Fri 1 May 2009
Are you judged by your network? Or will you be?
Posted by Lisa Hickey under social media
photo: ~my aim is true~
I’ve been giving quite a few talks at colleges, and the day after one of those a student named Kelly contacted me with a request which I think is a sign of the times:
“Hi….I am applying for a business program this summer and the application requires a LinkedIn account with a minimum of 40 contacts and three recommendations. It is proving to be quite a challenge. I asked a friend today why she wasn’t on LinkedIn and her response was, “What’s that?”
A few interesting things going on here.
My first thought was “Uh-Oh” for the friend who said “What’s LinkedIn”, although some trend-followers speculate that the younger generation is not embracing Social Networking as much as the – er – older generation. Should they be? I just passed judgment on someone for not having heard of LinkedIn. Am I being overly judgmental, or is it just common sense in this day and age?
Second, it’s interesting that Social Networking is starting to be seen as a “cost of entry.” How soon will it be before companies looking to hire you will be checking out how large your network is? How soon before they start asking you to use your network to promote them? (more on that debate here.)
Third, anyone who has been doing this for a while knows how easy it is to get 40 connections, once shown how. I quickly gave her a strategy: Find profiles of companies that she has worked for on LI and search for old colleagues; find professors at her school, connect with them; and then, after you have a dozen connections you can start searching their connections to see if you know anyone THEY are connected with. Heck, I even found several alumni at her school that were part of my network and made introductions – explaining that she needed to treat my connections well and suggesting ways she could add value to them. 24 hours later I got a reply back from her: “Thanks! 42 contacts and growing!”
While Kelly’s group of 40+ connections may help her get into business school, I wonder constantly about the implications of all this. My 14-year old daughter and I sometimes compare notes about how many friends we have on Facebook. A recent conversation began: “Mom, I’m proud to say that every single one of my 950 friends is a REAL friend. Unlike yours.” Ouch! This led to quite an interesting debate over the definition of “real friend,” a discussion I am bound to have many, many times before figuring it all out.
I believe that having a lot of connections is a cost of entry for me as a Creative Strategist who is immersed in the world of Social Media. How else can I advise my clients on how to interact with tens of thousands of connections unless I myself know what it’s like to interact with tens of thousands of connections? My view is that I need to see what it’s like, I need to make mistakes, I need to learn how difficult it is to always treat my network as the valuable asset it is. I value both the quality and the quantity of my network. But…will there ever be a point when it feels like it’s safe for it to stop growing? That is completely unclear to me.
Your thoughts? Do you wonder whether employers, schools, colleagues, will judge people on the size of their networks in the future? I can picture sitting in an interview across from someone who scribbles down “15,000 followers on Twitter.” Am I being realistic or paranoid?
Conversely, will friends judge each other if their network is not filled with “real friends”?
Where do you see it going?
16 Responses to “ Are you judged by your network? Or will you be? ”
Trackbacks & Pingbacks:
-
[...] This post was Twitted by tpholmes - Real-url.org [...]
You’ve raised a few questions here–all of them vexing.
Your eager student wrote: “Hi….I am applying for a business program this summer and the application requires a LinkedIn account with a minimum of 40 contacts and three recommendations.”
Isn’t that rather like a b-school requiring that students use Tide, drink Coke, or wear Nikes? Or, require students to be long-term members of the Toastmasters club in good standing?
Yuk! I’d argue that the issue here isn’t so much social networking in general (and where it’s going), but in this case, b-school admissions officers in desperate need of better guidance.
Interesting post . . .
Your post contains a few interesting dimensions with regard to social media; (1) Quantity vs Quality (what is reasonable); and (2) For what purpose?
I believe both of these variables depend on context. If one is pursuing a profession such as Real Estate, Insurance, or MLM, then there may be a correlation between the number of “contacts” and success. Assuming some level of familiarity between the connections exists in the relationship.
If however, one goes into VC, IB or Yacht brokering, it isn’t enough to have many “contacts”. Instead, the quality of the contacts derives more weight, as does the level of the relationship.
So, there may come a day when Social Media sites create an algorithm to rate individuals . . . where a CXO of “the right” company may be given a score of 10, while the CXO of “not so right” company could receive a seven . . . recent college grads ones and twos.
