Archive for the ‘Relationships’ Category

Empathy In a Highly Independent & Mechanized Society! Entrepreneur’s Pursuit …

Sunday, October 14th, 2012

How do you create more empathy in the world we live in? What are sources of empathy in individuals? What are degrees of empathy?

These are some of the questions I have been exposed to after my interactions with http://www.emotion.is founders Raul San Narciso (@raulsann) and his new co-founder Jim Kleiber.

While empathy could be considered as one of the innate human responses, we wondered if all empathy is created equally. There are many types of empathies such as cognitive, emotional and compassionate; I want to talk about sources of empathy and degrees of empathy.

Sources of Empathy:

Broadly, empathy could come from nature (genetic or innate) or nurture (our surrounding and environment).

Along the lines of genetic (based on a certain types of genes) and nurture (environment in which a child grows), there is some research suggesting that humans innately have empathic responses without any specific genetic signatures. This is evident in infant empathetic responses (almost universal); Chimpanzees – closest cousins to early humans also demonstrate such empathetic behavior. I feel this source of empathy is the most debated as there is some research that concludes that advanced human emotions such as empathy (along with love & compassion) can only be learned through experience – unlike fear and basic rages are present inherently in all of us right from birth.

Nurture as a source can be further divided into two categories – most common being structured parental and societal influence on children. Apart from that, specific or heightened exposure of empathy and compassion due to situations such as ancestral charitable history or specific situation or circumstance in the childhood could also be a source of empathy. This second category is situational and varies based on the context.

So at a high level these are the sources of empathy –

  • Nurture (Structured & situational)
  • Nature (Innate human nature)
  • Genetic (Specific genetic signature)

Degrees of Empathy

As all empathy is not created equal, our own degrees of empathy also vary based on many factors. For example our individual state of mind and individual perceptions, biases, prejudices also play an important role in our empathetic responses. Value attribution can also alter your level of empathy towards an individual or situation and we also see parities in response levels based on individual’s gender – women tend to be more empathetic than men in certain situation and women tend to be more empathetic to men than men to their fellow men.

Value attribution is very inherent in how we deal with certain empathetic situations. For example, its been proven that pretty women get a faster road side assistance from total strangers than an older looking gentlemen.

Individual and personal biases towards others or situations also plays a very critical role in our level of empathy.

Broadly, degrees of empathy can be based on following –

  • Gender (Women tend to be more empathetic than men)
  • Individual state of mind (more happy in your life, more empathetic to others)
  • Value attribution (More better looking you are, more empathy you get from others)
  • Individual biases and prejudices

Empathy: Where to?

Despite our natural and environmental exposures towards empathy, materialist societies, individualism and undue sense of entitlement are somehow casting a blind eye towards empathy. For example, in most metropolitan cities there are fewer people who stop and help you on the street than a decade ago. There is more animosity, hatred and crimes of prejudice today than ever before.

Maturing industrial era paved way for information age, automation & innovation – which bolstered individual freedom and independence. Even though societies and communities as a whole come together at various levels, individuals are less dependent on their fellow human beings. This independence and lack of need to interact with your fellow human beings in our day-to-day activities is certainly putting some pressure on our empathetic responses. While virtual (online) communities such as Facebook and its clones have allowed us to keep in touch with these emotions in cyberspace, no one knows the long-term impact of these virtual communities.

Can we collectively increase empathy in the world around us? If a startup wants to solve this problem, how would they approach to solve this and where would they start?

Raul & Jim are committed to make a difference in the world by giving much needed attention for empathy in our society.

Empathy can be embedded in the society via various methods and via various stages of human development. Parents and teachers need many more tools than what they have today to increase empathy in the current and future generations.

The biggest challenge for anyone to solve this problem is not about educating empathy but its fundamental importance and value at individual level as well as at societal level. When people in advanced societies are fairly independent and self sufficient, making them and their kids realize the importance and value of empathy is the daunting challenge.

As the technological innovation moves majority of our “needs” & “wants” to the realm of gadgetry & infrastructure reducing the need to interact, engage or depend on fellow human beings, as a society we should strive to protect and foster empathy – one of the core tenets of human relationships.

@Vsistla

Surgeon General Warning about my lack of professional or educational background in the aspects of empathy apply to this post!

