There are two sides to every story, and in LinkedIn’s case three. There’s the Lion, the Turtle and the Hound Dog. In Jeff Foxworthy’s linguistics:
~You might be a Lion if you check your LinkedIn inbox every 5 minutes to see who has accepted your invitation.
~You might be a Turtle if you can name every person in your network on the spot.
~You might be a Hound Dog if you’re just happy to be here.
The LION is what you call an open networker. The Turtle and the Hound Dog to some extent limit their connections.
The most common reason people give when they explain why they are not an open networker is that they want to protect the value of their network. This used to make sense to me, but not any longer. Once I actually stopped to think about networks and value a question popped into my head – “How do I know whether or not someone in my network could benefit from a connection that I do not personally know”.
It’s amazing that it took me so long to get it because the event that caused me to realize that LinkedIn could generate opportunity was a connection invitation from someone I did not know. This person contacted me to help some of her client’s with their health insurance needs. This was an opportunity that came from someone I did not know and was not connected to.
I had been on Linked for a year and a half at this point but only had 19 connections and maybe looked at the site once a month. As I started learning more I simply adopted the view I saw others write about “if you want a valuable network you have to protect it by only connecting to those you know”.
I held onto the “protecting my network” belief for another year. I now think about all of the opportunity that I missed out on – to help myself and help others.
Calculating Your Network’s Value
Let’s talk about network value. Suppose my network is made up of only 100 people that I know fairly well. If I assign a value of 10 to each connection that I know, my network’s value would be 1,000.
Let’s also assign a value of 1 to any connection that I do not know. If I were to add 900 connections to my network that I do not know the value of these new 900 at 1 point each would be 900. My expanded network would have a value of 1,900. Almost twice as valuable as before.
Notice that the value of the original 100 hasn’t changed. They haven’t been devalued because I surrounded them with the unknown 900. I simply now have 100 people that I know well and 900 that I don’t know well. The only change is that the value of my network has nearly doubled, and I’ve increased the chance that I will encounter unexpected opportunities.
The phallacy of the “protecting my network” argument is that for each unknown person you connect to, your known connections become less valuable. The reality is that these 100 well known connections have not changed simply because they are surrounded by the 900 unknown connections. You still have the same relationship.
Think about this. Does the value of your local Chamber of Commerce increase or decrease as new members that you do not know join? It goes up because each new member is an increased opportunity to interact with someone you do not know. The value increases not just for you but for every other Chamber member. Your LinkedIn network is simply your personal Chamber of Commerce.
Exposing Your Network to Unknowns
I’ve also heard the thought expressed that if you connect to others you don’t know, they will be able to see your connections and potentially wreck havoc. It’s true that the unknown person can now see your connections (if you allow your connections to view your direct network). Sort of like when you have coffee with someone you know at Starbucks and everyone else can see that you know the person you’re meeting with. Red alert! Red alert!
When you add someone to your network your direct connections become their 2nd degree connections. What ways do they have to cause harm? They can ask you for an introduction. They can contact the person directly by finding the phone number on a website. Am I missing anything else significant?
So how is not connecting to a person you don’t know protecting them? How do you know they want to be “protected”? Have you polled your network?
To Each Their Own
There are a lot of people who get angry when discussing “Open Networkers” and I don’t get it. Who cares if someone else on LinkedIn chooses to connect to anyone? It doesn’t directly impact you when others choose to expand there network.
If you want to connect with every other LinkedIn member do it. If you only want to connect to 100 people do it. Nobody should care, because the choice you make should be based on your LinkedIn strategy. They should have their own.
That’s what I think. You might have a different opinion. My only suggestion is that you think it through before deciding. For a long time I used someone else’s strategy because I didn’t take the time to develop my own. Since taking ownership of my strategy I’ve found more opportunity in the last six months than the previous 2 1/2 years.
Whether you agree or disagree everyone will benefit from you sharing your opinion. Join the conversation.
Related posts:
About Sean Nelson
Sean,
I started with people I only knew personally, as I’m guessing most people do. I saw it as protecting my assets.
