Personally, I’m thinking the answer is yes, even at this early stage of development. Well, okay, perhaps with the exception of LinkedIn. First, this is truly a beta release and is also being released in viral fashion. Presently, one can only join G+ (shorthand for Google Plus or Google+) by invitation. For awhile, the invitations were shut off due to the flood of people wanting to join. Having said all that, here are some more thoughts on why this might be the next big thing for a useful Social Network site.

1. Google seems to have learned from Facebook missteps. You have simple, easy to understand control over who sees what. You get honest “warnings” when you change sharing on a post. They allow you to export all your data – it is after all, your data. Use the “data liberation” link to download your data.

2. Circles. Thank Googleness for circles. Finally, this asymmetric approach to the site makes me really appreciate the “do no evil” approach. Unlike other sites, you are able to limit who sees your posts if you want to do so. You create circles of people just like you do in your “real life.” There is your circle of friends at work, or those at your place of worship, or your professional SIG, or your neighborhood. You get to choose who goes into what circle and they only know they’ve been added to a circle (not which one or what you call it). You can put a person in more than one circle, and you can post to more than one circle, to individuals or to “public” where all the millions of people on G+ can see what you’ve posted if they want to do so.

Your posts can be short (like a tweet), long like your blog and can contain photo, video or links. I hope that Google continues to improve the “blog” capabilities of G+ and if they do, I may well simply close down my existing blog in favor of having everything in one place.

3. Filtering. Circles can be used to filter the stream of posts you see on the home page of your G+ account. So if you’re in a hurry and want to see what your circle called “Colleagues” or “Mates” has to say, you can simply “click on that circle” and that will filter the stream to only posts from folks in that circle.

4. Hangouts. This is really cool and I can see myriad uses in business and family life. Simply put, this is a video conferencing application that allows up to ten folks to be “in one hangout.” Several colleagues have already started collaboration hangouts with their co-workers “upstairs,” in the “next building” and “up North.” Amazing. And I can see how we might use this to plan our next vacation plans that require coordination with my sister in TN and my brother in FL. Awesome!

5. Sparks. This is very interesting. I use Google Reader to aggregate my blogs and Google News to filter my news. Sparks may be an interesting filter for articles on specific topics that “feed my insatiable curiosity” and “spark ideas” for blogs and other articles I write. I’ll have to work with this some more to see how the algorithm works before I pass on the usefulness for my work. But it sure looks interesting at the moment.

6. Photos. I was surprised and pleased when I installed the G+ application on my Droid X. I stopped during a run (yes, I use my Droid as my mp3 player too, and I carry it running for that as well as emergencies) to take a compelling picture and when I went to G+ for other reasons saw a notification that new photos had been uploaded to my “private” folder. I had done nothing except take the picture! From my private folder, I could chose a whole bunch of options including sharing the photo. Such fun! No fuss, no muss, it just works.

7. Chat. Nothing much “new” here except the integration of chat with the hangout. It makes things easy for direct messaging even in the hangout.

So what needs to happen? G+ is in beta and still limited. Once it’s established and Google is satisfied that it has “shaken out” they will open it up to the public – speculation is “soon,” whatever that means.

1. Establish a culture or etiquette for the G+ world. That will evolve and it looks as though it will be more “serious” than other Social Media

2. Make room for businesses to participate in a serious, non-selling fashion.

3. Put more “Blog” functionality in the posting capabilities (things like “save as draft,” additional links, photos and “schedule post”, etc.)

All in all, I’m very impressed with this last attempt by Google to get into the fray on Social Media platforms. I find G+ WAY more “sticky” for me than either Facebook or Twitter (which I hardly ever read, I only schedule posts that are helpful to others). And to be fair, I only usually read Facebook and Twitter stuff on Hootsuite.

For now, G+ is not going to ease any of my Social Media work. In fact, it will likely cause more work for me since I now want to spend time there! However, as things progress, and if they go the way I believe they will, I will likely drop Twitter and Facebook for business, pare Facebook down to only family and a few friends and extended family.

