I gotta vent. I just gotta.
I’ve long been annoyed as hell by those people who call themselves “experts” or “gurus” on any particular subject, simply because they have an obsession that they wish to rationalize. Among those I think have carved out their own special corner of hell:
- Life Coaches
- Motivational Speakers
- Personal Shoppers
- Change Agents
- Feng Shui Experts
- Thought Leaders
- Social Media Gurus/Experts
All of these professions have one thing in common: they’re complete bullshit. Especially the last one.
But Wait! I’m a Social Media Expert!
I have been dealing/coping with this claim for a few years now, most notably from people who are all-too ready to drop to their knees any time Malcolm Gladwell’s name is mentioned.
“Experience is my teacher, and I’ve got lots of experience. Way more than 10,000 hours!” sigh
Of course, these are also the same people who always look for the easy way out, and actually believe that someone, somewhere, has lost 20 pounds in 10 days by eating anything they want.
One is not an “expert” or a “guru” simply because he has more social networking accounts than he has fingers. Spending hours a day, ignoring those at your table while tweeting your dinner, is not “one more minute” added to the 10k hours.
It just makes you rude.
Twitter and Facebook
Ever heard of the placebo effect? You’ve just been placebo’d.
Unfortunately, this is precisely what I’m talking about. Anyone who would be a “true” expert in this would know that these metrics are unreliable, unimportant, and otherwise useless.
There’s the more hilarious example that people give:
“I’m an expert in social media!”
“Yeah, I’ve got 5000 followers on Twitter and over 2000 friends on Facebook!”
Time for a reality check:
Just because you use something incessantly, it does not make you an expert.
[True story: As I was editing this post, this came through my twitter feed. Talk about proving my point!]
How To Tell if You’re Not an Expert
Generally speaking, it’s pretty easy to see that there is a difference between enjoying something and being an expert in it. Unless you’re willing to do actual work, you are simply an expert in enjoying that activity. Here’s a few tips on how to avoid those ultracrepidarian tendencies.
#1: You think you have nothing left to learn
This is your first litmus test. If you find yourself saying – at any point in your career – “I know XYZ is true because I’m an expert,” then no, no you’re not.
Anyone who has spent time studying or examining any subject has come to realize (very quickly, I might add) that the more you learn, the more you have left to learn. What’s more, the stuff you have left to learn is hard. There is always some discipline that has insight you need. You constantly get a feeling that you’re starting over (again!), and that level of frustration can occupy more than half your life.
I’m amazed at the people who have called themselves “Experts in Facebook Marketing” for a couple of years without understanding – or even examining – how Facebook has changed over the years, nor how Marketing has. It’s as if they have found the “submit” button for a Facebook advertisement and therefore can call themselves an expert in the subject.
#2: You can’t be bothered with the boring stuff
Expertise involves boring stuff. A lot of boring stuff. Expertise means sifting through a dozen bales of hay to find one hay-painted needle. The stuff that people want to talk about, the stuff that people are interested in, make up the 1-5% of the total amount of stuff that an expert has to know.
An expert can find something interesting in the boring tedium, however. The act of exploration can provide insight and interest for the expert that would look completely useless and uninteresting to the layperson. That’s when you know that you’ve gone to the next level – that you have sifted through information and found an unexpected connection amongst two seemingly unrelated and boring pieces of data.
But you can’t get there unless you actually do the work. To do the work that means stepping outside the comfort zone and looking beyond the “big flashy facts.”
Which brings us to…
#3: You don’t know how the system works
Look, it’s not possible to just conjure up “expertise” simply because you use something. You have to understand its system, at all levels. Everything is related to everything else, and no situation that involves human behavior is a closed system.
Let’s look at Social Media for example. If you call yourself an expert, how much do you know about the nature of group formation? Value systems that may affect affiliation with, or aside from, participants? To know the answer to those questions you have to be familiar with psychology and sociology.
How does the application (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc.) affect the communication styles of the participants? How does the software affect or create behavioral patterns? What about the medium itself? Are there parallels between using asynchronous communication styles with other forms? Differences? To answer those questions you should be familiar with communication models, perhaps even Medium Theory or Media Ecology. At the very least you should have read some Marshall McLuhan. Hell, if you’ve never heard of Neil Postman, you should go sit in a corner right now.
