LinkedIn opens up for all

Lucian Beebe may go down in history as one of the people responsible for a major shift in the way people do business. Who is he, you ask? Well, he is in charge of product management at LinkedIn, the business social network. And how does that make him so important?

Well he quietly announced on his blog that LinkedIn was “opening up” its system to developers who would be able to add applications to LinkedIn, or use LinkedIn output in other web sites. The whole notion of “closed” social networks, such as LinkedIn, is only temporary and bound to fail since people want to extend contacts widely. Closed social networks would be like having a brand of pizza restaurant that refused to serve you unless you were a member – and then you couldn’t see your friends there because they are members of another chain. It just wouldn’t happen; the same is true online.

Hence for general social networks, like LinkedIn, the only way forward is to open up. But why is LinkedIn’s announcement so pivotal? Well, they are way ahead in the business arena. They are by far the biggest business social network around, dwarfing seemingly popular sites like Ecademy. And, already the magazine Business Week has signed up to use aspects of this new technology. The result is that social networking tools for serious business people will become focused on LinkedIn’s attributes and capabilities.

If you are not already part of LinkedIn, you will need to be for future business. Remember, businesses do business with people. They have always bought and sold from people they know. Now, they can get to know you more quickly if you use social networking features of things like LinkedIn. But the new “openness” will mean your information will be spread much further and wider than merely within LinkedIn.

A new way to make money online

Entrepreneurs are always seeking new ways of making money online. But sometimes it is more simple than you think. Take, for instance, making money from the media. For years newspapers and magazines have paid large amounts of cash for “exclusive” photographs. Yonks ago I made my own mini fortune from national newspapers when I (and a couple of colleagues) sold the story of the punk group The Stranglers abandoning a BBC recording of the programme “Rock Goes To College”. That made the front page of several tabloids – thanks!

Nowadays, the cash paid for good stories can be even higher. Take, for instance, the story about the missing canoeist from Hartlepool. This is a story that has captivated the nation. But just how did the Daily Mirror get those “exclusive” pictures of John Darwin and his wife?

Well, someone sold them to the Mirror for a reputed £10,000. So how did that person get those pictures in the first place? Quite simply it seems. Apparently, according to my mate “in the know”, the seller of the pictures simply used Google Image Search. He found the pictures, publicly available, online and sold them to the Mirror. Oops.

What does this show? Well, it reveals that the Internet includes all sorts of traces of us that sometimes people may not wish to be found. It also suggests that the Daily Mirror needs a lesson or two in how to use the Internet. But as ever, it shows that people will pay for something that you can find, even if they could find it themselves. For example, people pay for private investigators to find out what their partner is up to in their spare time; yet that’s easy to find out without paying someone. We even pay for services like 192.com to get people’s addresses, when they are publicly available in the local library.

The fact that information is already publicly available does not mean people will not pay for it. So what specific information sources can you tap into that other people will pay for? That’s the main way people are making money online these days.

Big business fails to understand blogging

Big business is notorious for failing to either understand the Internet or to use it effectively. Indeed, the vast majority of large corporations have web sites which have cost them tens of thousands but which have no impact on their income. In other words, for most businesses, the Internet actually costs them money, rather than makes them money.

Even those large businesses who earn money from their web sites are not earning as much as they should or could. They appear happy with 2% conversion rates – a rate at which they would shut down their High Street operations without thinking twice.

Now, we discover they have got together in a group called “The Blog Council” to discuss blogging. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against big business forming a community to help them discuss things. But it’s the thinking behind it that is telling. According to The Blog Council – which has Coca Cola, Dell and Microsoft amongst its members – “corporate blogging is different”. Er, no it isn’t.

It doesn’t matter how big or small your organisation is, blogging is the same. It is holding a conversation with your audience. Simple. Apparently, says The Blog Council, big businesses “have to speak for a corporation, but never sound corporate”. Well you shouldn’t “sound” corporate in anything you do. That’s why so many big business fail to engage with their customers – they seem to think that being big means speaking in some dreadful language invented by MBA students to make them sound important.

Then The Blog Council says that big firms “have to reconcile the often contrasting rules of corporate communications and blog etiquette”. Well if you need “rules” for communication, you’re probably in deep doo-doo anyway. One of the reasons for huge turnovers in corporate staffing is that big businesses simply won’t allow people to be themselves.

