• Date of ill-fated Egypt Tweet. Yet Klout score rose from 40s to nearly 70 Klout points out of 100 possible total

Kenneth Cole's Klout score skyrockets during Egypt Fiasco --yet without sentiment data, Klout scores are an incomplete view.

Newer Older

Here's an example of influence not necessarily measuring the appropriate data needed for a holistic view of true influence.

Klout score factors in engagement (tweets, retweets, mentions, reactions) which they call "Reach. Amplification and Network" from an individual Twitter account, but fails to capture the *sentiment* of what's being said. Learn more here klout.com/kscore

For example, Kenneth Cole's Klout score has shown increased rankings across all visible analytics --despite him losing market credibility and suffering PR damage from Egypt Tweets in early Feb.

See his full klout analytics account: klout.com/kennethcole/score?ct=1

TAKEAWAYS
1) Kenneth Cole's dubious Tweet was influential --but not in a good way for his brand
2) Klout lacks sentiment and intention data --so factoring true influence is void of what people think of the content
3) Klout is a measure of reach and amplification (and only limited to Twitter and Facebook) --not true market influence.

THE BOTTOM LINE
Klout is a useful measure of reach and spread in only two channels --not comprehensive influence. Use it in part of your influence formula to measure --but recognize it is incomplete as a standalone metric. Savvy companies will build a *relative* influence formula that factors in the specific attributes in their unique market, one size does not fit all.

The Shifted Librarian, waynesutton12, and 1 other people added this photo to their favorites.

  1. getmwalsh 39 months ago | reply

    well said Jeremiah - great analysis. @mwalsh

  2. Conversationware 39 months ago | reply

    I thought there was no such thing as bad publicity

  3. mediaeater 39 months ago | reply

    Would that not be influence just the same? - he was influential at that moment. The "sentiment" as you say is a secondary measurement around language processing that differs IMHO from the amount of influence. Influence is ephemeral. I would look at this use case like the phrase you measure your press in inches, Totally agree with you .... he was influential in dragging down his companies reputation. It takes clout to do that.

  4. jeremiah_owyang 39 months ago | reply

    That's what your PR folk will tell you to make you feel better. but I assure you, good publicity is better than bad in nearly every situation.

  5. tsand 39 months ago | reply

    Luckily, Klout doesn't use flickr posts to boost rankings. :)

    What's your solution to this problem? More hands on interaction by Klout staff with the rankings, especially when a large spike is triggered... human analyzation would be great, but doesn't scale. Semantic Web FTW!

  6. jeremiah_owyang 39 months ago | reply

    Yup. Klout must factor in many other data sources: (mainstream mentions, other social websites) and new data types like Sentiment.

  7. Indiana Stark 39 months ago | reply

    There's no such thing as bad publicity. I wonder if Kenneth Cole's sales dipped at all?

  8. Weave 39 months ago | reply

    You're right - Klout by itself isn't anywhere near enough. Better to do a full conversational (and/or reputational) audit based on more powerful paid tools like Sysomos or Radian.

  9. rhappe 39 months ago | reply

    A very fine point J. No context, just activity.

  10. Sara Chi 39 months ago | reply

    So agree with you on "Klout is a measure of reach and amplification...not true market influence", I often doubt their real influence yet that scale of reach is still mostly brands/marketers are looking at, unfortunately. It'll be interesting to see what Klout can do with real life influence, according to Joe Fernandez, CEO of Klout. twitter.com/JoeFernandez/status/37319534679429120

  11. YacineBaroudi 39 months ago | reply

    +1! Context is key and baking it into influence scoring will be the defining factor.
    On a separate note, wondering why you called it "Egypt Fiasco"?

  12. scotthepburn1 39 months ago | reply

    Awesome points, Jeremiah. Your distinction between reach/amplification and influence is a critical one.

    Another key distinction is influence as a noun vs. verb. As a noun, influence is nothing more than "potential energy." But marketing requires "kinetic energy" -- objects (people) in motion. For all its reach/amplification, the Kenneth Cole brand may have trouble getting objects in motion as a result of this snafu.

    There's also the issue of directional influence. Kenneth Cole may, in fact, influence people to take action now...but maybe not in the direction the brand wants. An increase in followers and reach is akin to putting a powerful new motor in a car but omitting the steering wheel.

  13. commetrics 39 months ago | reply

    I just showed with two of my accounts how Klout scores can be manipulated relatively easiyl

    I will continue doing what I have done in the past, being social and sharing my intel. Have a nice evening.

  14. JavaJ9Murray 39 months ago | reply

    Thank you for posting this screen shot, Jeremiah, and for your insightful comments on what was shown!

    Problem is ... that many (most?) people do not care or pay attention, and Klout has the clout it wants. It reminds me very much of the sensational headlines on the trash mags at the cash in many stores; sure, maybe at some level people know they are not true, but it sure gives them something interesting to hold onto!

keyboard shortcuts: previous photo next photo L view in light box F favorite < scroll film strip left > scroll film strip right ? show all shortcuts