There is much chat at the moment around influencers and use, overuse and real value. But i think what's interesting lies in three attitudes that can make or break success and solve any conundrum.
Firstly if you approach any influencer campaign as a media buy first, where reach and budget (and control) are the lead parameters, then you have already lost the soul of a campaign.
It's about fit and relevance, not mass eyeballs. If ROI isn't led by engagement, workable (and maybe subtle) CTAs and an audience seeing a message that seems 100% right in this place, you risk being led by noise not value.
Scale of following may be the solution, but so might a niche. The discovery phase is where the value really sits
Attitude number 2 is expanding on that 'control' word and about learning to let go of the brand bible a little.
Brands who write long over specific briefs and 'script' elements don't get it.
If a mate in a pub talks to you in corporate speak around something, how well does that go down?
What you are buying (no shame in spending £ as long as is based on point 1...) is storyteller creativity.
So why shackle that with rules? Creatives hate rules. And many creatives are followed because they don't stick to them.
Reading the room matters. Allowing someone who knows their audience best to work things through is the value. Otherwise go back to controlled ATL choices.
The third key attitude is to see influencers as partners. Not just as creatives but as people to work with over time.
Let them grow to understand you. Weave you into their worlds and lives. Share thoughts with you. Let their audiences see a genuine link. Not say hello and goodbye in moments because something (maybe) shinier has caught your eye.
Three is linked to both attitude two and one. Tactical choices lead to surface data decisions and over controlling behaviour.
Which is when value starts to get questioned.
And is that surprising if you have missed all the marks you should be hitting?