Pre-network with LinkedIn

There are a wide variety of local events in the Los Angeles area that I periodically attend. I must say that I go through phases where I attend more events for a while and then I pull back and only attend a few. Right now, I'm in a fairly selective mode. So, when I go to an event, I want to make sure that I get the most I can from the time. Generally, it's a commitment of 3-4 hours between driving, networking, program. I have to make sure that I get at least as much value from that 3-4 hours as I would from spending the same time using LinkedIn for Networking – and that's tough competition.

Over the years, I've somewhat changed what I'm looking for when I attend a local event. It used to be that I first looked for good content. A program that had interesting speakers and where I expected to learn a lot. Now, unless its someone really great, I don't go because of the program. Most often I can spend 30 minutes on my own to get a better result in terms of content than I get from 60 minutes at an event. And most in-person events do not give you a back-channel or much opportunity for Q&A.

Side note: I very much enjoy local events where I'm the moderator because then I do get to shape the topic to my interests.

Obviously, if it's not content, then the key ingredient is who else is going to be in the room.

Quick Decision Process

I spend about 5-10 minutes deciding if I'm going to attend. The way I do this is simple. I try to find a list of people who are attending the event. Many events now publish the list such as the following:

If they don't have a similar list and I can't find the event on Facebook or LinkedIn or somewhere else, then likely I won't attend. I've found that it suggests that it's not going to be a good group and I definitely won't be able to pre-network so even if it's a good group, it will be hard for me to get much value from the group.

Using the list of attendees, I randomly sample 5-10 people. Actually, it's most often not random, I choose more people who have Profile Photos (but don't get me started on that). I choose people with names that are a bit more unique so that it will be more likely to find them on LinkedIn.

I have the LinkedIn Browser Toolbar installed which gives me a right click action …

So I can see a few mini-profiles:

Okay, I won't be spending more time on this list and I won't be attending. No offense to attorneys and investment advisors, but the attendee list suggests this is general networking mixer and not likely worth the time investment.

Side note: there generally is a high correlation between the people who have profile pictures on the site and the people who have profile photos on LinkedIn.

If the results had been better, then I would have spent time drilling down on people like Lee:

I don't know Lee, but by scrolling through his profile I can see some possibly interesting things to discuss. Does Browse My Stuff make sense from a channel marketing standpoint? What is happening from an eLearning 2.0 perspective around channel training? So, Lee and I could have a very nice conversation.

Gee – maybe I should change my mind and plan to attend. I could go back and look for 4 or 5 other Lee quality people and decide to attend after all.

Alternatively, I can reach out to Lee directly through LinkedIn and just set up a quick 30 minute call. In fact, that's what I will do after I'm done writing this post. And 95% likely that we'll talk within a few days. That's what makes it harder to convince me to go to a local event.

But, let's assume that I was going to the event after all, then I would spend time on what I discussed on my Socal CTO blog in my post on Prenetworking.

Pre-network the Event

Assuming that I am seeing a few different Lee-quality people, then my next step is that I'm going to pre-network with them prior to the event. I try to do this roughly about 2-3 days ahead of the event. That way the list of people attending is fairly complete and there's still time for back and forth with the person.

I will go through the list of attendees more thoroughly on this pass looking for anyone who I want to meet at the event. I look to find 5-8 people. You want to have a large enough list of people because some won't end up going and if you've committed to meeting someone at the event, you will end up going. And you could find yourself at an event waiting for that one person talking to attorneys and wealth planners.

For each of those people on your pre-network list, you simply send a "Get Introduced Through a Connection" to them:

It's nice that I have multiple people who can introduce us. It gives me a nice touch point with someone I already know. And they can vouch for me in the introduction. You don't get that when you are at the event.

Then you compose your message. The nice thing is that the subject is easy – name the local event.

My message to Lee would be very similar to what I'd say when I would meet him in person. Maybe something like:

Hi Lee,

I saw you on the attendee list for the upcoming event. I'm planning on going as well and it looks like we might have some good things to discuss. It looks like you have a background in eLearning and I'm going to be curious to hear how you are applying it for channel sales. I also have a technology that I think might apply in an interesting way.

