Some people just "get" the web. I don't know how to explain this phenomenon effectively or convey a reasonable set of criteria upon which a person could be judged, but there's no doubt about it. I think back to the first time I heard Greg Boser or Jessie Stricchiola speak at a conference, the first few blog posts I read at MindValleyLabs, the SEOmoz comments I read from Shor, the first time I talked in-depth about the business of being online with my friend (and now colleague) Nick Gerner, and the first time I met Kelly Smith from Curious Office. Every experience had that same "click" in my head that went something like, "Hey this person's pretty smart, they really seem to know their.... Oh My God.... They actually get 'it.'"
I spoke with a fellow Seattle startup CEO about this subject just the other day, and he noted that he tries to spend 75% of his time or more coaching his best people, his "it getters," because this produces the highest ROI for the company in the long run. I've heard similar advice from a lot of management coaching books and articles - invest in the best people you can get and they'll drive the business to do incredible work.
From my experience, it seems that the "it getter" scale looks something like this:
In great organizations, it seems to me that there's at least one, and on rare occasion two or three true "it-getters." At amazing companies, during amazing times (like Google over the last 10 years or Microsoft in the '80's and '90's), I'd posit that there might actually be more. Companies filled with "it-getters" are magnets for other "it-getters."
The problem is, companies get big, add staff and eventually, the hiring gets a bit sloppy. Thus, you can accidentally add lots of "doesn't get it" and "causes others to lose it" to your organization, sucking away the ability of others to produce more amazing times.
I'd say this all seems pretty basic and intuitive to most entrepreneurs and even most people who are aware of their work environments. Unless you're on the bottom rungs of my scale, you can probably ID most everyone on this scale fairly accurately. Except... Some people get "it" when it comes to certain topics, but not others. I'll use myself as an example. I think that generally, I get "it" when "it" is SEO. But I don't get PPC, I don't get landing page optimization, I don't get personas or display advertising. I might not even get management - I'm probably in the "sorta" or "mostly" gets it barrel there.
So let me propose a short and extremely simple set of recommendations for anyone running a company, starting a company, managing a team, or planning their professional life:
- Discover what "it" is that you get
- Apply yourself ruthlessly to "it"
- Become competent at identifying "it" getters in your areas of weakness
- Surround yourself with them
I'd venture to guess that this "simple" process is something very few organizations of any kind and very few people ever get right.
Close your eyes and think of the best meal you've ever had - the one where every piece of every dish sung with flavor and texture. It was probably prepared by an "it" getter. Now consider all the devices you use in your life - your chair, your phone, your laptop, your TV, a set of headphones, a car. That very best one - the one where everything works intuitively and harmoniously to make using it so simple and pleasurable that you recoil at the thought of any substitute - designed by "it" getters.
I'm not saying that competent people can't do good work. I just have this nagging feeling that when the stars align and every piece comes together just right, it's because the people behind it are doing something they "get."
Sorry for getting off the SEO track this week - I'll redirect my writing back to those topics soon :)
Just speaking as an educator, it's very clear that throughout our lives, we have many opportunities to "get it" and whether or not that happens depends on lots of factors.
When you watch a child learn to read, for example, there's a point at which you can almost see the light bulb turn on over their heads - they finally "get it"; everything clicks, and fluent reading begins.
While almost all of us are naturally gifted in one area or another, the true challenge is how we do in areas where we're not naturally gifted. That's where the hard work comes in, but if we're willing to work, I think we can become the "getters" even if we weren't born with that specific innate ability.
One of the biggest mistakes I made growing up was thinking that if I didn't "get" something right away, it would never happen. Since so many things came easily to me, I assumed if they didn't it just wasn't meant for me.
Thank goodness I persisted in embracing the internet, computers, and technology, even though not one single thing about any of those topics comes naturally to me. Perhaps I have clawed my way into the "getters" category, but it was through hard work, not natural ability.
Scientists have long known that young children's brains are elastic - able to rapidly change and grow based on experiences. For centuries the conventional wisdom has been that adult brains were set in stone - not much change could take place. Now we know that's not true; adults are creating new neurological connections all the time.
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: if you think you can't "get" something, you probably won't. Not because you're incapable of it, but because you've psyched yourself out before you even began.
Are there people who learn more quickly than others? Absolutely. Are people generally more gifted in some areas and less in others? Absolutely. Is anyone beyond learning more about a given topic, if someone else is willing to patiently and clearly explain it? Nope.
