True influence is about trust.
Modern consumers are struggling to identify which sources they can trust, and which sources are simply a brand trying to push their message in an inauthentic way.
On social media, for example, research conducted by Grey and YouGov found that a staggering 96% of consumers don’t trust what influencers say.
Yet the solution isn’t to move away from social media. That same study found that although trust is decreasing, usage is increasing. So what is the alternative? More and more brands are finding success - both in terms of reach, trust and revenue - through authentic social creators (those that already love their brand) rather than ‘rent-an-influencers’.
In this article, we’ll break down:
Percentage of consumers that do not trust influencer marketing according to a Grey and YouGov study
Who Should I Trust?
Who do you normally trust? Do you trust the opinions of close friends and family more than others? Or maybe it’s people that you work with, and other industry leaders, that you find trustworthy?
Where does ‘strangers on the internet’ rank in that list of trustworthy sources?
If you said at the bottom, you may actually be in the minority.
That probably seems counterintuitive, given what was said above about influencers on social media. The issue here is not the opinion of someone you don’t know (we all appreciate honest reviews of restaurants on Google, right?) but the opinion of someone who is clearly paid to advocate for your brand. And then a different brand tomorrow, and then a different brand the day after that.
So what does this list actually look like for consumers? When it comes to trust in messaging, here’s the spread:
Sources: IPSOS, Edelman, Kantar, IPSOS
Not the greatest picture for brands. So where does the opportunity lie?
Sources: Edelman, DKNewMedia, The Independent, Nielsen
It’s not a case of whether it’s a stranger vs. someone you related to - it’s whether the message is associated with a brand that pushes the narrative themselves vs. the message being shared authentically by others who love the brands. Traditional influencers fall into the former category, and consumers are catching up to it.
Lack of Trust = Lack of Effective Marketing Spend
Missing the opportunity to invest in the people who love your brand, and promoting authentic advocacy, is not just a smart brand building/reputation decision - it’s a smart financial decision too.
The main (legitimate) argument is that, by piggybacking on the following of an ‘influencer’, brands can spend money to create a spike in awareness, and hopefully sales (and that’s only if the relationship is managed in the right way).
But that’s exactly all that it is, a spike.
In one social post, your chosen influencer is promoting your product. In the next post they’re promoting your competitors. Of course, some of their followers would have seen the first which might lead to some engagement, but the lack of consistency in what this person believes in, stands for and advocates means there is always a lack of authentic engagement.
The more effective alternative is to identify individuals who love your brand and, although they may have a small circle of ‘influence’, have a really trusted relationship with their following and therefore much higher engagement. These are true advocates - or Brand Ambassadors - who support the growth of a brand in a trustworthy and effective way.
The impact on one vs. the other in terms of marketing spend is huge. Here’s how it translates to an actual return on investment (ROI).
The Economics of (True) Advocacy
Let’s compare the two scenarios - one ‘mega influencer’ vs. 2000 ‘micro influencers’ (or true advocates).
Imagine a scenario where a brand has a $100,000 budget to spend on a campaign launch for their new product line.
The campaign (and budget) is designed to increase the number of impressions that this launch achieves amongst the brand’s target audience.
| Option 1: Hire one ‘mega influencer’ (15 million followers) |
Option 2: Identify 2000 ‘micro influencers’ (7.5k followers on average) |
|
| Budget | $100,000 | $100,000 |
| Investment per influencer | $100,000 | $50 |
| Number of Influencers | 1 | 2000 |
| Average Followers | 15 Million | 7,500 |
| Reach | 15 Million | 15 Million |
| Engagement Rate | 1% | 5% |
| Total Impressions | 150,000 | 750,000 |
| Cost per Impression | $0.66 | $0.13 |
This brand would end up paying 5 times the amount per impression if they used one ‘mega influencer’ compared to identifying 2000 ‘micro influencers’ who already loved their brand.