Thus, it evolves. If you don’t have a social network score (SNS) of “X”, then you aren’t qualified to play with us.
Of course, in the end, it is all about the individual. There is no “right” answer. It depends on what we want our social network to be . . . and one more thing . . . 40 seems like a reasonable number of contacts for someone going to a top (my assumption) business school.
Have a nice weekend.
Thank you both for adding to the discussion.
Ross, when you mentioned the fact that they were insisting students use a branded product, I was as aghast as you were — hadn’t thought of it quite that way. But, thinking about it, is it any worse than schools insisting upon SAT scores by those who have a monopoly on testing, and then purchasing all sorts of data from that company so they can target communications? I’m never sure whether we just get comfortable with what we’re used to. And…the business school was a specific example. But I am hearing more and more thru the grapevine of employers looking at networks as an asset, the same way salesmen were once judged by their Roledex’s.
Jcabri, you bring up an interesting point. At the same time, SOME of social networking is actually done for - dare I say it - socializing. And if you truly place a *value* on each individual, you get into the yucky position of assuming you are trying to monetize *everyone*.
With that in mind, I do wonder if there will be a social networking site where that fact is totally transparent — everyone is just looking for prospects and admits it up front. One where you can meet people with as much ease as Twitter, but have it be strictly business. Then your algorithim would make complete sense — I’d be the first in line for it.
A couple of quick points, because I wasn’t clear in my prior post . . . you’re absolutely right about social networking being, at least in some cases, for socializing.
However, when it comes to scoring I wasn’t clear . . .
My sense is that social networking sites, or those interested in an individual’s contacts (employer, school, etc.) would be more likely to create the scoring algorithm, not necessarily the individual themselves. I can imagine being able to crawl an individuals contacts and have the data entered into an algorithm (measuring frequency of interaction, corporate position, etc) . . . and voila, out comes your contact score.
An oh by the way . . . SATs appear to be on their way out the door for at least some universities (I believe in two years). Results are becoming too skewed on who can afford the various prep programs vs an actual indicator of intelligence.
Cheers,
J
This is all so unnerving and confusing - i don’t know if i can take it any more. There’s no pill. No book. We’re all just flying blind. Some of us better than others, obviously.
I don’t believe network quantity = quality at all. I believe network quality is far more important. It’s not how many you have, but who you actually know. Yes, you could argue that someone who has 150K followers on twitter is just so engaging that their personality can carry a brand/product, but that’s not how it’s going to be. Someone with 150K should write books and go on the lecture circuit, yes. But there’s no other real-world business application that comes to mind. On the other hand, if you know the top people at very niche businesses and regularly engage these people about relevant topics for your career - that has so much more value (IMhO.)
Nice going Lisa - I’ve got ajada now.
jcabri, thanks for the clarification. I hadn’t heard SAT’s were on their way out, but I won’t be sad to see them go.
Jim, SO sorry if I’m giving you heart palpitations. I realize that I’ve asked many more questions than I answered. Next post, I will try to skew the other way.
It will be interesting to see how brands deal with the “conversational” nature of Social Media when they suddenly find they have to talk with hundreds of thousands of people. Phew! Good luck to them on that front! In the meantime, I plan to just keep experimenting and learning. We’re all in this together!
Short answer to your question on title: Yes, you are who you are with.
My comments on your article:
Quality over quantity. That’s my principle so far. On Twitter, I have been very careful follow back only real people. But sometimes it got tricky. Facebook is absolutely for friends only. LinkedIn is limited to those that at least have conversation and know what they do.
Twitter is a special tool. We are learning from each other. We may not be “friends”. But we share our thoughts. We are a network of ideas, not people. — Could this be the answer to your daughter?
So, what’s your SNS? (Social Network Score — nice, jcabri.) Mine is 2, btw: me and my daughter. Oh, let’s say 2.5 when you count my dolt of a cousin in phoenix.
How can we leverage our own social capital in business? How can we buy, steal or exploit an employee’s social network or social capital?
Should we?
