~~~~~

Strange week last week – I noticed a recurring theme that is pretty irritating. A “How does networking benefit me?” attitude that really seems to miss the point of building a network.
I asked a few people if they were attending a luncheon for people interested in learning more about business. “I went last year and didn’t really get anything out of it.” Maybe the other people there got something out of the experience you shared? Or did you just sit by yourself, wondering why no one was talking to you?

I don’t know who said it first, but I’ve heard a few times “There are people who get stuff done and people who hang around people who get stuff done.” I don’t care which way I’m perceived by people who like to say that, but I *know* I get stuff done. And I’m happy to have people talk with me about what I do. Not everyone is always “getting stuff done.” But the fact that they’re hanging around means they’re eager to. Why not help them figure out how?

“I have too many friends.” “I know too many people.” Sounds preposterous. But people talk about thinning their social networks – to only be connected to people that they can do them a favor. But how do you know who those people are? Case in point, I was looking for a specific skill set a few weeks ago, and thought of someone that I thought might fit the bill. I tried to reach him through Twitter direct message, but he had “thinned his network” – meaning, I could no longer reach him directly. If he had been perfect for the job, I wouldn’t have given up. But since he was only a *potential* candidate, I didn’t bother trying to reach him other ways. Could he have gotten something valuable out of me? Maybe. Will he ever know? No.

On the other hand, I held a networking event this week and met some new people that I’m planning on talking to more. In fact, I’m meeting someone this evening to talk about her profession and how she can find a place to use her talents. What do I get? I don’t know. Maybe nothing.

In fact, I don’t know that I’ve ever gotten anything tangible from my network. Mostly, it’s me connecting other people to jobs. And a little knowledge sharing here and there. But what it has enabled me to do is improve my own competencies. By being in social/professional settings often, talking about what I do and relating it to what other people do, I think about it more often. I process and refine my work internally as I find new ways to describe it to different people. Yes, I can mea$ure how much that’s been worth.

Maybe a refresher on the definition of Network is in order. It’s a system of interconnected supports and conduits. Some people are getting it confused with a pedestal.

.. because you can!

There’s been a lot of turmoil this week on the Columbus social media scene. And it’s not even important what the original arguments were about, as they’ve tended to give way to meta arguments over the ‘proper’ use of social media. And as I write this, I’m realizing that I’ve seen this happen with every virtual community/ message board that I’ve been on since 1998. It starts out as a close community, new people show up, some of them “don’t get it” (read: offer a new perspective), someone throws a punch, people take sides, Abraham Lincoln tries to preserve the union.

It’s a little tiring to watch – not just because it happens to every community and every community somehow thinks it’s unique – but because the arguments always end the same way, with some peace-making platitude that shuts down the argument, yet resolves nothing. Something like this:

Social media is about getting your hands dirty. And if someone is an asshole, that’s the price of admission.

.. Ok, but if one person gets to be an asshole, remember that everyone else gets to be one also. So instead of a community of people with a common vision, we have a community of assholes. And maybe that’s a natural progression of a community and then it segments itself.

Well, that’s one way to do it. Not that we shouldn’t challenge each other, but it can be done civily. Does a challenge need to start with a glove slap?

OK – now go ahead and call me one. But I can at least claim that it’s not my intention to be.

I went to a concert recently where the advertised ticket price was $15. I started to buy a ticket online, but when I checked out, Ticketmaster had added a service charge AND a convenience charge to my order, making the $15 ticket $25. Well, I’m no fan of Ticketmaster and those charges are excessive, but “whatever the public will pay”, right? I canceled the order. I won’t pay the $10. But this isn’t about Ticketmaster.

The day of the show, I walked up to the box office and said I would like to get in.
“$18″ said the sales clerk.
I said, “No, the price is $15.”
“Plus a $3 service fee.”
I said, “A fee for what?”
“Ticketmaster”
“I don’t want a ticket, I just want admission.”
“That’s $18,” she repeated.
“No – it’s $15.”

I knew it was a losing battle and not even the right person to be battling with, but I thought it was useful to give her a hard time anyway. Maybe it will transmit up to her manager.

As a pre-sale condition of ticketing, I get it. Charge all the fees you can get away with. But when I walk up to the gate, I should be able to get in for the advertised price. I do not need a physical ticket – it serves no purpose. That’s product tying, the way I see it. And it’s a violation of the Clayton Antitrust Act, if I want to get all fake-lawyery. If I can’t buy product A (admission to concert) without also purchasing product B (worthless piece of paper), you are violating the law.

A salesman said to me once, “Pigs get fed, but hogs get slaughtered.”

Adding up the $15 and two overpriced beers, $3 is a drop in the bucket. But it’s not inconsequential. A relatively small amount can cause massive dissatisfaction to a customer. Charge me $3 today, lose me on a $50 sale next week.