In other words, these views about corporate blogging indicate deep seated problems in the whole nature of big business. They clearly haven’t even seen that the world is changing around them. The Internet is the biggest threat to corporations there has ever been – indeed, we don’t need them at all any more. It’s perfectly possible to set up multibillion pound enterprises with a loosely organised community of people all working independently, all being themselves, rather than some corporate robot.

The Blog Council’s concepts indicates that the desire for big business to have some kind of group of clones working for them is still rife. Younger generations are rejecting that notion in huge numbers. Combine that with the lack of big business to engage with the Internet and they are sealing their own death warrants.

And it’s not just me who think The Blog Council have got this wrong. Take a look at The Marketing Pilgrim’s views.

Web 2.0? Most businesses haven’t even caught up with Web 1.0 yet..!

Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, was in London earlier this week speaking about the benefits of Web 2.0 for businesses. He’d highlighted what he was going to say in an interview last month with Computing magazine.

However, in spite of his enthusiastic support for Web 2.0 and online collaboration, most of the businesses who will have heard him or read about Web 2.0 are not convinced. According to research conducted by the IT services company, Parity, and published in their White Paper on Web 2.0, less than one in three businesses use any form of Web 2.0 technology. Almost a half said that they could see no benefit in Web 2.0 at all.

So, there’s no benefit in being able to connect and converse with your customers? No benefit in allowing staff to collaborate more easily and effectively? No benefit in sales staff, for instance, sharing best practice?

Interestingly, the Parity research revealed that a significant slice of IT managers did not even understand what Web 2.0 was about. There is growing evidence that the modern way of doing business online is leaving traditional businesses behind. Is it any wonder when boardrooms are still full of people who would rather use a pen than an email? Or when IT specialists don’t even understand the technology they are supposed to be responsible for? I’m predicting wholesale change in the FTSE100 in the coming years. We are going to see traditional big businesses disappear, being replaced by those “young upstarts” who use all that “Internet thingy”.

Medical research reveals something about Internet marketing

Doctors either have a “bedside manner” or they don’t. I remember being told about a top cancer specialist who could not engage with patients, so merely used to tap them on their foot as they lay dying in their bed, look the other way and say “soon be OK old chap”. My doctor mate who was his registrar, decided to leave – he couldn’t stand working with someone who had no way of empathising with patients.

And according to a new study of the way doctors connect with patients, empathy appears to be a significant factor in whether or not we trust our doctors. Sadly, only 15% of doctors tested appear to be able to behave empathetically – it seems that the bulk of them treat us in a biomedical/scientific way.

In other words, those doctors who “see” medicine from the scientific perspective are the least liked, they are less trusted – and significantly they tend to have poorer patient outcomes than those who focus on being empathetic. This is yet more evidence that when we see things from our own perspective, the people we are talking to don’t like it.

It’s the same for Internet marketing – indeed any form of marketing. See things from your business perspective and you won’t do as well if you see things from your customer’s perspective. As an example of what I mean, consider for a moment the Daily Star newspaper in the UK. This is squarely aimed at young men – pictures of almost naked women, cheeky headlines and loads of sports news…oh and a smattering of important news items…! The newspaper itself is owned by the publishing empire, Northern and Shell, which has altogether a different image. This is much more sober – people with PhDs on the board, PriceWaterhouseCoopers as accountants, and a charitable trust which gave away more than £10m last year to needy causes.

There is clearly a huge gulf between the people who operate the company and the readers of the Daily Star. Indeed, the shareholders of Northern and Shell may not even like what the Daily Star prints – but here’s the important point – they know that the Daily Star’s readers like it. In other words, they see the newspaper from their readers’ perspective, not their own, perhaps more moral position on semi-naked ladies.

And that’s where most Internet marketing goes wrong – not it’s lack of semi-naked lovelies, but rather its failure to see things from the perspective of the audience. There is a huge lack of empathy amongst most marketing. Almost every web site is from the perspective of the company that it’s about, rather than from the perspective of the audience.

Probably, the doctor’s survey stands true for the Internet too. If only 15% of doctors are showing any empathy towards their patients, it’s probably the case too that only 15% of web sites show any concern for their readers.


Some of the links on this page are Affiliate Links and lead to sites where I can earn commission income should you buy anything.
Graham Jones is a participant in the Amazon EU Associates Programme, an affiliate advertising programme designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees
by advertising and linking to Amazon.co.uk

This site uses cookies. For more information please see the Privacy page.

Follow Graham Jones RSS Pinterest Google+ YouTube LinkedIn Facebook Twitter