“Value” is a word that gets tossed about quite liberally in the business world, attached to anything that has any sort of perceived worth. Things are billed as “bringing value” or “adding value” or “providing value”.

The trouble is, value is in the eye of the beholder.

I’ve especially heard it a great deal in relation to blogs and Twitter lately, and most often in defense of someone pushing content on other people.

I need to know someone – either personally or at the least professionally – before I can really determine what’s of value to them. Assuming that they live in my world and view value through the same lens that I do is presumptuous at best, and downright pushy and rude at worst.

Push Me, Pull You

One of the revolutions (?) that’s part of socially-forward communication is the shift from push communication to pull communication. We touched it on the surface with the idea of the opt in email. But today, it’s more opt in everything. There are blogs and sites and Twitter and RSS and and and and….

You can select the content that *you* perceive is valuable, and you chose to consume it at your pace. Even in the Twitter stream, people are tossing out links all the time, but you can select what you wish to see, and what you allow to pass by. You can subscribe to one blog or a hundred. You dictate what you see and devote your attention to.

But push content is different. By sending someone an email they didn’t ask for, or DMing them a link to your e-book or website is assuming a connection with your content that you don’t even know exists. It’s arrogant to think that just because *you* find something valuable someone else will. Isn’t it? Am I splitting hairs? For example, if I follow you back on Twitter, am I implicitly inviting you to hawk your wares? Or is it more akin to an introductory handshake or a phone call?

Globally Speaking

I spent several years successfully doing business development and fundraising. And one of the single most important lessons I learned is that you have to be prepared to customize a pitch on the fly. Why? Because unless you’ve had extensive conversation with your prospect in advance of an initial meeting, you are making assumptions about what’s valuable to them based on best guesses. And you might be wrong.

So you have to learn to amend that articulation of value and customize it each time. You learn first. Ask questions. Listen a lot. Then, and only then, do you presume to present a solution  – or “added value” – to that person. The hope is that, at that juncture, you’ve learned enough about them to present that solution in their frame of reference. And the further hope is that you’ve earned enough trust that the person you’re speaking with will be open to your suggestion of what might be valuable to them.

My Question to You

Are you open to someone saying “I find this valuable, and you might too?”  At what point have you established enough trust in the relationship to be open to such a suggestion? Where do you cross from “pitch” territory to “share” territory, and what’s the difference?

Most importantly of all, how do you translate this into how you’ll build and execute your projects? Are you constructing value in the eyes of those on the receiving end, or through your own looking glass?

I think I have my answer, but I’m keen to hear yours. Won’t you share?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]