Naive or Strategic Networking? Who to invite to your network?

Networking is one of the more commonly used words, and not without significance. It plays a huge tangible role, for instance, in job-seeking or recruitment. Whenever I talk to my colleagues (recruiters of managers) from other countries, they all repeat the same thing: networking is the most effective way, regardless of whether they are French, German, Italian, Dutch, or Swedish; in other words,no matter which culture they represent.

However, do we really understand this word? Here I have serious doubts. For many, networking is synonymous with "connections" in an old-fashioned way (you know how and why), cronyism, and nepotism. Well, we don't need a new word for this. Cronyism and nepotism are enough. It's a different world, far from networking. Let's stay in the zone that is transparent and ethical, in the zone of business.

So, what is networking? Here’s the thing, a key issue, which affects the universal perception of this activity, up to the final "It doesn't work." What most of us do is nothing but Naive Networking. This is my original phrase, but it conveys the message well. Why naive? Because it is based on randomness and luck. All the spontaneous business card exchanges, occasional conferences, occasional seminars, lectures, networking trips (ticketed), etc., where the main principle we follow is "What if we meet someone interesting?". Equally rare is the networking on LinkedIn, without any general principle. So, we let ourselves go into the hands of fate. When we sum it up, we seem to have a lot of activity and a sense that we are acting and things are happening. It's just chaotic, random, without a general principle. That makes the effects futile. Most of these contacts are worthless, nothing ever comes from them. They are nice people probably, so let them be our contacts, but it still lacks the aforementioned general principle.

Example: I’m talking to a manager about his professional goals and a way to achieve them. He won't do it by himself. He must cooperate with others. It’s in their interest, but they must know about it somehow, right? In the end, I ask a question: how many recruiters do you know? How many of them know who you are and what exactly do you want from your development? Standard answer (after giving it some thought...) is: I know 5...6, including you... There are several thousand recruitment companies in Poland, so the industry probably employs a good 10,000 people... The minimum action is to choose 30-40 leading companies for our professional goal, identify in them a total of 80-120 people, and systematically reach out to everyone, with a thoughtful, simple, specific, and short message: Who am I and what do I want (the way to define these two is described HERE). It’s perfectly plausible.

Now it’s time for a simple experiment. Ask yourself: how many times have I been contacted in the last two years with cooperation/employment offers? Then, a second question: who contacted me and from which companies? Then, a third one: how relevant to my professional goal were these proposals? And last but not least: who didn’t get in touch with me (even though I’d like them to) and why? They also must have interesting projects, but somehow they don’t reach out to me... Think of the abundance of projects that pass you by this way! This is an interesting exercise, right...? It boils down to the question "How many times did recruiters call me in the last year?!"

Your networking is worth as much as the number and frequency of phone calls you get. Can you feel it now?

Well, but recruiters are just tools that others use. The true Strategic Networking is done with key people (decision-makers) in industries and companies that are important to you. It’s important not because of your current job (you already have it!), but the job you aim to be at in a few or even several years (!). The procedure is simple. You have identified the industry you are interested in. So now you can name the companies operating in it. Therefore, it is possible to identify specific key people, the decision-makers; several dozen specific names at least. So, activate yourself, the same way as with recruiters. A spreadsheet in Excel and you're on it, reaching everyone and building your visibility.

And so, LinkedIn suddenly turns out to be beneficial. Suddenly we know why and how to use it. Suddenly we understand the word "link" in the name and the reason for it. No wandering in the dark – we have specific goals. Starting with the simplest message like your and my professional passions are similar / we work in the same industry / I’m inviting you to connect directly. And a communication channel is created. Nonetheless, you won't do it in one weekend; particularly not in the panic mode, after an unexpected job loss...

Strategic Networking is carried out methodically when things are good when our situation is stable. Thanks to this, we don't have to hurry, we don't have to push the other side (we have time). Our actions don’t feel like panic. It is also not too time-consuming if were are systematic and act according to the concept described. Instead of smashing with a baseball bat, make precise cuts with a scalpel.

Don't waste time collecting random flowers while walking in the meadow. I'll pick up something here and there, it could be useful. It may be romantic, but in the end, there is no one to talk to and we complain that "Nobody ever calls me". In this context, therefore, it’s more naive than romantic. Find your meadow. Then turn on the mower and drive it through the meadow. Repeat this systematically. That's how beautiful lawns are born.

I have also invented another metaphor by myself and was proud of it up to a point. Well, it occurred to me that the described strategy resembles the action of water. Water that systematically penetrates the entire wall in search of cracks to broaden, and does not just hit one or random places. It's a good metaphor and I was proud. And then I read Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, which has an identical metaphor, though in a slightly different context. Over 500 years BC. Oh, life...

SUMMARY – 4 STEPS

The shortest version of the algorithm of actions in Strategic Networking:

1. Identify 2-3 business sectors that are ultimately important to you (recruiters are also a sector)

2. Having identified the sectors, indicate specific companies that initially meet the criteria that are important for you (see "Career planning, part 2", HERE) - a minimum of a dozen or more, do not filter too densely, do not overthink it at this stage (plus several dozen recruitment companies, as you should treat it as a sector of middlemen)

3. Now that you know the companies, identify key people, the decision-makers for your professional goal (operational area and HR) – 2-3 people per company; in your country and abroad; a network, which LinkedIn makes very easy

4. Systematically add/invite these people to your network of contacts, e.g. through LinkedIn and all other available methods (no randomness because you have a specific goal).

It couldn’t be simpler or more specific. And, at the same time, more efficient than collective blind dates and chaotic "don't stand there alone" (and why should I and pay for it too?). Remember - the winner of mass networking gatherings is their organizer, not the participant. Naive Networking is like standing at the Speaker’s Corner in Hyde Park and shouting out loud. Yes, there is a chance that we will find someone important. But why rely on this level of randomness?

The final recipe is almost like in The Expendables 2. After a brutal terrorist attack, Statham asks Stallone "What's the plan?" and he hears "Track them, find them, kill them". Well, just replace “kill” with “contact” and you have YOUR networking plan. The photo illustrating the article is the exact moment of saying the above words. Identify, find, contact.

Note - this is also the answer to the question I have already raised several times: who to invite to your LinkedIn network. So, now you know.