The Right Numbers

My numbers? The ones I make a positive difference to without me even knowing it. The ones that'll say "That Danny Brown was OK" when I die. Not forced faux popularity; not false economy of friends; just people that enjoyed my time here with them.

this is a very complicated question to answer. there is not one single set of numbers. in the work i do helping clients manage and analyze feedback we have this discussion all the time. we do it before we create any feedback event - whether it is a survey or a spidering event, twitter participation or community building. the key question is "why are we doing this, and how do we know we are succesful". this, of course, leads to several different metrics for each event and even at different times in the same event (before and after reaching critical mass - for example).

so, the answer to your question is truly it depends - but you better figure out what you need to see / get before you get started. there is nothing worse than measuring the wrong thing and ending up with the wrong assumption / perception as to the success / failure of your endeavor.

The ones that matter to me are the numbers in my phone of people who answer when I call.

But seriously, too often I think we worry about large numbers and forget about making an actual connection. What's cool for me, is that I can trust that I'm going to connect with someone (a connection I've made) because of the personal connection and conversations that we've had before. I went from digital handshake, to enquiring about the person and what they do, and a relationship developed.

In terms of rss numbers and twitter followers, I don't think any of those numbers matter if you don't have a connection with your audience (if you don't have influence). A connection should be more than just a "link." It should mean something more anyway. Those fishing for links are doing nothing more than building false equity in my opinion.

I work with people one to one... so 1 is the important number. But I'm a social animal by nature and I like to associate with many more. But it's not the numbers that matter most, it's the quality of the individuals. And once you have that, they aren't numbers any more.

heavy question Chris. The numbers are what everything is about if you look deep enough. But the right numbers are not as focused upon as the wrong numbers. Maybe the focus should be changed.

Very difficult question.

It's all about the quality of the (quantitative) numbers.
Then it depends how qualitative the quality of your numbers have to be in relation with your goal. (f.e. Reach vs. Conversions vs. Clientele etc etc).

Then it depends from whose perspective you must see it, yourself only or also your clients/employer/etc?
If more than one perspective, what is the overall goal where all must adhere to?

The quantitative value of the number is really irrelevant but who you can share that number with. Even if you sell 50k books, if you can't share that number with anyone it makes it totally irrelevant.

'One' is always important if you don't have the one... I think people are always in search for their other half to make that 'one'... If you are complete with the 'one' you can share all your other numbers with them and that is what makes those numbers relevant...

D.

Ahhh, the great 2.0 paradox:

1. Do you want the "right" amount of people based on "who" they are and what your message is? Or, as we say in Marketing, "the right message to the right people"

Or, do we want:

2. As many people as possible to see our messages?

You would think it is #1, but in reality, most people are stuck in the mass media mind-set and just want as many people as possible (#2)... because - for some reason - it does satisfy something deep inside to know that a large amount of people are following (or consider us important).

What if the market for your book was only 200 people (or 200 books sold)... why is that bad? (because, the mass media complex mindset says it's the amount, not the quality - as mentioned above).

And, for the record, I'm just as guilty as the next person of wanting more people to connect to me on places like Facebook and Twitter or as I watch how my Blog is ranked on Technorati or the Ad Age Power 150.

Old mass media habits die hard.

Great post Chris!

I've been thinking about this lately too. As my and I were talking about it she also reminded me of a book a professor gave me when I graduated from Seminary. The title of the book, "Called to be Faithful, Not Successful." I think when we stay faithful to our vision, whatever that might be, we're doing what we're supposed to.

Dr. Rus

I love numbers. I do most of my decisions based on numbers from P&L statements, balance sheets, profit margins, website conversion rates, Google Analytics, and the list goes on and on. But its Sunday and analytic metrics isn't my interest this morning.

To me the hardest number to determine is: enough

In a project with a client, I want to charge enough so we can provide exceptional service, but not more than what is reasonable for my client. I want it to be fair. This philosophy has helped me to not be the cheapest guy on the block and still have a growing company.

With service to my clients, I want to provide more than enough value. Two arbitrary terms in one goal (enough & value), make it difficult as each client has their own view of both. I want to be sure the people we have in place have the intimacy with the client to understand those ideosynchracies and are well in the more than enough category.

