Sometimes a topic or question comes into view that captures your interest for elusive reasons. Such is the alchemy of attention.
And these can be great moments of discovery. And other times these are just rabbit holes that waste time that you don’t have to spare.
I had just such a moment earlier today when I saw a TikTok video from social media marketing maven Courtney Johnson whose 2024 B2B social media predictions lead off with brands making a dramatic shift in 2024 from investing in external to internal influencers.
As evidence, she cites a year-old article noting that Cisco will train 84,000 people to become LinkedIn creators. We looked, and this was specifically about using Cisco employees to become “talent ambassadors” to attract others to work at Cisco. This feels a bit different in reality than as billed in the TikTok video.
Most of us understand intuitively the difference between outside and inside influencers. As well as B2B vs. B2C. It is essentially the same concept. The B2B influencer might promote an event or software product instead of the beauty products or luxury hotels that a more consumer-facing influencer might promote. The vibe may be different but the process is essentially the same.
If Courtney’s prediction is true, brands are poised to ditch their investments in outside influencers and train up their “in-house” influencer teams instead.
We understand there are no literal teams of influencers warming up in the bullpens of companies all over the world. However, companies of all sizes do have founders, CEOs, and subject matter experts who can become creators. And many already are.
Obvious Advantages
The fact that the dramatic-at-first-blush Cisco example fell apart so easily didn’t stop others from sharing Courtney’s TikTok. This includes B2B creator Amanda Goetz, who shared the video with her 23,466 LinkedIn followers (her X following tops 108,000), noting that she had similarly predicted a shift to in-house influence.
The dubious Cisco example notwithstanding, we agree with the notion that using your people vs. paying outsiders to promote you to their networks offers some clear advantages.
For starters, It seems considerably more cost-efficient for your company’s leaders to tout your product than to pay an outside influencer. A potential drawback of course if your CEO has all the charisma of a software developer. But who will be more passionate or knowledgeable than the ones who created what you are selling?
And if an executive has a strong brand developed from years of keynotes, media interviews, and podcasts, why not leverage that experience?
If your leadership isn’t up to the task, there may well be some charismatic and knowledgeable players deeper in the ranks who are. And they would probably jump at the opportunity.
So while supporting this prediction with an old and not entirely on-point example undermines it to some degree, we do think the notion of moving B2B influence in-house makes a fair amount of sense.
