Apr 28, 2017
Under the Influence® Marketing
(part 2 of 3)
Introducing *Strength of Network #SON a proposed KPI capable of measuring an Influencer’s network and their network’s network.
04/28
Standing out versus the rest of the field.
When you’re able to prove unequivocally, without a doubt that your advertising campaign using social media influencers is being accurately measured, you’ll be able to charge top dollar, because you’d be providing clients luxuries within their budget quite frankly they’ve never ever had.
When you hire an influencer, whether you’re a startup who’s primary objective is raising brand awareness or a small business launching a new product essentially what your after is their network which the Influencer is willing to let you borrow for a price.
Whomever is the one responsible for introducing 3rd party applications in lieu of Twitter Analytics must be sitting pretty somewhere still shaking their head in disbelief as the residuals keep flowing in monthly.
With all the data available today, there’s ways of measuring the Influencer prospect, their network and their network’s network. Contrary to what you’ve all been told, I’m a firm believer that reach is the only KPI that cannot be manipulated to an individual extent where it would bear any significant disruption on a whole, all by itself.
Those who follow the old adage of quality over quantity are simply attempting to draw attention away from because they know they’re weak in quantity by way how their network was built. How about the old adage that goes something like, “You can have your cake AND eat it too..!”
Introducing Strength Of Network, a newly proposed KPI.
Reference: Brand 24 Top 100 Influencers https://goo.gl/ZCZW2g
Tool: Scoreboard Social Report 4/1- 4/22 PDF https://goo.gl/ILSHdl
Section 1 Twitter users ranked by engagement
.
Section 2 Tweets (Top 3) ranked by engagement.
Strength Of Network = reach divided by number of tweets. *raw incorruptible data
Average Reach Per Tweet
#1 9842
#2 18,312
#3 3046
#4 3521
#5 3653
#6 6941
#7 8843
#8 29,220
#9 11,171
#10 13,386
#11 21,053
#12 16,500
#13 27,200
#14 15,714
#15 10,382
#16 9384
#17 21,622
#18 6887
TOP 4 w/ 20k plus average reach per tweet
1) ANN HANDLEY 2) JOE PULIZZI
3) TIMOTHY SNOW 4) LEE ODDEN
Top 3 Tweets ranked by engagement + reach
Ann Handley
.02/684k
.02/540k
.02/574k
Joe Pulizzi
.05/272k .04/218k .04/169k
Timothy Snow
.21/2.3mil .10/1.7mil .05/1.3mil
Lee Odden
.06/167k .04/110k .03/146k
The million reach mark obtained only 5 times by all included, 3 of which were mine.
Two years ago I first realized that I had a strong network that had what it took to go toe-to-toe with anyone.
The 5 missing were not calculatable due to too many followers.
As a substitute, conducted a Follower analysis via Twopcharts.com
Tools/Followers analysis
Here are the results:
RT 🔗 https://twitter.com/SnowinRI/status/857981103520350209
One way to get rid of KPIs is to replace them with smart benchmarking. While you were busy chasing a meaningless measure, you missed the transition away from website traffic to social media.
KPIs are the surest way to miss emerging trends and opportunities for change.
Advertising agency marketing researchers need to spend less time with their eyes glued to the live dashboard and more time realizing that the difference between black and white isn’t always gray.Your KPIs are robbing from ROI
I wrote about Twitter reach and impressions a couple of years ago. That was before Twitter revamped their Analytics dashboard. That was before Twitter gave us a good amount of metrics. Twitter analytics evolved considerably in those 2 years, but one thing seems to remain: the confusion between reach and impression. There is a difference between the two metrics, but a lot of articles, posts and social tools seem to confuse the two.
The reach to exposure ratio (R:I) can tell you a lot about the impact of your tweets. Whether you’ve measured 50 tweets or 50,000 tweets, you can use the ratio of reach to exposure to understand something about how those tweets have spread.
The reach:impression ratio represents the depth of penetration of tweets about a topic. A lower R:I suggests that people are seeing tweets about a topic over and over, while higher R:I numbers suggest broad but shallow penetration of that topic. However, a higher R:I does not always indicate success. Depending on the type of tweets you’re measuring and your goals with those tweets, bigger is not always better.
Low R:I = 0.0-0.19
A low reach:impression number (anything 0.19 or lower) suggests a large percentage of contributors are tweeting multiple times about the hashtag or keyword you’ve measured, which means the message is limited in scope and is not spreading far beyond those people’s followers. A number of people are receiving many tweets about this term.
Low ratios are fine in many cases, however. For example, regional issues and local news events, conferences, and Twitter chats, parties and contests are likely to fall in this range. And that’s perfectly reasonable for these types of events; they’re relevant to a smaller or localized audience and that’s who will see it.
If you’re aiming for a larger or more diverse audience, then start thinking of ways to get tweets about your topic out to a wider audience. What can you do to encourage more (and different) people to tweet? You should also be concerned if your R:I ratio is below 0.05. That suggests that someone is tweeting a lot about your keyword, to the point of being spammy.
Average R:I = 0.2-0.59
An moderate or normal ratio will be anywhere between 0.2 and 0.59. This suggests a normal distribution of tweets, retweets, and amplification. In this case, some people are tweeting multiple times, some influencers are tweeting to lots of followers, and most people are tweeting once or twice to their smaller set of followers. Most people will receive 2-5 tweets about your message.
Many general brand mentions and large product launches or announcements (Verizon iPhone, Chevy Volt) will fall in this range. Larger media events with a wide, popular appeal (like the Academy Awards and Super Bowl) will fall in this range, as well.
High R:I = 0.6-0.99
The closer this reach:impression number gets to 1, the more different contributors are represented in this report. Ratios of 0.6 or higher indicate that a wide variety of different people are tweeting to a number of diverse followers, spreading the message far and wide. Most people are not seeing more than one or two tweets about the hashtag or keyword. This is ideal if you want a large amplification of your message.
Twitter trends and popular hashtag memes (#LessAmbitiousMovies, #FollowFriday), significant national or international news events, and very big-name products and brands will fall in this range.
Depending on how many contributors and tweets you measured, high ratios could be somewhat misleading. If your report includes just a few hundred tweets and you have a R:I ratio of 0.8, then one or two people with large followings can account for a great deal of this ratio. The smaller the dataset, the larger the impact a few people can have on the R:I ratio.
You should also be concerned if this number is higher than 0.85 or so (which is incredibly rare). This indicates that most people only received one tweet about this message, which might not bode well for retention. How likely are people to remember something if they only read about it once? And if only one tweet about a topic is delivered to a person’s Twitter client, it’s very possible that person did not even see it at all.
*To calculate the reach:impression ratio, the formula is reach divided by exposure. You should get a number between 0 and 1 (if it’s higher than 1, then you probably used impressions divided by reach). For example, a recent report reached 147,425 people and had an exposure of 763,506 impressions. The R:I ratio is 147,425 / 763,506 = 0.19.
Bottom line is if you’ve got anything more than 10 times impressions:reach ratio something abnormal is happening. 15x and the Red Flag 🚩 needs to be raised that you’re gaming your KPIs and your message is simply being passed back and forth amongst your minion followers (probably fake) like a hot potato multiple times and not going anywhere further except your own little inner circle.
I have much to share and I know it’s not easy to look at. Let me know if you’re able to digest what I’ve shown so far so if need be, can clarify before continuing, thanks..!
Just because something isn't a lie does not mean that it isn't deceptive. A liar knows that he is a liar, but one who speaks mere portions of truth in order to deceive is a craftsman of destruction.
Under the #InfluencerMarketing