I just wanted to make the connection so that I'd be sure to meet up with you at the event.

Tony

You generally will get a very positive response to this kind of message and your time at the event will be much better because of the pre-network effort that you've put in.

This technique equally applies to conferences and other kinds of events. Unfortunately, few conferences provide attendee lists.

For more discussions on networking and LinkedIn see Networking Events in Los Angeles and Southern California, Secret for Networking at Events – Prenetworking, Pre-network with LinkedIn, Local Event Organizers Need to Adopt Social Media.

eLearning Topics

I've done a few posts in the past that take a look at the topics that are Hot Topics in Training.  In each case, these are crude in that they look only at what terms people are using in a given content set.  Back in 2007, I pointed out various aspects of what I was seeing:

• strategy/strategic and performance are back as topics after dropping way down in 2006
• surprisingly trainer is also back, you would think in the age of eLearning 2.0 this would be down
• notable dropping topics: games, simulations, knowledge, interactive and blended

Karyn Romeis commented:

Hmm. I have doubts about the validity of these data. Perhaps some topics are on the wane because they have become so integrated as to be invisible and no longer a topic to remark about. Just a thought.

And she's absolutely correct, that these are only general indications of what people are talking about.   Also, it only indicates what the presenters and conference organizers (for that data set) thought that the audience would be interested in and was worth presenting at the conference. I still maintain that it's helpful to keep an eye on these things.

And now, because of eLearning Learning, I have a much better way to track these things over a much more interesting content sets.

Background Explanation

By selecting LMS, I've selected content that is the latest and best stuff that's associated with the term LMS.   The keywords on left side are changed to keywords which are more closely associated with that term.  For example, we see terms now at the top like Learning Management System, AICC, SCORM. Take a look at the companies:

Saba (28)

GeoLearning (17)

SumTotal (22)

Meridian (9)

Cornerstone (19)

You notice the counts are out of order (not descending).  That's because they are ordered according to how closely the system thinks the companies are associated with the selected term within the content set.

This works across any subset of the content including sources, keywords and arbitrary searches.

For example, when I view my blog's content through the eLearning Learning lens, it shows me that relative to other sources of content in the system, I tend to talk about:

eLearning 2.0 (130)

Work Skills (26)

PWLE (16)

Flash Quiz (8)

Knowledge Work (40)

That's a pretty fair representation of topics that I talk about.

Topics by Year

By selecting 2009, I've selected a subset of the content, but in this case it's basically content associated with this year.  When you look at the keywords on the left you see things like:

Social Learning (356)

Social Media (411)

Twitter (725)

Google Wave (22)

Camtasia (76)

Adobe Captivate (71)

Social Network (460)

Now, the content set in this case are highly skewed towards innovators as compared to the topic sets being used by my past analysis (training conferences).  But still, this gives a general indication and it's especially interesting when you compare it to 2007:

Corporate Blog (20)

Personal Learning (23)

eLearning Tools (323)

Software Simulation (21)

Qarbon (6)

Second Life (135)

PowerPoint (148)

Google Scholar (9)

Authorware (16)

Ah the good old days of 2007.  Seems so long ago. :)

How about 2005?

Folksonomy (11)

Knowledge (233)

Off-shore (7)

Leadership (44)

Creative Commons (16)

Back when we still had hope that folksonomy (tagging) would make sense of the flood of content. 

Year by Topic

You can also go the other way to see things like selecting Twitter and you can see that the associated years are:

2009

2020 

2008 

2020?  That indicates that someone is talking about that year and about twitter in the same content.  So, predictions for the future and how twitter might relate. 

This stuff is definitely not exact, but it gives a general indication.  Twitter is a hot topic right now as compared to some others.

The years associated with Wiki suggest it was more discussed a couple years ago and now is discussed less.

2006

2010

2007

Does the associated years for SharePoint suggest it's a technology for the future?

2010 

2015 

2011 

2013 

You can pretty much do this endlessly.

I often will use this technique when I run into a new company to see if anyone is blogging about it and generally what is associated with it.

