Influential Research
I have an embarassing admission to make, one that I imagine will get me ex-communicated from the plannersphere: I hate the word "influentials", I think that word-of-mouth/diffusion-of-influence theories are way oversimplified, and I didn't even bother finishing "The Tipping Point" when I bought it years ago. In my experience, the real world (especially the one that I was most immersed in when the book came out, the music world) is way too complex and random for most of these theories to be of much value (Seth Godin's "The Idea Virus" was another that I bought, but didn't get past something like page 30).
So, I've been happy to see a recent flurry of articles that challenge a lot of the assumptions about the role of "influentials". Because of social media, the overly simplified influencer-models are even less meaningful; ideas flow in many more directions, among previously disconnected networks. I have no idea what the model of the spread of ideas through a network might (eventually) look like, or even if that is possible, but I'm pretty sure it will bear little resemblance to the linear model that books like "The Tipping Point" map out.
Marketers probably want to cling tightly to the idea of "influentials" though, as it must still be comforting to think that they still have some control over what happens in the network, and how their ideas will spread: "Social Media? Sure, we can steer that in the direction we want, we'll just find the Influentials! Quick, roll out a viral and watch them swoon!"

Flickr/chromacomms
Facebook/Dino Demopoulos
Linkedin/Dino Demopoulos
Twitter/chroma
YouTube/chromainc
Last.fm/chromacomms
Del.icio.us/chromacomms
Wishlist/Dino Demopoulos
GMail/Dino Demopoulos
Technorati/chroma
Blog/Dino Demopoulos
Hey dino
Great post. If you're at the planning conference try and come and see mark lewis and myself as we're doing a breakout session that should touch on a lot of this whole randomness vs overly simplistic linearity thing
G
Posted by: gareth | July 26, 2007 at 03:55 PM
I wouldn't miss that, definitely. I just have to find a way to get to San Diego. I'm working on it though :)
Posted by: Dino | July 26, 2007 at 03:58 PM
Great post Dino. I might add that I 'gifted' Blink by Malcolm Gladwell long before half way through it. I like him. I just don't subscribe to his stuff. Good marketing takes effort and customers are on the move all the time. Makes it worthwhile too!
Posted by: Charles Frith | July 26, 2007 at 05:04 PM
Very well captured Dino.
It is oh so natural to marketers facing the chaotic reality of social media revolution to re-invent or re-construct new tools for control over the message.
No one likes chaos and unpredictability and by instinct we have to make the unfamiliar, familiar. And these are great times for marketing gurus to come up with vague/abstract theories, so the execs' can feel back in control.
But these books are always telling nice (even great) stories, giving lots of examples and anecdotes. Those can be a lot of fun and quite educational, but most are too specific to work for you...
Here's to weekend!
A.
Posted by: Asi | July 27, 2007 at 01:46 AM
well, there is nothing to be ashamed about Dino. Influencers are just the way we try to capture and control the way complicated and unpredictable reality. How on earth can we define and identify influentials in the social reality that is chaotic system, system with endless number of factors and variables and roles. We are all "attractors" and have the power to influence the system and others. Tipping point, infleuntials are just one dimentional models that doesn't take into account that one day, so called influencer can be dumped by his girlfriend, someone scratched his car and left without leaving a note, while he was waiting for his coffee and when he rushed to his car to stop the policeman to write a fine, he spilled the coffee on his clothes and in fact doesn't care about telling others about the advantages of the chewing gum and send the links to their viral video.
We need to learn accept and understand chaos. We may feel safer with simple models that are contrable but it doesn't take us to great solutions.
Posted by: Daria Radota Rasmussen | July 27, 2007 at 05:30 AM
Agree.
It's a buffer for brands who are incapable of having strong ideas and opinions of their own in favour of simply appealing to a few transient trendies.
I have an article that appeared in Sleaze magazine that debunked such theories.
I'll dig it out and post it someplace just for a laugh.
Adam
Posted by: Adam | August 09, 2007 at 06:19 AM
Hi all!
Phentermine is indicated only as short-term monotherapy for the management of exogenous obesity.
More about of phentermine - [url=http://the-bestchoice.blogspot.com/]The best choice Phentermine[/url] (http://the-bestchoice.blogspot.com/ )
G'night
Posted by: juliavanderbat | August 20, 2007 at 06:22 AM