Archive for August, 2005
 |
I have taken both the quality and quantity approaches to networking. Fellow-networkers who lean toward the quantity approach tend to reply positively to quantity-based networking requests. For example if I “discovered” someone who had a large number of connections and is not connected to me and we also do not have many people common in our networks, I write to them saying something to the effect of “I have a network, you have a network, lets connect and share”.
|
And this request is not sent on the spur of the moment – I tend to take a good look at their profile and find out whether they would be open to such a request. I “never” use the boiler-plate template.
I have had two “success” stories on LinkedIn [the two which are the most evident and which would probably be regarded as "success" - that can be a subject for discussion on another forum!] One was when I had just joined LinkedIn – I had no idea how to approach the “networking”, who to write to and what to write to them. Overriding thought was “Who’d want to connect with me!?” I was just starting out in the innovation arena so naturally I wanted to connect with experts in that area. That’s how I got in touch with Joyce Wycoff of InnovationNetwork [ www.thinksmart.com ] and we eventually worked together for a year where I assisted her with the design and innovation marketing needs of the InnovationNetwork website. So yes, I got paid, I got international exposure and I got to hone my innovation skills learning from some of the best people in the field.
The second is the most recent: David Wittenberg [ Director, Innovation WorkGroup of Optimus Solutions www.optimusltd.com ] was looking to tap the Indian market for clients who might have innovation requirements. He is the alumni of Garvin School of Management [ Thunderbird ] and I had been a judge on the 2004 Innovation Challenge and had exchanged a couple of e-mails with Anil Rathi [ www.ideacrossing.com ] who was the organizer of the competition. Anil knew David and suggested my name and told him that I was on LinkedIn too. David visited my profile, checked out my blogs/website [ using links on my profile ] and promptly called me up. I am now the Director, Indian Operations for Optimus Solutions, USA for the Innovation, Marketing and Lead Generation WorkGroups. I connected with David on LinkedIn too – after I got the job.
The above were completely “quality” links but I probably would never have come across them if I did not have quantity connections because these people were connected to someone in my “quantity” list and the people in the “quantity” list are the ones who forwarded my requests.
I have also had a handful of enquiries regarding my design services [ www.aside.in ] and one even for transcription services – but none of them have developed into anything – they’ve stayed at the enquiry level and “might” turn into an engagement later on.
So yes, I made some money.
How much: Hard to quantify because there are so many indirect benefits apart from the “monetary” ones.
Networking Philosophy: I try to customize each and every request that I send.
Initially, when I started out networking, I would have connected with anyone who sent a reasonable, decent and well-worded request. Now I take my time and prefer to exchange at least a couple of e-mails before connecting networks.
Some of the criteria I use are: how many connections does the person have and who are the common people connecting us. For example if there are too many common people – it’s best to connect directly. Is the person also a member of the LinkedIn YahooGroups? [if he/she is, they probably know who they are connecting with and would remember me better [ some people remember me best as the 25 year old "hard-hat" wearing designer from India - check my website main-page top-left photograph www.aside.in ] I do not connect with people who don’t check their spellings – especially the ones that misspell my name. Rest of it is just “thin-slicing”.
I want to be “found” on LinkedIn when someone searches for “graphic design India” or “innovation India” and I want to give them the freedom to get in touch with me whichever way it suits them – not necessarily via InMail [why will a client pay to get in touch with a service provider?] There is no way that I can do a targeted search for companies/people who might need my services. But I don’t think that ever was LinkedIn’s purpose. [That's why I tend to wax eloquent about how openBC has given me more than six "success"-stories. - It just suits my business better.] My way of going around that issue on LinkedIn is to be connected to everyone – quite literally so – so I want to connect with as many people as possible.
For me, networking is about increasing visibility. Period.
Quality approach [ customized request/e-mail, some knowledge about the person you are writing to, clarity of intent ] always work best. If I wanted to connect with someone because they have a lot of connections AND I told them that’s the reason I want to connect with them – I have had a 20% success rate with that. I did an experiment sometime back [ detailed blog post here: http://biznetworking.blogspot.com/2005/07/being-diplomatic.html ] 80% of the people did not like the “intent” of connecting only because of the numbers. These were people who have made their e-mails id’s freely available on LinkedIn and mentioned on their profile that they are accepting connection requests.
Again, for me, having my e-mail id on my profile or my name on the InMail search results only serves my purpose of being found. Doesn’t mean I will necessarily connect with anyone who sends me a connection invitation.
August 15th, 2005
 |
Now that we have InMail on LinkedIn, the 4th Degree contact names are no longer visible even after paying for a Business Account [feedback from the various LinkedIn YahooGroups], although the InMail actually provides access to all degrees of contact after the 3rd [the 4th, 5th, 6th and the nth], you will not be able to see the name of the person tho whom you are sending an InMail. |
For someone like me – freelance designer, small business, no corporate to pay for my networking efforts, non-recruiter [where I'd probably charge the employer for the InMail sent to prospective candidate who was eventually hired] – I will need good convincing before I sign-up for a Business Account.
