Recently I viewed my Klout "influence score" on Twitter. It was 57. Curious, I checked out my PeerIndex "influence score" on Twitter, it was 60. Hmm, are these two scores becoming similar, measuring the same stuff?
I occasionally look at these scores and noticed that they had changed in the last few weeks. Both of my scores had fallen in the last few weeks.
Had I grown less influential during my recent travel visiting clients? I don't think so!
I had spent less time on Twitter, but that does not mean I am less influential today than at the beginning of the month. Hey folks at @klout and @peerindex... I have news for you! Influence is not like a suntan. It is not dependent on daily exposure/activity on Twitter!!
Influence is not like a suntan, it does not change much based on *daily* exposure!
I looked up a few twitter friends/colleagues and noticed they had similar scores across Klout and PeerIndex also -- some where closer than others.
Next, we retrieved the Klout and PeerIndex scores for all people [~ 200] I follow on Twitter to see if there were any interesting patterns in this sample. Some of them had almost identical Klout and PeerIndex scores, some were not calculated by one or the other service, and some had divergent scores.
Which score more accurately gauges real influence on Twitter? Are either of these influence scores significantly better than the back-of-the-napkin Twitter metrics [LFR score] I described earlier? How precise are these scores?
I found both Klout, and PeerIndex scores on 177 of the 200 people I follow. Of course, there is an LFR score for everyone on Twitter -- it is easily calculated by looking at a person's Followers and Listed counts in their Twitter Profile.
- Looking at all three scores we see some difference, but not much.
- Klout and Peer Index differ by an average of 13 across the 200 people I follow
- Klout and LFR differ by 15 on average
- Peer Index and LFR differ by 18 on average.
Does it really matter which score we use? How accurately can you measure something as nebulous as influence or attention? Is a several point difference between scores a significant delta?
Of course, the good news is you do not need to be popular to receive deserved attention!
To calculate LFR quickly, add a zero (0) to the Listed number and then divide that by the number of Followers, i.e. I have 4088 followers and appear on 483 Lists, my LFR is 4830/4088 = 1.18. A number > 1.00 means people are paying attention to you, a score approaching 2.00 means you have the focused attention of many! Of course, the good news is you do not need to be popular to receive deserved attention!
LFR finds us such Twitter gems as @VenessaMiemis (LFR=1.66), @zenext (LFR=1.69), @jhagel(LFR=1.72), and @twliterary(LFR=1.50), each is paid great attention to in their respective field, and on Twitter.
What other Twitter influence/attention metrics do you track?
UPDATE1: Interesting interview by Augie Ray with Azeem Azhar, CEO of Peer Index.
I like Azeem's concept of "cheap"(i.e. following) and "expensive"(i.e. responding) activities on Twitter. I agree, it is more important to look at the expensive activities to gain a more realistic perspective of who/what is really important. IMHO, the power of LFR is in the very expensive activity of creating and curating Lists on Twitter!
UPDATE2: I have created a LFR Twitter List, that anyone can follow, of people whose LFR > 1. If your LFR is greater than 1 and you are not on the list, and you have more than 100 followers, let me know!