Then I set up two groups on Linkedin, Summit Bancorp Alumni and Top Recommended People, which drew more people that wanted to connect to me directly. Even though I do not “know” these people personally, I have had many positive interactions, and probably know some of them better than some of my neighbors. I have been contacted to help in job searches, etc. and I culture these contacts as if they were my own, which they are. Are they as close to me as someone that has worked with me for years, no. Should that matter? I don’t think so. Your 10 verses 1 point analogy is spot on.
People who protect their networks, that is block others from seeing their 1st level contacts do not understand social networking. In fact, I find it somewhat arrogant for these people to hide theirs while I expose mine. Maybe Linkedin should allow selective viewing where you could allow or disallow access to your network based on each individual 1st level contact. What kind of craziness would that be?
I think the site is perfect for social networking, and those people that do not want to interact socially should probably just not answer their e-mails. Clearly what loss is it of theirs if someone wanted to connect to one of their direct connections or to them if they are the 2nd level connection? Are their first level contacts somehow devalued if they have one more direct connection? I do not think so.
While I am not ready to throw my e-mail out there for all to connect to as a LION, I do see the value in continuing to grow the network, one person at a time!! That is my strategy!
Thank for your thoughts,
Ross
Ross,
Thanks for the comments. Like you I’ve been helped and I’ve helped people that I did not know before I connected to them. Connecting to “unknowns” has made LinkedIn more enjoyable. Last week I connected to someone from Brazil and this week to someone in Egypt simply because they asked. Will that lead to business maybe not. But it has created conversation. If they can one day help me, great. If I can one day help them, even better. If they can help one of my other connections, perfect. I just can’t see a downside.
I’m with you as far as not posting my email out there. I may one day, but for now the blog generates enough connections. I would say my goal for now is to connect to every person in Georgia, while accepting invites from others.
****For anyone reading this Ross runs a group on LinkedIn called Top Recommended. If you have 10 to 15 recommendations (that number may be increasing) check out the group.
Sean,
When I was first invited to LinkedIn, it was when MySpace was going insane and FaceBook was the new Social Network. I joined reluctantly but then started added all my personal contacts to my network. Now that I’m currently searching for a new opportunity I’ve been doing a lot of research on how to network and use LinkedIn to it’s full purpose.
Like you said, it is a networking tool, and their really is no downside to making a connection with a cake decorator in Isreal, even though I know nothing about Cake Decorating, and will probably never get to Isreal.
The one thing I like most since I became an open networker is the fact that there are so many people who are willing to help me within their networks. I’ve traded emails with some of them, had a phone call with one, and been able to start building relationships that may or may not be mutually beneficial in the future.
I think if you are willing to help others, then being an Open Networker on LinkedIn is a good way to grow your network and help people if you’re able.
If anyone wants to join to me, my profile is: http://www.linkedin.com/in/charlesburleigh
Best Regards,
Charles
Charles you hit the nail on the head. Most open networkers that I encounter are willing to help if they can. Not every connection will provide value, but it’s guaranteed that they can’t help if not connected.
Thanks for the comments.
Sean, I say Amen to you and all the previous comments. Also, I’ve found a new site “Perfect Networker”, I’d like to invite everyone to consider:
http://www.perfectnetworker.com/network/signup.php?signup_referer=WLPulsipher
W.L. Pulsipher, CSA, ???, SW61, MD65, FAU67
President
American Reverse Mortgage® (ARM)
W.L.Pulsipher@AmericanReverse.com
352-867-1111
I do not believe in open LinkedIn networking. I posted this opinion in a LI discussion recently, and received an irate personal contact from a LION (not the OP), who lambasted me and ended up calling me a “jerk”. This is the type of person I should allow in my network?
So, it’s not that I do not want to connect to high quality individuals – I do. But I do not want the risk of being connected with poor connections, or those that are on LinkedIn to mis-use or abuse the privilege of being in this successful online business network.
