Archives for 7/15/2004–creative new business model

I think Jigsaw : The Business Contact Exchange has a very creative business model. I learned about them from a conversation I had with Vanessa DiMauro of CXO Systems. Many people will be offended by the idea that Robert gets benefit by selling Simon’s contacts…but fortunately, the Jigsaw system is anonymous. Jigsaw has potential to be quite successful, if they do not get sued into submission.

From their site:

Jigsaw is a Business Contact Exchange. Members exchange contact data they have for contact data they need.

Jigsaw is a collaborative system. Each member provides a few pieces of the puzzle. Jigsaw assembles them for the benefit of the community.

Quality contacts. Members are given strong incentives to add quality contacts and help keep them current. All contacts in Jigsaw have complete contact information

Mission:Jigsaw’s mission is to map every business organization on the planet, contact by contact, and keep them current through a collaborative effort. The resulting database will help business people perform their jobs more strategically and efficiently.

Value Proposition:For every contact a member adds, s/he gets two in return.

How does Jigsaw work?Members join Jigsaw in order to get contacts. Contacts are obtained with points.
Points are obtained by adding contacts, correcting contacts and referring other members.

Members choose which of their contacts go into Jigsaw. Members usually exchange contacts of lesser value for those of much higher value. All contacts are added anonymously.

Every contact in Jigsaw requires five points regardless of title or position.

Adding a contact earns ten points – provided other members don’t challenge the entry. Challenged contacts result in a ten point penalty. (Jigsaw is a self-correcting system).

Referrals drive Jigsaw’s growth. Members get 150 points for each referral (25 contacts).

Jigsaw is NOT:

A data aggregator (like Hoovers). Jigsaw leverages the collective knowledge of its members to provide great contacts at all levels of an organization.

Contact Management (like Plaxo). Jigsaw is for finding contacts you don’t have.

Social Networking (like Linked-In or Spoke). Jigsaw is about contact information, not relationships. Use Jigsaw when you need to find specific contacts at a given company and want to contact them directly.

Business Model:
Jigsaw is currently free, but will charge a flat $25 monthly fee upon formal launch. The low cost and the very high quality of contacts will help Jigsaw to quickly grow into a global community and create an unprecedented map of the business world.

An urban legend: face-to-face communication is the best vehicle for communication

Many people believe that the lack of non-verbal cues makes online communication inherently inferior to face-to-face communication. Albert Mehrabian, a UCLA professor, completed research in 1967 showing the significance of non-verbal cues in communications. He concluded, in part, “The combined effect of simultaneous verbal, vocal and facial attitude communications is a weighted sum of their independent effects — with the coefficients of .07, .38, and .55, respectively.” (Albert Mehrabian and Susan R. Ferris, “Inference of attitudes from nonverbal communication in two channels.” Journal of Consulting Psychology 31 (1967): 248-252. ) Out of context, this implies that in face-to-face conversation, 38% of communication is inflection and tone of voice, 55% is facial expression, and only 7% is based on what you actually say.

This statistic has grown into a very widely quoted and oft-misunderstood urban legend. Many communication skills teachers and image consultants misuse this data to indicate that your intonation, speaking style, body language, and other non-verbal methods of communication overpower your actual words. As a result, many people are concerned that online communication is much more difficult because body language, tone of voice, and facial expressions cannot today be effectively conveyed over the internet.

Not true. Mehrabian’s study only addressed the very narrow situation in which a listener is analyzing a speaker’s general attitude towards that listener (positive, negative, or neutral). Also, in his experiments the parties had no prior acquaintance; they had no context for their discussion. As Mehrabian himself has said explicitly, these statistics are not relevant except in the very narrow confines of a similar situation.

The conventional wisdom that face-to-face interactions allows more trust-building also makes us more vulnerable to false appearances. We may be easily duped by a nice suit, a firm handshake, and direct eye contact.

Pablo met Jonathan at a business networking event for Princeton alumni. Tall, handsome, and well-dressed, Jonathan looked like the very picture of a respectable businessperson. Pablo was favorably impressed.

When Pablo came home, he did a quick web search on Jonathan. The very first result that he turned up was an Administrative Proceeding by the Securities and Exchange Commission against Jonathan for violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In his future interactions with Jonathan, Pablo was careful to keep the information he learned in mind.

In online dating, people are frequently concerned about misrepresentation, because almost everyone in online dating sites is using a pseudonym. However, when building business relationships online, most people use their real name and real company. As a result, it is much easier to double-check the background of someone you meet.

If you suspect someone of misrepresentation, just check alternative sources of information. For example, try calling their corporate switchboard and reviewing their corporate website. A more subtle method is to check their domain name registration. Let us say you are investigating a startup company, like Go to and type in “”. You can see who owns that domain name. The address and phone number there are an alternative way of verifying that a business really exists, and where that business is really located.

Before doing business with any individual over the internet, we recommend doing an extensive search on both their name and their business name on an internet search engine, as well as running a literature search on them (e.g., with Lexis/Nexis). If the list of search results is too large to review them all, be sure not to just start on the first page of results and work your way forward—start at the back and check some random pages in the middle. This is where you are more likely to find any less-than-favorable information. F—— is probably the most useful website for finding negative information. (The F—– stands for a common vulgarity.) Ed. note: F’dCompany is a highly biased source and not always reliable source of information. But if you’re looking for dirt, that’s one place to find it. Take what you read there with a grain of salt, though.

The internet puts information about people at your fingertips before and during your interaction with them. The public information about them can give you even more useful insight into their motives than non-verbal cues, such as facial expression and tone of voice.