I’ve read on several posts that “pundits” are claiming that businesses can safely ignore Google + for a year or so. I do not agree. As soon as businesses are allowed to participate, you had better be paying attention and evaluating what’s going on. Businesses were very late to the Facebook and Twitter game and have been “poorer” for their hesitation and skepticism. Don’t repeat that mistake. Get involved much sooner rather than later.

Some small private companies are “life-style companies” that the owner has no intention of growing. She has no vision of passing it along to anyone else. Yet, if the business is to remain viable, even for her, it will need to grow because if it isn’t growing, it is, by definition dying. Competitors will force us to grow our businesses, we can’t “stand still.” The complaint I hear at this point is that I no longer own a business, it owns me! How do I get out of this mess? Well, you can shut down the business and go back to being an employee. Or, you can grow the business, hire trusted employees and then relinquish some of the work so that you can enjoy what you’ve built. That in itself will require that you initially put in more time and comes with all the frustrations of employees and growing a business. Hold that thought for a minute.

What if you are the CEO of a public company and have a board of directors? Who do you turn to for advice and clarity around an opportunity or challenge? The Board is your employer. Where do you go to get your answers questioned without causing concern – you can only admit to “not knowing the answer” so many times before boards and employees begin to lose confidence. Yet we all know that we either don’t have the answer or we know that someone should at least question our approach; perhaps pointing out a new view that opens creative solutions not previously explored. Do you have your own private advisory board to run things by before going in front of the Directors?

In both of these cases, a mastermind group, or a peer advisory board can be of immense help in challenging you to think outside the box or admit to what part of the problem you own or to provide some unique insights for your situation. This is definitely not a new idea. I first came across this concept in the business world when reading Napoleon Hill’s book “Think and Grow Rich.” Then again as a consultant to several small businesses, and the ones doing well had this in common – they set up a peer advisory board. I found that some were formal and some were informal. Some were paid boards and some were purely voluntary. This is not the same as the usual not-for-profit boards where a person pays to be on the board and it is generally focused on fund raising. I’m talking about a group of peers who have your best interest at heart and you either pay them for their time or perhaps it is a group that all pitch in for the cost of meetings and agree to help each other. The most effective boards are diverse. Of course there can be no competitors and no other strong business ties (vendor, interlocking board memberships, etc.). Making sure you have advisors who are sharp business people with experience, but not in your industry, will give the best results.

So regardless of your intentions for your business or career, establishing a trusted peer advisory board will help you achieve your goals, make life a bit more relaxing, alleviate some of the isolation, provide fresh thinking and help you avoid pitfalls. Who doesn’t need that kind of help today? Business has changed and will not be going back to what it was three years ago. Why try and grow it alone? Why not build a team that has your best interest at heart?

I’m not one of those who believes that the customer is “ALWAYS RIGHT,” meaning that the customer knows what’s best for YOUR business. I do believe that the customer is always right when it comes to what they want and you had better be listening. You also need to know what’s going on with how they perceive you as a vendor. A valuable vendor communicates with the customer, provides information about innovative solutions to challenges, stands behind their products and services, does what they can to help conserve their customer’s cash and isn’t always looking to make the maximum profit at the expense of the customer.

Before you get the impression that this post is going to be a “business bashing” tirade, I hasten to add that I feel the same way about employees and especially labor unions. Look at the recent discussion created by states cutting back on education expenses and using tenure or FIFO to layoff teachers. Parents and Administrators are now raising significant objections to losing promising young teachers simply because they were last into the workforce. We all know the concern about how to measure effectiveness of our educators, they are tired arguments and I believe them to be mostly discredited. Get over it. There is no compelling reason to keep a person in a particular paid position just because they’ve been there a long time (nor should they be let go because of that reason either). Labor unions would do well to listen to the paying public and figure out how to help the excellent teachers thrive, regardless of age or longevity in the workplace. That would make unions worthwhile.

