This seems to be the question that many Klout users asks themselves since yesterday. The reason is simple: Klout has released a new version of the algorithm to measure the influence to improve their accuracy and transparency.
The algorithm will now track better the quality of your interactions instead of the quantity. According to their official work there are three principles that form the basis of the algorithm to determine your score:
- How many people you influence
- How much you influence them and
- How influential they are.
So, something as having a more accurate system has been transformed in a very negative change because lot of users have seen how their score has dropped.
In my opinion the main error Klout has done is not the change itself as many users suggest, but how to reflect it in the score. They should have played more with the psychology of the people and increase the base of the score like for instance adding 100 points to everybody before apply the change, in that way people would have not seen a drop in their score and their egos would have been safe. I’m being a bit ironic but you get the point.
It is really worrying to see how many people trusts the score reputation indexes as the most important thing in Social Media, which in my opinion it’s plain stupid. Don’t get me wrong, I think any score system that allows you track your progress is good, because it will allow you to measure how you are evolving online. But it can’t become your only point of interest or action plan.
Some of the comments you can see in the Klout blog show the madness that is around the online influence and reputation Look this example
many organizations have coupled economic functions and job-related selection to your scoring system. By making this change, you have negatively impacted the job market
Really? Are there companies hiring based on your Klout score? If that’s the case I truly think it is very worrying where we are heading up.
As I said before in all our tasks it is important to have a way to measure success. So Klout, PeerIndex, TwitterGrader, TunkRank … and all the similar systems that give you an artificial and automatic way to measure influence can be a hint for how you are doing your activities online, but none of them can -neither should- replace how we evaluate the influence of a person. It is just common sense to see how any of these score systems attribute you online influence on subject but make you completely irrelevant on a secondary subject.
Don’t be fooled, B2B decisions are not being significantly influenced by conversations on Facebook or Twitter.