Spamming influencers – oh dear

One of our favourite anecdotes at Influencer50 is an early client of ours that sent the same email to its top 50 influencers inviting to an event. It effectively spammed them – no warm-up call, no introduction or offer of value. They called me in a panic when their #1 influencer responded with a “Please remove me from your mailing list” reply. Oh dear.

Barbara reminded me of this episode when she cites Pepsi sending out cola cans to influencers. Without finding out whether these influencers actually liked Pepsi, it’s a risky strategy indeed. As it turns out, Mack is a Dr Pepper drinker. It’s the fizzy beverage equivalent of sending an iPod to a Microsoft employee. Oh dear.

Interesting, Mack poses the question ‘Are Companies Targeting the Wrong ‘Influencers’ With Social Media?’. I don’t think they necessarily are, but Pepsi certainly targeted Mack in the wrong way. Better to find out first how wedded Mack is to Dr Pepper, to find out whether he’d be willing to try Pepsi, to see if he’d shift from a Pepsi ‘detractor’ to a Pepsi ‘neutral’.

Instead, Pepsi spammed its influencers, not with email but with cola cans. It’s the same thing. Another example of using new media in old ways.

Will marketers ever learn?

An interview with Nick Hayes

Nick, the president and founder of Influencer50, appeared on Webmaster radio last week, covering the basics of Influencer Marketing. It’s actually an easy listen, and you can stream the interview podcast here. Or download the mp3 here if you want to miss the commercials!

WOMMA launches Influencer Marketing handbook

The Word of Mouth Marketing Association (WOMMA) has just launched its Influencer Marketing handbook for comment. It’s worth a look.

I’m hugely relieved to see that WOMMA has resisted much of the nonsense that is talked about influencers, especially in the consumer markets. No paid “brand advocates”, no Big Seed Marketing, and no celebrities. Instead, some straightforward advice to get firms thinking about influence, and who might have it.

WOMMA tends to be very consumer-focused, and I’d like to have seen more reference to B2B influence, where the dynamics work differently, but that will come over time. More importantly, it ignores the subject of how to identify and rank influencers, since (I assert) some influencers are more influential than others. My guess is that measuring influence is in the ‘too hard’ tray, certainly as far as proposing a standard that works across all markets and sectors.

In all, the handbook is a useful source for those considering Influencer Marketing, and its bibliography is the most comprehensive I’ve seen. It certainly introduced some blogs that I’d not heard of, so I’ll check these out.

The handbook is available for public comment until Oct 20th.

Influence as vocabulary for integrated marketing

One of Influencer50’s first clients initially thought that Influencer Marketing could unite the disparate silos that existed in the marketing department. Thanks for the confidence, guys!

Much as we’d like to position Influencer Marketing as a panacea for marketing’s ailments, it doesn’t work quite like that. But strangely, and probably because the client’s expectation was set from the beginning, the outcome was closer to their aspiration than we thought possible.

It works like this.

A major issue in marketing is the silo mentality that divides operations into a wide range of disjointed activities. So we have PR, AR, partner marketing, events (from conferences to podcasts), user groups, collateral development, and so on, as well as a host of telesales/telemarketing and mailings.

Now Influencer Marketing doesn’t promise to unite all of these distinct activities. But what it does do is identify where the influence on decision makers lies. It does ask the question: “How does this activity relate to influence on decision makers?” And it does suggest that if and activity cannot demonstrate an impact on influence then you should stop doing it.

Influencer Marketing applies right across the marketing operational domain. It covers press and analysts, and partner organisations, and end-users, and events and other influence categories. So it offers a vocabulary for discussing the widest range of marketing activities, uniting at least the terminology for discussing and managing marketing.

Our client runs marketing operational management meetings, at which all representatives report on their activities. The reports are provided in terms of their impact on the identified influencers relevant to the activity. So PR reports on progress in engaging with the most influential journalists. Events are scheduled to leverage the most influential conferences (a diminishing category), and influencers are solicited to speak at client-arranged seminars. Partnership strategy is oriented around the most influential people in third-party organisations, even if formal partnerships don’t already exist.

Thus influencers have become a way of everybody reporting back using the same terms, and with the same degree of focus on who really carries influential with decision-making prospects.

We, and our client, are smart enough to recognise that this isn’t truly integrated marketing. But it’s a useful start, easy to implement, and aids management. It also helps to present marketing in a more organised and professional light to the rest of the organisation. This is important, especially with a recession looming and the budgetary axe being lifted.

Idea diffusion and influence

I was prompted to think more about Duncan Watts’s ideas by Sarah Fraser’s comment on my post on influencer communities, and by her post on professor Watt’s theories.

In fact, I’ve just finished reading Watts’s Six Degrees, which was excellent and more accessible (I found) than Barabasi’s Linked. So Professor Watts is top of mind right now.

Here’s where I think the key difference between what Watts says and my practical experience. Watts talks about the role of influencers in the diffusion of ideas. As Seth says, use ‘sneezers’ with influence if you want to crack a market. Watts disagrees that you can predict what ideas diffuse, or even whether you can identify influencers that might make diffusion easier or more likely. It’s pretty much random, according to Watts.

I agree. If you’re trying to use influencers to spread ideas and concepts, then good luck but don’t bet the firm.

My own view is that influencers can be identified, and can assist greatly, in the decision-making process. That is, not whether an idea is spread or not, but whether an idea is adopted in the end. Idea diffusion is part of the process, but it’s just the start. A decision-making process is often a long and time-consuming activity. In the B2B world especially, a decision may take years to emerge. Idea diffusion is necessary, but not sufficient.

