On the diversity of influencers

At Influencer50 we bang on about different kinds on influencers and why the world has moved away from focusing on journalists and analysts. And we don’t just mean bloggers and other social media users, which represent only a small proportion of influencers (especially in B2B markets). We’ve identified over 20 different types of influencer and probably are still missing some.

But why does this matter? Clearly, it matters if there are influencers out there that you’re not in conversation with. But why do influencers come from numerous sources? Why is there no small group of “super-influencers” that dominate a sector?

The reason is that diversity within an influencer community improves the overall functioning of the wider market. Having diverse backgrounds and agendas (and opinions, more than likely) means that a cross-section of influencers’ perspectives is maintained, which is good for broad-based discussion. It also means that the influence of a few personalities can be kept in check, lest bias be introduced. This is particularly important in decision making.

It turns out that a market, or a decision-making unit, will seek out a diverse array of opinions because it’s the wise and safe thing to do. It shouldn’t be a surprise, therefore, that influencer communities are not dominated by journalists or analysts, or any other type of influencer.

What’s difficult is identifying the less-than-obvious influencers. Identifying analysts and journalists is too simplistic and misses the bigger picture.

There are a couple of reference works in this area: The Wisdom of Crowds by James Surowiecki is very accessible, and the recent article in HBR on The Wisdom of (Expert) Crowds by Robert S. Duboff is interesting too.