Metricool's 2023 Instagram Study is one of the most cited reports of the year in the industry. Its dataset is solid: 316,000 accounts analyzed, 2.5 million posts, 9.4 million stories and over one million Reels. The study offers readings on formats, reach, frequency and growth.

For a public or complex organization that communicates on Instagram, the study's value isn't in repeating its conclusions. It's in knowing which of it should actually change next quarter's plan and which is industry noise that doesn't apply.

The study's main findings (a useful summary)

The study confirms six trends that are reshaping how Instagram works as a channel:

  1. Reels still dominates in reach and engagement, but the format's average reach has dropped 76% year-on-year as creation volume has saturated the format.
  2. Carousels have overtaken single images in the feed, both in reach and engagement, outside of Reels.
  3. Overall feed engagement has dropped 17.51% versus 2022, pushing creators and brands toward the carousel format.
  4. There's a clear correlation between frequency and growth: accounts with more followers post more often across stories, Reels and feed.
  5. Format diversification is now a condition for growth, not an aesthetic option.
  6. Account type and sector significantly influence what works; there's no universal recipe.

What this means for a public organization

The obvious temptation, reading this data, is to adjust the Instagram editorial plan to "post more Reels and more carousels." That reading is straightforward, easy to defend in a committee meeting, and almost always wrong for an institutional context. There are three reasons why:

Three nuances that change the institutional reading

  • Raw reach isn't the goal in the public sector. For a mass-consumer brand, reach matters because it directly feeds sales. For an institution, reach only matters if it reaches the right public, not just any public.
  • Frequency requires sustained production. Increasing posting volume without increasing editorial quality is the classic recipe for diluting the institutional voice and coming across as trivial.
  • Non-representative accounts distort the averages. The study's averages include accounts with very different dynamics (influencers, brands, media outlets). The useful benchmark for an institution is another comparable institution, not the average.

What to actually do with the study's data (what really changes the plan)

Three adjustments are worth applying, once the data has been run through the institutional filter:

  1. Audit the format mix. If the current plan is mostly built around single images, it's reasonable to shift part of the effort to carousels: they allow a more structured message, fit better with explanatory institutional content and perform better on reach.
  2. Review the cadence. Not to arbitrarily increase it, but to spot inconsistencies: accounts that post one week and skip the next come across as erratic. Regularity matters more than volume.
  3. Define Reels with institutional purpose. Reels works when it has a recognizable voice and a clear message. Improvised Reels, or ones that copy creator formats, do more reputational damage than good.

An industry-study metric is only useful if it answers "what decision does this change in my next plan?" If the answer is "nothing specific," it isn't information — it's informed noise.

Which metrics a public organization should keep watching

Beyond the ones in the study, there are four metrics with real decision value for institutional communication:

  1. Audience composition. Who follows you (professional profile, geography, life stage) matters more than how many follow you. A drop in followers that coincides with an inactive-account cleanup isn't bad news: it's housekeeping.
  2. Depth of engagement. Saves and shares matter more than likes for measuring real message resonance among professional audiences.
  3. Qualified traffic to your own ecosystem. How many people move from Instagram to the institutional website, not just how many interact on the platform.
  4. Comment sentiment. Periodic qualitative analysis of comments is the most underused metric — and the most useful for catching early reputational erosion.

The most common operational mistake

In the audits we run on Instagram communication plans, the most frequent mistake isn't strategic: it's about measurement. Many organizations measure what the platform shows them by default (reach, impressions, likes), without first deciding which metrics actually inform their decisions. The result is long monthly reports no executive reads and, worse, that produce no new decision even when they are read.

The rule of thumb: before requesting a dashboard, define the three decisions that dashboard has to inform. If you can't list those three decisions, you don't need the dashboard.

If your organization's monthly Instagram report never produces a new decision, the problem is probably not social media. It's your measurement framework.

Let's talk

No commitment. Reply within 48h.

Conclusion

Metricool's 2023 Instagram Study offers a broad and useful snapshot of channel behavior. Its real value for a public organization isn't in applying its averages, but in filtering which of its conclusions change decisions in the next plan and which are industry noise.

Three reasonable adjustments: shift the format mix toward carousels, check the real regularity of the posting cadence, and produce Reels only when they carry institutional voice. Four metrics that do inform decisions: audience composition, depth of engagement, qualified traffic to your own ecosystem, and comment sentiment. The rest is a long report nobody reads.