For the individual employee, learn to find out how you are doing and be ruthless about it. Embrace 360 reviews and if you’re company isn’t doing them, find another way to determine how you’re viewed by supervisors, colleagues, subordinates and customers. Don’t kid yourself on this. Your career depends on it. Are you flexible in assignments (not your values and ethics, but simply learning new things and taking on new assignments)?

The same is true, perhaps even more important, for those of us who are consultants, mentors and/or self-employed service providers. We had better genuinely have our client’s best interest at heart and demonstrate that so there is no doubt. Find a way to help your customer reach their goals, and one will undoubtedly be saving cash (and it always has been a goal, just exaggerated in this economy). I recently heard on a WSJ podcast that one enterprising HR consultant is teaching her clients how to do what she does so that they can carry the ball in the future. She said, “Why fight the market? The market is to help my clients save money. So I help them learn how to do these things for themselves in the future.” Ecology of information – the hallmark of a good consultant.

The way I see it, we are all in this together. Whether we are small business owners, leaders in large organizations, individual contributors, government employees, union members, in transition, or service providers we had better stop focusing on ourselves and start looking to add value. That isn’t to say we should not be willing to consider our own interests, it just that our interests can’t come first or be foremost.

If the folks at Enron, WorldCom, AIG, Citi Group and all the other dysfunctional organizations had paid attention to their reputation and had goals other than their own enrichment in mind, they would not have become dysfunctional. If we as investors insisted on long term value instead of quarterly stock gains, we would not have pushed the companies into being so short sighted. If the folks in Congress really had the best interests of their constituents at heart instead of their own selfish gains and focus on keeping their jobs, then perhaps their ratings and esteem with the public wouldn’t be lower than whale dung on the ocean floor.

I know, and “if a frog had wings, he wouldn’t keep bumping his butt on the ground.” It seems as though this is all unachievable. Yet, I don’t know of any other way to fix the mess we’re in. I’m convinced that even though it’s a big simplification, “taking care of number 1,” and “wining at all costs” is what got us into this mess. Collectively changing that focus would seem the only way to get out of it. It starts with “the man in the mirror.” Are you willing to change your focus? What is your company doing to “get back to basics” and focus on the customer? Are you looking for ways to change your business model, like the HR Consultant mentioned above?

Yet when you ask them what their process is to find top talent most reply in the same way, “We run ads” or “We post it internally.” That is the way 80% of all companies go about finding people.

Below are three real life examples of alternative ways of finding people.

1) In 2007, I was having lunch with a partner from a local CPA firm. During lunch he commented that they had been struggling for six months to find an audit manager. In fact, he commented that they would pay a $10,000 bounty for an employee referral. I didn’t add a zero. So I asked, “How many people have you hired?”  The reply, “None.” They were doing the usual, running ads and asking current employees. That was their process for finding people.

So as the lunch continued, he mentioned to me that they had just brought on a new client and that he had just had lunch with the new CFO at this same restaurant. I immediately asked the partner, “Did you ask the CFO who was the best audit manager at his current company?” or “Who were some of the best audit managers he had worked with in the past?” He had never even thought of this. I suggested that he could contact all of his CFO clients and ask them. After all, it is in the client’s best interest to have good audit managers.

This was such an obvious thing to me and yet he was willing to pay ten grand. For those of you thinking it takes too much time to find good people, I don’t think asking these few questions would have extended the lunch that much.

2) Last year I was conducting one of our in-house workshops for a mid-sized technology company in New York. During the workshop, one of the key executives mentioned how difficult it is to hire technical people. I probed a little further and asked about the type of people they hire. She commented that they want people comfortable with technology. People who understand how networks work, people who diagnose a computer problem when a client calls with a problem, install software, and perform basic repairs that clients need right away if something goes wrong. They were willing to train on their specific systems and software. They just wanted someone that was moderately technical and comfortable with technology.

