
Being a good networker pays off, but it requires skill as well as shamelessness - RachelF
http://www.economist.com/node/21639500/print
======
shenoyroopesh
I think one important step is to genuinely care about people and what's
happening in their lives and being in interested in just knowing them, whether
or not they are useful to you immediately.

Most good networkers I've seen are very much interested in people, whether or
not they can be useful to them. They will speak to everyone in the social
hierarchy, and remember important details about their lives. While this may
not be "necessary" to gain some advantage from networking, I don't think you
can do this long-term without just deriving pleasure out of just getting to
know other human beings and learning from their experiences.

~~~
GFischer
I agree that "good" (as in, succesful) networkers speak to everyone and
remember little details about everyone.

However, the best networker I know (we call him "el trepador", that would be
"the climber") spends a disproportionate amount of time on his superiors.

It's incredible the amount of time he spends networking or at social events,
when he was at the company I work for he learned the President's and CEOs
favourite sports and activities, organized an in-company tournament of the
President's favourite sport, played golf with the CEO, played football
(soccer) with his coworkers, organized outings, invited other CxOs to
barbecues at his house.. he hardly had a night to himself. He also kept track
of everyone he met at any kind of event.

He was hired as a programmer, but he managed to avoid any kind of task that
involved working in the backend and always maneuvered to work in client-facing
or high profile tasks, his favourite trick was building a fancy (but simple)
web interface on top of complicated backends (and getting designer time, which
was key), which usually resulted on his getting most of the credit.

He's now a CEO (at another company in the group of companies which he's
buddies with the president), and he has no university degree and didn't spend
any time studying - at the same time he was doing all that stuff, I was
working towards an MBA and spent about as much time after work as he did, his
time investment definitely paid off a lot better.

~~~
anon4
It's a bit sad how you often have to choose between actually making useful
things and being paid a lot of money.

I'd call him a douche, but this is a clear case of don't hate the player, hate
the game.

~~~
golergka
Why hate for the game? The dude sounds like he's really good at what's he
doing, and I think that the company that he leads will profit a lot from his
skills. Would be a shame to keep a person like that in engineer position.

~~~
gress
The skills he has are all about receiving a disproportionate amount of credit
for work accomplished by a team. How will the company profit from this?

~~~
MrDom
A programmer in a management or CEO role could make the lives of every
programmer underneath him better. After all, he actually knows how to make
software. By extension, he knows what's possible and what's not, what's
reasonable schedule-wise and what's not. Most managers/CEOs don't.

~~~
gress
Does he? It sounds like he avoided responsibility for anything that might have
carried risk, and only picked easy wins with good visibility in order to make
himself look good.

~~~
MrDom
I know there are people who climb the ladder in the manner in which you state.
Is this guy one of them? Maybe. Maybe not. But one thing is certain: at the
very least, he has the base minimal understanding of the software life cycle,
which is always beneficial in a manager. Even one who shirks responsibility
for visibility. ;)

~~~
gress
Sure, but assuming he is such a person, you are implying that this minimal
understanding of the software life cycle is better for engineers at his
company than integrity and a desire to see engineers justly rewarded for their
efforts. I doubt that.

~~~
MrDom
_you are implying that this minimal understanding of the software life cycle
is better for engineers at his company than integrity and a desire to see
engineers justly rewarded for their efforts._

I implied no such thing. I'm making a generalization. Your statements so far
consist of "Yes, but what if he's an irredeemable sociopath? It's better to
have a non-sociopath who doesn't understand software than a sociopath who
does." I agree with that, but those aren't the only two options on the table
and I refuse to believe the worst in somebody I've never met and only know
through an anecdote in a hacker news comment.

~~~
gress
Neither of us are making judgements about an actual named person here. We are
talking about an example that was given. This stance of 'I refuse to believe
the worst in someone based on anecdote' is disingenuous.

That example included a detailed description of the ways the person achieved
advancement, which fit the characterization I gave.

You are just choosing to ignore that.

~~~
MrDom
_You are just choosing to ignore that._

Wow, you really don't see it, do you? Huh.

 _It sounds like he avoided responsibility for anything that might have
carried risk_

That directly contradicts the description GFisher gave, which was "he didn't
shirk "hard" projects per se, but he'd only take them if they were very high
visibility". You can't take projects without assuming responsibility and you
can only say they carried no risk unless you assume that any and all high
visibility tasks were low to no risk. I can speak from experience and say
that's very much not true.

It sounds like you've projected onto him your disdain for people that move up
ladders instead of make things. And you don't even realize it.

