There is something rather disturbing about what happened to me after another person initiated a LinkedIn connection during a network session online, because apparently their rules of engagement changed somewhere between my reply “‘yes happy to connect, let’s have a longer chat” to an unexpected exam. Suddenly this was no longer two people exploring whether there might be something mutually useful to discuss, but an unexpected audition for the privilege of having a meeting – I am not quite sure where I morphed into a marketing agency appearing at the door to my local Spoons with a clipboard and a suspicious moustache – yup I was being ordered to prove my credentials before being granted an audience…!!
The follow-up to my online “chat over a virtual coffee” came from one of his colleagues, and suddenly the conversation had been replaced with what looked suspiciously like a “jump through these hoops”: requirements for a complimentary audit, competitor analysis, lead generation opportunities, a 90-day strategy, proof that we are a bona fide business, a UK case study, measurable results and preferably a testimonial or reference, all before they will apparently agree to the conversation that had already been arranged. Which left me sitting here thinking, well, hang on a minute, what exactly was the original conversation? Was the interest in what we do genuine, was the veterans connection real, was there actually an interest in exploring whether we could work together, or was this simply a rather more elaborate route into qualifying a potential supplier? I am not accusing anyone of making anything up, because I obviously cannot know what was in somebody else’s head, but when the tone changes that dramatically overnight, it does make you look back at the earlier interaction with slightly different eyes and ask yourself how much of it you should take at face value.
I can understand businesses being fed up with endless generic sales approaches, because nobody wants their inbox filling up with “we can transform your website with our cutting-edge SEO solutions” when the cutting edge appears to be a pair of very blunt scissors, but this is rather different when the person making the connection was the one who came looking for you on LI after networking and and knew that we support veterans. In fact one of his emails had mentioned that his dad had been in the Navy and another colleague also had family in the forces. That gives the original connection a very different flavour, because it sounded as if there was a genuine point of common ground and a reason for the connection beyond simply adding another name to the LinkedIn collection.
And that, to me, is one of the more interesting things about networking, because we can be very easily influenced by the little bits of personal connection people offer up in conversation. Somebody’s dad was in the forces, somebody’s brother served, somebody’s colleague has a veteran in the family, somebody has a personal story about something your organisation supports, and naturally you listen because those things create common ground and make a conversation feel more human. You are much more likely to think, “Oh, these people understand what we’re about,” rather than, “Here we go, another person trying to sell me something,” because the interaction has suddenly acquired a bit of context and shared experience. But when the next communication lands looking very much like an “entry sales qualification” exercise, it did make me raise an eyebrow, pause and wonder whether that personal connection was actually relevant to the relationship or whether it simply helped establish rapport at the beginning.
I think this is where we need to be a little more careful about the things people tell us in networking groups and online business communities, not because everyone is secretly wandering around making things up with their fingers crossed behind their backs, but because people are very good at presenting the version of themselves and their business that they want you to see. We hear claims about experience, expertise, clients, results, relationships and personal connections all the time, and because networking is built around people rather than spreadsheets, we can sometimes give those claims more weight than we would if they appeared on a sales proposal. Someone saying they understand veterans because of their family connection feels very different from someone simply saying “we work with organisations supporting veterans”, and that human element can make us lower our guard without even noticing that we have done it.
Then there is the other irony, because they were asking us to demonstrate that we understand their business and can add genuine value before they will consider talking to us, which wasn’t how things started; I am now thinking that perhaps I should be applying exactly the same test to them.
Do I understand how they operate?
What do they actually bring to the table?
How can I verify the claims they make?
Do their case studies stand up to scrutiny?
Just kidding !! However, after this interaction, do I actually feel that I would want to do business with them or more importantly, would I be happy referring people to them? Because if the answer is “I’m not sure I even believe the context in which this conversation started any more”, then spending 10 minutes having a chat let alone several hours producing a free audit for them suddenly seems rather less attractive…
That isn’t about calling anybody dishonest, because there is a huge difference between saying “I have evidence that somebody made a false statement” in my best Senator Josh Hawley voice and saying “something about this interaction has made me reassess how much confidence I place in what I have been told”. The latter is simply sensible due diligence because if somebody wants me to provide references, case studies and proof of measurable results, I’m not entirely comfortable with that, but let’s put the boot on the other foot guys: “I reserve the right to look for the same level of substance from your side of the table”.
I originally met this person in a regular weekly networking group, where everyone has known each other quite a while and perhaps that’s my mistake for letting my guard down: I need to remind myself that the more impressive somebody’s claims are, the more important it is to look behind them rather than simply accepting them because they were delivered confidently in a networking conversation.
And perhaps that is the real lesson here. Networking is supposed to be about building relationships, not collecting people until somebody eventually becomes a sales opportunity, and if somebody approaches you because they have apparently found a genuine connection with what you do, particularly something as specific as supporting veterans, it is reasonable to assume there is at least some authentic interest behind it. But if their next stage is effectively “prove yourself, do the work, provide your credentials, show me your results and then maybe I’ll give you a meeting”, I think it is perfectly fair to step back and have a ponder. Not “they’re liar liar, pants on fire”, because we don’t know that, but simply: what I was told initially sounded genuine; what I’ve received subsequently has made me question the context; and before I invest any time or trust in this relationship, perhaps I should verify a few things for myself.
Because if they want us to do our homework before they will talk to us, there is absolutely nothing wrong with me doing a little homework of my own or just picking up my watering can and tending to the plants in the back garden…