These people were “extremely” hard to find.

I asked if they ever go to Best Buy and engage the Geek Squad. Have they ever taken in a computer and found someone that provides great customer service and demonstrates that they understand technical issues?

She and her team had never thought about these people. I received an email two months after the workshop letting me know they had hired two people from Best Buy.

3) My best friend manages a store for one of the major retail chains. Every time we play golf, I have to listen to him complain about how hard it is to find people willing to work. He complains that his company works people hard and is demanding. The result is a lot of turnover.

So I asked him how often when he or his team is out shopping and they come across a great person in another retail chain do they engage the person, give them a business card and ask the person to call him, or let the person know that if they ever think about leaving to call him.

I mentioned that I go to a coffee shop most mornings when I’m in town for an hour of work. At this coffee shop, every person is probably in their late teens and early twenties. These people run the coffee shop. They open every morning at 6 AM so they have to get there by 5:30, they are friendly, they know customers by name, the coffee shop is clean and they are great employees. So I asked if he ever asked any of them about potentially coming to work a his store.

In both cases he replied no, and that he doesn’t even encourage his team leaders to be aware of potential employees when they are out shopping.

Qualified people are all around us. As a recruiter, I always have my antenna up. Most CEOs and hiring managers just walk right by these people. Work with  your team and start noticing people hiding in plain sight.

Download our Hiring Process Self Assessment Scorecard and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of your hiring system. CLICK HERE to get your assessment.

Get our most popular chapter “Sourcing Top Talent” from our best selling book, “You’re NOT The Person I Hired” which is available for Free to download. CLICK HERE to get the chapter.

Consider joining our LinkedIn group,  Hire and Retain Top Talent. This group is dedicated to discussions and articles to help  you improve your hiring and retention. CLICK HERE to join the group.

I welcome your thoughts and comments.

Brad Remillard

I think there are many reasons why we’re moving away from the old “product/feature” or “needs/benefits” selling for all except the most commodity types of products. The internet is replacing salespeople and telemarketers in many of these cases. I believe we are and will be spending most of our time in “consultative/relationship” selling and migrating even more to “trust based” selling for our key customers and clients. A few of the reasons for this reframing of the sales process seems to be (a) less consumerism (for common commodities) thus a more sophisticated level of sales is left, (b) on-line purchasing is minimizing interaction with salespeople for commodity purchases and research, ( c) the economy is limiting what people and companies are spending so each purchase made is scrutinized and (d) social networking is training us to give value in our relationships – without expectation of quid-pro-quo.

This last reason is what I’m thinking most about these days. In face-to-face networking, whether you’re in transition or in search of business clients, you are likely finding that you MUST first provide value to those you meet rather than “ask for the order.” This concept, not an new one, hit the Wall Street Journal This Morning podcast recently, and it is sure good to have some validation in what I’ve been proposing to those I mentor and coach in the business community. The point is that from Social Networking sites where the protocol is to deliver value and NOT sell or self-promote, to the WSJ advocating the same generous approach to networking for your career we are being taught that unless someone has our best interest at heart, we should avoid “doing business” with them. How do we know if someone “has our best interest at heart?” Clearly, it is that they are focused on us and how they can help us rather than being focused on themselves and asking us to help them or buy from them. Think about this for a minute. If I am focused on telling you about wonderful me or focused on getting you to place the order with me, then how can I possibly have your best interest at heart? This concept is put succinctly in the saying “People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.”

I am beginning to think that one of the more powerful catalysts for changing how we interact with each other (in person or remotely through the media) is being shaped by the etiquette we are taught in our Social Networking interactions. In their excellent book on Social Media Marketing, Friends with Benefits, Darren Barefoot and Julie Szabo make it clear that marketers and those blogging or posting on others’ blogs or interacting with bloggers have to add value before they have the right to request assistance with their marketing program. What comes through clear (at least in my mind) is that “selling” is taboo in almost all cases.

