A Millennial's No-Nonsense Guide to Networking

Few years ago, when I used to work for a "Work-Hard-Party Harder" Gen-X consulting firm, Networking was the in-thing. It had a mysterious sex appeal. 

You could see the word everywhere. Inside work cubicles with motivational posters urging you to not simply work, but network to achieve common goals. Even inside dining rooms which probably meant that you better have a working pizza lunch to get your net work done with the mundane business of eating.

You could hear the word everywhere. It probably won the first prize for a million dollar quiz question sponsored by the Human Resources Department: Tell me one good buzz word which will be uncritically lapped up by everyone - from CEO to Managers to Consultants.

Do you want to get noticed by Principals to vroom up your career graph and do exciting stuff? Do you want to switch teams to greener pastures outside your comfort zone? Do you want a favorable rating in the labyrinthine 360 degrees performance evaluation process?

To be frank, I was wet behind the ears in the consulting game and it was quite incredulous for me to imagine that all those questions could have only one answer, repeated ad nauseum by any one you met inside the organization.

In case you’re wondering, if this sounds like a lament of an introvert, no, not at all! We haven’t met in flesh form, I suppose? I am sure you wouldn’t entertain that train of thought otherwise.

 Here’s the thing. Networking was all over the place. But, relationships? Rare.Very rare. No wonder, I felt asphyxiated.

Look, if you cut the necessary PR crap, at the end of the day, business simply does two things. 

It converts nature into products, and relationships into services. Broadly speaking, the former happens in industries, and the latter through networking. 

N-E-T-W-O-R-K-I-N-G

Scratch the word deep enough, you will realize that the word is an illusion. As I speak, I recollect one of my favorite lines from the sufi saint, Hazrat Zaheen Taj,

Pani-Pani rat'te rat'te pyaasa hi mar jaaye! 

Chanting 'water', 'water' endlessly, one dies of thirst

Most of the professionals I meet in business suffer the same sad fate. Repeating "networking" endlessly in the quick sand trap of their identity, their human selves die a little in those frayed, lonely moments, when they feel disconnected from their breath, their environment and everyone else. 

You see, it is in our human nature to confuse means with the ends. Strategy with the result. If you are doing something, with an exuberant thought cloud hovering over your head, "Yes! I am networking here!", it is likely that you are screwing up. You better stop, right there. 

Why do we long for relationships and yet remain averse to anything that even remotely smells like 'networking'?

Because, we humans have tasted the real thing. We know it - a pulsating spark of a shared human energy throbbing in a spontaneous moment of ideas, thoughts, and feelings resonating in unison.

And if you look back and zoom in those precious moments, you will realize that what made the moment sweeter was your presence - pure fulsome presence without any inkling of an agenda. We were fully present without the urges of an impulse to get something. And that made the difference. 

But there's a twist in the tale. 

In a world which makes it easier to be in digitally mediated relationships with anyone through networked technologies, our expectations of relationships are changing. We hold conflicting desires to remain in a loosely coupled relationship and also remain secure in an arm’s length, or, in today's terms, a node's length. In other words, we want the rosy parts, safely pruned from the thorns.

In case you didn't notice, our modern notions of "relating" are gradually taken over by the shape and language of "connections" inside social networks.

You can stay in touch, without being connected. Or be connected, without staying in touch. More importantly, all human connections by default come with a neat, user-friendly, exit clause – all it takes to disconnect is a single click.

So, let me outline the intricate painting of human relationships with a few broad strokes. Yes, broad strokes do imply that it would come with necessary simplifications so that we could proceed with our inquiry, building on the substrate framework of relationships. 

 Human relationships and the way we relate with each other broadly exist in a metaphorical spectrum spanning from solid to liquid state. (I borrow the term "liquid" from the works of the famous sociologist Zygmunt Bauman)

In a solid state, relationships are marked by human bonds which remain impervious to communication mechanisms. Think of your relationship with your mother, or, your spouse. You would know exactly what I am talking about.

On the other hand, in a liquid state, the strength of relationship is constantly in a flux, depending on the strength of the connection between the nodes of the network.

Let us take the case of LinkedIn.

Say, you are connected (and not necessarily 'related') with me in my first-degree-of-connections cluster, and, let us assume, you've been regularly interacting with me in these virtual spaces.