~~~
gress
Nope - you have quoted out of context, deliberately ignoring: "He was a bit of
a douche, mostly by shirking low-visibility projects and getting
_disproportionate amounts of credit_..."

~~~
MrDom
Which has nothing to do with assuming or not assuming responsibility. This is
known as moving goalposts.

You'll notice I've said absolutely nothing about whether or not he assumed
disproportionate amounts of credit. That kind of thing is murky at best. How
do you measure credit? Is it something your boss gives you because he likes
you or is it something you actively vie for? In some cases it can be one, some
the other but in most cases it's a little of both.

You still haven't admitted even a little bias, despite being shown your quite
obvious bias in at least one context.

~~~
gress
You said nothing about whether he assumed disproportionate amounts of credit,
but you didn't have to because that is a _given_ since it was stated by the
original poster. Now you are trying to discredit that part of the description
by saying it is hard to judge. May I remind you that we are discussing an
example presented by someone else. If you choose to selectively discredit
parts of the given description to suit your position, we are no longer
discussing the same example. Perhaps you believe that nobody ever assumes more
credit than they deserve.

I admit that I am biased against people who assume disproportionate amounts of
credit as CEO. I think that is a highly undesirable trait in any kind of
manager.

------
rattray
"Shameless" really does seem to me the best word to describe the most
important aspect of networking. Or at least, the hardest part - once you've
read _How to Win Friends and Influence People_ , it's still really tough to
approach strangers or ask acquaintances for introductions.

Carnegie doesn't teach you how to get over that. The only thing I can think of
that might is Theater; acting or improv classes. But I'd be very curious to
hear how others have overcome social inhibitions and learned to go for it.

~~~
sea6ear
Back when I was in college in a Christian organization we would pair up and go
share the gospel with other students on campus.

One technique that worked surprisingly well for me was that one of the pair
would pick the person that the other would have to go up to and try to
converse with.

Somehow that created the feeling of a dare that I could get into, even though
if I had been considering talking to the person on my own, I would have talked
myself out of it.

~~~
wanderingstan
A friend of mine is the best salesman I know. He attributes his success to
griwing up as a Jehovah's Witness, with mandatory door to door proselytizing
every weekend. Rejection doesn't phase him in the slightest.

~~~
joshfraser
That's the same reason why there are so many sales organizations in Salt Lake
City. Nothing trains you to get over rejection like trying to sell religion
door to door.

~~~
epaladin
I've been intrigued as to why Mormons have such an seemingly disproportionate
"success" rate, and ended up doing a bit of research on the matter. It really
seems like it comes down to facing failure repeatedly. And most of them get
the experience when they're around college age as well. I've been trying to
figure out how we could build something secular into normal primary education
that would achieve the same result.

~~~
guelo
It's already done at many schools for fundraisers. Things like having the kids
sell chocolates or magazine subscriptions. Also girl scouts with their
cookies.

~~~
epaladin
Much of the time it's the parents doing the pushing, and the kids in tow for
the "do it for the children" factor. The kids probably don't really know
what's going on, and don't have to take direct responsibility for any of it.

------
josefresco
There's some good advice in this article, I do a fair amount of networking so
consider myself somewhat of an expert in the field. I'm not comfortable
networking, but it's required for my local market and B2B business model.

"Be flagrant in your pursuit of the powerful and the soon-to-be-powerful, and
when you have their attention, praise them to the skies."

That's one strategy, there's also the "hard to get" strategy. Successful
people get "sold to" and flattered all the time and are generally sick of it
or at least aware. In my networking, sometimes I will specifically avoid the
alpha of the room, and build contacts around them, possibly leading to a more
qualified introduction. Found it works better than the direct approach "I'm a
huge fan" tactic.

------
ryanjshaw
For me, a person who isn't a natural networker, this article seems to be
missing a key element: what's the objective?