Linkedin Skill Endorsements Gone Awry? Initial Review & Recommendations!

Wednesday, October 10th, 2012

As many of the active LinkedIn users are aware, LinkedIn’s latest feature – social endorsement of “Skills & Expertise” – is in later stage of its beta release and growing like rapid fire in the past few weeks. What’s interesting is LinkedIn brought social validation by your network to this feature they started testing since Feb of 2012 – a social proof for your skills and expertise.

After studying this feature for a few days, I decided to do few social experiments & surveys and my past few weeks of results have been nothing short of eye openers – with respect to user behaviors. While my data set is only limited to my own network, I am quite certain these results would be very akin to majority of LinkedIn users.

While most people endorse as a social convention – “you scratch my back and I scratch your back” – very much similar to how most of us used LinkedIn Recommendations, unlike LinkedIn “Recommendations”, skill endorsements can be removed any time you want after you endorse.

Similar to tweenage kids, I am already seeing immature behavior – where people endorse skills and delete the endorsements if you don’t endorse them back or if you don’t endorse them as many as they endorsed you.

Also, from a sheer value standpoint, an individual’s recommendation for you will always be more valuable than that individual’s endorsement, even though in the long run, # of credible endorsements speak a lot about you than recommendations.

Here are some of my thoughts and conclusions around this social experiment -

  • Reciprocity seems like an unspoken rule – This seems to be an overwhelming expectation – with my own direct experience as well as with people I spoke with regarding endorsements. Times when people solicit you to endorse them in return for their endorsements and other times they straight up harras you. This is very much akin to some of the spammers in the world of Twitter – You follow me and I will follow you.
  • When it comes to Endorsements, huge egos are at play – I have purposely ignored to see what would happen if I didn’t “endorse back” someone who deserves some endorsements. To my surprise, their original endorsements have been removed after few days! This is a big shocker for me.
  • Mutual friends & partiality in endorsements don’t get along – When you rate two peers inconsistently on skills they both pride themselves (like endorse Product manager to only one even though both of them are equally good and skilled at Product management), you start a pissing contest – most of the time without any straight confrontation.
  • That’s not a skill I am proud off – re-endorse me! – Thanks to LinkedIn’s auto recommendation of skills based on your profile, most of the people I spoke to were unhappy about some of the skills that were automatically chosen for them. I heard one person contemplating to contact all the people who endorsed him on a particular skill to re-endorse for some other more relevant skill. Another wished he could change the skill text without losing the endorsements for that skill.
So, how can LinkedIn make these endorsements more credible and experience less controversial/painful? While it is too soon to conclude where the crowd sourced endorsements could go for LinkedIn, here are some recommendations -
  • Endorsements are not same as Follow! – People should not be endorsing others and then remove them the next day. If they are not sure about endorsing someone, they should not endorse to begin with.
  • If you insist on leaving “undo” feature, then at least insist on getting rational feedback on why someone wants to undo their endorsement just a few days after they endorsed that person.
  • For Credibility, lets focus on Quality than Quantity- LinkedIn can make these endorsements more credibility by offering rich data around individual endorsements and individual motives behind endorsements. Such as  -
    • Displaying # of endorsements given vs # of endorsements got will give you some understanding of the value of endorsements.
    • Publish like an Endorsement Gradient that is calculated based on – # of endorsements given by those who did not get an endorsement vs # of endorsements given by those who got an endorsement.
    • Maybe an infographic about who (as in relationship – professional or personal) actually endorsed to learn why they endorsed – if all your endorsements are coming from your family members or close friends who never worked with you, then we know how valuable your endorsements are. 
    • Percentile the endorsements by skill or overall – When you crowd source people to endorse, some kind of percentile for individual skill endorsements or total endorsements – based on industry, education qualification, # of years of experience, etc – would be very useful.
  • Educate your users that endorsements are not social convention! – This is very important. When someone on the street says hello to you, you say hello back to them – that is social convention. Endorsements should not be social convention. Period! Educate your users with proper “coach marks” and alerts.
As per LinkedIn users, to create more credibility for your endorsements, stick to following principles -
  • Tell your endorsors to only endorse if they feel strongly about it. You do the same.
  • Tell your endorsors that you will not be reciprocating them back. Reiterate that endorsements should not fit social convention. If they try to obligate you, be polite and say that you don’t know enough about them on that particular skill to endorse.