So there are always workarounds and like the famous LinkedIn Cheater’s Guide by Christian Mayaud, I have a simple workaround to the problem presented to me by the above-mentioned situation.
Here’s to better networking!
First some facts:
- When you search beyond your 3rd Degree network, you do not get names of people.
- You get a short part of their profile, which includes the following:
–Headline
–Location [Country]
–Industry [eg. Graphic Design]
–Currently [what the person is doing currently - eg: Director, Indian Operations with Optimus Solutions]
–Past [past employment details - 3-4 jobs - I am not sure exactly how many]
–A short bit of text which contains the keyword that you searched for
This is what an average short profile will look like [.gif file - opens in new window]
- When you click on a particular Headline to get to a more detailed view of the profile then you get to see the following:
–Headline
–Location[Country]
–Industry[eg. Graphic Design]
–Current[current employment]
–Past[past employments]
–Education [list of institutes/colleges]
–Endorsements [from whom and how many]
–Summary [the summary that you enter in your profile]
–Specialities [the keywords that you enter in your profile]
–Contact Settings [who you want to connect with and what kind of requests they are open to - some people also list their e-mail here - good idea if you want to be found]
This is what an average long profile will look like [.gif file - opens in new window]
Here’s what to do to get your name on the search results [and there are various ways to do this - I am only presenting the one that I use]:
- Open your profile page – where you can edit your details. Edit your “HEADLINE” and include your name right at the beginning try to use brackets to seperate it from the text [See how I have done it at the end of this post]. One shortcoming of this approach is that your headline becomes shorter – you will have to remove redundant text to accomodate your name.
- On your profile, also edit your summary to include whatever details you would want – the summary is included in its entirety in the search results detailed profile so think what would benefit you the most – give accurate details to the person searching. Some people could even paste their complete profile – including past employment/groups etc.
You’re done!
Remember, it’s the “HEADLINE” that you need to edit and include your name in so that when others search by keyword and you are not in their network, they can still see your name.
This is what my short profile looks like to someone who is not within my 3rd Degree contacts. [.gif image - opens in new window] and this is what the detailed profile looks like [.gif image - opens in new window]. My name and e-mail are included in the Headline itself – which is ofcourse a personal choice.
And I am not advocating this as a “best practice” – we all have different views and different requirements! You are welcome to connect with me on LinkedIn – do visit my LinkedIn Profile.
August 12th, 2005
 |
We have been reading about misinterpreted e-mail messages in the course of business networking and I recently cited a post from the VirtualHandshake blog here, which talks about preventing flame wars. |
*For those who have not read any of the Harry Potter’s, a “howler” is a letter written by a parent to his child who has done something bad/wrong. A howler arrives via an owl, if not opened quickly, automatically unfolds and reads itself out “VERY LOUDLY” and once done reading, goes into explode into flames and a puff of smoke – it’s MAGIC. The howler is an obvious form of scolding and anger venting method.
As I grow to understand life less and less, I learn to live it more and more.
-Jules Renard, writer (1864-1910)
WHEN YOU ARE THE RECEIVER OF THE E-MAIL
Interpret less
How can we be sure what the other person meant when they wrote an e-mail to us? It isn’t a face-to-face conversation [even in face-to-face conversations we're always guessing what the person "really" meant].
Give the benefit of doubt
We should have the graciousness to give the writer the benefit of doubt. With the increasing importance of e-mail communication, we need to understand it’s shortcomings and accept the same. Not only should we give the benefit of doubt, we must first think that the person must have written whatever they have written, to our benefit. That they had good intentions when they wrote the e-mail.
When in doubt, ASK
If you think that the person’s e-mail language/thought is unwarranted, then write to them and ask them what it is about. Tell them how you felt and what made you feel that way and mention that you would like to clarify. 99 times out of 100 the writer will respond with a “Sorry I was misunderstood” or “Sorry I was not clear enough”.
Ignore
If you do not know the person well enough and the person has been blatantly rude, don’t take it personally. It is not your problem, it’s the writer’s problem. Ignore. Especially if the person is retorting to a personal e-mail on a public forum and attacking you individually.
WHEN YOU ARE THE WRITER/SENDER OF THE E-MAIL
Be Brief
Don’t ramble, PLEASE. E-mail is best when used as a very specific medium of communication. And by that I don’t mean that e-mails are/should not be long, I mean they should effectively and quickly say what they want to convey – and THAT’S IT.
Don’t mix subjects
If you are writing about how your dog’s doing, write only about that [although I doubt you'll have anyone 'e-mail' you to ask that...]. If you are writing to explain about your latest job, write only about the “job” – factually, objectively. If you are writing about what your personal opinion is about ‘anything’, do not say what you think a third person believes or what the general public thinks – because that’s what you “think” – you do not know it. The best way to do this is to see what the subject line says – then follow that. Separate subject, separate e-mail.
Reply to the individual
If it is a group e-mail and there is something you would like to personally discuss with an individual, reply to the person who wrote the e-mail, not to the whole group. Otherwise you will be writing an e-mail that will be irrelevant to the group and might antagonize the original writer. Unless it’s an e-mail praising someone. Remember: Praise in public, insult / criticize / reprimand in private.