In life, I want to have enough money to change my perspectives and dependencies in life. I don't have to be rubbing elbows with Warren Buffett to be happy. I want enough to be stable and in a position to give back nearly 100% of the time. I assess where that enough is on a regular basis and make sure I am building with that in mind, not some random big goal number.

I want to spend more than enough time with my my family, but never not enough. I've very sensitive to their characterizations of my workload and how much they've seen me. One never hears "Wow, you really are just coming around too much." from your wife and child. But you will hear, "Man, you always work." or "Working late again?" or "Daddy, I don't want you to go." Over the last few years, these comments have been greatly reduced in my family as I have structured my life to make sure I spend at the very least enough time and hopefully more than enough time with my family.

Finally, I want to do more than enough for my world. After helping a friend run for US Congress in 2004, my idea of world greatly narrowed. We fought a hard and expensive fight to only become a blip on the national screen. It taught me a lesson in understanding your community spheres, whether its geographic, industry or otherwise. It is no good to either you, your business, or your influenced to be stretched beyond the places where you can have amazing impacts. I'm still finding my legs here, but as I begin to do more with my local chamber; have gotten focused on my local charities (not the big guys, very local folks); become a strong proponent of local foods; and focused my business on local strategy, I am getting a feel for what enough is by recognizing "not enough" in this facet of my life. The beauty of this particular pursuit is that as you achieve enough and more than enough in your local community, your sphere increases in size and now its your state or your national trade organization. It builds. That's something my friend running for Congress didn't get.

I've always admired and have held up as a role model to me the life of Benjamin Franklin. I'm a digital tinkerer who got started early in life (age 14) as a worker bee and have spent the last 12 years working for myself (now 38). Franklin used his worker bee life to master a trade and then built a business around it. But at some point - in his case age 44 - he made the decision it was "enough" and he allowed the business to do its thing with minor interaction while he stretched out his intellect and passions. He did most of his inventions and civic work after the age of 44 and spent over 40 years in that pursuit because at one point he decided he had enough in one facet of life and not nearly enough in the other.

Every circumstance has a different enough. Find it.

The right number? Setting aside the biz writing that pays the mortgage, the right number for everything else is...one.

I write because I cannot *not* write and if only one person comes away from the read more curious, informed, amused, enlightened, challenged, thoughtful, joyful, educated, or inspired, then I've achieved my numbers.

That said, I do check my Twitter grade and my FeedBurner stats, I just don't post them in every other tweet!

Agree, it is a numbers game. To define it even further I keep the 80/20 rule in mind always. 20% of your clients drive 80% of your business, almost always.

So it stands to reason you pay the closest attention to that 20% of your clients. It is nice to have 20,000 followers on Twitter or in my radio days, 10,000 listeners every quarter hour. But it is always that 20% hard cover client/listener who pays the bills.

Give 80% of your attention to that 20% and you will live to fight another day.

I suggest when consulting the not for profit sector that you can reduce your volunteers by 80% and still grow. How .. just take that 20% and ask them to bring a volunteer that is just like them to join the group. That 20% are the selfless givers, not the self serving.

Double your 20% core group and do it easily with their help, let go the 80% of the pack that takes most of your time to manage anyway and you will see your productivity double and well, the fund raising dollars will likley go through the roof.

It is a numbers game .. the 80/20 works for me in just about everything. It does above all else, bring focus to your project.

I follow the numbers that make my practice better. To that end, the tools that Hubspot has put together have helped me develop my social media practice while giving my an opportunity to study the practice of those I respect.
With analytics, the numbers help me determine when to engage readership. With Twitter, volume is important so that we can sift through the potential to find the relationship that will make a difference for us.
(If numbers are only flaming vanity...I go in a different direction.)

When considering numbers, I have to go back to my days working in community access TV. Back then, we didn't care if 1 person or 1000 saw our show. If that 1 person cared enough to call us up or send us a letter (we're talking pre-Internet, here)to tell us they had enjoyed our show, then we'd done our job.

However, it was easy to do this because community access TV (at least in Canada) doesn't have to make a profit. We didn't need numbers, we needed to provide access and help to people from the community who wanted to put a TV show on the air. Commercial TV networks don't have that same luxury, unfortunately.