As per endorsing me, take a wild guess!

@Vsistla

All Entrepreneurs & Investors are cursed by “Value Attribution”!

Friday, July 13th, 2012

Value attribution is a basic innate human behavioral tenet  that superimposes characteristics and qualities of an individual or thing when we  are assessing the “objective” value of the individual or thing. In other words we tend to stick with the “perceived value” of a thing or individual over its “objective value”. Our perceptions from our own culture, past experiences, diagnostic biases take over and trump our ability to assess based on the real objective values.

Value attribution phenomenon was demonstrated by Joshua Bell – one of the finest violinists and Washington Post in 2010 in Washington D.C. at a Subway station where over a 1000 people walked by without paying attention when Joshua Bell – one of the best known violinists in the world played for over 45 mins on his $3.5 Million worth violin – at a busy Subway stations in D.C. Metro.

Value attribution is all around us – every time you try to interact with someone who is more accomplished than you or in a different social strata …..some of this is very much reflected in our Zombie relationships we have built around us via social networks.

Our media industry also plays into “value attribution”. We see this in typical headlines and trade journals as well – where if someone famous or accomplished gives a sound bite, that gets more visibility and credibility than someone who is nobody although both of them concluded the same thing. Specifically when I was a research analyst early 2000s anything I said was picked up as a quote and listed here and here but no one cares two hoots even if I had said something more profound via my blogs or otherwise without such a credible “qualification”.

How is “value attribution” related to startups, entrepreneurs and investors?

Well, let me tell you that its spread intravenously through out the entire industry – for worse.

Entrepreneurs:

Whether you are a first time entrepreneur or serial entrepreneur, you do face negative and positive biases respectively that adversely affect you, regardless of the bias.

For first time entrepreneurs, most investors – angels and VCs alike have a negative bias for the inexperienced and lack of credibility. The mentality is if you didn’t do this before why would we invest in you and take a bigger risk.

Where as for a seasoned or more than once entrepreneur – angels & VCs – especially those who have already invested or saw the entrepreneur execute in the past – give a positive bias – and are lot more inclined to invest. Most investors are ignorant of the fact that success is not fungible and every startup would have similar as well as unique challenges. Millions of investor dollars go in the gutter because of positive bias towards serial entrepreneurs.

Investors:

For one of my previous startups, many investors have told me that they would only invest in entrepreneurs with whom they have worked in the past.

While taking the “known devil is better than the unknown god” approach works in most cases, I am willing to bet that statistically investors might lose “more” on startups that they have not invested but should have than the startups they have invested based on the “value attributions”. 

 

Investors – angels as well as VCs alike give higher weight towards existing relationships, past experiences & emotionally charged biases when they deal with known entrepreneurs. On the flip side, they go the other extreme when they deal with first time entrepreneurs with perceived biases.

Investor or entrepreneur or just about anyone – approach all your interactions with people (strangers or friends) around you as if its a privilege for you to interact with them!

Especially first time entrepreneurs should create interesting avenues and opportunities to overshadow “value attribution” that they will inevitably face when they want to build their startup and do fund raising. There is no check list I can provide but will tell you that its your mind set and perspective that will help you overcome this dogma.

 

What else Twitter could do to become more valuable?

Saturday, May 26th, 2012

I love Twitter but I always felt it could do better …..lot more useful if it continued to innovate – and here are my thoughts -

Image representing Twitter as depicted in Crun...

Image via CrunchBase

  • Tweet an Email & Email a Tweet: More clearly, I would like to be able to send tweets to an email address and vice versa. Why not? If anything, that seals Twitter’s long term viability. Twitter has built a tremendous platform where its users within the platform are able to communicate one to one, one to many & many to many. Now its time for Twitter to expand their reach into the juggernaut of communication – email!
  • Quite a few Real time communication platforms – PubNub, Pusher and like have emerged and are going to create new business opportunities for Brands and Platforms that want to control and maintain their own real time communication platforms. This, while might not impact Twitter’s primary user base or market, Twitter could make some strategic movies in either integrating with these platforms or encourage these platforms to collaborate – so that users from their branded ecosystems could communicate to and fro with Twitter users.
  • Image representing Salesforce Chatter as depic...