In that case, it's likely that you are reading this post after a LinkedIn notification which prompted you about this article I published a while ago. 

Now, what made sure that you received this notification? No, you didn't receive it because we are directly connected with each other. 

You received it because the LinkedIn algorithm, based on the connection strength score it computed from its cloud service, decided that you should be told of my article in your notification panel. (Is it right on the part of an algorithm to mediate the terms of relations is a lengthy post for yet another day.) 

 Solid relationships are couched in the familiar-yet-ambiguous language of "relationship" and the complicated-yet-human act of "relating". They rely more on implicit understanding and less on explicit communications.

Why do they rely less on explicit communication? 

The solid nature of the bonds, encoded with implicit understanding, obviates the assumptions held about the depth of trust and intimacy in the relationship. 

You never think twice before calling your kin in the middle of the night, because you know that it is a normal thing to do. And such strong bonds make it possible for us humans, to build a relationship on something which on the face of it, looks deceptively simple - a promise, or a commitment.

Liquid relationships on the other hand, are couched in the technical language of "connections", and mutually exclusive acts of connecting-disconnecting, as they rely more on explicit communications, and less on implicit understanding. 

Why do they rely more on explicit communications?

The liquid form of the bonds makes it dangerous to proceed with presumptive assumptions about intimacy and trust. If you aren't socially attuned enough, it could lead to embarrassingly awkward moments, which could destroy the possibility of relationship forever.

Haven't you come across social situations in parties where somebody, who isn't yet a part of your group, makes a presumptuous insider comment which completely puts you off to ostracize that person forever?

The tenuous nature of liquid state relationships makes it amenable to perceive connections as investments. Managing them can sometimes resemble a stylized speed dating game, bordering on the slapstick, with ritual games turning every mundane moment into a social occasion. 

 Let me give you another example from my favorite social lab, LinkedIn.

Long before LinkedIn changed its UI, keep-in-touch cards of this kind were common.

If I take these cards seriously, they are telling me a story.

I have 15 ways to keep in touch with my professional network. My connections are celebrating their birthdays, work anniversaries, new jobs, when they aren't busy sharing their personal updates and articles on the stuff they are involved in. 

When I play these ritual games, as predicated by the algorithm and the User Interface, my actions inside the network could be easily theorized under the lens of a portfolio investment strategy, where I work towards building an optimal set of connections within my finite attention chunk spans to develop contextual liquid relationships at scale.

If you've followed me this far, here's a piece of advice that should be obvious.

Before you go ahead and introduce yourself to that Influencer who could accelerate your career, evaluate honestly where you stand in your social relations with him/her in the Solid - Liquid spectrum of relationship. The closer you stand with him in the solid state, the stronger your chances of him/her acceding to your request.

There is something deeply ironic about the act of networking that can only be seen through the light of a lived experience. You know that you are doing it well, only when you know at the bottom of your heart that you aren't consciously doing it. And there's a good reason behind this. 

Those who most want to meet and network with others are those who are least wanted to be met and networked. If you've dated fellow humans, this should be obvious. Those who are the most desperate to date others are those who are least wanted to be dated.

Why is this so? Let us understand this social dynamic in depth. 

We learned earlier that human relationships extend in a solid-liquid spectrum.

In every act of relating across its life journey, we embark on a gradual and deeply convoluted journey of building trust and intimacy from the liquid state to the solid state. 

What happens when someone, whom we perceive as desperate to network, approaches us? 

We experience a curious reaction which can be described in two parts. 

a) We are put off by the presumptive assumption of over familiarity and trust which is out of touch with reality - our reality - the level of trust we perceive as required to facilitate a networking opportunity. 

b) We recollect similar situations where we've been accosted by such people in the past and impose our previous reaction upon the current situation.

Did you notice how the language used to describe this situation quickly turned from approached to accosted?

So, how does one embark on an organic journey from relationships to services, which doesn't feel contrived, or manipulative?

I would like to introduce you to Networking Pyramid - something I built for this article, inspired by the powerful Collaboration Pyramid built by Oscar berg.

Networking Pyramid depicts the broad journey we, the humans could undertake to make networking effective without compromising the human context sustaining our relationships.

