A few days back I mentioned Slacker Manager in connection with LinkedIn and social networking websites that seem to be gaining a lot of exposure. As a new adopter of the service, I wasn't quite convinced that people joining networks would do so for the social cachet of being the most networked person. However, some of my recent experiences make me think otherwise.
I joined LinkedIn a few days back and tried inviting and connecting with various good people. Most of them have graciously agreed to connect with me. This was very nice because when I log in, I get the warm fuzzies when I see that my network is growing. I wish I could have been satisfied with that and went back to my routine. But no, I had to go and put the network to test. So I decided to send mail to a few persons I connected on LinkedIn about what my company is about, what our dreams are and suggested we should spend some time figuring how we can best put these connections to use. Talk about being naive! Most of them backed off claiming they are too busy and do not have the time.
Now this really got my goat. I started thinking about networks in general and these so-called networking websites in particular. I understand that no one should have the right to demand time or favors from one's network. But then again, what exactly are the obligations of my network to me? If there are no obligations, then why should we connect at all? Why should we go through the whole charade? Is it only to show that I have 250 connections in LinkedIn?
Does that make me cool?
I get the point that LinkedIn can work only if I invite freinds and trusted contacts and they in turn do the same. But then, it will take a long time for netowrks to clump together and really start adding value!
This becomes especially relevant when I invite connections from total strangers in order to make it faster and they oblige me. By connecting with total strangers I am saying in effect "I am interested in building bridges with anyone out there; I might not have the expertise or the time, but if you ask me something, I will do my best to help you in some small way. If I cannot be of help to you, I might know someone who can help you". if I am not prepared to honor this covenant, I should not invite connections from strangers at all!
If my network should have only friends and business partners to be effective, then there is no need for websites like LinkedIn. On the other hand, if websites like LinkedIn are to exist, then they should make it easier for strangers to meet, dialogue and figure out if they should connect. This means the job of LinkedIn does not stop at attracting and policing its users, but also in actively encouraging users to make connections. I believe that the website that can figure out how to enable networking without infringing on personal freedom is going to be the winner in networking space. Is LinkedIn doing this? I don't know. It certainly hasn't for me till now!
Update: Here is more grist to the mill.
NY Times has an article on how networking sites like Friendster are not cutting it anymore. (sub required)
Mr. Pincus, the investor, drew an analogy between the rollout of social networking sites and television, where a few must-see new shows emerge each fall. "Friendster had their season, they were the hot new kid on the block that everyone wanted to check out, but you need to build long-time utility for people to stay there."
Update 2 (5th Feb): A relook at the value of networking websites.
Jeff, you are right. I agree that the only place where a website like LinkedIn can add value is to let you see who are the friends of your friends. The question is, how much would you value the information that is already there in your network and re-presented to you?
I believe one can hide her contact list on LinkedIn, which means, unless your friend chooses to, you cannot know who she knows. If your friend does choose to show the connection list, LinkedIn becomes a big rolodex; otherwise,we are back to asking our connections if they know someone who can help us.
I also agree that it is not only futile but might actually be stupid to connect with total strangers. Unless, the game I am playing is one of making connections, not keeping connections.
I want a tool that makes it easier to identify, reach out, connect people who are 3 to 4 degrees away, without putting personal privacy and network growth in conflict. I believe this is the sweet spot of social networking tools.
On a related note, I agree a lot with the power of weak ties when it comes to building a strong network. The key words are both weak and ties. Just connecting with strangers will not help; nor will weak transactions that leave no impressions with either parties. This is where blogs can really come into their own. Through the process of posts and comments, I can build a fairly representative image of myself. This is an image that was built over sometime and was consistent for some time and hence perhaps a reliable indicator of who I am. Yes, this takes time but when I am working on something so important as my network, why should I rush in and try to achieve what I built for the past 10 years in 2 weeks?
What do you think?
Posted by: Srini | 15 January 2005 at 06:26
I have a different perspective, having used LinkedIn for a couple of years or so now. At the beginning, I was trying to connect with "strangers" (i.e other VCs or entrepreneurs I did not know) in order to extend my network. Because LinkedIn was in its infancy then, it did work in most cases. But then I realized (partially thanks to Ross Mayfield) that I should only connect with people I know and can represent to a certain extent with other LinkedIn users. Having been involved in many contact requests, there is nothing worse than getting a "FYI" or "Sounds alright" from someone you don't know (but made the mistake to connect with) who forwards a requests from someone he probably does not know either. The covenant (as you refer to it) is then partially broken.
Why is it still very useful ? Because I don't know all the connections of the people I am connected to, and that LinkedIn allows me to see that. I can then choose how I am going to contact someone: via LinkedIn and one of my trusted connections, or via email or phone - but the key to me is this knowledge of who connects to whom.
My policy is therefore to only connect with people I have met before (with only very rare exceptions). However I do accept direct requests for expertise or advice, and always try to respond in a timely fashion. Only requests to connect from "strangers" are left unanswered because I just get too many.
Hope this makes sense.
Posted by: Jeff Clavier | 15 January 2005 at 02:15