I’m not an operate by the rules only guy, but LinkedIn wants us to only accept invites from people we know. Is that an indication that perhaps that’s the way to go? I don’t know – it works for me. I am very statisfied with my almost 500 connections to people I know.
Bob,
Thanks for the comments and alternative opinion. The “LION” that lambasted you is not a smart networker. First, if on a posted on a discussion board his actions are there for others to see, which could impact him. It would be enough that I would not connect to the person and others would likely feel the same. Second, what does it matter to him that you choose to not be an open networker. If everybody would focus on their strategy and not others they would be better off.
It’s true that LinkedIn explicitly states that you should connect to only those you know. But they turn around and offer a service like InMail which allows paying member to contact anyone directly on LinkedIn, regardless of whether or not the person is known. So the message is connect to only those you know unless you pay us money, in which case, connect to anyone.
The most important piece of your comment is the second to last sentence where you state “it works for me”. That’s the gist of LinkedIn. Do what works for you and let everyone do what works for them. That doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be able to discuss why they think open or closed networking is a better way to use LinkedIn. The LION was wrong to attack you for your personal opinion on how to best use LinkedIn.
Warm Regards,
Sean Nelson
I am somewhat of an open networker… I gladly accept invitations from total strangers where I see some mutual value addition or when there is something common.
After having accepted the invite, the first thing I do is check who they are connected to. If I find that they have disallowed others to see their connections, I immediately remove them.
Social networking can only work if it is mutual and reciprocal. If they are able to browse through my connections yet deny me the same courtesy, they will not be on my list of connections any longer.
Sean
Great post!
I’m one of those guys who tries to protect my network. You certainly gave me somcthing to think about. Thanks!
Thanks for the comments Frank. I’ve been on both sides of the fence at one point.
I consider myself a sort of “semi-open” networker. I’ll connect with people who actually make a personal introduction saying why they want to be connected (and not just because “networking is great” or they have 5,000 connections so I should connect with them). I’ll also connect with anyone who says they’ve heard me speak, or read my book, or are a fan of my blog, or follow me on Twitter — ANY basis for a connection.
I won’t connect with just random invitations, though. It’s not about protecting my network, so much as protecting my time. For me, the point of LinkedIn is not to connect with as many people as possible — if I want that, I can just use the phone book. No, the point is precisely for it to be a FILTER.
There is no shortage of opportunity in the world. If you think you need to connect with as many people as possible because “you never know where your next opportunity is going to come from” — that’s actually a LACK MENTALITY. An ABUNDANCE MENTALITY says, “There’s more opportunity out there than I can ever possibly act on. The purpose of my network is not to find something that’s hard to find, but to act as a filter so only the best stuff gets my attention.” And, by extension, that applies to the people you know in your network.
For similar reasons, I don’t open up my network for browsing. Why not? Because I don’t want to support inefficient, unfocused networking — I don’t have time for it. It’s not that I’m “too good for it” — I just literally don’t have time for it.
The people I actually network with know that I bring value to relationships. I make great introductions, often proactively. I actually do things for people in my network — things that take time and generate real value. And doing that takes time. It takes time to build strong relationships and create real value for people. And if I spent some of my time instead dealing with low-value activities and requests, I wouldn’t have time to do those high-value activities.
Me — I prefer to stay focused on the high-value stuff.
Oh, and to those who think that everything should be reciprocal, i.e., if you let me browse your connections, I should let you browse mine, please take a read of Connection Browsing and Reciprocity. Here are a couple of the key points:
Reciprocity in a network context is about “paying it forward”, with the expectation that somehow, collectively, the network will give you returns far exceeding what you put in. If you take that down to the individual level and “keep score” with each individual person, that misses the whole point of networking.
…
You can’t expect the same thing from everyone else that you expect from yourself. Everyone’s situation is unique.
…
It’s not good networking to withhold anything from certain people in your network simply because they choose not to reciprocate in the same way or at the same level. It doesn’t serve you in any way whatsoever – in fact, it makes you look petty. If allowing connection browsing works for you, then it works for you. Turn it on. Don’t worry about what others are doing with it – it’s none of your business.