I explored this relationship between influence and the decision-making process in the book, and also posted on it (in summary form) here. Idea planting (as I called it) is right at the start of the process, but is relatively low down in the awareness of senior decision makers. Thus idea diffusers (connectors, sneezers, etc) may not be that influential in affecting the ultimate decision. There are a whole bunch of other influencers that intervene after ideas are sown.

Idea diffusion is also important in the process of deciding whether to do something. Do I adopt SOA? Do I need a Web2.0 strategy? Do I need a new car? But it plays less of a role in the subsequent decision of what to buy. Different influencers are in play at this more practical stage, like product reviewers or case studies or implementers.

The only problem I have with Professor Watts’s arguments is that when he doubts the role of influencers in any aspect of life, it doesn’t fit with real world experience and intuition. My guess is that we can all think of people who are influential in certain areas of life. Fitting this experience and intuition into a practical marketing approach is what Influencer Marketing is all about.

Evolving PR towards influencers

Seth reminds me that PR is a diminishing activity, in terms of its importance. The more enlightened PR firms accept that their business has been commoditised, with minimal opportunities for differentiation and fierce price competition. The question is, what do you do about it?

As ever, it’s a mindset change that’s required. Most start-up firms I know begin their marketing activities by recruiting a PR agency. Why? Because that’s what everyone else does.

Why not try to engage with the 50 most important people in your target market? Sure, some of these will be journalists, and you should definitely reach out to them. But you’ll probably find there are only a relative handful of them, which means you can treat them differently. Find out what they want to hear, what they’d find useful, what they’re interested in. Concentrate on being a resource for these most important journalists.

It means you don’t have to go chasing after the hundred other hacks that cover your space. Then use the time saved to focus on other influencer types, such as analysts, academics, consultants, bloggers, standards bodies and regulators.

The catch? It’s hard to determine which of the hundred journalists are really influential, by which I mean influential on decision makers. And it’s even harder to determine who else is influential, beyond journalists. But just because it’s hard doesn’t mean you shouldn’t, or can’t, do it

From Analyst Relations to Influencer Relations

Duncan Chapple posts an interesting comment on the expansion of analyst relations (AR) departments to a wider Influencer Relations approach. He notes that in starting from an AR perspective firms may miss out key groups of influencers, or gather them together as “left-overs”, and subsequently treat them inappropriately. I agree.

I think AR (or PR for that matter) can be a good starting point to adopt an influencer model. AR is a defined function within most firms, and (importantly) has a line-item budget allocation. There is also an established body of good practice and plenty of discussion to keep AR fresh and top-of-mind.

If you’re coming at influencer from an AR starting point, then SAP’s model is a great archetype to follow. Don knows that his model will evolve over time, as indeed it has done already, but you’ve got to start somewhere. Redefining AR as a sub-division of Influencer Relations is a start, if for no other reason than it identifies the gaps to fill.

I do think, however, that the ‘Relations’ model (AR, PR, media relations, investor relations, influencer relations) is often seen as an end in itself. At a practical level, in most IT organisations there is little coherency between relations and any marketing or sales activity. Sure, an analyst may be wheeled out at a lead generation event, or quoted on a product website. But it’s hardly integrated marketing.

AR and PR firms complain that they’ve been pushing an influencer model for several years, but firms lack the budget or insight to implement such a shift.

Not true – firms are deploying influencer models, but they are mostly not starting from within the AR and PR functions. They are typically emerging from operational marketing functions. Why is this? It’s simply because marketing is increasingly ineffective through the use of traditional models. It’s hard to differentiate a message, even harder to get that message heard, and even if it is heard, you’re unlikely to be believed. Why? Because it’s you that’s delivering the message. Get an influencer to deliver the same message, and it’s more likely to be trusted.

More importantly, by understanding why customers don’t buy from you, and then mapping influencer-led messages onto those objections, you can create a portfolio of counter-arguments based on what influencers are saying. That’s Influencer Marketing.

Unsurprising, then, that most firms truly engaged in an Influencer model are coming less from an AR or PR start, and more from a marketing start.

Influencer Marketing, as we define it, is precisely aimed at growing sales. It does this through a process of influencer identification and engagement, leading to an embedding of influencer-led messages that support and enable sales.

Influencer relations may get you on a shortlist. Influencer Marketing will make sure you get the purchase order.

B2B magazine op-ed

Nick has written a short op-ed piece for the US-based B2B magazine. It’s available here.

The Book – update, case studies and reviews

The Book is imminent, which in publishing terms means two weeks or so. It’s due on the 3rd December in the UK, and 14th January in the US. Don’t ask why…

The book’s available for pre-order on various amazon sites. Because of the Christmas rush, we won’t be doing much in the way of formal promo until January, though I am discussing some of the book’s main themes at the CMO Summit next week, as an exclusive(!). I’m also at the Word of Mouth Marketing Forum in January.

One of the main features of the book is the use of case studies. We have twelve of them, and I’ve previously announced that Wipro, Adobe, Palm and Yahoo! are among them. I can now divulge that IBM and Nortel will also be included, along with several firms that declined to be identified for competitive reasons. More details on all the case studies is available here.

Finally, we’re delighted to have had the book reviewed by a dozen or so CMOs and other notables. The book reviews are posted here, and will also feature on the book cover. We’re really chuffed that so many took the time to read the draft and provide comments. Nick and I are indebted.

CMO Council Summit talk

I suppose these days I should refer to this as a “gig.” But I just can’t shake the image of rock stars in leather trousers. I digress.

I’m invited to address the CMO Council’s Summit next week in Berlin – I’m in the after-dinner slot. It’s a great opportunity to meet lots of Marketing chiefs in one place – should be a good event.

If you’re going, let me know – perhaps we can hook up.