Looking Back

So when I go back to Hot Topics in Training, the topics that were hot then and by looking at the associated years I can get a sense that:

• assessment – not discussed as much now (e.g., 2001 2002 2000 2003 2004 are associated years)
• virtual classroom – still current
• strategy – old
• flash – still current
• performance – old – not sure why – shouldn't this be a perennial topic?
• roi - old
• enterprise – future and old
• games – still popular

This is definitely something that I'll be using as I go forward. 

Network Skills

I personally believe that one of the areas where learning professionals need the most help is how communities and networks impact learning and building individual and facilitation skills around these:

• Knowing how to individually leverage Network Skills and Communities to help with work and learning tasks
• Community and Network Facilitation Skills to help others learn and work using networks and communities

In my post Networks and Learning Communities, I looked a bit at this topic.  But, I by no means consider myself an expert and find that I spend quite a bit of my time building my network skills so I can do this more effectively.  

So I was super excited when I saw that Nancy White, who helps me learn about all things communities and networks, posted a response to the New Skills for Learning Professionals Big Question for July 2009.   When I looked at her first post, I was actually disappointed because it wasn't really about networks and communities.  My disappointment was purely my own making.  But Nancy came through and posted her follow-up pieces and especially Part 3 and the Online Facilitation Wiki that was a great launch point for me to read a bit more.  I also used both the Communities and Networks Connection and Work Literacy to source additional reading.

So, starting with her post I've spent the past few hours going through a lot of material, processing the information and writing this post.

I've come to few realizations from the process.

My Focus is on Networks

There were great definitions of communities, groups, networks, facilitation, management, etc.  I realized during the process that I mostly focus on networks and less on actual communities.

• Community - a group of people with bounded membership who have some shared, congruent interest and interact with each other over time.
• Network - a constellation of individuals associated via fuzzy, unbounded membership and overlapping … not fully congruent … interests

For me a couple of examples:

• LA CTO Forum – definitely a community.  Meet once a month.  Invite only.  Learning and peer support.  Somewhat a classic community or practice.
• Learn Trends – not quite sure this fits Nancy's definition of a community – it looks like one, but my sense is that it's somewhere in between a community and a network

Where I spend most of my time is with the blogging network and various other networks.  In some ways, Learn Trends is just part of this network allowing us to meet at various points and act a bit more community like.  We share our interest of learning.  There's quite a lot of discussion/debate whether blogs act as networks or community.  Probably don't want to kick that hornet's nest.

And I'm not alone in my questioning / focus.  Take a look at: How relevant are communities of practice in a network age?

My Community Facilitation Skills are Hopeless

One thing I started to realize is that good community facilitation takes time, desire, skills and appropriate mentality.  For the LA CTO Forum, I have a couple of cohorts who help to organize things, but there's quite a bit more we could be doing.

For Learn Trends, Jay, George and myself do not spend time on facilitation.  We should.  But we don't.  In fact, this is probably a great opportunity for someone to learn about facilitating an online community. 

Does anyone want to jump in who does have time, desire, skills (or willing to learn) and appropriate mentality to help facilitate the Learn Trends community?

I found this great piece - The Art of Hosting Good Conversations Online – I will go back to refer to this quite a bit to remind me of all the kinds of things I should be thinking about.

But frankly, I will have to grow these skills over time based on specific situations.  It doesn't look good for me to become a really adept, willing community facilitator.

Network Weaving

I don't like the term, Network Weaving, but that's what Nancy calls it – although I don't think she likes it either. 

In the eLearning space there's this very complex network of people, organizations, content that forms this amorphous thing where we all play.  The combination of blogs, sites like LinkedIn, various discussion groups, etc. weave us all together in a weird way.  We still have the core human desire to connect.  Many of us enjoy learning and discussion around these topics.  But we really don't act like a community.  And people vary widely in their connectedness and activity level.

What I found on Network Weaving left me wanting something quite different … I would run into materials that talk about how you analyze and map networks.  Such as the advice:

Improved connectivity starts with a map – knowing the complex human system you are embedded in.

I'm sorry, but I'm simply are not going to try to really map out this incredibly complex network.  Of course, the folks who are writing this are networking mapping folks who come at it from that perspective.  I think it would be a really interesting picture and there's real value in it.  But it's only a starting point if it's relatively easy to do.

