Onboarding message (exclusivity)

(Darren Gough) #1

I tried to join a linkedin group today and got this auto email back:

“We will review your profile, and accept your request as soon as possible if you meet our standards.” At first I thought this was a fairly pretentious and rude thing to do. It got me thinking though - have they now set my expectation that being a member of this group will give me access to high quality people and discussions? Does it increase my desire to join?

I’m still not 100% certain. Curious to know what other people think.

(Sarah Hawk) #2

I’ve experienced this once before (it was a community, rather than a LinkedIn group) and I was at first taken aback, then rapt to be accepted, then sorely disappointed by the quality and level of engagement and left after a month. Lots of big names were thrown about as being members, but I saw no evidence of their participation and felt tricked. Exclusivity as a theory is a good one, but it needs to actually deliver.

I’ll be interested to know what this group is like (if they deem you worthy of entry :wink: )

(Richard Millington) #3

The socialmedia.org folks do a good job of this (@kurtvan).

They have a pretty strict criteria, turn a lot of people away, and attract the audience they want.

The hard part is turning people away. Especially if it’s paying customers. We tried this as Hawk notes with CGEEK at first and didn’t have the resources to push through with it. So everything went quiet until we opened everything up.

I like the idea of exclusivity, but it’s really hard to stick with it to make it happen. And you need to be well connected to get the first members.

(Priscilla McClay) #4

I don’t think it’s rude to have criteria but I do think that’s a rude way of putting it. I’m an admin of a closed group, but we only review requests based on whether someone’s job is relevant to our fairly narrow topic area, we would certainly never talk about “standards”.

Do you feel like you know what the “standards” are in the group you applied to (eg job role, level, years of experience)? If they’re going to be exclusive, I think they should at least be clear about it, and then it would feel less personal to be refused. Plus, then they haven’t set a false expectation, as with the group that Sarah mentioned.

(Darren Gough) #5

I think that’s a very good way of putting it @Priscilla.

Standards is a very tricky word to get right in written communication. It’s fairly clinical, can be a little archaic if used in the wrong context and certainly in this situation felt snobbish.

(Sarah Hawk) #6

Prerequisites might be better.