A true leader has the ability to turn the "causes others to lose it" into "getters". That's what teachers are trying to do all the time with students. It can be done.
For some people, understanding the web comes naturally, almost instinctively. For others, lots of hard work and study enable greater understanding. And others never really try to understand it (or never come across anyone who explains it in a way they understand). But very few people are incapable of "getting it".
Lorisa,
I asked a friend of mine.. and his daughter..
"when did you stop asking questions?"
he said, never.. (and he's right)
his daughter said.. when she didn't get somehting in a classroom and the teacher started avoiding her when she rasied her hands..
the style/or method of education is everything.. (well, except superior parenting)
delete.. dbl post?
sowwy
Lorisa - I love the application of the term "fluency" to this discussion, because I think that's what we're getting at--the point at which you've mastered something to the point of unconsciousness application of what you know.
For some people, in some subjects, that fluency is immediate, for others, it grows slowly, and some have a "moment" after struggling where it just clicks or pops into place for them. Some people probably lack the perseverance to stick it out to fluency in some subjects.
Thumbed! :)
Outstanding comment Lorisa. I wish you had been My Teacher.
I've found that if I apply myself long and hard enough eventually I "get" just about whatever I set my mind to - still working on quantum entanglement, but it'll come.
For me the key is being interested, and sticking to it.
Yes, absolutely, Dave. I was thinking about this concert pianist I heard play a few weeks ago. He was brilliant. Clearly, he "gets" the piano.
But if I told him that, he'd probably laugh ruefully, thinking of hundreds of thousands of hours spent practicing to achieve his level of mastery. Hard work is almost always a huge part of "getting it".
lorisa, i agree that one can be taught to "get it" in some areas. but as i read this post and the comments i can't help but think that nobody completely "gets seo". if "getting it" means being fluent i don't think that's possible. merriam-webster defines fluent as:
how is it possible to master seo when it is such an ever changing industry? i feel you need to learn and grow everyday.
"getting" reading or piano would be much easier to achieve since the concepts do not really change.
Kimber, I would say a couple of things. First of all, I don't know that I would equate "getting it" and "fluency" as being the same thing. I used the word "fluency" specifically in regards to reading, as a technical term, and while it's certainly a part of "getting it", I don't think they're identical.
Secondly, I think it's possible to "get" something and still have more to learn. All that means is when additional information presents itself, you'll be much quicker to assimilate it into what you already know than someone who doesn't "get" a topic very well. (Indeed, they may not be able to process new information about the topic at all).
Just like a concert pianist will always have new songs to learn (and possibly, new techniques and ways of musical expression), someone who "gets" SEO can still be learning and updating their knowledge.
I'm not sure that one in a million people get "it" especially if we are micro focusing on those who get the web. That means that if you have a company of a million people, only 1 gets it.
I work in a company of 250, and there are a couple of people that I feel actuallly "gets it".
However, if by "gets it" you mean "gets the web like Michael Jordan gets basketball", then you might be right. But if you mean "gets it" like they have a natural understanding of how it all works and how to apply it and always just understand things in their wheelhouse without having to explain it a million times over, then there are more out there than you probably think IMO.
People who "get it" are all over the place. I see a lot of potential in a lot of people. Some might apply it differently, but there are a lot of people out there with that talent IMO. Shoemoney "gets" making money online. Rand, you "get" social and technical SEO. The former COO of my company "gets" business. My nephew "gets" video games. One of my bloggers "gets" how to be happy in life.
They each have a natural inclination to know what they are interested in. And they can all apply it. My focus is to find what is a person's "it" and help them apply it to align with my personal or business goals so everybdoy grows together. That part, I get.
"micheal jordan gets basketball"
excellent descriptive term...
yeah. That made me smile too!
unless he is playing for the wizards...
LMFAO!!!! he still got it.. the IT dept, (the rest of the team) jacked him up though
I would think that Rand's chart is more representative of the ratio of people who get "IT" to people who don't, in a general population.
I seriously doubt that his intention was to imply that only one out of all of the SEOmoz readers gets SEO, however, you could probably make a good case for SEOmoz readers representing the upper end of that scale in the general population.
Love the highly scientific stats :) I wonder if the IT is an ever-changing target as the web changes. I know some people who used to get IT are now less of an authority.
"It" is an ever changing target as the world changes - politics, business, communications, transportation, resources, populations, et al.