Instead, what I'm asking about is:

• What could I do to get more from the network? 
• What can I do to help other people get more from the network?

And when I say "Get more" … I think about the ability to tap a larger network of folks, get to them for help more quickly and easily, learn from them faster, more easily establish conversations, draw them together into ad hoc groups as needed, and ??? a lot of things I don't know even what they are yet ???

In fact, some of the nuggets I found helped me think a bit about this knowledge gap.  In What Networks Do?, they point to filter, amplify, convene among other things.  With Browse My Stuff I should have thought of social filtering a lot sooner. 

I'm sure I'm missing a lot.

And, I'm probably thinking about this more than most.

Which leaves me with …

Where's the help for Network Skills?

Nancy talks about how community facilitation skills sound a lot like network skills.  After reading a lot of the material, I'm not convinced that the mapping is that easy and I certainly don't get the path from one set to specific actions in the other. 

So, I know some of the materials I've produced such as the LinkedIn Guide for Knowledge Workers.  

The ironic thing is that like network themselves – how to kinds of information around network skills seems to be missing.  Most of it is unfortunately more tool centric.

So where's the help for building my / our / their Network Skills?

Learning Performance Business Talent Focus

One of the more interesting aspects of the discussions I've had over the past few weeks as I prepare for the free online conference on the future of learning is the perspective on the focus and scope of responsibility of internal learning organizations and external learning/training companies.

Caveat: This is definitely not a new issue. I'm not really claiming any great new insights.  It's a first cut at a developing mental model.  This is only partially formed and I need help to flesh out my thinking.

Please let me know what you think.

• Does this ring true? 
• Does the model work for you? 
• Do you similarly hear these kinds of clues?  And what other clues do you use to identify?
• What are the implications? 

With all that said, I believe that I'm beginning to get a handle on the differences in focus that people bring to bear around their responsibilities.  The following crude diagram captures a bit of it:

I'm finding that learning professionals of all types (IDs, CLOs, VP Learning, C-level at Training Company, etc.) tend to own a different view of their responsibilities in this space.

• Learning – Responsible for ensuring learning objectives are achieved regardless of the delivery mode.
• Talent – Responsible for ensuring that talent is analyzed, selected and developed to meet the needs of the organization. 
• Performance – Responsible for ensuring that behavior change occurs in a way that improves performance.
• Business – Responsible for ensuring that business objectives are met.

Know the "Right Answer"

Let's say that we are interviewing a potential new learning professional.  We pose the question to them:

What do you see as the responsibility of a learning organization?

Many (probably most) learning professionals are smart enough to be able to answer the question such that they focus on creating solutions that are ultimately about all of these.  They would position themselves right in the middle of the diagram.  This is, of course, the right answer although a very adept job seeker will be able to adjust the answer quickly based on the focus on the organization that's doing the interviewing.

If you've done much interviewing in your life, you know that asking this kind of question is most often not effective.  Instead, it's much better to find out by asking about specific examples of projects they've worked on and listen to the focus.  You ask about things like the types of solutions that they've used, what were the objectives, how did they tackle the problems, etc.

Of course, I'm not interviewing people for a job.  Normally, I'm talking to people with the goal of getting help on particular needs, e.g., how is social learning being used in insurance companies or other highly regulated industries, how does this technology work out in practice, what other things should I be looking at to solve this issue.  In this case, I've had a bunch of conversations around the Business of Learning and this model is somewhat falling out from the discussions.  But it's still conversations and I'm coming to fairly quickly recognize some clues that indicate the focus of the individual.

So what are some clues about the focus that you can listen for?

Learning Focus Clues

The person is showing learning focus when you hear:

"… learning objectives … "

"… learners …"

"We have very limited budget and our focus needs to be on building critical, core skills."

"I wish we had the time and money to spend on informal and social learning solutions."

"We want to make sure that our informal learning still ensures that we meet the learning objectives?"

"Our trainers don't have time to get involved with the learners after the training."

