Beichert, M., Bayerl, A., Goldenberg, J., & Lanz, A. (2024).

Journalof Marketing, 88(4),40–63.

https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429231217471

‍

Beichert et al.(2024) address a central question in influencer marketing: whetherdirect-to-consumer (DTC) firms generate higher returns by working withlow-followership (nano/micro) or high-followership (macro) influencers. Thestudy fills a gap in prior research, which focused on engagement or awarenesswhile neglecting revenue outcomes and associated costs.

Drawing on a largedataset of 1.88 million purchases linked to 2,808 Instagram-sponsored posts andthree field experiments across DTC firms, the authors evaluate three ROImetrics: revenue per follower, revenue per reach, and return on influencerspend (ROIS). Results consistently demonstrate that nano-influencerssignificantly outperform macro-influencers across all measures. For example,average revenue per follower for nano-influencers was €0.265 compared to €0.049for macro-influencers.

A mediationanalysis reveals that engagement—both follower interactions (likes, comments)and influencer reciprocity (replies)—explains this effect. Grounded in socialcapital theory, the authors argue that smaller followings foster strongerrelational ties, enhancing commitment and reciprocity, which in turn boostsales conversions. In contrast, as follower counts grow, tie strength weakens,reducing engagement effectiveness and ROI.

The studychallenges conventional seeding strategies that prioritize high-reachinfluencers, suggesting that efficiency lies in leveraging nano- andmicro-influencers at scale, aided by influencer platforms that reducemanagement costs. It advances influencer marketing literature by integratingrevenue and cost data into outcome evaluation. Practically, it urges brands tomove beyond vanity metrics toward ROI-focused strategies that privilegeauthenticity, engagement, and niche audience alignment over sheer reach.