LinkedIn; what is left of B2B? Is B2B still the key?

Personal experience justified me writing critical notes about LinkedIn where requests and comments the past months were only receivable in written by Customer Service but never responded by a senior manager or someone from the development / engineering team (addressed separately through LinkedIn).

Partly disappointment about unanswered but serious B2B tool issues, fortunately still benefiting, LinkedIn was approached to deal with important matters when doing B2B over the net and most important when claiming to be the largest B2B tool.

Why would LinkedIn ignore a paid member that has success in doing what they promote?
What is the future of a B2B tool that becomes less a B2B but more a common social media tool, a clone of Facebook?

Or did LinkedIn discover success is limited and the best possible scenario is a network without B2B?


The first real (and largest) B2B network is not interested in suggestions from a paid member. Why would the management ignore what both should have as a common goal; improving the tool?

Could this mark a new mission and would this benefit the LinkedIn member looking for B2B?

The management (or responsible departments) look like to be instructed as the core business seems no longer establishing B2B but on becoming another type of network.

Facebook is for example larger, more profitable and involves no business making its entry levels very low while there are also no expectations like in B2B.

This can easily be defended since most members of LinkedIn act the same as in any other network. They show themselves but avoid doing business for their company.


After joining LinkedIn in 2005 the first goal was a large network but that changed because of B2B successes and quality became the next goal. In 2007 it was best to upgrade to a paid member which opened doors that could have remain closed or were hard to open.

This was rewarded by good opportunities saving a crisis year like 2009 while 2010 contributed well to record sales from LinkedIn (client) connections and communication.

Perhaps 2010 was an exceptional as a result. Can we as a company repeat it and can we continue using LinkedIn as the best global B2B tool?

This is honestly doubted. Known for some time many LinkedIn users, despite their settings, do not welcome business deals at all (even when their profile identify them as decision makers) and more members are concerned about new job opportunities, getting recommendations from old colleagues or welcome anyone in their network.


The real doubt or threat comes from the management of LinkedIn. What is their business plan and strategy? A short term hope of being bought by other investors or perhaps merger with Facebook? A quick profit after now being listed on Nasdaq?

Before explaining further just a short translation of users at LinkedIn that should not be here or become open to business as they represent a company or organization;

- groups discussions hardly or never involve statements related to B2B from business leaders where introductions are used to overestimate skills, achievements and experience.

LinkedIn is clearly not yet accepted by corporate means where fear of spam is justified because LinkedIn cannot filter spam. In fact they let members do the guarding of new members like group acceptances.

Still transparency and connections fortunately can undo (some of) the above but this is a too small bias and should be the stronghold of LinkedIn.

- direct approach, even when activated business deals or reference requests in profile settings, are not followed up by the owner of the profile. They do not represent employer, left organization or feel embarrassed because of wrong title?

A majority of the members should do B2B because this is not Facebook but the majority uses this tool to look for jobs, to find old class mates or trying getting the largest network. Or is doing business no longer the purpose of LinkedIn?


Besides these negative aspects of LinkedIn in the beginning of 2011 some essential utilization changes took place or better said user limitations were activated.

Partly features are reduced to force subscribers to upgrade their account, to pay more as they probably do not want to loose their business opportunities.

Subscribers but also normal members must have noticed it is no longer possible to activate a link directly at your own profile to send a group message to another connection that is part of the same group(s).

Perhaps for non frequent members not that important but when using LinkedIn for new business often it will cause delays during office hours which are not appreciated.

Removing such link is not explained by Customer Service, by their developers or engineers while knowing the reason or better the advantage should be easy explained as this has a paid service. It is like bringing your own chair to the movies.

Instead the importance for the recruiting industry, network junkies and unwanted advertisements seem to win it from real B2B deals and are the main reasons for the board of LinkedIn to go public or let their teams cut on B2B utilization.

Going public and getting the same status as Facebook explains the changes because social networks are not places to do business but to give consumer behavior insights.

Social media networks might offer B2B for companies but not for its members. When networking communities like LinkedIn claim exclusivity for doing business they should do more for their members which are professionals looking for business, not for social behavior when being on the payroll.

The question is if LinkedIn is still following the same principle or is just reaching the status of a milking cow where individual B2B will become less and less of interest, especially in case of small businesses.

As long as there is room for fake profiles, spam, insults at discussions, unanswered business deals, wrong impressions, false titles and no B2B usage improvements LinkedIn is not an exclusive and business network but just like any other.

Let´s see 2011 was just a bad start or the beginning of the end. To be continued...

Japan; what will be the impact on the (global) economy?

At this moment economists of well known resources world wide come with their adjustments (and similar explanations) on Japanese economic growth (GDP) expectations for 2011 and beyond, including currencies and other leading indicators.

Now the damage, the delays and the recovery will have an impact, here is no disagreement. The question here is what this will do to your economy and business?

Some say it is too early to tell and adjust modestly, others heavily correct their forecasts downwards of Japan or other countries. Probably the truth will be somewhere in the middle but what are you going to tell your management or stakeholders? Following a heavy paid opinion in case it goes wrong?

If Japan is a key country to your business or Japanese firms are competing it will be helpful to access reliable data and to integrate them efficiently at any corporate level. Now who can deliver that? What resource outperforms others about Japan? What fits nowadays in your budgets?

Let us not tell each other stories and fairy tales about forecasting. There is no resource (or economist) able to tell you what exactly this impact will be in the short, long term, in size, in dollars or yen or in your industry. It is all guessing, constantly adjusting and no one will afterward tell how wrong they were.

Some professionals do not care and rely blindly on that brand name provider where paying the price seems of lesser concern. As corporate pays the employees follow without benchmarking or doubt. A too common vicious circle of business - market intelligence with no tangible synergies or contribution.

Others tell their planning, market intelligence, finance or other data teams to search on internet looking for more (free) information about Japan. Here extra labor costs and outdated info seem not questionable because it is for free. Sure!

When knowing all the alternatives, what is your price for reliable economic data of Japan and the effects globally? What is your tool or provider? Do you care about quality, synergy and fees when using macro parameters?

If so, please contact me because on Tuesday the 5th of April we will release our new monthly edition of Major Economies, including the last changes of 25 selected national and international institutions for 10-15 key Japanese macro parameters (2-5 year forecasts).

Key differences with other alternatives; hard to beat average forecasts, more cost / time savings and faster ROI. Is that welcome in this business climate or not?

I´d be pleased to inform you how to get this Japanese update without charge. Thanks in advance!