In my business, would it be great to have more clients than we know what to do with? For sure! But I'd rather have 5 excellent clients than 10 lousy ones. In my social networks, I'd rather have 100 people I really connect with than 5,000 that I don't.

The other thing that comes along with huge numbers is huge growth and huge responsibility. In my business, I have no problem with larger (good quality) numbers, as long as I'm prepared and have the time to scale to meet the demand. In my social networks, I am already finding it hard to keep up and my numbers aren't even that high. I do what I can to keep connecting, but I feel bad when I can't do it all. More numbers certainly isn't going to help that.

I guess I'm a quality over quantity kind of person. Do I think I can still be successful if I don't have huge numbers? In my personal definition of success, I think yes.

You answered my question! Stop thinking about the numbers and help somebody. Got it.

In the associaton world, we measure the number of members and talk constantly about whether that is growing, stagnanting or declining. We ask sometimes look at in the context of the number of potential people in our marketplace (# of pr professionals, plastic surgeons, event planners) which its own flaws in assuming that all with a title are equally potential members. I would propose that in the association world the more important number is how many within your organization are engaged. That percentage is a better measure of future growth and current satisfaction.

On area for associations that we're really exploring is how important is size. If they goal is to bring a community together does it really matter how large it is? From an infrastructure perspective, if we have complex, traditional associations, it does. You need many people for a many-layered association. Take away some of layers, gather a couple of members and we could still have a vibrant community.

To me, quality = engaging relationships; quantity = people in the crowd; although, it is individuals in the crowd that become connections and can lead to quality relationships.

Focus on quality first and quantity second. The work that you put into the foundation will provide profitable, long term returns.

I think there is a way to quantify all these numbers in a way that impresses "the corporate types" (or fill in the blank for your particular industry/niche), but they likely don't mean much to the bottom line or the person providing the numbers.

I'm often asked to provide Web traffic statistics on specific Web sites at our university. What does that number mean to them, or to that person's boss or advisory board? Should I provide extra numbers to give them a bit of context, or just give them the number they were asking for? For a museum on our campus, what does it mean to them to have 5,000 visitors to their site a month? Does it mean a good percentage of them physically went to the museum to see a particular exhibition? Does it mean a school teacher was influenced to schedule a field trip to the museum for her class because of what she saw? Did they see enough of the online exhibitions that they felt they didn't need to come to the museum in person? Sure, there are ways to track all of these things, but not with solely providing "you had 5,000 visitors to your site last month," especially when the overall university site had nearly a million.

How does one put a number on value and influence? Sure, you have over 20,000 people following you on Twitter -- and while that's an impressive captive audience number, will all 20,000 buy your book? Likely not, but it gives the publisher-types a warm fuzzy feeling that that's 20,000 people you can reach out to with little effort, and no investment on their part. The investment is on your end - engaging these people for months (or years) and building this eRelationship that develops a sense of trust and belief, that make people want to read what you have to say, and to tell their friends and associates about it. I don't think it's possible to put a number on viral marketing, other than the over-used term: priceless.

Hi Chris, it seems everything old is new again, apparently quality does count, even on the web!

Re "at a conference? Not to me. I’d much rather the right 300 than a massive 2,000"...

Exactly! Whether we're looking for sales, brand loyalty or readership, it's still a numbers game but 100 targeted, interested potential clients or dedicated/loyal readers will do us a lot more good than a zillion Twitter followers or Facebook "friends" just desperate for attention.

I've started to look at the numbers as a zen concept. When I look at analytics, I try to look for the forest through the trees- what are the trends? What am I doing different? What seems to be valuable, and what doesn't?
If I get too focused in trying to move the needle versus just creating quality content, I don't think I can do as good a job as creating a solid website/podcast/product that delivers consistent value.
Right now, I have those large post-its 20 x 20, with ideas, categories, organization schema, and maps of where I'm going are posted all over my office. Taking the time to retread and regroup is important.
In terms of relationships, Dunbar's number and more, I think nothing will ever replace the close, trusting relationship you have with people you know-I can build new relationships with people, and those can lead to other connections and relationships, but the one on one interactions that move the value of the relationship needle don't scale. But that's really the connection that matters most.

