Business Networking Relationships: Stop Leaving Money on the Table

I interact with a couple hundred people in an average month. I encounter many of these folks in business networking settings, and I enjoy watching the different techniques, personalities, strategies and objectives that are incorporated into networking conversations.

What I didn’t realize until recently is that most business networkers are leaving an enormous amount of money on the table. Why? Because they are narrowly focused on closing business they can individually find, close and deliver.

All of us network in “individual mode” sometimes. But truly effective business networkers know there is a much more sophisticated way to build their business – to collaborate with others to find, close and deliver business that is much too large for them to execute on their own, yet profiatable enough to partner with others to successfully get the job done.

What the people locked into “individual mode” don’t realize is that there are actually six different types of relationships that can be built in a business networking environment. They are typically only participating in one or two of those relationships. Those can be profitable, but the revenue generated by some of the other relationships can be unbelievable.

The first three business networking relationships are based on the individual contribution mentality. One person is responsible for business development (and possibly for delivery of the offering.) I call these relationships 1) casual referral partners, 2) power partners and 3) power groups.

Anyone can be a casual referral partner. They may not know one another's business very well, but may know people who can use their respective offerings. These leads tend to be less qualified, but sometimes work out nicely.

Power partners typically pursue similar target audiences or decision makers. They are more likely to use similar buzzwords, and understand similar concepts. They typically give better leads, too. But since the interactions are usually less formal, the relationships may not produce predictable lead flow.

Power groups take the power partner concept a step further. All of the benefits still exist, but the relationship is more formal, meetings are scheduled on a regular basis, and sometimes performance metrics are established. An effective power group can produce qualified and predictable lead sources.

Business networking effectiveness can take a major leap forward if people are able to grasp the power of the second three types of relationships. But these relationships require a much higher level of business maturity, sophistication, and most importantly, a willingness to work as part of a team.

I call the second three relationships 4) project teams, 5) collaborative teams and 6) consolidations. They take the skills required for the first three relationships and add a group sales and delivery model. So, instead of focusing on what is best for the individual, they try to achieve the team’s objectives. Some of these teams might even provide each other business cards and email addresses so they can chase business under "one flag."

Project teams are usually formed because one of the team members finds an opportunity that goes beyond the scope of their ability to deliver on their own. They bring in other team members to strengthen the offering and to deliver the best value for the prospect. This model keeps the value high for the client and keeps overhead lower for the person who sold the deal, but they have to be able to trust their partners.

Collaborative teams not only deliver the project together, they often sell it together. Sometimes these teams are formed even before the client is chosen. Putting these teams together takes high levels of trust, professionalism and a willingness to follow rules of engagement. But when they get access to the right opportunities, these teams can deliver big solutions and make big money – more than any of them can effectively handle as an individual.

Consolidations are the rarest types of business networking relationships. These are actually mergers or acquisitions of two companies after establishing that they work extremely well together. Autonomy to operate independently is lost, but the combined company is typically much stronger than its previously separate parts.

The good news is that one person can (and usually does) participate in more than one of these relationships at a time. Those leveraging the fourth and fifth relationships are very likely to be participating in the first, second and sometimes third relationships as well – leaving fewer opportunities unexplored and fewer dollars unharvested.

I will go into more depth about these business networking relationships in later posts, but would love to hear your thoughts, questions and feedback in the meantime. So, add them to the discussion.