Performance Focus Clues

The person is showing performance focus when you hear:

"behavior change"

"performer support"

"toolkits and job aids"

"involve the managers"

"back on the job"

"feedback"

Business Focus Clues

The person is showing business focus when you hear:

"customer satisfaction" (or a host of other business metrics)

"metrics" (and they don't mean Level 1 and 2)

"move the needle"

"we probably don't need much training"

Talent Focus Clues

The person is showing performance focus when you hear:

"fill the talent pipeline"

"talent mix"

"job profiles"

"succession planning"

"competencies"

"recruiting and selection"

"performance review process"

Notes, Questions and Thoughts

Unfair Bias around Learning Focus?

As I wrote down the clues that indicate a learning focus, I felt I was being unfair.  I've talked to a lot of very smart people who clearly have the learning focus.  I respect them, consider them to be valuable contributors, and feel like I'm being unfair when I put down those clues.  I feel I should somehow even this out a bit.  But I wasn't sure how.

Obviously, this is partly personal bias.  All things being equal (which they never are), I'm guessing my focus is more a business and performance focus.  I was a professor for 11 years and still do lots of presentations and workshops where clearly the focus is learning.  Certainly Work Literacy has a learning and performance focus and is a passion of mine.  But day-to-day, my passion and where I probably play best are things like data driven solutions.  Working on eHarmony for its first 4 years with a combined purpose of making money, making better marriages and supporting a rather complex performance was fantastic.  Working with emerging or established companies is fantastic.  Looking at social learning as a performance mechanism is fantastic.  So maybe I have a strong bias towards business, performance, and then learning and that's why it doesn't sound quite right the way I've positioned it.

You will notice I didn't say much about talent focus.  I'm know about it.  I do work in it.  I've actually done data driven solutions in that space.  But it's not my normal focus and I feel a little bit removed from a talent focus.  I definitely struggle the most when talking with people who have a very strong talent focus.

So, I'm really not sure how to level this playing field a bit so that my bias is not coming through.  Thoughts?

Also, I'm sure that most people do flow between these things a bit, but have a more natural home.  I'm not quite sure how that fits into this whole discussion.

Separation of Performance and Business Focus?

I debated on separating performance and business focus.  You may notice that they two overlap more than most of the other sections.  That's intentional.  I believe that there are quite a few people who take a combined business and performance focus.  There are relatively fewer who are dominant on the performance focus – but occasionally I run into people who seem to come at it with that focus.

Talent and Performance Intersection?

When I first did the diagram I intentionally did not have an intersection point right in the middle – and specifically it excluded intersection of Talent and Performance. 

Most people who I talk to who have a talent focus seem to come at this whole picture from a completely different angle.  They describe goals in terms of looking at the overall mix of talent in the organization.  They look at the picture much more holistically.  They are quite often trying to align this with top level goals of the organization, but in many cases they really are not talking about moving the needle.  They care about learning as part of development and to build important competencies in the organization and to fill the talent pipeline.  So, intersection with learning and business – not necessarily focus – is clear.

Intersection between talent and performance seems less common.  Normally the folks who look at the big picture talent issues are far removed from day-to-day behavior and performance.  They would claim that they look at it in terms of skills and competencies.  They need to know about behavior in the form of job profiles, selection, performance reviews, etc.  But the reality is that they are typically not thinking about what it takes to directly help to get the sales people to sell more, or change how retail sales managers get the associates to act in a way that improves customer satisfaction, etc.  They won't be building a job aid anytime soon.  They are likely not talking to the performers or facilitating interactions on the job to get performance to improve.  It's a level indirect from that.

As I said, I initially put these as non-intersecting, and then I thought about people who work directly with sales management that really do take a look across all of these issues.  I'm not saying that all sales management improvement professionals take this approach, but certainly some do.  They look at who the sales people are, how they get selected, the comp packages.  But they also look at the sales support materials, sales meetings.  They get in and get dirty day-to-day.  So, clearly this kind of dual focus exists, especially around specific goals.

Organizational Expectations

When I discussed the "right answer", I pointed out that an adept learning professional seeking a job would quickly adapt to the interviewer and make sure that their answer corresponded to what the person wanted to hear.  You would listen for clues and use the language that fits.  Same as what I just described.

