“To be influential is not to be popular”: Benchmark of Influence for Pharma accounts
Last few months, different metrics capturing socialmedia influence have become more available. Klout , Kred , Tweetlevel Edelman,  measure through complex calculations, the influence of social media channels linked (or not) to socialmedia accounts. For the twitter channel, comparison could be interesting to see how these different metrics correlate for physicians and for pharma companies actives on Twitter.
Although some scoring indicators such as Kred and Tweetlevel includes several dimensions, I kept my primary focus on “Influence” (my long time fav topic) scoring and compare them with simple indicators such as #followers. Do complex calculations provide more value ? In this post, I present results for pharma twitter accounts.
Nice correlation was obtained for most active Twitter pharma accounts, Novartis is outlying (Klout 67; Kred 768). Pharma Twitter accounts where supplied by @pharmacjw (courtesy of cegedim CSD). I added two pharma execs accounts John Pugh (Boehringer) and Dennis Urbaniak (sanofi) to the bunch, just to see how individuals performed against companies including their own. For TL influence vs Klout the correlation is less obvious. This could be due to Klout score taking into account more than the Twitter channel where TL is currently limited to the Twitter channel. Novartis is outlying here also (Klout 67; TL 61). Both scores highly correlate with the numbers of followers (size of the bubbles) and to the number of tweets. Interestingly, John Pugh and Dennis Urbaniak are aligned either on Klout score or on TL Influence with. Well, if these metrics are to be trusted, social media is social after all as individuals rank equally next to official corporate account. But again, the question would be how many of their followers are patients and not #PR or #marketers.