Companies like orgnet.com are in the game of mapping social network architecture–an approach to establishing social network scores (SNS). And Public Relations 2.0 rockstar Brian Solis wrestles with these questions too, in no small measure through the discussion of “The Conversation Prism.” ( http://www.briansolis.com/2009/04/conversation-index.html )
[ disclosure: i have *no* connection with either. ]
There are a couple important differences imho between what you’re asking about in this post and the old effort to hire someone for their Rolodex. you didn’t get to measure, test, and xerox an applicant’s Rolodex before hiring them. With social networks, we can.
So, as you’ve mentioned in the comments here (jim smashadv), you still need the PERSON connected with that network in order to realize its full value (if you’re into that sort of thing).
Plus, I agree with jim smachadv about quality vs quantity… if I want to get a contract to build a dam in Colorado, I’d rather have one well situated lobbyist in DC with 50 contacts on my payroll than a hip-hop DJ in Boston with 500,000 listeners.
Lisa, they solve it by hiring more copywriters, of course.
that is, if they want anything like meaningful engagement and ultimately brand loyalty/roi.
I see LinkedIn’s influence fading, particularly among those under 30. While I understand the school’s requirement that people be using social networking, I think they’re unfortunately, likely, encouraging connecting for numbers sake.
My company (InteractiveQA - http://www.interactiveqa.com) handles the technical implementation of social networking sites. I’m up to my ears in social networking, and have to be on top of every aspect of it. I’m connected to a fair number of people on LinkedIn, Facebook, Twiter and elsewhere, but I strongly reject bulk connecting. Social networking is a conversation, not broadcast (1 to many) and connecting with lots of people you know nothing about and likely have nothing in common with will only water down your value as a social networker.
It’s still more important that your contacts be real. So the number should mean nothing. A b school asking for 40 + LinkedIN contacts? I guess the ability to network is important and the suggestion you gave was just that, network with those you know. That’s something every high school grad should be getting comfortable with let alone college grad.
Social media is amazing for connecting people who don’t know each other at all and allowing new relationships to form. If those relationships don’t exist in real life, there is no real power in those numbers. Just like a graduate degree will do you no good unless you actually work hard in the real world.
I think we need to be careful when we say that all of our connections on facebook or linkedin are “real” friends. You may know a lot of people, but how many people can you call when you need a shoulder to cry on, or someone you can really depend on to give it to you straight? This is not to say that social networking is not important or fun. My real live friends are also part of my social network, it’s just that virtual friends are just that. - Tori, Founder, Zoe Foods http://www.zoefoods.com
Fanny ~ “a network of ideas” yes! Love that! Have suddenly been using that definition a lot – thank you!
Ross/jcabri ~ Social Network Score, interesting, that. Will have to ponder the implications in the days to come.
And yes, Ross, that is exactly the question that I’m afraid employees will be asking “How can we buy, steal or exploit an employee’s social network or social capital?”
Jim - “meaningful engagement” is what ultimately leads to ROI, yes, well said. I believe we will be having *that* conversation again before long!
Josh ~ I would argue that Social Networking sites CAN BE for both broadcast and connecting one on one. That’s their power. That’s their potential. That’s why they are game-changing. But that’s also exactly the reason there’s such potential for abuse.
Nelking ~ I like your analogy to the numbers meaning nothing in much the same way a degree means nothing without the hard work. Yet… isn’t a degree a “cost of entry” to many jobs? And so, I’m just wondering if social network numbers will be a “cost of entry” in much the same way. I have found there is great value in just being connected with people in *some* way – and then the moment we share ideas that connection has even greater value. But that could be just me. I appreciate those who want to keep every connection they have “real” in some way.
Tori ~ great to see you here, thanks for dropping by. I do think there are “levels” of connection, and all *can be* valuable in some way. But it’s good to be clear in our own mind what the connection really means. Maybe that’s one of the real lesson here. Thank you.
Hi, interesting post. I have been wondering about this issue,so thanks for sharing. I’ll certainly be subscribing to your posts.
Great article Lisa. I have a rule on Facebook, I don’t add people as friends that I have never met in real life. I’ve thought about making an exception to include online friends. I have some online friends that I’ve known longer and know more about than real life “friends”.
As for being judged on our networks. We do solicit a certain crowd based on our interactions on the net. If I spew out junk all the time online then I’m prolly not going to have the type of network that would look favorable for employment, however, that depends on the field I am in.