How can you choose between micro and macro-influencers?

In our MENA region, we are seeing greater interest in the micro-influencer segment over the mid-tier, macro, and mega and it is for obvious reasons. "Genuine Content and Genuine Interest". Unlike other segments, the micro-influencers use tools and resources within their means which makes it more legit. Their followers are loyal and have shared interests. In addition, they tend to be fare more reasonable in their fees, they are genuinely interested in achieving KPIs.

Micro-influencers are an invaluable asset for brand ad campaigns, thanks to their exceptional content and unique ability to connect with their audience. With a relatively small but engaged following, typically ranging from 1,000 to 100,000 followers, these influencers specialize in specific niches such as fitness, beauty, travel, or gaming. Their remarkable engagement rates, heightened trust, and genuine authenticity set them apart from larger influencers, making them more relatable and credible to their devoted fans. Brands seeking impactful advertising campaigns should tap into the power of micro-influencers and their remarkable content to foster meaningful connections with their target audience.

Choosing between micro and macro-influencers depends on your campaign goals, target audience, budget, and desired level of engagement. Micro-influencers typically have smaller followings but are highly focused on specific niches. If your product or service caters to a niche market, micro-influencers can provide more targeted exposure. Macro-influencers have larger followings, offering greater reach and visibility. If you're looking to quickly boost brand awareness, they can be effective. There's no one-size-fits-all answer. Both micro and macro-influencers can be valuable depending on your specific circumstances. Often, a mix of both might be the ideal approach to maximize your campaign's impact.

Micro-influencers have 10,000 - 100,000 followers. Under 10,000 is really a nano-influencer. The idea that micro's are more authentic or have higher engagement than macro's isn't always the case. There has also been a significant uptick in creators of all sizes, utilizing bots and pods to boost their engagement. Creators should be chosen based on so many things outside of their follower count. The follower count and a title doesn't unlock their value props.

When you see the follower figures B2C influencers have, all B2B influencers look like micro-influencers. The important thing is to understand if their audience allows you to reach people you're unable to reach through other channels. They may also offer a more creative approach than tradition media, such as the trade press. Micro-B2B-influencers are unlikely to be as well setup as those with larger reach simply because it's not financially viable in its own right. Therefore, you may need to be more hands-on in content creation and idea development to get what you need.

I disagree here. Yes, macro influencers are not easily reachable by the common man but they have been able to gather massive following through identifying a specific type of content that resonates with his/her audience. Hence, when they say, people relate and listen. Actually, they have been able to crack the social media code with higher quality content, relevant hashtags and effective engagement strategies.

This really isn't the case at all. And the idea that we can or should group creators based on following count is an awful way to look at it. There are macro-influencers who have highly engaged communities that they have been working on building for years and there are also some that rest on having a big follower count and don't put the work in. It all depends on the creator and their dedication to their audience. I've always looked at tiering differently; Nano 10k and under, Micro 10k-100k, Mid-tier 100k-500k and High Tier is 500k+. Macro cannot encompass all behaviors and trends over 100k - there are too many variations. In general even four categories isn't really enough - and categories lack value in general.

All product/service placement is about how many eyeballs will see the content. The key difference between micro and marco is the potential audience size. The relevance of that audience is not the question- both can have highly niche and engaged audiences. The budget question is reach. Consider any influencer as a professional. If you wanted your house plumbing fixed you could not go to a plumber and say 'I'll give you the pipes for free if you fix my plumbing'. If you want a professional you have to pay. Sames goes for an audience. Their time and output can add value to your brand. Smaller audience expect to pay less, big expect to pay more. You're paying for the years of experience to build an audience, respect that with your treatment.

First and foremost, choose the right partners! Don't find yourself falling for the "micros are the way to go for brands" or whatever buzz words and trends people are pushing. Find creators of all sizes who have the attention of the audience you want and go from there. Obviously you have to be realistic from a budget standpoint but don't hyper focus your program into a certain grouping just because some buzzword filled article tells you to. User generated content isn't something creators "produce" with a brand. UGC is something your brand fans make without your collaboration and you find it through social listening/being tagged.

There are a lot of ways to find creators and you should be sure to utilize a mix of them all. You can get a great platform like Tagger that has millions of creators in it, search creator marketplaces, search hashtags on platforms, see who is engaging with other influencers, social listening, etc. Use all your tools. Finding them is step one, then you have to deep dive into each account and vet them. What is happening on their account, is their community active, are they taking actions based on content, is the creator legit and not using pods, etc.

Currently, there doesn't seem to be a good platform for finding and sourcing B2B influencers. Successes I've experienced relied on reaching out to individuals who hadn't necessarily even labeled themselves as an influencer - they were simply well known and well connected in their field.

Have a set process for the way your team works. You should have tools, spreadsheets, etc. Make sure you are tracking everything in the way it makes sense to your team to collaborate seamlessly. Have contract templates created and alternate versions when you get pushback.

The B2B influencing activities that I've done for the semiconductor and electronics industry have given me free reign, mostly accepting my creative suggestions and ideas. As influencing is a relatively new marketing concept in B2B, I think we're still finding our feet as to what it is and how to use it.

B2B influencing is yet to reach maturity, in my opinion. We have trade journalists that sort of fall in this bracket. But there are also established industry voices that have been doing the awards and dinner circuit for years who could also be considered as possibilities. Personally, I see B2B influencing going in two directions. There will be the savvy individuals who carve out their own base of followers or build communities. Then there will be the businesses that cultivate B2B influencers from within their own organizations and utilize them in their own corporate campaigns. I think many markets are still kicking the tires on this and we are yet to realize the role of influencers in B2B fully.