Op-Ed | The Truth About Micro-Influencers
NEW YORK, United States — In a recent survey, 64 percent of marketers said they would
prefer to work with micro-influencers (those with 5,000-100,000 followers), versus 16 percent preferring to work with celebrities. While there is no sole definition of a micro-influencer, there is a general consensus in the marketing press that micros are the new holy grail of influencer strategies: easier to collaborate with and more likely to drive action among their engaged audiences.
But should brand marketers throw all their budget into micro-influencers? As you look to scale and segment your influencer programmes, it’s important to ground yourself in data and align your efforts to the activities best suited to each type of influencer. The most successful programs we’ve seen among brands align influencer marketing with marketing and business objectives and work backwards to establish an effective mix of influencers.
No one type of influencer (celebrity, mid-tier, micro or nano) is likely to carry your marketing efforts on social media. It takes an army of micro-influencers to generate impact, and even then, it remains marginal in the total influence ecosystem of most brands. Marketers should take a holistic approach, as each tier of influencer has its own benefits.