    Image via CrunchBase

    On the entreprise front, Yammer, Chatter and like are making big strides and creating new markets. Twitter should not ignore these networks. Deeply embedding with these platforms is in the best interest of Twitter.

  • Lastly,Twitter is really a real time LinedIn, in my view. When it comes to relationships,I feel Twitter is creating more value than LinkedIn; Its time for Twitter to start thinking beyond being a broadcast/communication platform. Brand pages concept should be expanded for Twitter users to create a details social profiles – potentially opening opportunities within recruiting space as well.

This blog post is motivated by Chris O’Brien’s comment about Twitter not being a Business ……Thank you, Chris.

When it comes to Relationships, Twitter delivers more than LinkedIn!

Friday, May 4th, 2012

I love Linkedin – at least I used to ….

Image representing LinkedIn as depicted in Cru...

Image via CrunchBase

Linkedin allowed me to “connect” with my professional relationships, keep in touch and engage. At least that was the promise when you connected with someone via Linedin.

In the past 9 years, LinkedIn’s value creation for “relationship” has only gone down.

Case In Point: In the past 1 month (March 29th to April 29th), I have received about 45 LinkedIn connection requests and 20 of them are from complete strangers I have never met. Out of these 20 strangers, I have accepted requests from 15 of them based on mutual backgrounds and potential value the relationship could generate in the long run.

Anytime I accept a LinkedIn request from complete strangers – who requested the connection with the reason we are on the same LinkedIn group or went to same college, etc – I send a follow on email to find out what evoked them to send me a connection request and if we could have a quick discovery call.

Out of the 15 emails (suggesting them for a discovery/”get to know” call) to these complete strangers who have connected with me via Linkedin – only 2 people have actually responded back to me. That’s less than %15 success rate.

Here’s another stat that drives this message home: My success rate (receiving back an acknowledgement) when I “congratulate” my LinkedIn contacts – when they make progress in their careers is less than 23% on average.

Yes, my experience doesn’t stand for a scientific survey but I feel the writing is on the wall!

On the other hand, lets look at social & personal broadcasting platform – Twitter!

Image representing Twitter as depicted in Crun...

Image via CrunchBase

I have been able to engage meaningful conversations – DMs – via Twitter – even with people who are NOT connected with me via LinkedIn. Most of the DMs to my followers get answered. In the past 1 month, I have initiated DM conversations with 8 different people and ONLY 1 person didn’t respond back to me. That’s just less than 90% success rate.

 

To keep my relationships fresh, Twitter seem to work out better for me than LinkedIn. That maybe the case for other Linkedin users as well. Most of the time, my LinkedIn emails to people I have known for a long time(or for that matter to new people) don’t get answered.

Here is the bottomline: LinedIn can ignore Twitter at its own peril. Twitter is becoming a relationship platform that could ultimately threaten LinkedIn.

When a user signs up for LinkedIn, currently they have options to either create an account with their email ID or by using Facebook connect.

It is time LinkedIn allowed people to not only sign up with Twitter IDs but also accept LinkedIn requests via Twitter handles – not just email address.

LinkedIn Sign Up Using Facebook ....

If I further dissect LinkedIn and Twitter – both these platforms have distinct roles to play in the world of networking, conversations and relationships.

The biggest reason LinkedIn still “rule the roost” when it comes to relationships is because of the features such as resume like profiles, ability to offer a dynamic rolodex and so forth. If Twitter can address those deltas, Twitter could potentially threaten LinkedIn’s business – if not immediately, maybe in the long run.

Also, traditional recruiters and head hunters are still using Linkedin as their primary source of talent search, but with detailed Twitter user profile pages that addresses needs of recruiters and head hunters, the shift for Twitter from being a broadcast/conversational platform to be a broadcast/conversational/recruiting platform.

So, either LinkedIn could wait for the inevitability or maybe strike a deal with Twitter to integrate LinkedIn Profile pages within Twitter User Profile pages – this way, LinkedIn can preempt Twitter from creating their own resume like profile pages.

Here is my bottom line – my relationships via Twitter are looking more richer and active than via LinkedIn and I feel that’s a sign!

@Vsistla