Build your new year on authentic relationships.

All this talk about electronic communication highlights what's often unsaid — personal relationships are most powerful. That's the subject of a great new book I was privileged to help with: The neXus Initiative by Brent Henley.

I've known Brent for a while. His brilliant insights into organizational dynamics make him a valued consultant to companies, governments and groups around the world. In fact, he was recently invited to teach a workshop in Frankfurt, Germany to world leaders from Africa, South America, Europe and more. Why is Brent so successful? He understands relationships.

So it's no surprise that his new book is about relationships. For years Brent theorized that our current understanding of "networking" and "relationship selling" was fundamentally flawed. It was missing key components like solving problems, earning trust and the simple art of listening. He saw that most of the events (often called "networking events") geared toward business growth are centered around "taking" or "getting" what you can from others.

As with so many experts in history, Brent wasn't afraid to ask if things could be different. He theorized a way of doing business based on giving, not taking. Then he tested the theory (with the help of a trusting client) and the results were great. It turns out that we can build our own business by helping others build theirs. In fact, it's probably one of the most proven, long-term ways to succeed.

Brent took his test-case results and formalized them into a method anyone can use. He calls it a neXus, a small group where people meet and look for ways to help each other. I'm oversimplifying, as there are some rules and principles that truly make the groups work. But in its essence, The neXus Initiative shows us how to switch our business growth from taking to giving.

And that's where this entry really begins.

Haven't we had enough takers in our economy?

Haven't we seen what taking can do in recent years?

As we start the new year and look back on what for many was not a pleasant time, I can't imagine a better thing to do than commit to reaching goals in a new, better way. For me, that means building a neXus.

I have never recommended a single product in this blog, but this quick read is clearly worth the exception. It's relevant, as I often discuss how personal relationships will always be the most powerful form of communication. It's also exceptional, in that this idea of giving that seems so revolutionary is something we know and agree with in the very core of our being.

We've seen where the method of "taking" gets us. I invite you to take a look at what the future of business looks like by reading The neXus Initiative.

A mile wide. An inch deep.

If you're like most people, you've got more than 100 friends on Facebook. If you're like me, you've got more than 500. Having 500 real friends is a physically impossible feat, though Facebook seems to have made this possible.

Somewhere between 100 and 500 friends, the makeup of my Facebook audience began to change. I started off friending people I know, but as time went by I listened to the "experts" (who tell us we need as many Facebook friends as possible) and eagerly made "friends" far and wide.

That's when it dawned on me. What if:

1. We join a social media site and get as many "friends" as possible. That's all fine and dandy and things are looking up.

2. It's no surprise — those "friends" are doing the same. After all, that's what we're all told to do, right?

3. Then, statistically speaking, every time my audience gains a friend or follower, the chance they'll read my updates gets watered down. After all, their Newsfeed is packed with messages, what's the chance mine will be seen? One in 500? Less?

4. Before you know it, the only people really paying attention to my life are my actual friends, my mother and a handful of creepy people. And let's face it, it was that way BEFORE Facebook.

I've seen this happen to businesses who try to leverage social media. Things go well in the beginning as their new "friends" respond to updates, but they're left wondering what happened once they gain several hundred followers. The first "friends" were the real friends. The latter were acquaintances. Lastly, they're "friending" people unlikely to respond to their message.

This trend of gaining hundreds, if not thousands, of "friends" literally creates shallow relationships. Professional marketers argue that it's volume that counts, but that's only true if you're selling plastic spoons. People know when they're treated like a number and I'll bet those professional marketers that their favorite marketing materials promise meaningful relationships, because that's what matters.

And that's what we'll come back to. I'll wager that the pendulum will swing when it comes to online relationships. We will, one by one, begin to wonder: In an online world, where's the value in meaningful relationships?

As we listen to the professionals who say we need lots of "friends" and we continue to "friend" and "follow" in some meaningless way until we have hundreds of them, we watch our messages drown in that ever-growing, ever-distracted crowd. That's when we're left to find that the best place to be heard is among true friends. And that's a status that has to be earned.