So what are you seeing as the major reason for the move to trust based selling? Do you agree there is a general and pronounced aversion to the “old” selling models? How do you feel when someone posts a “solicitation” in a comment on your blog? How do you feel when you are constantly “sold” on a blog? Does this translate to how you interact with colleagues and professionals in your business life?

The networking ladder might be: Card Based Networking, Group Based Networking, My Strengths Based Networking and finally Trusted Relationship Networking. As before, the first three are focused on you and the highest rung is truly focused on helping others and trusting that what goes around will come around – without having that in the forefront of your mind when networking.

On the first rung, the so-called networker believes that s/he has had a great evening when they leave the dinner event with 25 or more cards. What a great night! Well, I highly doubt it. What that person has is a bunch of cards, no knowledge of the persons giving them the cards How could they? 25 cards in a couple of hours? How much time did they spend asking questions to find out how they could help the other person?

On the second rung, the networker is targeting a special interest group which makes things a bit more comfortable to contact people because there is a “common interest.” You can build on that common interest to develop a relationship. My observation is, however, that few people practice the art of finding out what they can do for the other person. They are still focused on their own needs.

On the third rung, the networker is now aware that they need to be showing how they add value. So they tend to speak to others about what they can do to solve common problems companies might be experiencing. However, the conversation is still focused on them even though they are touting their added value. This conversation is fine with someone who asks you how they might find potential employment/client opportunities. But it is for AFTER they ask you to explain, not before.

The fourth rung of the networking ladder is where the accomplished networker spends most of her/his time. They ask lots of questions about the other person. They are genuinely interested in the other person. They are the ones who leave a huge dinner event with only three cards. They’ve spent a minimum of 20 minutes with each of those persons getting to know what they do, how the came to be where they are, what their interests are, what is going on in their lives that might offer an opportunity for assistance of some kind. They make a promise to do something to help the other person and then they make sure they do it. They are careful to choose groups and events that will attract the people they want in their network. They are all about developing trust and serving others. Authentically, with no quid pro quo expected.

This is definitely not a new concept. I’ve observed that very few sales folks, even highly effective sales folks, understand Trust Based Selling. I’ve noticed that the most effective networkers DO understand Trust Based Selling and they carry it over to their networking activities. Those who fail at networking are also pretty poor sales people; they are inconsistent in their results and their customers are not at all loyal.

Here are some resources on these topics:
Never Eat Alone – by Keith Ferrazzi
Trusted Advisor – by David Maister
Trust Based Selling – by Charles Green
Other great resources might be Think and Grow Rich (mastermind concepts), How to Win Friends and Influence People, The Tiberias Success Factor.

What are you doing to network properly? Are you building long term relationships or collecting contacts?

This situation, continuous networking, is not at all unlike the dilemma I discovered when I founded my consultancy. While I’m delivering services, I’m not marketing. Inevitably, I’d wake up one day and realize I had “no place to go.” And then I’d start the long process of marketing again and hope that something turned up soon. The same is true if you’re a “W2 employee” and you let your network lapse while you are focused on your job at the company you serve. At some point, you will realize it’s time for you to “move on,” and you’ll have to scramble to build your network.

So how do we address this situation? I have no silver bullet to offer. My sense is that the only thing to do is to make sure you keep a core group of maybe ten to twenty really close relationships alive and well no matter what you are doing. That way, it will take less time to reconstruct a meaningful network when the time comes. Find ways to stay in touch and help your key network relationship. Send useful articles, keep up to date on what they are doing, meet for coffee or a quick, early breakfast. Stay focused on them.

There may be some help here in using the now “hot” technology of social networking software. It’s amazing how well LinkedIn works to help me stay in touch with colleagues. I’m now exploring using this blog, Facebook and Twitter as a way of staying in touch and providing value. I’m not sure what will finally shake out as being the most effective, but I’m giving it the good old “college try.” You might want to explore using technology to help you keep in touch with your network as well. Remember though, it’s about providing value, not self-serving.

