Since we’re doing the initiating of the partnership, we get to choose who to approach. Since it’s our choice, I think it only makes sense that we reach above where we are and seek out partners that not only have the quality we have but also have the exposure, client and sales base, and the reputation we want to have for ourselves. In this type of partnership, our partner’s image and reputation rubs off on us a bit giving us the chance to enhance our image and reputation via the company we keep.

This means selling the partnership idea is more difficult–but the potential rewards are far greater than if we took the easy way and partnered with someone on our level. If we’re going to invest the time and effort, why not make it really worth it?

It also means that we’re going to have to prove ourselves and the partnership to our new partners. Consequently, we can’t expect to see results until our partners have seen results.
But if we pick our partners well and prove to them the partnership can and will produce for them, our association with them can: 1) enhance our image and reputation in our market, 2) open doors we might never have been able to open, and 3) bring in lots of new business. To me, those are three goals worth pursuing and you can’t reach them through a referral exchange organization.

What’s your view in terms of the “due diligence” you need to do on your referral partners? Many referral organisations encourage (mandate in many cases) their members to cross refer each other even if the other member isn’t necessarily the best at what they do. You seem to be indicating a much more through approach where you make sure the partner has the same level of quality as you do.

Ian