Next week I'll pose two questions:
1. What if the only people praising social media are the ones who make money on social media? ...and...
2. What if the only people making money on social media are the ones selling things about social media?

Can we just (not) be friends?

Let's face it, there are too many invites on Facebook. I can't keep track of them anymore.

So your dog park is throwing a party — I'm not up for the scooping.

Your nephew turned six — how do I know you again?

Some obscure New York comedian is in town — who?

I realized that my wife could birth a child and, if my only invite is on Facebook, I'll miss the whole thing (thankfully she has other ways of letting me know).

These invites became overwhelming (and now ignored) when I gained a few hundred "friends." That word appears in quotes on purpose. Fess up, can we really call that many people friends? I just don't think it's honest for anyone to say they have "friended" a hundred, even a thousand people. (And does anyone else cringe when friend is used as a verb?)

The people who really are my friends most often didn't need Facebook to know me. I'll bet it's the same for you. I meet most of my friends in some analog fashion. We shake hands. We share stories. We really do for-goodness-sake know each other. Facebook is great for communicating with those people after we've met, but where do the rest fit in?

If you've "friended" me, I'm glad you did. I just think we should use a more accurate word for our relationship, perhaps something like "passerby" or "lurker" or "bar hopper." (You know who you are.) Those labels seem more appropriate for most Facebook relationships that usually aren't very deep. Would it be all that bad to have "acquaintances" and "dude who rides the bus with me" on our Facebook page? I don't think so. After all, it's more accurate than blanketing everyone with the "friend" label. Most of these relationships fit in a category of more personal than "homeless guy" but less personal than "co-worker." So let's just call it what it is.

Because if everybody on the planet is considered a friend, it's easy to understand why I can't keep up with the invitations. How do I know what's important? How do I sift through the countless events to find the ones from real friends? I can't.

So if you invited me to something using Facebook, sorry I missed it. Until Facebook allows me to filter events by "real friend," "sort of a friend" and "who the heck is this?" I'm not sure I'll be able to find your invitation anytime soon. Honestly, I've given up.

To Facebook: If you want me to start paying attention to invitations again, can we just (not) be friends?


Next week I'll pose the question:
What if the only people paying attention to us online are the people we already know? (And the weirdoes, of course.)

Who's the best at social media?

I'm almost finished with Stop. Think. Send. (the book). But before going to press, I'd like some feedback from you.

What organization do you think is the best at using social media?

It can be a company or a club, large or small. I want to know who you think is doing it really well. Who's really listening and making good things happen? Who's doing something innovative with that information?

I want to put the best examples in my book so we can inspire other organizations to do the same — making everyone's experience a bit better.

Last but certainly not least, if your example is chosen, I'll include your name in the book as part of a special thank you.

Feel free to post your answer as a comment or send it to jeremy@jeremybroussard.com, or @jeremybroussard on Facebook or Twitter. Thanks!

Donny defines interruption.

Just received an email from my good friend Donny Broussard. He's the editor of the online film review site KillerFilm.com and oversees film equipment for the University of Louisiana. As you might imagine, things can get pretty busy for Donny, so he decided to let everyone know how he defines interruption:

Greetings,

Due to high workload, I am currently checking and responding to e-mail twice daily at 12:00 P.M. CST and 4:00 P.M. CST.

If you require urgent assistance (please ensure it is urgent) that cannot wait until either 12:00 P.M. and 4:00 P.M., please contact me via phone at 337-255-4769.

Thank you for understanding this move to more efficiency and effectiveness. It helps me accomplish more to serve you better.

Publicists and vendors feel free to email me any press release, screener announcement, interview opportunity, as well as any other request. My email comes to my phone and publicists are sorted so that I can get press releases to my staff immediately.

Sincerely,

Donny Broussard
Editor-In-Chief, Killer Film LLC

Pretty simple, really. Now he has the time to write, read and review for the site without feeling tied to email. He can turn off the interrupting "ding" on his email software and twice a day he can handle all of his messages.

What would your life be like if you checked email twice a day?