Why
Microsoft Linked Up with LinkedIn
On
Monday, LinkedIn agreed
to be acquired by Microsoft for US$26.2 billion in
cash — once again proving the old adage that who you know
matters as much as what you know.
That may seem a counterintuitive conclusion
in our 21st-century knowledge economy, in which unlimited bandwidth, pervasive
connectivity, and transparency should theoretically allow professional talent
to meet professional talent acquirers without an intermediary. At some level,
LinkedIn, which enables people to establish connections with friends,
acquaintances, and complete strangers for the purpose of professional
development, shouldn’t have to exist in the 2010s.
In the olden days, you know, like, before the
Internet, it really was the case that the people you knew directly had a
significant influence on your ability to make a living, or even to get into the
workforce. People forget, but it was difficult to get noticed professionally in
the 1980s and early 1990s. Professional circles tended to be small, geographically
confined, and closed. If you were, for example, a reporter on a small regional
newspaper, there was essentially no way for a big-shot editor at a major New
York newspaper to see your work. Larger law firms in Chicago had virtually no
method to keep tabs on crackerjack litigators in Wichita. And if you were a
fantastic coder in Minneapolis, it wasn’t particularly easy to demonstrate your
portfolio of work.
As a result, it was tough to break in to many
spheres: politics, entertainment, media, law, investment banking. That is,
unless you had connections. Unless you knew people. And if you wanted to become
known to those in your industry, you had to step out of your shell and show up
at events, cold call, write letters, or ask friends and family for introductions.
The Internet and social media changed all of
that, of course. As media went online, brilliant bloggers could let their work
do the talking for them — and get them discovered. Lawyers could easily create
email lists to distribute news of the latest transaction or case they handled.
Coders could effectively display their work on the functional websites they
built. On a more level playing field, people could demonstrate their
competencies, and companies could find the exact professional talent they needed.
And emails took a lot of the awkwardness out of telephone calls.
That was the theory. In practice, however,
generations of experience (and eons of evolution) have turned people into
social creatures. We like to feel connections to individuals. Most people spend
as much of their waking life in the workplace as they do at home. And we’re
simply more comfortable giving an assignment, or an interview, to people whom
we feel we know.
And that’s where LinkedIn came in. The site
set itself up as a place where personal networking could be easy and painless —
it took a lot of the awkward personal interaction out of the process. You could
ping somebody, and if she didn’t want to be connected to you, no big deal. You
could keep tabs on friends, former colleagues, and frenemies without having to
pick up the phone. If you weren’t comfortable walking into a room full of 40
strangers and striking up conversations, you could reach out to a person who
works in the same office as your best friend from college. LinkedIn would also
alert you to people in your network who switched jobs, companies, or even
careers. Which meant that your network expanded even if you just sat still. You
could figure out whether you knew people at an innovative new startup, or
whether someone you had once worked with and admired might be interested in an
opening you were trying to fill.
Yes, LinkedIn is far from perfect. Many of
the connection requests I receive from around the world are from people whose
professional arcs and interests will never intersect with mine. Many of the
pieces written by the company’s band of influencers (disclosure: I’m one) are
full of bromides. As it has evolved from a hiring and professional networking
company into a media and sharing company — like Facebook for work — LinkedIn
has demanded more time and commitment from its users. And they haven’t always
proven willing to engage.
Even
so, the acquisition of LinkedIn by Microsoft caps off a remarkable run for its
founders and executives. And the value of LinkedIn — to its shareholders, to
Microsoft, and to its 433 million
members — highlights the enduring strength of
human, personal connections in an age of drones, robots, and algorithms.
Daniel
Gross, executive editor of strategy+business.
http://www.strategy-business.com/blog/Why-Microsoft-Linked-Up-with-LinkedIn?gko=066cd&utm_source=itw&utm_medium=20160616&utm_campaign=resp
No comments:
Post a Comment