Are undergrads really more influential than Gruen panelists? Klout thinks so
In this guest post, Sarah Ballard and Sean Rintel warn that marketers who rely too heavily on online influence measurement system Klout may be foolish to do so
Klout is increasingly becoming a hot new marketing metric. But basic tests suggest that it offers highly questionable results.
We asked: Could undergraduate students really have more Klout than Gruen Transfer panellists Todd Sampson and Russel Howcroft?
While The Gruen Transfer’s panelists may be among the top Australians in the business of influence, the Klout online social influence measurement service shows that typical undergraduates appear to have as much online influence as Gruen panelists.
Online social influence is becoming one of the hottest new marketing metrics.
Companies such as PeerIndex and Klout claim to measure influence by weighing up combinations of platforms, followers, and sharing. Klout is currently aggressively promoting itself by pairing with brands; for example, Cathay Pacific is currently offering free entry to its SFO lounge to passengers with Klout scores above 40, and Red Bull has worked with Klout in Australia. It’s clear that brands are looking to partner with the most influential advocates available, but is Klout a reliable way to measure influence?
Klout scores start at 0 and Klout claims that the average user gets a score of 20 out of 100, but we decided to put that to some simple tests – in particular examining whether people who link it to their Facebook profile get a disproportionate lift.
Twitter-linked accounts: You’re a 10 even if you do nothing
To determine the baseline Klout score, we conducted the “Snow White and the Seven Dwarves” test. Seven Klout accounts were created named after the dwarves and appropriate content was tweeted daily (e.g. jokes from Happy). The dwarf Klout scores stayed at 10 for the entire month–even Sleepy who posted nothing and had no followers. This result suggests that baseline score is 10 and that the claimed average Klout score of 20 is very low.
To determine the baseline Klout score, we conducted the “Snow White and the Seven Dwarves” test. Seven Klout accounts were created named after the dwarves and appropriate content was tweeted daily (e.g. jokes from Happy). The dwarf Klout scores stayed at 10 for the entire month–even Sleepy who posted nothing and had no followers. This result suggests that baseline score is 10 and that the claimed average Klout score of 20 is very low.
Facebook-linked accounts: Is 40 the new 20?
Next we tracked the Klout of three male and four female undergraduates, aged between 18 and 28, who used Facebook, averaging around 400 friends and reporting only light Facebook activity. Astonishingly, all of their scores rose dramatically above the claimed average of 20. The average peak score was in the mid-40s. The scores dropped slowly and all but one maintained scores above 30.
Birthday bump versus consistent posts
Several of the undergraduates had birthdays just after signing up for the study, and their Klout scores reached the high 40s and dropped slowly thereafter. This suggests that the increased activity surrounding major life events considerably affects the Klout score.
Thank you! I’ve been screaming that Klout has no clothes for a while, and am still amazed at how much stock some experts place in it.
It’s easily gameable. Because ll scores are normalised out of 100 it doesn’t give you a true measure but a normalised measure against everyone else on Klout – most of whome you shouldn’t be benchmarked against. Klout is useless as an analytic tool on your own activity. It is marginally useful in identifying potential influencers you should attempt to reach.
But, strategically, it is no more useful than common sense.
Super interesting… great post “Klout is not really measuring influence, rather, it is measuring activity on social networks.”
I de-activate my Facebook every two weeks when I’m not promoting A Rational Fear… I’ve noticed a correction to my Klout correlating with my facebook use… often the difference is up to 8 points….
Fuck. My klout score is 62… Should I take this off my CV?
Exactly. All it measures is quantity of activity. Not quality. Or other ‘social equity’ such as media exposure etc.
A useless tool designed to collect and sell your personal information.
Excellent piece.
Great post / analysis. I signed up to Klout to see what it was all about, and after a couple of weeks deleted the account as it seemed so irrational.
To be fair – only an undergrad would take Klout seriously as anything but a bit of fun.
another data scam.
someone will overpay for it – they always do!
My favourite thing about Klout is the list of topics it thinks you’re influential on. Pretty sure they partially employ the “close your eyes and point” technique
Anon #7 – sadly, I have encountered a lot of people who don’t know much about the social space and are putting huge emphasis on klout because someone or other told them it was important/significant/the next big thing.
Great article guys! Really interesting
Blind Freddy has more Klout than Tod Sampson and Russel Howcroft and rightly so. These two guys are worse than 2nd hand car salesmen (apologies to 2nd hand car sales guys).
I’m just so thankful the Gruen Transfer gives these legends in their own lunch times a platform to demonstrate how brilliant they are to us lesser mortals.
I don’t think Klout is a serious measure of online influence – nor do I think it makes it self out to be.
Don’t forget sole revenue stream is brands paying to be a Klout Perk.So Klout wants the ‘massses’ to sign up, believe they have huge influence and share their perks with their friends as they’re now social gurus
If anyone in their right mind recommends social activity/measurement using Klout then I would be incredibly suspicious of their work.
Mo Klout, Mo Problems
Interesting article. If I had a dollar for every time I saw someone try and use quant variables to construct an engagement score, influence score, amplification score or appreciation score I would probably have a few hundred on the hip by now. They are looking to use a combination of quant data to create a surrogate for something qualitative.
As a quant researcher I have learnt over time that the pursuit of this holy grail of turning quant into qual is the road to hell. Millions of hours have been lost and we have little to show for it.
At a respondent level these scores often look ridiculous as is demonstrated above. I don’t understand why these metrics aren’t labelled as what they are instead of what they clearly are not. It just gives the measurement a bad name and perpetuates the ‘snake oil’ reputation that online and social media metrics already have. The fact is there will be a strong relationship between activity and ‘klout’ (influence and amplification) but this needs to be demonstrated not assumed.
Klout – that’s just a game to get the highest score… not real influence
Why not take a look at Kred http://kred.com – transparent, real-time and as we look at communities much more accurate.
We also have the full twitter firehose so we can look at influence across 120 million profiles.
Andrew Grill
CEO, Kred (and Sydney expat)
@andrewgrill
True influence measurement is still 3-5 years off and it won’t be a startup that cracks it.
For those looking for further reading, this Wired article is the most unbiased and realistic summary of Klout I’ve seen: http://www.wired.com/business/2012/04/ff_klout
note: I have no affiliation with this article, so you’ll have to forgive the complete lack of self-promotion
What’s clear in the social influence measurement space is that nothing is clear, with all the different “measurement” tools varying in their analysis of the same social properties!! Klout is useful sometimes as a benchmarking tool, but noting else … unless your property has a really high score!!
Thanks for the tip on Cathay Pacific. I might try them out.
My Klout sits in the high 40s, which I find amusing as I find it, PeerIndex and Kred extremely flawed one-dimensional systems.
Apparently offline influence is meaningless 🙂
I’ve got a score of 62 also… what does that get me?!
Thanks for the study! I am getting so tired of people advertising their Klout-scores, as if it means anything…
Since the beginning of Klout I knew it doesn’t work. Seeing me listed under “Fundraising” although I have not posted on fundraising for the past two years, was quite enough. Add to the neverchanging score over the past years, because I have not added Facebook – to make it clear, that Klout is more toy than tool.