The first question from almost any brand starting with creators is how many followers theirs should have. It’s the wrong question, but it leads to the right one: what has to happen when someone sees the content?
Size follows from that, not the other way round.
The three tiers, and what each is for
The labels vary depending on who you ask. What matters isn’t the exact cutoffs, it’s what changes as you move along the scale.
Micro. Small, tightly connected communities. The recommendation reads like one from a friend: there are replies in the comments, there are DMs asking where to buy it. This works when you need conversion or product proof, and when your category demands credibility — supplements, skincare, anything people put on or in their body.
The limit is obvious: one alone doesn’t move volume. Micro works as a squad, not as a signing.
Mid. The middle tier. Usually people who already treat this as a job: they deliver on time, they understand a brief, they have a format of their own that works. This is where reach and credibility still coexist, and usually the best starting point for a brand that has never done this.
Macro. Large reach in one go. It’s for awareness: a launch, entering a new market, making a whole category aware you exist. What you’re buying is attention, not trust. Engagement per person is usually lower and the price much higher.
Which objective calls for which size
If you want to sell now: a squad of micro and mid with a dedicated code per creator. That’s where you can measure which profile brings buyers and keep the ones that work.
If you’re launching: a macro spike so the market hears about it, backed by micro and mid who actually explain the product. The first opens the door, the second gets someone to walk through it.
If what you need is content: micro and mid, paid as content production with usage rights included. It comes out cheaper and more believable than a shoot, and you walk away with assets you can run as ads. Making content, not reach, the objective changes the entire brief.
If you’re entering a new category: start with micro in a very specific niche. Before reach, what you need is to find out which objections show up in the comments.
Three expensive ways to get it wrong
Buying followers instead of engagement. A large, quiet account costs more and sells less than three small ones whose audience replies. Always ask for recent per-post performance, not the number on the profile.
One big creator as the whole campaign. That concentrates the risk in one person: if that post underperforms, there is no campaign. With ten mid-tier profiles, two weak ones don’t sink your quarter.
Asking micro for macro numbers. If your objective is raw reach and you hire five micro creators, the result will look disappointing even if the campaign worked. The mistake wasn’t the creator: it was measuring against the wrong objective.
Before picking a size, pick what you’ll measure
One piece of advice that saves money: decide the metric before signing. Reach, engagement, clicks, attributed sales, or cost per usable piece of content. They aren’t interchangeable, and each one points to a different creator size.
A campaign with no defined metric always ends up judged by whichever number came out prettiest, and that’s useless for deciding the next one.
At Venture180 this is the work that happens before we propose anyone: understanding what you want to happen, and building the mix from there. You sign off on the proposed roster before any creator is contacted.