Post by account_disabled on Dec 25, 2023 23:09:12 GMT -5
A good practice to send non-personalized invitations to strangers, what interests me are people, new contacts and what we can get. mutually bring. In addition, not everyone knows how to personalize an invitation from a mobile or tablet (more than 50% of LinkedIn traffic comes from mobile or tablet). In these cases, I assume that it is up to me to initiate the dialogue and not limit myself to validating (or quickly rejecting) a standard invitation. Depending on the invitations I receive, I either accept the invitation and then initiate the conversation; either I start by initiating the conversation and then I decide whether to accept the invitation or not. What is surprising is that many do not respond.
They invite a stranger without introducing themselves or indicating the purpose of their Email Data approach. Rather than simply accepting or refusing, we try to go further, to create value by seeking to initiate discussion and we do not have an answer. Sometimes some people even return to our profiles to see who wrote to them (even though they sent the invitation). Bad practices are increasing Others “yell at” you (or almost), give lessons in networking or how to live, forgetting 1) that they are asking 2) that they themselves have not taken the time to behave correctly towards you by introducing yourself. It's not a big effort, invitation personalization messages are limited to 300 characters, without an email address or URL.
I had another recent example with a salesperson who had targeted me among her prospects. We don't know each other, we've never seen each other, she's asking and is sending me an impersonal invitation. I respond by thanking her for her invitation, inviting her to tell me more about who she is and her professional news. A few don't respond but generally people respond. This is the first time I have received reproaches in response, a response with networking lessons; all accompanied by a proposal for services that do not suit me and references that I already know very well. I'm not convinced that approaching a prospect in this way is the best way to achieve your goals.
They invite a stranger without introducing themselves or indicating the purpose of their Email Data approach. Rather than simply accepting or refusing, we try to go further, to create value by seeking to initiate discussion and we do not have an answer. Sometimes some people even return to our profiles to see who wrote to them (even though they sent the invitation). Bad practices are increasing Others “yell at” you (or almost), give lessons in networking or how to live, forgetting 1) that they are asking 2) that they themselves have not taken the time to behave correctly towards you by introducing yourself. It's not a big effort, invitation personalization messages are limited to 300 characters, without an email address or URL.
I had another recent example with a salesperson who had targeted me among her prospects. We don't know each other, we've never seen each other, she's asking and is sending me an impersonal invitation. I respond by thanking her for her invitation, inviting her to tell me more about who she is and her professional news. A few don't respond but generally people respond. This is the first time I have received reproaches in response, a response with networking lessons; all accompanied by a proposal for services that do not suit me and references that I already know very well. I'm not convinced that approaching a prospect in this way is the best way to achieve your goals.