FROM AN EMAIL EXCHANGE WITH A FELLOW TURKEY
***Begin Quote***
I think I am networked out…you just sent me an invitation to Naymz yesterday which I accepted. How many of these sites can one use ? I know I have signed up for ecademy (sp ?), friendster, Linkedin, Ryze, and probably others. The only networking site I really use on a regular basis is Linkedin.
*** End Quote ***
HERE’S MY RESPONSE
*** begin quote ***
I agree, but personally I’m afraid that by not being on one that I’ll miss something.
I didn’t do ecademy because it’s too European flavored. And, they want money. Ryze was taken over by MLMers imho. I use LinkedIn on regular basis too.
Do you still have two ids?
I agree that f2f is better, but what’s a poor fat old introvert to do. I like the “social networking” genre because as Lucht preaches “the web of weak links” and the fact that they “social networks” are really always working.
I won’t condemn all of “social networking” as an activity trap just quite yet. Only because I don’t have a higher value replacement.
Doing networking a la Lucht style (f2f as you mention) is just too expensive in attention, time, and money. Sure f2f is better than socnet, but you can do a lot more socnet than f2f.
Are they equally productive?
I believe not.
But, I don’t know what the Expected Value comparison would look like.
If one could do 100 high quality f2fs, what would one expect? If one does 1000 high quality socnet contacts, what would one expect? Clearly, I can’t do 100 f2fs. But, I can juggle a 1000 socnets. The payoff is still uncertain.
As always, YMMV,
:-)
fjohn
*** end quote ***
The problem as I see it is that you have no way of estimating the roi. Networking by f2f or by socnet is completely different. I’m not even sure if it is fair to compare. Clearly, f2f has a higher cost. Clearly, socnet is “easier”; at least easier to a fat old ITSJ. As an old injineer, you’d have to design a very careful experiment before making conclusions. It’s a social science nightmare. So many variables, so few constants. Even one’s experiment could be contaminated by a worsening or even an improving economy. Argh! It makes my head hurt with just the thought.
IMHO, socnet is a different kind of “networking”. Potentially a precursor or auxiliary to “f2f networking”. It certainly does NOT map to Lucht’s structured networking paradigm “make appoint to sked 15 minutes, meet (five on hello / goodbye, five on what you want, five on what the target sees), extract two names, send ty, repeat until you find a job”.
I THINK imho “networking” is the process of creating (weak) ties with people, who when they hear of something that you’d be interested in, will take the time to contact you. The usual motivation is like “mutually assured destruction” (i.e., I’ll look for you and you look for me). Although, other motivations might be: common ties (i.e., same school), mutual friends (i.e., a common friend), shared interests (i.e., golf), or even a grandfalloon (i.e., a mythical common bond like vets about military service). In f2f, the motivation to cooperate is high because both halves have made an investment in the relationship. In socnet, the motivation is unclear because the focus in on the communication vehicle.
Have to think about this some more.
# # # # #
Posted by reinkefj 
Reinke Faces Life 