For myself, I do participate. I might not always post a general comment for the world to take notice. But I will send privately msg’s on posts of noteworthy.
The question of more professionals relates strongly back to the preconceived ideas of the value (if any…) one gets from Social Networking. Time is the biggest consideration. Second, the level of participates gets called into question.
I’m not speaking about forums that basically “filter” the members, say Alumni schools or extensions of Professional Established Associations. But generic groups which in this section are numerous to say the lease. CCTV. IP Video, Surveillance and the ever growing list of new groups. If there was some type of vehicle or tool that could at least measure the volumn of “thread” visits, we would have a starting point.
One area that is of concern is profile completion. And the ability of suggested introductions actually being done. Example: if you’re in the same group as me, it’s easy to send an invite for connection. If I come across someone that needs an introduction (from my network of connections) the % of acceptance drops. A common response I get:”…I don’t know them well enough to forward this request…” Hence this brings the second opportunity “Upgrading” “paying a fee” to be able to send In Mails to those perhaps outside of your network. Maybe it’s just me, but paying a fee to perhaps have the ability to reach out to other professionals, rather questions Social Networking in general.
What we find common is like tier individuals within a forum. On occasion the threads are interrupted with “Reps” professing their product line/service. Most of us are use to it with other Networking Groups, there always a handful looking to sell the group. This is fine that’s their stick. When the flow of ideas runs parallel and not up and down where is the growth?
Business today is very tough. Those of us with tenure understand the concept of building a relationship takes TIME and effort. Unfortunately, the business model of this sector is not about long term relationships, it’s about finding the next install. With regards to security what does separate the tiers is the simple distinction between a “purchase” and “investment”. Purchase addresses an immediate need; Investment looks at the long term.
I reference the IT industry a lot. Why because Security is an exact mirror of it. How many years did it take for IT to come to grips with “upgrading” existing equipment on continual bases to take advantage of the new business tools available? That alone is the key ingredient Uncle Bill brought to the table with Microsoft. Each upgrade NEEDED a faster more robust system. We’re currently seeing the beginning of this change with the infusion of IP Networks. Many current providers of Analog will not make that transition because their model does not plan for investment in themselves. There about razor thin margins and volume. (We already know the outcome of that story path…)
Security is moving from the facilities side of the house to IT because of technology. A total new business approach has to be applied. Security once ear-marked as expenditure now has to don the new cloths of a “profit Center”. Which means the ROI and expectations goes to a total different level. Utilizing the system for other purposes like “generating” revenue. Analytics is the first step. But unless executives within these same organizations don’t get the concept and are not provided the tools to take advantage of the possibilities, nothing moves forward.
Security manufactures are a big part of this mistake of focusing on product(s) and not 3rd party Applications that turn this raw data into usable information. Ask any IT Director Worth his/her salt; it’s the APPs that changed everything in the IT world. Remember the mirror…
bluegil's Pond 
Leave a comment