Measuring influence or communication skills

 

Do you have influence? This question is causing quite a stir at the moment, but what does it mean in the wine world?

This question will be of particular relevance next week at the London International Wine Fair. Why? Because with the massive growth of online sources of information, wine businesses will want to understand who can help them spread their message, and build their brands.

“I’m 47 on that”

Influence“, in theory, goes beyond raw numbers of readers, hits and followers, and instead promises an insight into a wine communicator’s ability to engage their audience and generate some kind of activity (see here for a previous post “Writing Under the Influence of Twitter“).

In many ways, it is analogous to how wines are scored, except this time it is the communicator themselves being scored. Take James Suckling for example, infamous for his point-scoring perspective, in the world of influence he himself is scoring 47 and 53 instead. I don’t think he’d like these numbers, but should he be impressed?

The “science” of measuring this influence is in its infancy, but developing every day to include a wider range of information sources. Two of most widely used services today are PeerIndex & Klout, and for your enjoyment, analysis and feedback, here is a list of “top 100 wine twitterers” I have created from the MANY folks I follow every day:

(Click on the link for the full global list of the most influential wine accounts and for information on what the different columns mean)

You will note:

  • The list is ordered by an overall influence score that does not relate solely to wine (I am hoping to work with this data in the near future)
  • The list is arbitrary & incomplete – I certainly don’t know all twitterers interested in wine
  • It is a mix of all those with interest in wine, covering many different segments – winemakers, marketeers, personalities and consumers that could/should be looked at separately
  • It is based largely, at this stage, on twitter activity (though facebook, linkedin and others are apparently taken into account). So if you are not on twitter, tough luck!
  • Most of all, influence is a very personal thing, so you probably will disagree with this list

For comparison, here are Klout scores for the same top 10:

Klout score for wine

Unfortunately Klout’s list does not allow for more than 10 users at the moment, so it is very hard to compare (but this data should be available shortly) however, you can see a similarity in the general order of users.

In essence, the influence score is a measure of how likely a message sent by this person is likely to be heard and acted upon. It is calculated based on measures such as the size of the audience, the volume and quality of interactions with that audience (messages, retweets, lists), the nature of the content being shared, and how unique and interesting that is, and more.

Measuring your social media skills

But does it mean anything? More importantly, does it help in any way?

I feel uncomfortable with the idea of “most influential” lists, yet I do recognise that the people who feature highly are those I read and look out for.

I believe it would be better for the term “influence” to be replaced with “skilled at social media communication” – unfortunately that is a lot less catchy. I believe that these measures are really about how skilled the person is at communicating clear messages in a way that people will want to follow, read, share and react. Skills are learned, and the effort and time users invest in these accounts is therefore also reflected in the score.

Does it matter? Whatever you think these measures mean, they do reflect the profile of certain people and messages. More decision-makers (advertisers, PR companies, buyers, consumers) are paying attention. For that reason alone, the answer is, Yes … but don’t lose sight of the big picture!

It is always important to keep an eye on the leaders in a field, but don’t forget that in an area that is developing as fast as social media, the next big thing is probably not included yet!

Next week’s LIWF will see a lot of influence at work, and if managed well, see these scores rising. Brands will see their influence scores rise as visitors share their reviews and links online. Communicators will be discovering and sharing the kind of unique content that their readers are interested in, and looking to share. Who wins? Everybody – brands, writers and consumers, and the online wine culture.

Have you checked your score? Is it a fair reflection? Want to know how to improve it? Come along to the Access Zone on F70 at the London Wine Fair to ask us.

Update 10/5/2011: here is a list just of UK wine bloggers as an example

Stay tuned to WineConversation.com as we explore the area of influence, or communication skills, and look in more detail at what this might mean.

Enhanced by Zemanta
  • Serge the Concierge

    Robert

    Influence is a ‘mushy’ thing.

    Are we talking about being influential within the wine sphere, the cognoscenti, or being influential in the public sphere, people who buy wine?

    Something you or I write or broadcast might get traction or attention because another party mentioned in the story or someone with a bigger megaphone spreads the news.

    Some topics might be short hits and fade as quickly like cheap perfumes do while others will have lasting power like a wine with a long subtle finish.

    Maybe we tend to confuse popularity contest and influence.

    Thinking out loud.

    I wish we could continue the conversation in person at London International Wine Fair but it does not seem I will find my way there.

    Have a great day

    Serge

    http://www.sergetheconcierge.com

    • http://thirstforwine.co.uk thirstforwine

      I totally agree. In fact the point is that this is not INFLUENCE at all, but a measure of social media skill (and by extension, a measure of time invested). It is more than popularity though, even though that is a factor. It is early days, and it is probable that this first step in analysing “influence” will help to create more meaningful measures that are actually based on measurements of actions affected rather than their proxies (such as retweets). However, we should be aware of this process, especially if we are bloggers wanting to get noticed, or brands who want to get connected.

  • rickbakas

    Wow! I hadn’t seen this data in about four months. One thing I’d be curious to see (especially in the Peer Index list) is what the metrics would look like if Twitter hadn’t “gifted” select tweeters their followers. In other words, @GaryVee, @JancisRobinson, @Catavino, @RandallGraham and @AbleGrape have all been on Twitter’s “featured users” or “Who To Follow” list in the past or currently (@AbleGrape gamed the system while working at Twitter). That means thousands of free followers and ultimately larger reach.
    I’d like to see what other wine tweeters could do if they were also given the same thing. These lists would look completely different. Agree/Disagree?

    • http://thirstforwine.co.uk thirstforwine

      It could be interesting, but as far as I understand it, reach is only one metric. Robert Parker has a lot of followers too, but doesn’t score as highly. The important thing is not how you gain followers, but how you interact with them (and them with you). Follower schemes tend to produce a less interested crowd, so if anything it DEvalues your interactivity score. Obviously the balance between the value placed on reach vs interaction is key to the usefulness of the metric.

      In any case, I think we would be better off if we stopped thinking of it as actual “influence” and considered it a score-card of how you are doing with online interactions. If that matters to you (and for most it will not) then it gives you, and others, additional feedback about your personal brand online.

      • rickbakas

        With you on that. Can’t we all just share some wine and good conversation?

  • http://cambridgewineblogger.blogspot.com/ Tom Lewis

    Robert

    This is fascinating; I think this does measure influence, but only in a limited area (i.e. mainly on Twitter – a hugely influential person who does not use Twitter would not feature here).

    It is also a great example of how it is increasingly possible to measure the reach and influence of messages – something that traditional above-the-line advertising cannot do (leading to the adage about half your spend being wasted, but you just don’t know which half !).

    Overall, this is indicative, and part, of the fundamental changes going on in the world of advertising and marketing – fragmentation of traditional media, shift towards online activity, increased focus on more subtle influencing, greater measurement of ROI – all of it fascinating !

    Cheers, Tom

  • http://catavino.net Ryan Opaz

    Rick, AbleGrape did not “game the system” he happened to work for twitter, and thus he got followers. Likewise, Catavino would rather not be on the “featured list” as most of our followers are spam bots. That said, I still think we would rank high, as both Gabriella and I do as individuals. Less followers often times means greater influence, if all those followers are following you for a reason.