Can LinkedIn Remove a LinkedIn Group? A true story. | Windmill Networking

Can LinkedIn Remove a LinkedIn Group?

I have a habit of going to my User Groups screen on LinkedIn pretty often. Because I manage or co-manage four different LinkedIn Groups (The Izakaya Club, So Cal Sushi, Cross Connects Asia Pacifc, and Tercero Wines) I am always checking for new member requests. Because I am always optimizing my group membership I am constantly maxxed out at the 50 groups that LinkedIn allows us to join.

The other day it happened again: I was cut down to 49 groups again. If you read my previous post on what to do if you get kicked out of a LinkedIn Group you can imagine that I thought that I was a victim again. I got on the defensive and compared my notes and confirmed that I had indeed been kicked out of a LinkedIn Group.

It just so happens that at the same time I noticed a LinkedIn Answers post asking whether it was fair to be kicked out of a large group that was a truly an all-encompassing welcoming group. He was talking about the same group that I was kicked out of. But why would I be kicked out of it? I was a supporter of the group and was in communication with the Group Manager.

After deeper research, by doing a LinkedIn Group search, I realized that the LinkedIn Group was no longer in existence. It just vanished off the face of LinkedIn! This particular group had been removed once before by LinkedIn, but a blog post yesterday by Vincent Wright that I spotted on Twitter (hey, you’re not on Twitter yet?!?!? @nealschaffer) showed convincing evidence that LinkedIn had forcibly removed this LinkedIn Group. The reason that the Group Manager told us why they were removed? ”Competition.”

Can a group of 10,000 professionals really compete with an established brand and powerful membership of 37+ million people? I highly doubt it. So there is something more to the story than the naked eye can see. But this was a group that was frustrated with the restrictions of LinkedIn and decided to create their own network on Ning.com This is not uncommon as many other LinkedIn Groups have companion Yahoo Groups or Ning platforms. The reason? The LinkedIn Group functionality is just not nearly as robust as the competition. But I believe that these are _companion_ sites and NOT competitive ones. Obviously LinkedIn may feel differently about that.

But it also makes the potential for Ning.com look very interesting. Anyone can easily create their own “LinkedIn” type of social networking group online for free. And with the variety of plug-ins that are available for the Ning platform, like real-time chat a la Facebook, it makes sense for LinkedIn to start absorbing more of this technology so that others won’t want to start online networks elsewhere. After all, if LinkedIn is for professionals, and professionals use chat, skype, and video conferencing, isn’t there a lot of extra business (read: $$$) that LinkedIn could be raking in by providing these sorts of converged services that Ning already has?

Enough about Ning.com. Getting back to the topic of LinkedIn, it calls for a reminder that if you are on the LinkedIn Platform, you need to play by their rules, like it or not. They can do whatever they want because it is their sandbox that we are playing in. They can remove a LinkedIn Group should they wish to. Fighting with LinkedIn Customer Service will be, for the most part, a losing battle, so unfortunately it’s a classic case of “Love it or leave it”. I do believe that LinkedIn can learn a lot and further improve their service by lending more ear to what they probably perceive as “complaints”. Just don’t forget that while there may be some whiners out there, there are also a lot of intelligent professionals on LinkedIn that have some great feedback on how to better the platform. Is anyone listening?

Neal Schaffer

Thank you for your excellent comment. I agree wholeheartedly with what you say. I also wish that they would at least have a forum for those who utilize LinkedIn the most to both offer advice to LinkedIn and receive advice from LinkedIn, ideally resulting in a greater mutual understanding of each other. The power users, like myself and apparently yourself, are those who are also evangelizing LinkedIn the most and helping them grow their membership one at a time. We're the good guys, not the bad guys.

ahlwp

Neal,

It's interesting that most often the people that LinkedIn tends to target are often some of it's most active users. Active users are more likely than non-actives to push the envelope.

Active users are more likely to get frustrated with the limits and look for alternative ways to derive functionality and value. Often these activities conflict with the stringent view that LinkedIn has as to how it should be utilized.

The downside is that at a time when it sorely needs to increase activity among it's user base, it limits those who are pushing the boundaries. While LI is a great tool, it probably only has about 10% of it's membership participating actively. Imagine how valuable a tool it would be if it had 50% of it's membership participating actively.

A little more input from active members would be beneficial to LI and it's members. In the end they built the sandbox and have the right to determine how people play in their backyard. But they would be wise to remember that while they provide the functionality, it's the user's who provide the value.

Neal Schaffer

Hi Jeff. Actually the competition was with a ning.com platform. But I do believe that there is an unofficial reason as to why this group was disbanded that someday we will hear about...

Jeff LeFevre

Great Article Neal! I don't get the whole competition thing. LinkedIn is a great tool for networking and for them to be concerned with someone promoting Twitter is ridicules. It's like people who block their connects. It's no different than someone who runs their own group. They have a Napoleon complex over their group. Perhaps they're short or their mother never taught them how to play in the sand box!

Categories