@Rachel - with regards to any numbers translating to business activity, that's exactly the point. You've hit it exactly.

Half of this thinking came from our conversation at Stamats08, so it's prescient that you came and weighed in.

There's nothing wrong with being a rockstar.
It's a totally healthy sign when a lot of people
gather and cheer when they hear what you're singing.

Chris exemplifies it.
My buddy Ed Dale brings the rockstar out of the
least likely, or least obvious.

But you have to be a pilot too,
for your sake and the passengers.
Having 300 people sit behind you only helps
if they're on the right flight.

Are they paying for the concert?
Where every body gathers because they like the sound?
Or at least for the flight, where a large
focused subset has chosen 'this is for me'?

There are real bills to be paid.
You have to find ways to reward the
pilot. Real ways $.
Because you're then actually CAUSING
what is good, and helpful, to exist.

The passionate sponsor shares in the creator role.

If you don't? If you stay in this recent
"What's in it for me?" mentality all the time?
You get a year without the best people you've found.

You have to see that on the give,
and set it up with your own 'audience' on their give.

Chris, I can't even tell you how grateful I am for your post today. This has been a subject that's been weighing on my mind lately and a huge source of contention on Twitter yesterday.
I totally agree about the quality vs. quantity concept. But you're right, in business it is a numbers game. Everything is about numbers. From the return on investment we offer our clients (numbers) to the reach and influence that advertisers want to know before they fork over money to have a presence on our blogs/sites.
As we move more towards conversational and word-of-mouth marketing, numbers become a hot topic. Some will argue that we can't cast our net too wide because then it doesn't seem natural while others will cast out several nets with the hope that they will bring home even more "fish" than they would with one.
In my opinion, people are starting to scrutinize the methods of acquiring these numbers instead of what, again, my opinion, scrutinizing the "how". Meaning, how we treat and interact with those numbers once we have them.
Let's be real. Traffic numbers on our blogs, follower numbers on Twitter, heck, even "friends" on Facebook are starting to matter to companies, large and small, that want to reach an audience they are having difficulty reaching through traditional media. As my hobby and passion has quickly become a career (which I am so humbled and grateful for) numbers have become more important to me because they are important to the clients I work with.
But that hasn't changed one iota the way I treat people or my desire to reach out and help other people.
However, I'm learning the really hard lesson that it has changed the way some people treat me. The more "numbers' one has in social media opens one up to that much more scrutiny.
I've met an enormous amount of people as part of these growing numbers that have touched my heart, opened my mind, and taught me more than any school I could attend. Is that worth the scrutiny? Heck yeah!

@jessica- is the real problem here, then, that our relationships are no longer private, but transparent, and are being attached a value by companies?
Is it that our private interactions are now economic as well?
I think this gets into the interesting areas Dan Ariely talks about in Predictably Irrational, when the economic and personal relationships merge, awkwardness ensues.

In an industry where a 99% failure rate is acceptable (i.e. being satisfied with a 1% response on direct mail), you'd think there isn't much to lose by going after the smaller, stickier audiences.

But as you say, there's always the lure of more. And in a society where bigger is better, it's ingrained thinking. Ultimately over time we'll be able to track loyalty, influence and ROI much better - where trends will pop and such measurement will be much more apparent.

In the meantime, we soldier on...

Scott Monty
Global Digital Communications
Ford Motor Company

From a marketing perspective, numbers do matter. It proves that we really are "great" and that you should listen to what we have to say. Whether you are a mom blogger encouraging people to enter your giveaway or an affiliate marketer trying to sell a course, we are all do some kind of marketing and NEED the numbers. BUT, keeping those readers/subscribers/followers is what really counts and if you can sustain x amount of stats for longer than a week, then more will come and those numbers are well deserved;)

And of course, the larger your numbers get, the more apt you are to be shot down or challenged. It comes with the territory but you face it and move on. After all, a person with say, 4000 twitter followers, must be influential or they wouldn't have the numbers.

It's definitely not about the actual number, it's about the relationships behind those numbers. Having thousands of followers is just a statistic. Having 100 dedicated relationships that can be turned into help, inspiration, and dinner dates is something worth measuring, but only in respect to its self.

