is a lot like measuring aspects of our real life, like what impact we have on other people, for example.
Because I’m torn, I’m going to answer Tom’s question in two ways. First, I’ll provide some ideas on how you can sort of start to get your arms around how you might be influencing people online. Then I’ll talk about some ways that aren’t as tangible but are just as (if not more) valuable.
Measuring Your Influence – Resources to Explore
There are two really popular ways to get an idea of your online influence right now. One is Klout and one is Empire Avenue.
I’ve talked about Klout before. It’s essentially a series of algorithms that combine to give you your Klout number (the highest possible is 100). On the surface, Klout seems to be the perfect answer to Tom’s question. You can see what topics you are influential in, who influences you, who you influence, where you rank compared to other people, and what your “reach” is – in other words, how many people see that tweet that you send out.
My problem with Klout has been and remains the fact that it seems too much about quantity and not enough about quality. If you tweet all day every day, you are likely to have a higher score than someone who only tweets a few times a day but tweets really high quality stuff. This encourages people to tweet a lot but doesn’t really encourage a super high quality to those traits. That I find bothersome.
Empire Avenue is another site people are turning to in order to get an idea of what their online influence is. Empire Avenue is more about social currency – how much stock do people place in you? Again, the gamification that is possible in this kind of context just seems too high to be meaningful. If you have a lot of Twitter followers already, you can ask them to do you a personal favor and invest in you. Does that mean you have a lot of influence? I don’t know. Maybe you’re able to get people to do stuff for you, but you already have that mechanism built in.
Peer Index is another influence measurement system. I’ll be honest and say I don’t know a whole lot about it – it doesn’t seem to get as much traction or play as Klout or Empire Avenue. If you have thoughts about Peer Index, please feel free to educate me along with everyone else who pops by!
In addition to these “influence measurement” systems, you can also look at things like your Google Analytics. How are people finding your blog site? You can look at the number of likes you get on Facebook (although again, the gaming involved in that kind of endeavor kind of negates the meaning of it). I might also throw out there taking a look at how people are engaging with you across Social Media platforms. Are your blogs getting tweeted a lot? Are a lot of people on Twitter following you to Facebook or Google Plus? These are less specific measurements of your online footprint.
The less tangible stuff…meet Clarence
One of my most favorite movies of all time is It’s a Wonderful Life, and one of my most favorite parts is when Jimmy Stewart’s character is taken through his life by Clarence the Angel to see all of the lives that he unknowingly affected just by doing what he did. This scene beautifully encapsulates how we can touch other people in our lives and in the world, for ill or for good, without even meaning to.
In the online world, this is equally true. Let me give you a really neat example from my own experience.
About a month or so ago, I wrote up a post listing 60 women in the online world who I think are the bee’s knees. I wanted to highlight these women because they do great things and darn it, they deserve recognition! This past week, a friend told me that her appearance on that list came up in a job interview and that the interviewers were impressed she was on that list. Imagine my surprise that something I put together could reach employers in a place far from where I live, a fact that ended up impacting a friend I interact with on a regular basis.
Does that speak to me about my online influence? It does. Does that matter to me more than my Klout score? It sure does.
The problem, of course, is that we don’t always hear about things like this. We are often left to wonder if we are getting through to anyone at all. But this experience has led me to believe that everything we put out here really can reach any given person at any given time.
For me, the answer to Tom’s question is that you can’t really measure your online influence, but you can mold it to be the way you want it to be.
That’s just my opinion, though. I tend to favor the squishy and intangible. What do you think?
Image by Bert van ‘t Hul. http://www.sxc.hu/profile/bertvthul
This post touches on something I’ve often pondered, Margie. Thanks for posting it!
We humans seem to have a visceral need to quantify EVERYTHING! While much of our universe can be reduced to, and sharply defined by, mathematics, there are many areas that refuse this approach. A good example would be love. Without an established unit of measure, building a useful equation for “How much do I love sunshine?” is impossible. I would argue that influence is a similar entity.
You point out a critical flaw in the math by invoking Clarence. These mathematical models focus on known figures, such as number of posts, retweets, and followers, but in no way manage to ensnare the unseen aspects of our influence. One may have a grand total of thirty followers and four retweets, but what about that one comment you made last year that was retweeted by a friend that was retweeted by one of their followers and ended up influencing a new business model in a young person’s mind on the other side of the world, that ultimately changes the world? I don’t think there’s any way the algorithms can track such an off-the-rails abstract. Not only that, but I doubt there’s any way we could realize such things ourselves without the intervention of a Clarence. I can’t help but find it a rather elegant example of chaos theory.
Well said, John!
Sometimes quantifying things is extremely important, but I agree with you – we tend to go overboard sometimes and it makes us lose track of things, intangible though they may be, that really truly matter more.
I’m very glad you liked the post! Thanks for your comment 🙂
Margie,
Thanks for using my idea and taking it somewhere I didn’t expect! I’m a big fan of “It’s A Wonderful Life” too, so I quite enjoyed your bringing that into this discussion about social influence and measurement.
To your point about not hearing how our actions can affect and influence others, I’m always surprised when someone who’s not “into” social media mentions something they’ve seen me tweet or post on G+ – it helps me be more aware of what I send out into the world and to make sure it’s the kind of thing I’d want someone to say ’bout me.
Glad you liked it, Tom! Thanks for the idea!
It’s always good to interact with people online who are not really of the “social media” world. I call it a truth serum – it definitely keeps you on the straight and narrow!
Margie, it’s not so much online footprint you speak of as it is the value/worth derived from an online presence. There are plenty of people who tweet 24/7 and post useless information on Facebook, Google + and YouTube. Because of some algorithm they may be deemed ‘influential’ or ‘valuable’ but are they really? Is that translatable to a job or business relationship or even personal relationship/friendship? It’s one thing to be all over the online space, something completely different to be making a real impact.
I think about the celebrities who, combined, have millions of followers on Twitter, went dark as a way to raise money for charity. Stating they would come back online after they raised $1 million. It took 5 or 6 days for them to reach $500K and it was a matching donation of $500K that got them back online. They anticipated raising all the money in 24-48 hours. Online presence, lots of followers did not translate. And therein lies the answer.
It takes more than just followers or likes or fan or readers or +1 people to really give you influence and clout in the real world.
As always, fantastic article Margie!
Sara
Sara
That’s a TERRIFIC analogy, Sara. It’s also important to note that online influence doesn’t necessarily mean people will want to spend money on you or on your behalf. For businesses, that is a very important part of the equation that can get missed if you focus all of your energy on numbers of followers or numbers of subscribers.
Thanks for the comment!
Good article Margie. Am sure somethings fundamentall wrong with how Klout measure people’s influence online. Do you know what exactly they measure on Linkedin? Number of contacts, number of people ask to connect with you, number of messages you get, number of discussions you start, how many people comment on your discussions? Or maybe number of recommendations?
Klout considers that Richard Branson, Bill Gates and Seth Godin only have less than double the influence I have on social media. That would be good for me but shows that something’s very wrong with Klouts measurements.
A friend of mine who really has 0 influence on social media tweets A LOT and is hence considered influencial by Klout.
Would be seriously interested to hear from you if you know what it is they measure since it doesn’t make sense to me that Gates and Branson will millions of followers online should only be as influencial as a pensioner I know in the States who’s active. Sure she’s active but definitely doesn’t have millions of followers.
Hi everyone! I’m here today to share my new website with Free Movies to watch with NO LIMITS and Registration! Check it now! http://www.DefectedWorld.com