"It" is the web at the moment. And "it" inside the web are the pieces Rand mentioned - SEO, PPC, etc. One can even 'Get It' for a small subset of one of those subsets, ie: >Web >Internet Marketing >SEO >Social Media
So there's hope for me yet :) hehe
Huh? I don't get it...
No the true joke is
Get what? :-)
Example in my personal career:
1. Bloggers - I so don't get them but I've chose to surround myself with them more often via a person that does totally get them (Dan Honigman).
2. Social Media - I get it but don't have time for it to be highly impactful. I thus develop a strong relationship with the Social Media interns at Tribune in order to create a larger community (plus there is the whole @ColonelTribune aspect which I won't get into). I also reach out to people with large networks that are passionate about Twitter, Digg, blogging, SEO community, etc. and they ping me when I should jump into a conversation or community for a while. They are like a filter so I have enough time to manage.
3. PPC - I get it. But I hate it. Just not my thing. Way too mundane for me. So, I help out when I am needed and partner with people in organizations or the community that have a greater passion for it.
4. SEO - Get it, love it, share it! I evangelize SEO while riding the bus, train, plane, and of course everyone I touch internally. I wear my passion for SEO on my sleeve and make no excuses for it. It's a part of who I am as an individual. Others around me that want to learn more gravitate toward me and I feed off their strengths (example, Daniel). If only I had more time . . . ;-)
One note . . . if you're an in-house SEO, find the people that immediately 'get SEO' and set them up as your advance team. Then get them passionate. You can do a lot more with a bunch of SEO Generals marching with you than you can trying to do it alone. The trick is keeping the lead so they don't all of a sudden start going rogue on you. ;-)
Brent D. Payne
Of course, the real question that this begs asking, is can you turn the people who aren't "It Getters" into them? Is it something that you can teach?
And how do you ask someone, when hiring them...
"Look, now I've got one final question. Do you "Get It"?"
...without it sounding like you want to know if they have enough sex?
In my opinion: No. If I got what Rand meant by “getting it” then I would put it something like this,
“By doing hard work and practice one can become a professional but not an artist.”
But then if we could take from level of “Mostly Gets It” to “Nearly Gets It”, it would be huge productivity gain.
its the old digital native versus digital immigrant argument at work - it is possible to train people - but they've got to have the smarts to get their own wheels turning, otherwise they'll just repeat from what you've said without any inspiration or imagination..
There are no dumb questions in my opinion as each one is one step up the knowledge ladder. Just try to understand the answers as best you can!
I agree that you can't just teach someone how to "Get It". As far as I can tell, people tend to "Get It" in very specialized areas when they are presented with a chance. Part of managing a good (read diverse) team is to identify who gets what and get them working on it.
If you read back on Rands 2006 SEO pay scale post, towards the end he mentions that he focuses his hiring on people he believes have potential more than a long track record. We have all seen people, who are ready to get it if you make it available to them.
Just read an article in Time magazine from way back in 2005 and instantly thought of this SEMOZ article. Enjoy. :)
Steve Jobs on what happened after the iMac launched: "The people around here--some of them left," he remembers. "Actually, some of them I got rid of. But most of them said, 'Oh, my God, now I get it.' We've been doing this now for seven years, and everybody here gets it. And if they don't, they're gone."
good post and chart.
the thing is that the ones who do "get it" are not always good at explaining "it" or teaching "it" to the other ones, since they just know "it" !
Good point. The ability to teach others and manage others is not a common trait of the guys who generally get "it"
This is a problem I've seen before. We combatted this in my org by empowering the 'it getters' with continuing education and allowed them latitude to share their information in different media. They didn't start out as the best educators or mentors, but they ended up that way. It obviously gets quite a bit more challenging as the org gets bigger though.
I love the chart. I think you are right about how if you just focused on the one thing of hiring brilliant people and getting out of their way, you'd be a long way towards success. I think it was Jeff Bezos from Amazon who said something about how his job changed from "how do we do that" to "what shall we do" to "who should we hire to work out what we should do".
*musing* I dont get it most of the time - most of the time I "feel" my way around the net. To be honest when I moved to the UK from Kenya - I had never used a computer except to play games (Amstrad - you had to load the game from an audio cassette). Mys first two years I spent paying people to wordprocess my hand written asignments...
Now I feel I am seeing a light of the tunnel... albeit I have long to travel :P *end_musing*
So, based on your scale and the fact that SEOmoz has about 30,000 readers, from your perspective, only 1 of them gets it (congratulations Shor) - and I guess you're lucky to have that, since the odds are 1:1,000,000.
