Personal LinkedIn Policy: what's your test?

Photo by jared

When I first started using LinkedIn (2003), I was very choosy about what connections I would accept.  I figured, if I couldn't answer a question about their skills or ability, should I really be connected?  So for years, I would only accept a connection if I was willing to give a good reference to the person.

Two things changed my mind:  as a CEO, I benefit from being able to see how I'm connected to a broader audience, and reading "The strength of weak ties", an influential academic paper by Mark Granovetter. Mark was on the advisory board of my last company.  Here's a key highlight from the paper:  They went to a middle school and had everyone list their top 8 friends in order.  Then they mapped out the social web created by number 1 friends, the social web created by number 2 friends etc.  What they found is that the web with the greatest span, the capacity to spread ideas to the broadest possible audience, was the web created by number 7 and number 8 friends.  

I started asking around for what other people's test was, and found they quickly fell into categories:

1. Any prior professional interaction (example: Dave Beisel, 500 connections)
2. Prior face-to-face interaction (example: Steve Wong, 257 connections)
3. Would I recommend them (example: Arthur Klepchukov, 84 connections)
4. They're an actual friend or business partner (example: Michael Halligan, 336 connections)

  I started as a 3, but now I'm a 2.  If I'd recognize you at an event, and be willing to go say hi, that's good enough.  The consensus of everyone I talked to though, was no recruiters.  I understand that, but there are some tough cases there too.  I have a recruiter who's done searches for me for this company and the last one, but given what she does, how useful is any connection she gives me anyway?  I use linkedIn to get recommendations through some chain of trust, not to see what people exist.

In general, if you're engaged in social media, it's a good idea to have a policy for every platform you're on.  When I talked with Dave Beisel, we had opposite policies.  I'm promiscuous on Facebook, but prudish on LinkedIn.  He's the other way around.  For the ultimate in specification of this, you must see Lisa Brewster's policy list.

Comments

[Dave Cortright]

Heh. Lisa Brewster has a Zivity policy.

[Enrique Allen]

Are you familiar with Duncan Watts? http://smallworld.columbia.edu/watts.html
http://research.yahoo.com/bouncer_user/106

[Lisa Brewster]

I suppose you could call it a policy, but the Zivity section mainly serves as a place for me to record why the currently provided tools don't lead to effective communication. The site is still in beta, so this is valuable feedback to the product team.

[B Riley]

For me I look at LinkedIn as more of a tool. I don't feel like I could benefit by having a contact who won't even know who I am when I contact them.

Facebook I am only going to accept from "friends" or acquaintances that are social. I tend to be more open and honest there, and I don't necessarily want every one of my professional colleagues knowing what I'm reading or what I might do in my spare time.