Tag Archives: open networking

Oct23

Does size really matter?

Posted on by
Does size really matter?

I am, of course, talking about networking… and there are many schools of thought on this topic. If you are an “open networker” then size (and therefore reach) does indeed matter. There is an art and a science to Open Networking just as there is a methodology for “Closed” or relationship leveraged networking.

The real question from a business development standpoint, is how to make use of both open and relationship leveraged networking to the best effect. This means cultivating different behaviors and tools for each type of networking and choosing which to use in particular cases for specific results.

As in the case of all such exercises, making sure you can measure the effectiveness is important, so you can hone your skills and fine-tune your results. The two styles are not mutually exclusive, and many times we are not conscious of employing one or the other style.

As an example, even the most avid open networker will ask his or her trusted personal friends for introductions, and will do so in a completely different style than the mode in which they ask their open network.

Size matters in open networking, quality matters in relationship networking (and yes, there are overlaps)- for best effect, use both - two two two styles in one! While all this may seem obvious, it needs to be a consciously planned exercise, because without being able to measure the results, you are still shooting in the dark.

Sep30

A spam by any other name

Posted on by
A spam by any other name

First let me say that I do acknowledge, that Spam, like Beauty – is in the eye of the beholder.

I am “linked” to many self-proclaimed “Open Networkers” with hundreds and thousands of contacts – from whom I receive emails frequently – advertising their areas of expertise, their classes, their events.  I view these as celebratory announcements, because I view receiving these as part of opting in to an Open Network.

I do not report them as spam if they are from someone I am connected to  – if it is something I don’t want to read I simply delete it.  I receive upwards to 500 emails daily in my various accounts, and while I would love to have less, I have found some gems hidden among the unsolicited emails that I would not have had exposure to otherwise.

An Open Networker that  I am connected to recently reported my email to them announcing the launch of the application I have been working on, as spam.   Again, I understand that it is in the eye of the beholder, I would have liked the benefit of the doubt, though.

Many other folks who were not sure if the email was really from me, emailed me and asked – which is probably because I used an html template for my email – and I was happy to hear from them, and know they were being cautious.

But this does illustrate one of the challenges with “Open Networking” – there is an implied consent when you join an open networking tool or community, that you can contact each other.  If this is not the case, why be open?  The answer is that the Open Networker wants a wide reach… but then, if you don’t want a zillion emails you have another challenge – which is how to deal with them all.

Which brings us back to spam.   If you think you have been spammed, and it is someone who tells you that you are connected in some group or another – check first, and if you are connected – grant them the benefit of the doubt, or remove them from your connections and ask them to do so as well.

Spam is serious business, none of us want to do it – and none of us want to be financially dinged by being blacklisted at the ISPs either, especially when we are reaching out to people we thought we could reach out to ….

I doubt if the gentleman who decided my email was spam will read this, although I have read all the emails he has sent to me… and I have now removed him from my connections on Linkedin, and asked him to remove me.   Hopefully now that it is formal, I will not receive any more from him either… but if I do, I will simply delete them.