That's a smack in the face of your very active and very intelligent community, many of whom very much - get it.
BTW - I "get" the premise of what you're saying. I just think it comes off very poorly (i.e. elitist), with your chart and examples.
haha, your mathematics makes me sad :) Speaking about SEOmoz community, I am almost sure there are more "it getters" than anywhere else ;)
In "Days of Thunder" Robert Duvall's character said "He thought he knew about cars, which made him twice as ignorant..." Maybe we're mostly like that guy ;)
Think you know about SEO?
I think you're looking at the wrong population. The fact that someone is reading Seomoz puts them way ahead of most other people in the average organization.
Aw, I don't think Rand meant to single out Shor vs. the rest of the community--he probably wasn't thinking of it like that. I think it was unrelated to the SEOmoz community.
BTW, all this "it" talk reminds me of Faith No More's song "Epic": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsETamxkT9E
WHAT! IS! IT!
Sean - seriously. Lighten up.
Rand,
THE most kickass thing is when a client "gets it".
unforntunately the client was using DNN.. but...
the CEO "gets it" so instead of the IT guys (info tech version of "IT"), he calls me up and i walk him through the changes i want to DNN for SEO ....
i was skipping down the hall at the office.. the client "getting it" made my day...
which made SEO work!
now.. when the client or client's IT dept. doesn't "get it" then SEO doesn't work...
(and you thought this had nothing to do with SEO)
Paisleyseo, Lots of IT departments and web designers don't get "it" (SEO in this case) - which keeps us in work. ;)
or out of work, when the CEO ask for results and the only answer is... umm.. "the IT department still hasn't made the updates.."
or they blew away all the seo modifications, or they remove the stats code and you lose a weeks worth of tracking, etc..
i could go on and on and on and on
Awesome post.
Instead of thinking about this as 'elitist', a better way to approach it would be to figure out what everybody's It is and then find out how to implement it in a way that benefits everybody on the team.
Rand, I love that you are so upfront about knowing nothing about PPC. I "get" PPC, landing page optimization, etc. But some of SEO just throws me, it's my weak point of the two. But that's why I'm here learning all the time.
Great point.
kate.. lmao.. we shall trade info.. maybe i should outsource PPC to you.. seo.. well u know.. that I know.. PPC.. only thing i know is after you get top 3 placement organically, move ppc ad to #2 or #3 on the right to enchance "voice" or branding without getting clicks..
ok.. weird... triplepost.. must reboot
#3
An interesting post Rand and one that, I think, probably needs more thought on my part to properly comment. Still, that's never stopped me in the past, so here goes..
When I think of 'it' in relation to the web I generally think of people who understand/can comprehend that the web has changed huge parts of the way that people (at least in the developed world) work & play, and that those changes are far from finished. I wouldn't necessarily apply 'it' to something like SEO. WHy not?
Well, I think that I 'get' SEO: I understand how important it is that sites can be found, the necessity to be available to those using the 21st Century browser/homepage (Google) and of what is needed for that to happen. Could I code you up anything that you would need to do this? Not at all - I'm a marketer who happens to work in digital. Does this mean that I don't get it? I hope not.
I think that your ratios are more realistic when you apply them to those people who instinctively understand how the web is changing the world: I realise that this is what you do in your opening paragraph, but I think that you lose this when you start talking about SEO etc..) SEO, PPC etc.. are 'just' skill-sets. But, as with those skill-sets, 'it' can be taught.
And no, I wouldn't put myself in that 1 in a million bracket. Maybe the 1 in 20 :)
PS - Apologies if this is a bit disjointed: last night the only thing I 'got' was beer.
Similarly applicable to business in general..."The 80-20 rule, states that, for many events, 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes. It is a common rule of thumb in business; e.g., "80% of your sales comes from 20% of your clients."
Just as an FYI, that's called the Pareto Principle :)
Amen, Rand. I know more than a few people in my life that fall pretty low on your "getting it" spectrum. Often, for some topics, it feels like I'm the only one who does get it. Of course, I suppose that's why they hired me; because I'm an expert in certain things that they know little or nothing about, but need.
Out of curiosity, do you have any advice for how to convince the people in the "Doesn't Get It" or "Causes Others to Lose It" categories that they, in fact, don't get it when they think they do, and to get with the program? That would be incredibly helpful.