Data I’ve seen in multiple places indicate that “C-Suite” positions last an average of 24 to 36 months. “C-Suite” executives do not find their next assignment on Monster or other media. They find it through their network. So you’ll need your network every 2 or 3 years and it takes a year, minimum, to build a solid network of colleagues. It’s not what you know it’s not even who you know. It’s who really knows you. And as we’ve discussed, that means you have to be genuinely interested in knowing and supporting those in your network first.

What strikes me is that there is so little knowledge about what networking really is all about. Many very accomplished salespeople, executives, business owners and “C-suite” folks THINK they know, but the evidence is to the contrary.

I receive a fair amount of “introductions” to people through e-mail. It’s another sign of the times and I too use e-mail to introduce people. After one such recent introduction, the person introduced contacted me by e-mail. Attached was a very detailed resume (bad in itself) and another document of “target companies.” The body of the e-mail said essentially; “Hi, I’m glad so-and-so introduced us. I’m working to expand my network. I’m a high level executive . . . blah, blah, blah!” This went on for a couple of paragraphs and then the person asked for three or four names from my Rolodex that might be good contacts for them.

Then came the clincher: “I know networking is about helping others. Please let me know if there’s anything I can do to help you.” Right. Ninety-nine percent of first communication is about you, 1% is an after thought, throw away sentence acknowledging the recipient and that’s going to fly? I think not.

Networking, properly done, is always and only about what you can do the help the other person. Not about getting something for yourself. The person above did not have permission from me, did not yet know me, and should never have assumed I care about his plight/resume/target companies or anything else. I certainly am not going to introduce him to my network of trusted colleagues (who in turn trust me not to waste their time) based on that e-mail and attachments. Here’s a hard message for folks in transition to internalize: “No body cares about you.” . . . . Yet.

Instead, in building your network, it is critical to be authentically interested in helping the other person. The universe is indifferent, but generally fair in that “what goes around comes around.” You can’t fake this. It will be sensed that your are being manipulative – “S/he’s only acting interested because s/he wants something.” You have to build trust, give me a sense that you have my best interest at heart (or at least don’t intend to just “use me.”)

That’s why it takes a very long time to build a network. If you are introduced to me by one of my trusted inner circle of colleagues, then you have a leg up. Don’t destroy that budding trust by assuming you have permission to sell me something or ask me a favor.

So how do I go about this myself? Well, not perfectly for sure. Here’s what I attempt to do and actually do accomplish when I’m at my best. I would write that e-mail when Joe introduces me to Sue, copy both and say something along the lines of: “Hi Joe and Sue. Thanks for the introduction Joe. I am alway willing to reach out to someone in your network of colleagues. Sue, I’d love to know more about what you’re doing these days. Joe introduced us believing that in some way our relationship might be beneficial. Do you have any time over the next couple of weeks for a quick cup of coffee or phone call? Let me know and we’ll try to match calendars.”

I would then go out of my way to figure out how I can do something to help Sue. Find an article or perhaps make an introduction to someone else that would be mutually beneficial. I would only share about my own situation and how Sue can help me after she asks for that information. Which will only be after she has some feeling of trust that I’m not focused only on me and my own needs. If I’m focused on my own needs, then I don’t have her best interests at heart. If I don’t have her best interests at heart she cannot trust me to do what’s right, only what works for me.

Think about this. If you are introduced to someone as a possible beneficial relationship, do not burn the bridge with the new connection by being focused on yourself. Also, when you “blow the introduction,” you will cause damage to the person who introduced you in the first place. They won’t make the mistake of bringing you into their network again. This takes time. This is difficult. This takes lots of energy because you really do have to do something for someone else, not just hang your resume on every phone pole. If you’re going to try to network, then learn the intricacies. This is not a game for amateurs.