Do not pass go, do not collect $200.
[Update: If you want to know about what the numbers mean, you should at least have a basic understanding of statistics, or know someone who does. Check out the conversation in the comments about this in particular.]
How do you know your campaign has altered attitudes? How do you delineate between natural curiosity and a campaign’s influence? To know those approaches, it might help to have at least a passing knowledge about persuasion, even advertising. At least be aware that the hard work and research has already been done for you, so all you have to do is read it!
[Update: Check out this post of the tip-of-the-iceberg-lesson that Audience Analysis actually is more than just having someone tune in. Really? Audiences aren’t monolithic? You don’t say! If only there was a field of study about this… oh wait…]
Speaking of reading…
#4: You’ve never even picked up a research study in your “field of expertise”
Anyone who hasn’t even looked to see what others have found out, is no expert. They’ve bumbled their way through trial-and-error, found a few things that worked, found a few things that didn’t. At best, they have painted themselves into a corner of the things they like to do, called it “good,” and have become willfully ignorant of their own field.
Yes, that field where they call themselves an expert. You know what that’s called? Fraud. Poser. Bullshit.
Which is, of course, why people who call themselves “social media experts” are never, ever respected. They get hired, and they get paid a lot of money, but rarely are they ever truly believed or respected as experts in that field. Most I’ve come across are viewed – even within their own companies – as a cost of doing business. A necessary evil.
You’re not an expert. You’re a lucky son-of-a-bitch who gets paid to play on your phone.
Listening to podcasts (or even being on them) that discuss social media content does not qualify as ‘research.’ At best such things are what happens when legitimate people who have done the research attempt to make it palatable to the layperson. At worst, it’s self-referential intellectual masturbation.
However, it’s not research, and it’s not expertise.
In order to be an expert, there has to be a program of study. You have to know the direction you’re going, not just make observations on the stuff you like.
#5: The only people who know you, are the people you know
Many people who call themselves experts do so based upon anecdotal feedback of people – and only the people – they know. They don’t qualify how their ideas have impacted others, and rely very heavily on the placebo quantification mentioned above. They don’t realize their own self-selection of data, their own biases based upon pre-conceived notions of feedback of people who matter to them. After all, most social media ‘experts’ would rather be seen as popular and well-liked, because that (in turn) proves that they’re an expert!
A person who is an actual expert contributes to the broader understanding of the field. As I mentioned, they don’t just observe and opine: they actually contribute ideas and test them. They provide their reasoning and expose it to criticism and replication. This, in turn, leads to fans and detractors, people who concern themselves with your ideas. These people will be swayed by the persuasiveness of your arguments, and you’ll never even know they exist.
Why? Because it’s easy. It doesn’t matter if the tools are accurate or not, or can be corrupted by false data or not. As long as everyone agrees to the same bullshit numbers, it’s all good, right?
Wrong. Decades of advertising research has shown us that simply luring eyeballs and earlobes to your particular message does not translate into measurable action (e.g., purchasing, affiliation, attitude changes). Nor does participation – in my own academic research I found that participation levels vary wildly based upon the software of communication on the Internet, as well as the level of agreement. In other words, people are more likely to participate with your message if they disagree with you, unless you already know who they are and are using their preferred method of social media.
So how do you know how influential you actually are? Have people taken your school of thought – that you created and thought up – and applied it to their own observations? How do you know? Have you even bothered to find out, or is the prospect of being minimized (or wrong) too scary to pursue?
Many ‘experts’ would rather accept the “lack of opposition” as evidence of “positive influence,” a dangerous and ultimately useless perspective – especially for companies who wind up paying for that ‘expertise.’
Put Your Effort Where Your Mouth Is
The clues of how to bring skills up to match the braggadocio aren’t difficult, they’re just not sexy or quick. This leads me to believe that these people would rather focus on bullshitting their way through life than actually earn a reputation worth having.
There is, of course, no obligation to do this. People are free to continue to do what they’ve been doing, and if it’s been successful so far why stop?