What a great post. I have ben working in a large company for a while now.
The problem is that the dont get it - causes others to lose it are generally at the top calling the shots in larger companies.
What you also find is in companies where ideas are thin on the ground, the don't get its will look or a get it to ride on the back of pretending to get it and reducing the effectiveness of any person that gets it or even semi gets it (of which I would class myself somewhere around the mostly gets it)
The next step is that the it getters leave and the perpetual demise of the big company continues.
I suppose this is probably about management theory and could be said about any dicipline - but its very interesting nevertheless
Too true. Incompetence thrives in bureaucracy.
I guess the solution is to divide infrastructure into semi-autonomous teams. But then that gets unweildy and everyone suffers from lack of communication. And so on and so forth.
Another brilliant non-SEO post! Keep them coming.
I could relate to this one because I recently said to my boss that major innovation ceases once a company gets larger than some small number of founders.
Google comes to mind as a company that will be hard pressed to invent something bigger and better than its current twin model of Search and AdWords. Large companies often create bureaucracies that slow down innovation and ultimately drive their "get itters" to smaller companies where they can make a difference. Was this the case with the Cuil founders?
I completely agree with this, and i've seen this in effect - however:
"causes others to lose it" - this category is actually worse than you've stated as butting heads with these people (especially if they're in senior or influential roles or decision makers) will actually cause the "gets it" crowd to migrate elsewhere...
And when you get a team together of people who nearly, mostly or really get it then you can see the sparks fly.
I get that for some "it" is simply whatever is "it" for their org.
However, from your time spent here on your posts, author and commenter, what value have you created?
Most concise post wins :)
Thanks in advance
-Sroberts
Recruitments...how does one handle deceptive candidates - ones who look like complete Mr/Ms Awesome at the time of the inteivew and idiots after they take their job. Or Mr/Ms Aweosome who are awesome but dont know where to go and hence look like complete idiots(real future assets)...
There was a post the other day about recruiting and hiring in the seo realm. Might be pretty helpful. Key point is to identify quite clearly exactly the things you're looking for both in the job description and prospective candidate. Once you've got that narrowed down pretty clearly the deceptive ones should rise to the surface. Enabling the ones in the interview that don't know where they're going comes down to being able to recognize the traits that will make someone successful in the position rather just skills. You can teach many skills, but natural aptitude is a different thing.
Agree to you. Avoid going with your gutt feeling. Test & test the candidate in different conditions in the interview and his probation period...
When you do 'it' make sure your passionate about 'it'. :)
Cuil it down man.
Cuil. Doesn't "get it".
I dont 'get' SEO, PPC or any other online marketing, but I'm trying to. I 'get' backend programming, the importance of front end, customer focus and UI. I'm going for the whole set though. :)
I get it.
SEO is a tricky industry to "get it" when much of what we do is based on guesswork as to what makes Google tick that month. When I first started in SEO i met people who I thought "wow - you are an SEO genius" but now realise they just knew more than me at the time and were average at best. So, who decides if someone gets it?
I am off to find something really unusual (but simple) so I can be the only person to really get it.
Rand,
Your analysis is very interesting to me. One thing I've noticed is the younger crowd, the up and coming generation (my age group) has a much higher getting "it" ratio than the older crowd.
You couldn't be any more right with your analysis of the "it" getters and what they provide for an organization. I've been developing our marketing team in a very similar fashion.
If you're short on "it" getters, look to the youth!
Rand,
One of your best posts!
I am running into this a lot at my day job these days. People don't really "get" what we "DO". Our sales people must either talk to people that I don't get to work with to sell the product, or they're just really, REALLY good. Because there are so many times that the first step of installing our product is to clear up all their misconceptions, and teach a small "class" on network/computer security and monitoring to the customers.
In addition, we are having an aweful time finding people (employees) that get "it". And it makes their jobs very hard as they struggle to create reports or alerts or whatever for the customer, but they don't really understand what they're doing. They're just going through the motions.
To your point about the people that "Cause others to lose it" - having a 1:20 ratio probably isn't right. It's probably a much more complex equation. Why? Because (This is a TOTAL generalization, obviously there are exceptions to this rule!!!!) as people get closer to retirement they seem to get it less because of lack of interest, and lack of knowledge maintenance. They don't get the opportunities to re-train, or take classes, or whatever. So if you have a field that is say, less than 10 years old.. This number could be quite higher. Also, bad moods are contagious. It's always easier to bash a product than to say "Hey this thing works pretty well, given the complicated nature of this business!" and what happens it that little bugs start to become a big deal in everyone mind. This spreads ill will towards the product and stuff like that.
