Mike Arauz is a strategist at The Axis of Influence: Popularity, Reputation, Action
Gavin wrote this excellent post on Friday in which he mapped the key elements of influence (on the social web):
Influence is always a hot topic. Everyone wants to know who has it or how to get it. So, it's nice to be reminded of what it means and how to recognize it. I agree with Gavin's break down here. And I like how it reveals less discussed, but still important, territories of influence like Niche (little reach, much respect) and Hype (much reach, little respect).
I want to add to Gavin's map a measurement of the action that the individual (or brand) can inspire among their followers. Ultimately, being well known and well respected only gets you so far. The final test of your influence comes when you actually make a recommendation or ask your readers to do something. Do they take action? Here's the new 3D map, with three axis: Popularity, Reputation, and Action.
Update:
I've altered the labels on this diagram slightly, to try to address some of the confusion in the comments. Also, it's important to note that each of these variables, popularity, reputation, and action exist independently from each other. It is possible to be strong in any one of these aspects, and yet be weak in any of the others. Most importantly, it is possible to achieve both popularity and even a strong reputation, yet still not be able to instigate action among your followers. How to achieve each of these goals is a whole other conversation, one that is already well under way, and one that I'm sure I'll pick up in the near future.
Now we have a new quadrant reserved for the most successful influencers who have found a way to channel their popularity and reputation into collective action. Perhaps they have a tribe of readers who buys every one of their books when they come out, like Seth Godin. Maybe they've used Twitter to inspire evangelists and get loyal customers, like @zappos. Or maybe they've channeled a nation-wide movement into a successful campaign for President, like Barack Obama (I promise that I'll try not to use Obama as an example in every one of my posts about the social web for the rest of the year, but it won't be easy).
Ultimately, it requires all of these aspects to become a phenomenon in your market (context is always key). But, even if your popularity is relatively weak, you can still achieve success by instigating action.
If you have any examples of influencers who fit into these various quadrants, please leave them in the comments.
Influence is always a hot topic. Everyone wants to know who has it or how to get it. So, it's nice to be reminded of what it means and how to recognize it. I agree with Gavin's break down here. And I like how it reveals less discussed, but still important, territories of influence like Niche (little reach, much respect) and Hype (much reach, little respect).
I want to add to Gavin's map a measurement of the action that the individual (or brand) can inspire among their followers. Ultimately, being well known and well respected only gets you so far. The final test of your influence comes when you actually make a recommendation or ask your readers to do something. Do they take action? Here's the new 3D map, with three axis: Popularity, Reputation, and Action.
Update:
I've altered the labels on this diagram slightly, to try to address some of the confusion in the comments. Also, it's important to note that each of these variables, popularity, reputation, and action exist independently from each other. It is possible to be strong in any one of these aspects, and yet be weak in any of the others. Most importantly, it is possible to achieve both popularity and even a strong reputation, yet still not be able to instigate action among your followers. How to achieve each of these goals is a whole other conversation, one that is already well under way, and one that I'm sure I'll pick up in the near future.
Now we have a new quadrant reserved for the most successful influencers who have found a way to channel their popularity and reputation into collective action. Perhaps they have a tribe of readers who buys every one of their books when they come out, like Seth Godin. Maybe they've used Twitter to inspire evangelists and get loyal customers, like @zappos. Or maybe they've channeled a nation-wide movement into a successful campaign for President, like Barack Obama (I promise that I'll try not to use Obama as an example in every one of my posts about the social web for the rest of the year, but it won't be easy).
Ultimately, it requires all of these aspects to become a phenomenon in your market (context is always key). But, even if your popularity is relatively weak, you can still achieve success by instigating action.
If you have any examples of influencers who fit into these various quadrants, please leave them in the comments.
Monday, November 10, 2008
|
9 Comments:
i like it! one question: the + and - ends of the action arrow - is it supposed to read that if the influencer has -popularity and -reputation, action goes up?
Each of the axis are independent of each other. The + and - simply refer to having a lot of popularity or a little popularity, a strong reputation or a weak reputation, ability to inspire a lot of action or only a little action. Obviously, the most powerful combination is strong in all three variables.
It is a little confusing, as I've labeled the Action axis at the opposite end as the Popularity and Reputation axis (maybe I should change that).
It's a 3D model, so the upper right and near quadrant is the most successful quadrant.
Very cool Mike. I think I have the same confusion as Amber, though, the action vector seems labeled in reverse (+s vs -s).
I wonder if you can dump something like this into Mindmeister and have the community add nodes.
Clearly, this illustration needs a redesign. I'll get to it tonight, or maybe tomorrow.
But, none of the individual variables effect the others. So if the influencer has strong popularity or reputation (or the opposite) it has no bearing necessarily on the action that their followers take.
This is key, because there are lots of individuals and brands out there who are very popular and even have good reputations, but can't actually get their followers to do anything.
I'm not sure you need a three dimensional chart here, action is a vector, just like 'loyalty' or 'awareness' - an additional axis would be something like 'Height' or 'Body Odor' or something that has some bearing on what you're talking about. :)
I totally agree! this is such an important point, but so hard to get across sometimes - that someone with a comparably small following usually has more cred and a better action catalyst ratio (? is that a thing?) than someone with a fairly large following that doesn't necessarily feel very connected to them.
I feel like I've been trying to figure out a way to show that (with proof) forever...
Hey Mike ... excellent stuff! The way that I was seeing it, was that the action axis was not necessary because the likelihood of action is dependent upon the strength of weak ties. That means that action is more likely when there is less than a 1:1 relationship between the blogger and audience.
Having said that, I like the point you raise about niche blogs instigating action. Will have to give this some more thought!
Hey, you might also like Dina Mehta's view at:
http://dinamehta.com/blog/2008/11/10/measuring-the-value-of-conversations-in-social-media-engagement/
I agree that the strength of weak ties contributes to action. But, it's possible to instigate action without hardly any ties at all. Imagine following a link from the public time line on Twitter posted by a complete stranger who is unconnected to you and your Twitter followers. But, you follow the link because it's relevant and compelling to you.
(Now, I think we could argue about whether or not the fact that they're on Twitter is evidence in and of itself of a weak tie, but that's a slippery slope, and I think not a very helpful interpretation of weak ties.)
I love where this is headed. I'm imagining a breakdown of what contributes to each of these variables:
Action - the strength of the weak ties, personal relevance of the action to each follower, and is the action compelling
Reputation - the experience of the influencer, are they human and authentic, and have they shared enough to create an shared intimacy with their audience
Popularity - reach, reach, reach
Cool ... I am liking this. Of course, the question will be how do we measure this for real? Feeling brave?
Post a Comment
<< Home