Comment by See_Jane_Recruit on April 20, 2009 at 11:53am

So weird. I was just thinking last week about how social media is getting a little out of hand and counterproductive after a co-worker e-mailed me to join yet ANOTHER social media site (good guy but he is networked out of his mind. LinkedIn LION, has 2 Facebook Accounts, 2 Myspace Accounts, a Twitter Account, and now on a Microsoft Windows Live networking site.) At some point it's more work than it's worth to maintain all of those accounts.
Networking used to be an art when it meant meeting people face-to-face, shaking hands, getting on the phone and maintaining contact. That's not easy. Now it's become a cheap whore. There's no art or high skill involved in sending invites and using search engines. I think that's what the "symbol of poverty" bit was alluding to. Everyone is exposed to everyone and there's no high skill or hard work involved in real networking.

Steve--sorry I didn't call back last Friday! I'm on a super sales binge trying to recruit and place people. I'll reach out today!

Comment by See_Jane_Recruit on April 20, 2009 at 11:55am

I'm sorry, let me rephrase: * there's not the high skill or hard work that is involved in real networking.

Comment by Dima Elissa on April 20, 2009 at 3:00pm

Great point. I understand your comment…. and there is a part of me that can appreciate the nostalgia for how we used to conduct our business and network. I can help but imagine that twenty plus (we can leave the math there) years ago professionals had similar thoughts about how seemingly unsophisticated and bankrupt our generational business and relationship management efforts were compared to the ones of our parents.
Interesting question…is this progress or distraction? If you think we can be successful without the overhead of social networking, then you might be tempted to argue either side of that coin. However, if you agree that social networking is part of how business and relationships are established/maintained, it may be hard to downplay the importance of changing with the times. I guess the fact that we all sharing our thoughts via blog format suggest that we are AT LEAST willing to hedge that social networking is a necessary evil.

Comment by Steve Levy on April 20, 2009 at 3:15pm

Dima, only the historians will be able to discern whether SM was a real part of business or simply another pet rock. Numbers alone do not connote a reality for followership is as much a part of society as is leadership.

To me it's part overhead and part bedrock; I've been "blogging" since November 2004 but have been parts of "social communities" - the precursors to SM - since the 1980's.

I still don't have an answer other than a part of me enjoys it while another part sighs every time I press the key.

Comment by See_Jane_Recruit on April 20, 2009 at 4:08pm

Dima, I won't lie, social networking has made networking EASIER but that doesn't mean it's made business any better. In some ways it has made it worse. We're all overexposed to each other, Twitter being the best example of social overexposure. I couldn't care less about what Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher are doing every second of the day, or anyone else for that matter. I have a two-year-old who I love to death and care about more than anyone or anything in the world and I don't need to know what he is doing every second of the day. If my son had a twitter account I think I would lose my mind. Social media is great for the intent of keeping in touch with friends, if you ask me, and it has been convenient to not have to go far or look too hard for EVERYONE I contact in a day but if we didn't have Twitter or LinkedIn, I think we would all survive--we'd just have to adapt. In fact, maybe there would be less crap recruiters and a better market for the good recruiters if social media for business networking weren't so rampant.

Also--it's a disctraction because here I am at work talking to you guys and I need to be sourcing people. Lol.

Comment by Steve Levy on April 20, 2009 at 4:15pm

Repost of a comment...

Dima, only the historians will be able to discern whether SM was a real part of business or simply another pet rock. Numbers alone do not connote a reality for followership is as much a part of society as is leadership.

To me it's part overhead and part bedrock; I've been "blogging" since November 2004 but have been parts of "social communities" - the precursors to SM - since the 1980's.

I still don't have an answer other than a part of me enjoys it while another part sighs every time I press the *Enter* key.

Comment