Anyways, that's just my rant because I'm experiencing this first hand at the moment in work. When it comes to SEO - I'm not really sure. I'm probably in the "Mostly gets it" category. But I say that not because of the SEO itself, but as far as putting the rubber to the road (I don't make a lot of money from the web).
One of your best posts! Cheers!
~Nick
A really great success mantra. But I think most difficult part of this isApply yourself ruthlessly to "it" But sometimes I really feel that knowing what “is” that you get is really a curse. I say this because sometimes the difference between who you really are and what you want to become is so great, that living life becomes an ordeal in itself.
it takes a lot of self awareness to apply your recommended 4 step philosophy but when done right it is almost hard for a company to fail
Perhaps a new form of "psychic apparatus"? The "it", "ego" and "super ego"?
It's great to see an integration of tech philosophy into the weekly cycle of posts. Very fresh. Very insightful.
Close but I think its ID, but maybe I don't get IT when it comes to that subject. ;)
You're right! it is "Id" in the literal sense of Freud's "psychic apparatus". I propose "it" instead of "id" as a result of Rand's "it" conundrum.
@jeepfish
that all depends on how much Broca's area works in the subject.
I attended an online SEO meeting yesterday. The presentation was good, but it was obvious to me that the person giving the presentation did not "Get it".
Thus they made suggestions that were off the mark. Being that it was an interactive meeting, I questioned things, but the presenter was sure of the advice given.
Another thing that pointed out that they didn't "get it" was the examples shown for good SEO sites. The main pages were almost all images, no text, and some flash. Not a good example of SEO.
[sigh]
Great article Rand! You know, at some point in tenure, "IT just clicks" and you "get IT". Some people "get IT" much quicker than others, I refer to them as "old souls". Many people with street smarts "get IT".
Again, that was a great read and worth signing up for. I'm a nube to all this stuff but I think I've "gotten IT" somewhere along the way. It becomes part of your DNA, ask my 8 year daughter, she knows. ;)
I agree about just getting it one day. Felt this same way about Algebra once upon a time. Didn't get it, didn't get it, didn't get it.....then Whamo! A light bulb clicked one day and it all made sense. I don't see this subject as being any different.
To those that said they were unsure whether or not you could learn to 'get it' I'd have to say yes. Some learn and learn, but are not as intuitive about it, while others will have a lightbulb moment one day and it will all fall in to place.
Tried and true forumla for being sucessful in business or as a business. I've have seen this in one form or another from Guy Kawasaki and Robert Kiyosaki.
I would venture to say that you can be a "doesn't get it" type and surround yourself with a few "it getters" and still be highly successful.
So that leaves two options: either get "It" or get "Its" (it getters).
Nice post Rand!
Did anyone check out MindValleyLabs?
Maybe it's just me, but it sounds pretty scammy. If it hadn't been Rand mentioning them, I wouldn't have given this the time of day...
Does anyone have any actual experience with these guys? Is there any substance beyond the marketing hype?
Ha ha ha - Yeah, when you read the sales messaging, it does come across a bit strong. I'd check out their blog - https://blog.mindvalleylabs.com - which is a bit more compelling for professionals. I should have pointed to that first.
Thanks for the link to the blog. They don't have that featured anywhere on their main site for some reason.
Would you recommend their Training Course?
Hadn't heard of them before, but anyone who promises to make you rich on "autopilot" and uses a squeeze letter is usually selling digital information at a price. I wouldn't call it a scam until I can see what is the information. When the price ends in "7", you know they are another network marketer. It is not a cookie-cutter site - they have gone to some trouble to make it attractive.
When Warren Buffett or Bill Gates starts posting squeeze letters offering their secrets for $97, no $67, no $27 for the next 15 minutes, I might sign up. :)
The Mind Valley blog is an example of good writing style to attract attention. "How to get published on authority sites" is a compelling title, but when you follow it to Anik Singal's Aff Classroom site, it is just another list of standard link-building tips slightly modified for a guest article.
Similarly, "Find authority sites mercilessly" (paraphrased) - great title, but when you think about it, they could well be plugging IBP, WebCEO or a dozen others with the same slogan. I didn't check out the tool, but the technique (build a mailing list by offering something for free) is another good learning.