Adam Grant on Networking is (Unintentionally) Misleading

It didn't take long. Shortly after Adam Grant's New York Times column arguing that "networking is overrated" appeared on the Times' website, I got my first e-mail from a former Paths to Power (the class I teach at Stanford) student. After noting that, at least on the surface, what I teach seems in opposition to Grant's message, this individual, smart and talented and also modest, self-effacing, unassuming, and unpolitical to the point of probably not being helpful to their career, asked me my thoughts. So here they are.

It's Not Either Or. In paragraph 17, Grant notes that "accomplishments can build your network only if other people are aware of them" I would add that accomplishments can build your career and influence only if other people notice you--and building social relationships is one way to be sure you are noticed. So it's not about doing good work or networking. Its about doing good work and being sure you have the contacts and personal brand to get noticed.

Consider as a case in point, Adam Grant himself. Grant, who was kind enough to endorse my last book, Leadership B.S., and I hope will endorse my next book, Dying for a Paycheck, is by any measure a singularly accomplished organizational scholar and teacher. He has published prodigiously in peer-reviewed, academic journals. He has written or co-authored three books. He is rooted in evidence and writes even newspaper columns with links to the relevant social science literature.

But I would also note that Grant has more than 1.6 million LinkedIn followers (and LinkedIn is itself a networking site), had his work featured in a New York Times Sunday magazine cover story, has pursued a thoughtful and effective social media strategy, and among other powerful people, is tightly connected to Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg. Grant's many connections and the building of his personal brand ensures that people get exposed to his wisdom. He exemplifies my point--do great work, but also be sure your work and you are noticed and connected.

Networking Positively Affects Career Success. The empirical literature on networking and career success is both long-standing and extensive. As one article noted, "social capital theorists have established decades ago that better connected people do better in life." This should not be surprising in that social relationships can provide access to information, access to resources, and people to sponsor one's career. A longitudinal study measuring both salary increases and career satisfaction found that networking was positively related to both. I am not going to extensively review the large social science literature here. I encourage interested readers to go to www.scholar.google.com and search to access the voluminous empirical research demonstrating the positive effects of social capital and networking on numerous outcomes.

There Are More and Less Effective Networking Strategies and Behaviors. I took piano lessons as a child. I can assure you that should I attempt to play a piano concert, people would be running for the door. This, however, does not mean that no one should perform a piano concert--only that people should acquire some relevant skills before doing so! Similarly, there are differences in people's networking skills--and these skills can be learned and developed. Keith Ferrazzi, for instance, in Never Eat Alone and in his public speaking, attempts to teach people both the importance of and how to be more successful in getting others to help them in their careers.

As I noted in Chapter 7 in my book, Power, research demonstrates the importance of weak ties in providing non-redundant information and contacts. And also in that chapter, I described the work of University of Chicago professor Ronald Burt who shows the career and performance benefits of people who fill brokerage positions in networks. Filling structural holes entails connecting groups of otherwise unconnected but potentially mutually beneficial people and units together. Moreover, occupying central network positions is helpful in building power and influence.

In fact, there are occupations--think venture capital and investment banking as two--whose business model essentially consists of linking people and organizations, investors and entrepreneurs in the first case, capital and opportunities in the second, together. And lest you somehow think that creating venues for people to get together is not valuable in and of itself, consider how a once relatively obscure Swiss economics professor became powerful (and rich) by starting what has become the World Economic Forum.

The Sad & Unfortunate Part. Grant is right--people think of networking as dirty. Research shows that there is a tension between building personal relationships at work and the desire to have friendships that are not instrumental. People naturally like to associate with people with whom they feel comfortable--people similar to themselves whom they know, thereby forgoing the benefits of building numerous weak ties.

So here's my prediction: The people skilled at and comfortable with networking will not change their behavior because of Grant's column, because they have personally experienced the advantages from their networking activities. But the people who find networking difficult or unpleasant probably will take his writing as just the excuse they need to forgo building the social connections and relationships that can potentially get their work noticed and accelerate their career. This is an unfortunate and undoubtedly unintended consequence. But to the extent that the very people who most need to build social connections step back from doing so because they find it unpleasant and now they believe they don't need to, they will just perpetuate their disadvantage.