Reading articles like these is like reading the underpants gnome plan in South
Park: 1. Network 2. ??? 3. Profit

Can somebody explain what step 2 is? For instance, I have a handful of very
successful acquaintances. I always think there must be some way to leverage
them, but I have no clue to what end. This is probably a really obvious and
stupid question to most people, but completely eludes me.

~~~
qznc
Step 2 could be:

You get a job offer without sending an application.

You get a contract offer out of the blue.

You hear of some great event, you would have missed otherwise.

You get invited somewhere, you would not have had access to.

You have more people to pitch for funding/investment.

You have more people to show your side project to.

In general, I think it mostly increase the amount of opportunities you
receive. Note that most of those opportunities are probably crap/spam.
Nevertheless, if you found a profitable game, it helps to play it more often.

~~~
visakanv
I like Derek Sivers' take on it. Your next big break is going to come from
someone you know, so get out there and know people.

Be helpful, and make sure people know what value you can create/provide. And
they'll make the referral, often in valuable situations you can't even foresee
or imagine.

------
Fede_V
Uhmm, while that article has some useful advice, some parts of it made me feel
genuinely uncomfortable. For example:

"Reward the self-styled “thought leaders” in each session by adding them to
your Twitter “follow” list. "

Really? Part of the reason I barely use linkedin anymore is because the
essays/thinkpieces people post on that site are so incredibly self indulgent
and empty of content. Everyone there is so transparently trying to emulate the
style and content of a Thomas Friedman column, while painting themselves in an
amazing light. It's reached the point where if an article has the word
'leadership' in the title, I assume it will be garbage.

I actually despise the artificiality of networking so much I wrote my own tool
to optimize it and automate it, and used it at a conference I helped organize:
[http://elifesciences.org/content/3/e02273](http://elifesciences.org/content/3/e02273)

------
isilya
This is so disgusting. A phony and a fake. I understand that it is how the
world works, but still, awful.

Are not the connections built in this way fragile?

~~~
hkmurakami
I actually think that the "intent" is what makes is phony and fake, not the
skills or techniques employed. I think I use some of these techniques (or
"rules of thumbs for conversation" \-- albiet not as extreme) with some people
I'm friendly with because I genuinely want them to enjoy the conversation and
our time together.

I sincerely do not want or expect any favors or benefits from them. If we're
in a setting that begets conversation and I know that we don't have tooo much
in common, I'm going to go out of my way to make the conversation enjoyable
for them, because their enjoyment of the conversation will make the
conversation enjoyable for me as well.

The alternative is often either side taking turns about subjects that the
other person has no interest in, and those conversations don't do any good for
either person.

~~~
Hoffmannnn
The two aren't mutually exclusive. You can be genuinely interested in what
somebody has to say, and still plan to use them later.

Don't kid yourself into thinking they wouldn't do the same for you -- instead,
think of it as a mutual agreement to provide services to each other when
needed.

~~~
ZoF
More like a mutual agreement to request services from each other when they are
required.

E.g. to ask you if you want a particular contract (when it needs to be
fulfilled regardless). Not to 'come up' with a contract because your 'bro' is
out of work.

------
DanielBMarkham
_Although successful networkers must be calculating, ruthless and shameless,
they do better when they somehow make it all seem spontaneous, accidental
even_

A couple of years back I was working with a guy who had grown a consulting
shop into 70-80 folks. I was helping with sales into an existing client. The
deal was I'd help do the sell and then I'd pick up a few months of work to add
to my runway for my startup.

We needed another consultant, so the main office sent us some candidates. The
guy I was working with immediately picks the one with the most connections,
even though his skills weren't a good match. When I mentioned this, he said
"Yeah, but it's not important whether his skills match. We need his network."
If you're looking to grow a business, it's all about finding people with good
networks and mining their contacts.

This guy continues to do very well in the business, and now he has a huge
network, but there's always that slight feel of inauthenticity about him. It's
nothing that anybody would point out, and it doesn't prevent him generating
business. It's just there.

Contrast this to me. I follow and try to be friends with people because, well,
I like them. I like what they're doing and I want to hear more about what's
happening in their lives. My network is not very huge, but my goal is to get
to know folks and have them get to know me, so it can never be that huge.

I'm not saying my way is right and this other guy's is wrong, but I am much
happier doing it my way than if I did things the way this other guy did. The
minute I start feeling like I'm conniving? I'm doing something wrong.

~~~
cylinder
Business is by nature inauthentic. None of us would be there doing the work if
we didn't need to earn money to live. I'm really not sure why everyone expects
authenticity, passion, etc in business and work. It's all a charade.

