LinkedIn Corp., 2008 Case Solution & Answer

The Three Dilemmas

3a) Open Platform or A walled garden

LinkedIn should open-up the platform and allow the sharing of data across different platforms. This will allow users and developers to integrate LinkedIn data and profiles to other websites including other PNS and SNS platforms(Yoffie, Slind, & Achsaf, 2009). This will create an easier flow of data as well.This will be particularly beneficial through partnerships with the corporations by allowing data flow to company’s job portals or pages. Especially, companies having an active job posting on LinkedIn. It will also benefit the users by not having to input their credentials again and again. In a way, this provides an extension to vision of the company by providing a platform for professionals across the board while connecting them directly with employers. LinkedIn can follow the example of Google and try to reduce the barriers and allow an easy flow of data through SNS and PNS sites.

On the downside, LinkedIn need to adopt some procedures to prevent theft of personal data of the users. Any data shared should be at complete consent of the users with a warning screen and confirmation.

3b) Go Social or Stay Exclusively Professional

Professional networking is key differentiating factor of LinkedIn and it has to retain that factor to be able to compete with the big players in both SNS and PNS. It is LinkedIn’s key competitive advantage in the industry to be able to provide networking platform exclusively for the business and professional. Although, it is arguable that some people in their early professional years use SNSs for professional communications as well, but it will not be accepted as a norm in the corporate world. The culture of the organization differ due to internal and external factor for example, casual clothing can be acceptable in a Technology firm like Google while it can never get a positive response in professional services firms. Similarly, social network communication will not be accepted with open arms in corporate world. The two platforms are distinct and have different application in user’s life.

SNSs have seen tremendous growth in last few years. Comparatively, the growth by LinkedIn is lower with lesser average visit time. The third-party application usage data also shows significant difference between LinkedIn and Facebook. The number of users for SNSs would continue to grow at a higher rate compared to LinkedIn. Although, LinkedIn should try to adopt some of the features to attract more traffic like sharing of business and professional articles with the connections.

3c) LinkedIn Growth: Organic Vs Acquisition

LinkedIn should focus on organic growth as it is sustainable in the long-term. Organic growth is slower,but it can help organizations set a pace for themselves. Additionally, it can provide a thorough learning curve for LinkedIn to let it weigh each option carefully. LinkedIn may choose to diversify through acquisition; if at a certain point of time, it feels that it can not grow organically in the current business line.

Inorganic growth or growth by acquisitions provides a rapid growth potential, but it can create integration problem within the organization. Additionally, there can also be cultural difference in organizations which will create problem in governing and managing organization. It can also create conflicts within the organizationand ultimately, negatively affecting the performance of the company(EY, 2014).

Therefore, it is highly recommended for LinkedIn to go for organic growth for the short-term and can analyze the different options further in the future.

4. FACEBOOK = LINKED IN + TWITTER

The statement makes sense in two ways.

a) Facebook provides similar services to that of LinkedIn and Twitter.

As discussed earlier, some of the young professionals are using Facebook for professional communications. Additionally, more and more multi-national companies are making their presence known on social media with regular posts and announcements on the pages. In this context, Facebook is indirectly in competition with LinkedIn being used for professional communication.

Similarly, Twitter is large social networking platform and an established competitor of Facebook in the industry. Twitter, although a largely popular network has limited functionality and features.

Facebook in a big picture (excluding some features) provide similar services to that of LinkedIn and Twitter.

b) LinkedIn & Twitter combined can counter Facebook

The same statement can also mean that LinkedIn and Twitter, together, can counter Facebook in long-run. This is in a way gives an opposite view on the discussion above. Facebook have risen to be a strong networking site with a growing customer base, if LinkedIn & Twitter want to counter it, they have to work together. This may also indicate a merger of a sort, an acquisition or a mutual agreement to counter the threat posed by the Facebook.

This statement may not be considered realistic, because, it is based on the assumption that services provided by Facebook are similar to those of LinkedIn and Twitter combined. Facebook has mostly been a social networking site with some business networking presence. On the other hand, LinkedIn is a completely professional networking serviceprovider. Twitter is a social network service with different emphasis and strategy than that of Facebook. Neither, Facebook can counter the level of professional services provided by LinkedIn, nor, Twitter can provide the same services as that of Facebook.LinkedIn has a focus on niche market compared to that of Facebook.

Even if both LinkedIn and Twitter merge and establish a new platform to counter Facebook. It will take a long-time for them to be able to counter the growth of Facebook. It can be concluded that the statement is most likely not true and based on multiple assumptions………..

This is just a sample partial work. Please place the order on the website to get your own originally done case solution