WHAT TO DO WHEN YOU DON’T AGREE WITH WHAT THE WRITER HAS TO SAY
I am all for knowing what someone else thinks. I appreciate diverse thoughts and opinions. But what I appreciate most is when someone who does not agree with my point of view writes to me saying that they do not agree with my “opinion”. They don’t say that they don’t agree with “me”. My opinion might change tomorrow and they might agree with that but I will stay the same, intrinsically, and if someone does not agree with “me” now, it’s unlikely that they will agree with me tomorrow. If you are the sender of an e-mail which is meant to convey a difference of opinion and if you say that you don’t agree with the person – you’ve got it all wrong mate! The message you’ll be sending is “I don’t like you”. The reader’s mind will read it and interpret that “This person does not like me”. Don’t criticize the person, criticize the opinion/idea/thought.
As always this is not a comprehensive list – these are things that work for me.
August 9th, 2005
 |
“Why bother?
We have wonderful online networking portals like openBC and LinkedIn but why do we need them to facilitate our networking efforts?
We have our Outlook Address Book and Plaxo, so why add to the clutter with LinkedIn and openBC? After all, we just need to stay in touch with the people we know.” |
My point, on the contrary, is that the people/names that we have in our address book/phone diary/Plaxo, are people we already know. People we have already been in touch with, people we have interacted with – acquaintances, friends, colleagues, family. Portals like openBC and LinkedIn facilitate our interactions with “strangers”. That’s the basis of online business networking – connecting with strangers.
Of course different people use these portals for fulfilling varying needs. For example, recruiters use these portals to get in touch with potential candidates, employers can use it for background/reference checks, job-seekers use it find their next job, etc. People like me, [small business, freelancers, entrepreneurs, business owners] use it for Word-Of-Mouth marketing and advertising and getting in touch with potential customers/clients.
Apart from allowing us to get in touch with strangers, online networking also helps us stay up-to-date with regards to what our acquaintances are doing. What’s the point of having a friend if we don’t even know what they’re doing? What’s the point of having a world-class business service when no one knows about it? Online networking portals facilitate that awareness. Then again, the counter argument to that would be that if one had to announce a world-class service, why would one do it on openBC/LinkedIn, personally to strangers? Why shouldn’t one use the “traditional” media like newspapers, magazines, websites etc.?
For me, I see more value in contacting a person individually and letting them know about my services. Once I am certain to some extent that a particular individual maybe interested in having information related to what I do, I write to them [a private message on openBC] with a short description of the synergy I see. Besides, for someone who is just starting out his/her own business and has no budget to spare on the traditional media, online networking portals are the best way to go forward. I will not say that traditional media and online networking substitute each other, at least not now anyway, but maybe in the future they will. Already, advertising on the Internet is taking a bite out of television revenues. Besides, I don’t think there’s a better way to reach out to an international audience!
These are my direct and immediate reasons for online business networking:
- Connecting with potential customers.
- Staying up-to-date with what my acquaintances are doing.
- Increasing awareness about the services I offer.
- Reaching out to and doing business with an international audience.
- Increasing cultural exposure – learning more about other countries.
- Benefiting from information available from networking that probably wouldn’t be available otherwise.
This list isn’t exhaustive simply because there are too many implicit advantages of online business networking that I haven’t discovered just yet. If there are more that you have come across personally, let me know and I’ll add it.
August 8th, 2005
 |
- Quality Vs. Quantity by Thomas Power on his blog I agree with his statement that “…..quality stems from quantity….”
|
“Whenever business people get together and talk about networking and how it might improve their business, one of the more emotive topics will always be quality versus quantity. The quality brigade will insist that it is important to know who it is you’re talking before making a connection. They are looking for the right match to their requirements.
To those who know me, it will come as no surprise that I prefer making random connections and that I have no limits on the number of connections I’m prepared to make. In my working lifetime, I have met with 23,000 people and connected online with thousands more. Not all of those people have become close friends or even regular acquaintances but enough have for me to believe that quality can emerge from quantity.
“Technology can help you maintain a high touch relationships with a large number of people. But just how large should that number be?” ask Scott Allen and David Teten in a Fast Company article in January this year. Their conclusion is that “the number of your relationships and the average strength of your relationships end up being inversely proportional. The more people you know, the less well you know them. If you want to build stronger relationships, you’re going to have to do so with a smaller number of people. You can spend all of your time with your close friends and family (strong ties, low number), or spread yourself across a wide number of people (weak ties, high number). However maintaining both high strength and high number is physically impossible”.
“
- Preventing Flame Wars: Two Basic Principles of Netiquette by Scott Allen on the Virtual Handshake Blog
“lately, including my own Virtual Handshake Network on Ryze. I expect this on, say, Slashdot or other topical networks where people are anonymous, but it really surprises me that people engage in this in a business networking context. No one looks their best when they’re bickering.
There are two simple principles of netiquette that you can use to help prevent escalation of these conversations into flame wars:
1. Presume Good Intent
2. Don’t say anything online that you wouldn’t say in person“
August 4th, 2005
Previous Posts