------
tieTYT
> The first principle for would-be networkers is to abandon all shame. Be
> flagrant in your pursuit of the powerful and the soon-to-be-powerful, and
> when you have their attention, praise them to the skies.

I'm reading "How to win friends and influence people" right now. The author
would disagree. He would recommend compliments, not flattery. Compliments are
sincere, flattery is transparent brown-nosing that makes you lose credibility.
I'm paraphrasing the book not giving my opinion: I have no idea what I'm
doing.

That said this is very relevant to me because I've recently quit working as a
full time employee for 10 years and want to have a go at consulting for
companies. I jumped in head first and it has not gone as smoothly as I would
like. My biggest issue so far is I don't know where to go to network with the
people that I should be talking to. I can go to free networking events with
founders of companies, but all of them seem to be at the pre-funding stage and
can only pay me in equity. I'm looking for people that can pay in cash. Any
advice would be appreciated.

~~~
shawn-butler
I read that same sentence "abandon all shame" and it is where I have had
reservations and probably holding me back in making connections.

I know I am busy and don't feel like I should be wasting other people's time
with trivial pursuits when in reality they are probably thinking the same.

I would take a engineer / scientific approach. Adopt one methodology at some
events and use flattery / shamelessness at another. Compare results.

------
Animats
This works a lot like the PUA ("pick-up artist") thing.

The first book on that subject, Scoremanship, by Frank Gray (1969) was written
by a salesman and follows the classic approaches from sales manuals.

------
gadders
For a more humane take on networking, a good read is the "Working Out Loud"
blog from John Stepper. You can find out more at
[http://johnstepper.com/working-out-loud-the-
book/](http://johnstepper.com/working-out-loud-the-book/) or
[http://www.workingoutloud.com](http://www.workingoutloud.com).

------
hkmurakami
The title makes this seem very sinister, but having read through it, I
actually think that a lot of these "skills" are basic conversation skills that
can be used in non-networking settings as well.

Personally, I've used them at holiday parties to engage in civil conversation
with other guests, or even young children guests.

------
marincounty
Let's be honest; Most people network in order to gain something--period. That
something is wealth(an individual who is wealthy can be financially wealthy,
good genes--yes I will take that over money, or has something of value(teach
me?) the Networker desires.) I have a sister who lived her life networking
before it had a title. Yes, she is financially successful, but no one really
likes her--that includes ex-husbands, "friends", and I think, her kids are
losing respect every year they age? That's the networking I grew up with. This
new type of networking--where the objective is finding friends; I think is
wonderful. I just don't see it. The networking I see is still ugly, and so
obvious. Good luck, I personally couldn't stomach it.

------
msc96
non-print link: [http://www.economist.com/news/business/21639500-being-
good-n...](http://www.economist.com/news/business/21639500-being-good-
networker-pays-offbut-it-requires-skill-well-shamelessness-network-effect)

~~~
Aardwolf
The non-print is 10x slower to load, renders something you need to close in
front of it first, and renders a lot of useless stuff around it.

The print link, despite the inconvenience of having to close a print dialog,
is SOOOOO much better. Why aren't all websites like that? As a bonus, it works
on mobile too, since it's only what is needed and wraps at the side of the
screen: the text.

------
lifeisstillgood
I prefer to imagine I am a consultant for "figuring out the world".

Often times I come across a problem _inside_ an organisation and take it upon
myself to dig down to the bottom and sort I out - happily introducing myself
to HR or accounts or sales just following the trail. I seem to have no social
blockers because I am working for the same company and therefore there is
already a common aligned interest.

For networking that crosses organisational boundaries it's harder - but I try
to remember we all have an interest in a better world.

------
walterbell
If you volunteer to help organize a large event, one side effect is that you
will talk to many strangers while sorting out logistical details. It removes
pressure and provides your emotional brain with many data samples of
successful interactions with strangers, which will come in useful in future
approach situations.

------
terrn
"Be flagrant in your pursuit of the powerful and the soon-to-be-powerful, and
when you have their attention, praise them to the skies." \- Isn't this one of
the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition?

------
noipv4
MBA approach to the workplace is what's wrong with the world IMO

------
cek
The first rule of building your network is: build your network. A professional
network does not happen spontaneously or by accident.

~~~
mcguire
The network is a valuable asset itself.