Of course, that happens in organizations as well.  The collection of people in the organization establish what the expectation is around focus.  If they expect you to have a learning focus and deliver formal training solutions and not bother them back on the job when they are doing real work, you will quickly find yourself taking a learning focus in order to fit. 

Meaning and Use of the Model?

I debated on whether this model is useful and meaningful enough to post.  It's pretty much an internal mental model that developed based on many discussions (and really many years).  That doesn't mean it will make sense for anyone else.  Nor does it necessarily suggest that it's useful.

So, can you tell me whether this makes any sense to you?

In terms of use, for a long time – without having thought through this model, I've known that there's incredible friction trying to move someone from a particular focus.  This comes up all the time in practice:

• To convince someone who's primarily learning focused to spend time and effort on solutions that come after training, you need to talk about it in terms of additional learning transfer opportunities.  The learning won't stick unless we get out there after they are back on the job and reinforce it.  We can talk about "office hours" where learners come together to discuss issues they face when they are back on the job.  And you know going in that this all will be a tough sell.
• You need to talk to most talent focused people in talent terms.  If you have a toolkit / set of job aids, you need to talk about it in terms of reducing the time to competence or how it fits with development planning.
• If you are talking to business or performance focused people, prepare to get in and get dirty.  You need to be prepared to be in there working with the people to get the performance to change or the needle to move.  I'd suggest not using the words "learning objective" … they may perceive you as "one of those people" … they'll let you know when they will need some of that kind of thing. 

But this is more than language.  It translates into how they think about tackling problems and the kinds of solutions that they consider. 

 

Again – this is all partially formed and I'm really hoping that you will weigh in with thoughts.

Subscribed to Best of eLearning Learning?

I just got through posting the eLearning Learning Best Of for this week:

Knowledge Skills Mentoring Tips - Best of eLearning Learning

There's something that doesn't make sense to me, so I need your help!

Best of eLearning Learning is a Must Subscribe

I could be completely wrong, but I feel like these Best Of posts represent a really valuable contribution to people who don't have the time to read all of the posts from all the great eLearning bloggers and all the other sources that we track and include on eLearning Learning.

In fact, even for me, and I'm on the extreme end of reading blogs, I often miss good items that are surfaced through the Best of eLearning Learning lists.

In my experience doing presentations to learning professionals, polling the audience I find that roughly:

• 10% – use an RSS Reader to monitor blogs as sources of content related to their professional interests
• 90% – do not use an RSS Reader, but do subscribe to various email lists and other sources of content related to their professional interest

The Best of eLearning Learning is really aimed at the 90% audience. It's my belief that if you are interested in eLearning and only could subscribe to a single email (or RSS feed), you should subscribe to the Best Of feed. I also don't know that there's anything close to that available anywhere else. And I also believe that even if you are in the 10% you probably should subscribe (although via RSS) to the Best Of list just to help make sure you didn't miss good stuff during the past week, month or year.

Or to put this another, rather blunt way -

If you had to choose to subscribe to eLearning Technology, this blog, or the the Best of eLearning Learning, you should subscribe to the Best of eLearning Learning.

Of course, the right answer is to subscribe to both. ;)

Please Help Me Figure This Out

My expectation is that eLearning Learning with it's higher traffic rates and great content should be acquiring new subscribers at a faster rate than this blog.

But that's not the case. Both are growing. But for the first 5 months of this year eLearning Technology adds about 20 new subscribers per day at a fairly constant rate and eLearning Learning is adding about 10 per day since it started a few weeks ago to offer email subscriptions. Heck, I would think that most of the subscribers here would immediately have subscribed to the Best of eLearning Learning and the numbers would be much higher already.

All of this doesn't make any sense to me:

• Any thoughts on an explanation?
• Have you subscribed to the Best of eLearning Learning? Why or why not?

Part of the issue may be reaching the 90% audience. By definition, the 90% are not subscribed to this blog and are not reading this. So maybe there's an additional question:

• How can bloggers reach the other 90%?

I'd appreciate your help in figuring this out.