Perhaps my favorite business relationship-building question – the one I refer to as “The One Key Question That Will Set You Apart from Everyone Else” – is, “How can I know if someone I’m speaking with would be a good prospect for you?”

This not only causes you to focus on how to add value to this person and the new relationship . . . it also communicates the fact that you are focused on adding value to this person and the relationship.

People who ask this question see magical things happen and new worlds (and potential prospects and referral sources) open up before their eyes.

However, one of my newsletter subscribers, Scott, asks: “What do you do when you know in advance that you really cannot give someone a referral. I’m in a BNI (The World’s Largest Referral Exchange Organization) group and there are people in certain businesses within my group who I am committed to referring to. Do I not offer to refer this new person business, or is there another way to handle the situation?”

Excellent question, Scott. The same would also hold true with any niche market you’re working where you are the supplier to many people in that field and certainly it would not be realistic to think you could refer to all of them. And, of course, it would be unethical to suggest you would when you know you wouldn’t.

The solution is simply to keep in mind that the main goal is to constantly and consistently “add value” to their lives and businesses. There are many ways you can do this besides direct referrals.

For example, information that would help them in business that you see from an article (either in traditional media or online), recommending books on general sales/businesses or something relating specifically to their industry, sending small booklets that are inexpensive but will have high impact. You can add value through a touch campaign such as do many of my clients and friends at SendOutCards.

Also, the more you can find out about them personally via the F-O-R-M method; knowing about their FAMILY, OCCUPATION, RECREATION and MESSAGE (things that are important to them such as a charity they work with), the more ways of adding value to them become available.

You can also introduce them to people and resources that may be of value yet are not direct referrals.

So, there are many ways to do this, limited only by your imagination. The key question to ask yourself is, “In what way can I add value to this person’s life and business?”

I notice more and more of my friends such as Randy Gage, Art Jonak, Robert Ringer, Paul Jacob and others investing a lot more of their writing space on the topic of Capitalism vs. Socialism. I’m glad they are because the differences between the two are the differences between prosperity and misery both for individuals and for the masses.

Since we’ve never in our world history had a truly capitalistic society, for our purposes here, we’ll refer to mainly-Capitalist societies as “Capitalist” and those that are not as “Socialist.”

(Explanation of above: the U.S. at one time came ‘relatively’ close to pure Capitalism (of course, the monstrous, immoral and horrendous institution of Slavery ruled it out and then the later creation of nationalized banking and government control of the money supply), as have some other countries — regrettably, we now operate in an economic system known as a “mixed economy — part Capitalist and part Socialist, which has a natural tendency to lean towards Socialism. And, this is regardless of the party in power.)

To the degree that Capitalist societies have allowed Capitalism to thrive, that is the degree to which their country and citizens have prospered. To the degree they have not, they have experienced the opposite.

Over the past 50 years the world has seen former socialistic countries turn on the spigot of Capitalism and move from rancid purveyors of poverty to become economic powers (just a few examples; think: “The Hong Kong Miracle”, South Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Ireland, Estonia, etc).

Unfortunately, the term “Capitalism” is — in my opinion — one of the very most misunderstood terms in the English Language.

In watching the television pundits, reading the many articles and in listening to and participating in conversations on this topic wherever I might be, it’s very noticeable that the problem with the misunderstanding is right within the premise. This is where just about 100 percent of all misunderstandings occur.

“Even the most logical argument — if based on a false premise — can never lead to a correct conclusion.”

In order to intelligently discuss Capitalism and Socialism, we must know what they actually are; what the terms mean. Believe it or not, most people don’t. They have an … “idea” as to what they both are, but don’t really know.

This is SO dangerous that it has caused our country (the U.S.) to sink into a socialistic abyss.

Two problems I see with this:

Many Americans are not even aware we are have drifted into Socialism (since they can’t define either Socialism or Capitalism). And, if one is not aware of a problem, one is powerless to fight it.

Many Americans do not understand the extreme danger of such an economic system. (Typical question: “But, doesn’t Socialism help the poor?” Correct answer: No, not at all. Not one single bit. More on this in future postings.)

If you ask most people the cause of our current economic meltdown, they will cite “a failure of Capitalism.” I’ve also actually heard terms including runaway “‘de-regulation’ of the banking industry.”

In actuality, this crises had nothing to do with Capitalism or de-regulation of any industry, least of all banking, which is actually one of the most regulated industries there are.

First, for the problem to have been a failure of Capitalism, we would have to actually have Capitalism. We don’t; we have a mixed economy with so many rules and regulations that thwart Capitalism and the good that it does, it is sickening to those who understand it.

And, the irony of people blaming de-regulation of banking (the fact that it is hugely regulated and was protected from its own ineptness from the get-go) is so ironic it should be self-evident.

The fact that it’s not self-evident is downright scary.

If you are interested in how this meltdown occurred — and I truly hope you are — I’m going to ask you to click here and read two articles. The first is by Sharon Harris; the second is by Steven Horwitz. Though I believe Mr. Horwitz’ article title is titled incorrectly, the article itself is brilliant.

After reading the short article by Ms. Harris, there will be a link to the article by Mr. Horwitz, should you choose to read that, as well.

What about the definitions of both Capitalism and Socialism that I referred to earlier?

In Part 2, we’ll look at the definitions of those two terms, as well as the intent and, more importantly, the results of both. These definitions will provide the premise from which we can logically and intelligently discuss the two types of economic systems.

A subscriber wrote to ask what to do during an upcoming formal event where a bunch of attendees would go from person to person for an orchestrated five-minute exchange of networking (italics on purpose). In other words, as he put it, “we’ll each have five minutes to pitch ourselves and our products/services. So, how do I get that person’s business?”

After suggesting that he forever lose the word, “pitch” from his vocabulary (unless in the vernacular of a baseball game), my response was to treat his five-minute conversations as he would any other five-minute conversation at any other event; focus on the other person. Ask the Feel-Good Questions he learned in Endless Referrals and, of course, The One Key Question.

“But” he continued, “how will that result in their doing business with me or referring me to others?”

I explained that they don’t do business with him and refer him to others after you meeting them for the first time during longer events; why should this event be any different? “Get their business card and begin the same five-step follow-up process you learned in the book. Effectively add value to their lives and, over the short-term and/or long-term, you’ll do business with them (if they need/want your services) and/or receive referrals from them.”

He then understood. What had “thrown him off” was a new type of environment. But, as he discovered, the premise is still the same; “All things being equal, people will do business with, and refer business to, those people they know, like and trust.” That can begin during a five-minute chat, but the success is in the “relationship-cultivating” follow-up.

So . . . regardless of the situation; regardless of the time; regardless of the particular event, genuinely focus on the other person and how you can in some way add value (or, as Wallace Wattles used to say, “add increase”) to their life.