HOW TO MEASURE AUTHENTICITY? A TRUTH ABOUT SOCIAL INFLUENCERS, COMPLIANCE & TRUST

There seems to be agreement that truth and authenticity gain much more significance with millenials. While Dana Thomas's book "How luxury lost its luster" had virtually no impact on luxury brands' image, millenials suddenly seem to care about the what, who, how and why. Questions that luxury brands probably only encountered on the sophisticated Japanese market in the past but that really did not matter too much globally (unless there was an exceptionally committed owner or leader).

So what about authenticity now? I have a simple belief: Authenticity necessitates trust and/or independence.

I also have a personal perception resulting from my (non-representative) studies of social-media posts: Compared to external influencers, in-house Social-Media influencers can very well be passionate about a brand, but they rarely communicate in an authentic way. That is a subjective impression, of course, as I don't (yet) know how to measure authenticity. But that's what I feel.

My guess is that internal influencers are far more controlled: they are under surveillance of their supervisors, they have to respect corporate guidelines and comply with marketing design bibles, they might have to coordinate with regional sales authorities and, not to forget, they must be aware of legal risks (although I sometimes surprised about the naivity of some corporate posts and wonder whether their management is fully aware of the risks).

As a result, posts of internals appear often "polished" or even sanitized and "brain-washed"/controlled. External influencers seem to behave much more spontaneous, emotionally. And yes, literally radiating autonomy and indepence - an important ingredient to charisma, social attractiveness and power. This self-assurance is part of the secret of today's social-media celebrities. And of course, which corporation would accept that an employee becomes a social-media celebrity?

So the systematic limitation also affects the socia impact. In other words, even the best marketing cannot distort corporate reality too much. Not to forget: externals can collaborate with many brands. This non-exclusivity might be completely contradictory to traditional testimonial approaches, but it is crucial for authenticity and impact.

So I am clearly advocating for a collaboration with external influencers, supported by internal "social-media partners". Does this solve the problem? It depends. Authorities recently started with enforcing more transparency for consumers with influencers that "forgot" to mention that they were getting paid for their promotion. Despite the fact that studies revealed that such transparency does NOT have a negative impact on credibility and reach - on the opposite. (The new rules of authenticity apply). But the problem reaches deeper: if your external social-media expert legally acts "on your behalf", you might bury a substantial legal compliance risk - being liable for every single post. So suddenly you will have start controlling and sanitizing your influencer's posts. This will probably lead to an intercultural shock: when your corporate lawyers meet with your social-media heroes. I can already see the shaking heads when they look at 40 pages of contracts. 

There is only one solution to the problem: you have to base the system on trust - trust in your influencer or trust in your own decision to chose the right person for your brand. And set them free, independent. Let them literally co-create the brand communication. Very counter-intuitive for traditional luxury marketeers that have been raised with the maxi-control & micro-management paradigm. And yes, the details really matter. Now more than in the past. This is exactly why even perfect control cannot be as perfect to the detail as authenticity. Millenials have a seismographic sensitivity when it comes to intuitively uncover incoherences in the details.

Not to be misunderstood: Corporate compliance is crucial and important. But - although nobody said it loud - compliance killed trust in corporations. It replaced cultures of trust by cultures of systematic regulations organizing distrust and control. By definition. A problem that is rarely explicitely addressed and that easily leads to a corporate schizophrenia between other HR/leadership values and the compliance imperatives. 

This world is simply incompatible with the positively "naive" world of millenials. Please take that into account when you organize for authenticity. Believe it or not - your future will depend on it.