Matchmaker, matchmaker, make me a matchmaker.
That's what Susan Kates is hoping to hear from people willing to pay $750 to learn the skills and secrets of her trade – and to get a Certified Matchmaker certificate, suitable for framing.
Kates, CMM, is well-known among singles in the city for DinnerWorks, a meet 'n' eat ('n' maybe mate) program, in which she brings groups of singles together to check each other out while eating dinner at local restaurants.
Kates also works one-on-one as a personal matchmaker, bringing together couples with the potential for compatibility and chemistry.
Training other people in Toronto to do that is Kates' latest venture. As an executive board member of the New York-based Matchmaking Institute, she's offering the first local training session sanctioned by the institute on March 8.
"Can you learn to be a matchmaker? That's an interesting question," says Northwestern University psychologist Eli Finkel, who researches dating and relationships. "It's possible if, with enough training, you can learn to see through some of the facades and that what people need is not necessarily what they want."
Matchmaker wannabes will learn interviewing skills, how to really listen to clients, how to look beyond the obvious, how to coach clients through getting to know each other, how to draw up contracts, an understanding of the industry and how to deal with checklists – those shopping lists single people compose.
"Most people have a list," says Kates. And they're pretty predictable.
"A woman who is 33 will say, `He must be two years older, 6 feet tall, good-looking and a doctor or a lawyer.'"
In all her matchmaker wisdom, and with her database in mind, Kates may suggest, "How about a 38-year-old MBA?"
Kates says it's also important to understand how essential it is that "two people are `in the same place' at the same time."
"This couple was dating and having a great time," she says about two who had met online, "but he hadn't actually left his marriage emotionally. On paper, there was a lot of compatibility. On (dating website) eHarmony, they would've got a hit from each other. But he wasn't ready. She was."
The woman signed up for Kates' service.
Clearly, singles willing to spend in the range of $1,000 to $10,000 for the services of a personal, professional matchmaker are more serious than those who sign on to a dozen dating sites. Matchmakers' clients want to cut to the chase.
Sites such as Match.com and Lavalife.com are the eBay of love for anyone with a detailed shopping list.
"We allow for custom searches," explains Kim Hughes, editor-in-chief of Lavalife.com. "If you're looking for a Cantonese-speaking Lutheran who finished university, is non-smoking and is a Virgo, we can let you find that person."
But that person may not turn out to be "the one."
"Do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner?" is the question investigated in a paper in the current Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Research at speed-dating events led author Finkel and his Northwestern University colleague Paul Eastwick to conclude that "people may lack introspective awareness of what influences their judgments and behaviour."
Speaking by phone from Chicago, Finkel confirms, "Some of the research shows people may not have great insight into what they themselves may desire in a romantic partner."
That disconnect has resulted in some dating sites evolving into matchmaking sites.
They've gone beyond the shopping list approach and adopted the scientific approach, offering "algorithms of love."
That's a fancy social science phrase for working backwards. At eHarmony, research and development vice-president Galen Buckwalter and his team looked at the pattern of profiles of husbands and wives in successful marriages.
"Who knew that love and science would be so compatible?" is the slogan of eHarmony Labs, which has a scientific advisory board, uses "a wide range of new assessment instruments" and boasts "academic-level research."
The result: a patented Compatibility Matching System. Clients answer 258 personality questions and the program picks matches for them.
It's been so successful – eHarmony claims a whopping 100-plus weddings a day – that two other dating sites, Match.com (with Chemistry.com) and Perfectmatch.com have developed their own academic-designed algorithms. (An algorithm is a set of rules used to solve mathematical problems, especially with a computer.)
Finkel says it's plausible that eHarmony has developed a strong algorithm because it has collected so much data. But because the system hasn't been peer reviewed in a scientific journal, "the scientific community doesn't know if it's valid," he says.
No matter the method of putting two people together, once the must-have attributes and deal-breakers have been sorted out, the compatibility and values issues accounted for and the physical and personality preferences filtered, nearly everyone except the hardcore scientists agree that a love match is as unpredictable as, well, cupid's arrow.
Finkel, however, begs to differ.
"There's no reason to believe it's alchemy or metaphysical," he insists. "It follows lawful processes."
Know thyself Make Me A Match suggests listing qualities you consider attributes as well as difficult qualities in yourself and in a potential partner.
Great qualities:
Accomplished
Adventurous
Affectionate
Committed
Communicative
Down to earth
Educated
Faithful
Family oriented
Fun
Independent
Passionate
Responsible
Relaxed
Understanding
Difficult qualities:
Arrogant
Cheap
Chronically late
Critical
Defensive
Dishonest
Disrepectful
Egocentric
Hold a grudge
Irresponsible
Lazy
Obsessive
Negative
Self involved
Weak
Deal breakers could include:
Rude and pretentious
Poor manners
Constantly late
Heavy drinker/drug user
Different religions
Bad breath/ poor hygiene
Multiple divorces
By Judy Gerstel
Toronto Post
http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/307448