The reason is obvious to me, but may not be obvious to others. For me, it’s because if I’m going to push for an “influence marketer” or “social media expert” to accomplish a goal, I’m going to have some pretty basic questions that need answering. If someone who claims to be an expert can’t answer them, or doesn’t even understand them, I’m going to move on.
I’ve already found many companies, analysts, and social media “gurus” try to snow me with some fast talking, thinking that I won’t pay attention to the man behind the curtain. They think that I’m going to swoon over meaningless “impressions” and “reach.”
I’ve had a lot of conversations that have gone like this:
Expert: “We’ve gotten over 96k impressions over a 4-week period.”
Me: “What counts as an impression?”
Expert: “Someone who looked at the tweet/banner ad/Facebook post.”
Me: “How do you know they looked at it? I ask this because I know that I don’t always see what goes through my twitter stream, and I rarely pay attention to banner ads myself.”
Expert: “Well, it’s an industry standard metric that comes from an influence measuring tool.”
Me: “How does the tool work?”
Expert: “I’m not sure, but if you go to their website you can find out.”
Me: “Okay, so assuming that it’s an industry standard metric, what do the numbers mean?”
Expert: “It means we’ve gotten over 96k impressions over a 4-week period.”
Me: “Let me rephrase: what do we do with these numbers? How are they useful?”
Expert: “Well, you can use this as a benchmark for future studies.”
Me: “Let me make sure I get this. You’re giving me a number that you don’t understand, based upon a tool you don’t understand, to report a situation that you don’t understand, but as a foundation for doing another counting exercise that you don’t understand, using the tool that you don’t understand, to recommend what course of action, exactly?”
This conversation happens a lot. In fact, I can’t remember a time when it didn’t go like this. Depending upon when I’m asked to join the conversation, I may or may not be able to stop an obvious waste of money. I can’t help but look around the room of those who have deferred to ‘experts’ but are afraid to ask questions that may make it appear they are ignorant about how these things work.
Where The Harm Lies
Ultimately, this is where I get the most annoyed and the cause of my rant.
“Experts” of this ilk and with these motivations are the digital equivalent of snake-oil salesmen. They make their living convincing their marks that they have some special knowledge about the mystical, magical world in which they live, and they make promises far beyond what can be delivered by anyone.
Worse, companies – especially smaller companies that feel the pressure to have a greater influence in the broader market narrative – wind up spending time, energy, and money believing that these “marketers” can move the needle. When the needle, in actuality, moves only slightly (and not impressively), exaggerated “influence” and “reach” numbers are thrown about as “industry standard” (which, by the way, doesn’t mean what they think it means) to make things look far more significant.
Here are some questions to ask yourself when thinking about hiring a social media “expert”:
- What is your plan for improving name recognition?
- What is your past track record of success?
- How do you measure success?
- How do you propose turning “reach” into “action,” or at least “preference”?
- What is your process for measuring the impact of this plan?
- How do you know it’s valid and accurate?
- What are the contingency plans if the plan fails to live up to expectations?
None of these questions are unreasonable or unanswerable, though with the hesitation to ask you’d think that they were radioactive. Anyone who does not have an answer, or a methodology to answer, not only shouldn’t be hired but has no right to consider themselves an ‘expert.’
[Update and Disclosure: This is fair warning. I’m currently on the Boards of three industry associations and also have been involved in research projects for my company. I will ask you these questions. Do your homework.]
Thanks for the Comics
Two of the comics above, the Cyanide and Happiness comic and the VectorBelly comic, nailed it. You have people who claim to have an understanding and “love” for science, but in truth they have no temperament to do what’s necessary to actually be eligible to make the claim.
The same can be said about ‘experts’ and ‘gurus.’ They’re not willing to get into the less-exciting nuances of how things work, but still want to claim a status as if they had. It’s like watching hours and hours of TV and considering yourself an “expert” in television.
So, if any of the above is true, and you call yourself an expert or guru, please stop. Really. Just… stop. I suppose there’s something to be said about outing oneself as a poser and a fraud, but I’d rather have my time back instead of wasting it pulling on my hip waders.
Either that, or do what real experts do, and do the work.