Personally, my # of contacts has grown rapidly recently but the number of real relationships is not growing in proportion to that. I'm working on a small subset of those contacts to improve the connections.

Thoughtful question.

Supposing you have 10 or 10,000, would it make a difference if you could move them to an end? It all depends on your goal. Clients might be impressed by numbers, but if you can't leverage those numbers what is the point? But the numbers might be helpful in staying on top of the latest trends if you have mechanism for filtering all of that stimulation.

Bob
http://www.jobmatchbox.com

As a reviewer, numbers matter. Every company I work with wants to know my numbers. That affects whether they want to give me their products to review or not. If I only have 10 readers or 10 pageviews, they won't be giving me anything. If I have 100,000 page views, then I'm getting somewhere and it is profitable for them to give me their products to review.

On my personal blog, not so much. I want quality readers checking out my personal website. I wan quality comments and people sharing ideas and thoughts on the issues I discuss. For this, quality over quantity is important. Ultimately, it depends on what I'm doing business wise, personally or in any capacity. Numbers matter, in some cases, but then again..so does quality.

Oh, and please tell your 50,000 readers who are buying your book to please stop by and buy mine, too LOL. Once it is done.

OK, in order:

What are the right numbers for you?

Well, I have blogged about having a LONG term goal of 1 million subscribers. This goal seems increasingly ridiculous and self-centered to me but it is an indicator that I'd like to reach a wide audience. Do I want to try to have meaningful connections with 1 million people? Not really, but I'm always up for meeting great, interesting, and stimulating minds.

Which ones are you measuring?

Blog subscribers, Twitter followers, and blog page views are easy to measure, so that's what I measure.

Which ones do you think really matter?

Blog subscribers is an important indicator, but certainly does need to be taken with a grain of salt. We're all lucky if more than 1% of our subscribers are really engaged in the conversations, especially as your audience grows.

And are those three the same?

There is some commonality, yes.

We've chatted about Dunbar's number around the water cooler at work on a few times. Does it apply to online communities as well?

There was a point a couple of months ago where my approach to my Twitter feed changed, from where I was able to at least quickly scan through all updates, to where I had to be selective and leave gaps. And, yes, that was at around 150 followers. Coincidence?

Numbers plays a vital role in any business model. Numbers don't lie and are a way to measure results just like your brochure example, a way to find what works and track stats.

Sales is a numbers game for the most part. It's funny how we don't pay attention to measurable numbers in order to raise accountability. I guess few of us want to be held responsible.

I actually tend to think that the maximum amount of people that could be influenced by myself (on a one-on-one/face to face basis) would be 20 prime movers. I found that these 20 people tend to have at least 200+ people that would react to their movements and interests and would help further their cause. Digg got it right when they made the maximum # of people that you could shout to be 200. You can't have personal relationships (of even an acquaintance basis) beyond this. Your brain simply can't handle more relationships effectively. So find the prime movers...influence your 200. And you will be amazed at the exponential progress you make in promoting your cause/product.

Whoah, dude! Dunbar was talking about "maintaining stable social relationships." Turning that into followers, subscribers, or sales leads is stepping way way WAY over that "handshake-to-tongue-in-the-mouth" line (http://www.chrisbrogan.com/when-not-to-sell-me-...

I measure as much data as I can get my hands on just because I like analyzing stats however, at the end of the day, I'm not overly concerned about the data. I write on my blogs and play in social media because I have a deep interest in connecting with people. I'm humbled to have just a single person who finds any content that I produce actually interesting. Of course I always want to hit new milestones and some of that helps with social proof.

Everyone wants the best stats but having the best stats doesn't mean anything if no one is actually listening. For instance, there are other blogs that have subscriber counts exponentially larger than this blog however this blog gets more interaction through comments than many of the others. So, which one "matters" more? I'd take smaller numbers and greater interaction any day.

Furthermore, if you have a small subsriber count but every one of those subscribers is a key person in your industry, does it matter that you don't have a ton of subscribers? I'd suggest that it doesn't. Now, the other side of that is that by having a lot of subscribers, followers and friends, you increase the opportunity for interaction and to get your information out there.

I think there has to be a balance of both. It's great to watch your numbers and try analyzing them to affect changes but don't become obsessive over them. Keep producing great content, interacting with the community and being who you are!