Each of the activities from the bottom to the top have been arranged based on the degree of trust and intimacy required to function in a social environment. 

(Aside: This design pattern originates from the world of architecture, and has been described as Intimacy Gradient, in the classic book, Pattern Language, authored by Christopher Alexander)

In the bottom-half layer constituting the liquid relationship zone, you will find activities performed in public gaze.

You exert your presence, share your thought capital, juxtapose niche knowledge, ideas and the right set of people to build an interesting bricolage, and contribute towards the networked commons in your social environment. 

These liquid spaces also give you the necessary ambient awareness to keep track of potential networking opportunities. They alert you of high-leverage information of economic value flowing through your network streams.

Always remember this.

High-leverage information of economic value is often bound to be available in a deeply unstructured form. It could be nothing more than a stray update or some one liking some random image floating in the stream.

If you are receiving a piece of information in a more structured form, like an article or a nice and shiny report from a consulting firm, it is likely that the piece of information you are devouring on has already been leached of economic value.

Perhaps, if you are really smart, you could still leverage that information in a an appropriate context. However, be rest assured that any piece of information served on a platter for you on a nice-to-know basis has already sunk into diminishing returns.

As you immerse yourself in relevant streams aligned to your needs, you build appropriate pathways to realize them.

With recurring presence and surplus collective value shared in the community commons, you start gaining trust and reputation in the community and you start moving upwards onto the top-half constituting the solid relationships zone.

In the top-half layer constituting the solid relationship zone, you will find activities which are performed in private gaze with sufficient trust and intimacy baked into the shared context between the individuals.

Think of job search, or pitching for Venture funding. It is highly likely for such activities to unfold in personal and intimate spheres of sociality. And posts (like the one below) which violate the appropriate norms of sociality turn spammy in no time. 

There is a reason why I chose to call this Networking Pyramid, and not Networking Hierarchy. 

The activities from bottom to top haven't been structured to imply that those in the bottom are simple and those at the top are complex.

The Pyramid indicates each activity as a stepping stone to orchestrate a successful networking opportunity at the apex where direct, monetary benefit awaits you. 

Now, you may not necessarily believe that monetary belief should be the ultimate purpose of networking. Neither do I. That's the limitation with using pyramid as a structure. As this is meant to be a "guide", I have consciously adopted a cliched generalization that we like to do networking as means for self-serving reasons.

Understanding the spectrum of relationships and figuring out how Networking Pyramid works is very critical. If you grok this well, I am sure you will be able to adroitly navigate through the maze of relationships needed to thrive and succeed in the digital age.

Bonus Parting Gift: A Millennial's Glossary for Networking in the Digital Age

Digital Technologies have changed the networking game as knew it. To deal with it, you need new words. Here are some of my favorite words I discovered in Michael Andrews' brilliant book, The End of Absence [Highly recommended if you've enjoyed the topics I have touched upon in this article]

1) Smupid ( A portmanteau of "smart" plus "stupid")- Be wisely hesitant before you offer insights in a F-2-F setting to smupid people caught in the paradox of feeling smarter by the ease of access of information and also feeling stupid by the minuscule effort they undertook to receive the information. Make them do some work. Don't give it away too easily.

Eg. Do you come across a text in an unknown language and keep waiting for Google Translate to auto-translate it for you? That's a classic instance of smupid thinking.

2) Tandem-Talk - Stay away from your laptop while talking to someone over the phone. That's rude and considered bad manners. Tandem-talking - checking out small nuggets of information in the person's LinkedIn profile or any other virtual avatar while talking to the same person raises doubt over the person's intelligence to sustain a conversation without seeking external crutch.

3) Phone Dodge - Never, ever check your phone's notifications when you are living through an awkward moment in a shared living conversation space with a friend or an acquaintance. Observe throughout your socializing period of the day when you feel triggered to do a Phone Dodge - "the act of compulsively checking one's phone in an awkward moment". Observe what happens to your breath when you don't give in.

4) Overspire - Haven't you observed that feeling of overspiration - when there is too much inspiration to do stuff, seeing the social ideas gaining currency around your stream? That is a clear indication that you need to walk away from the abstract world of social networking and confront the flesh-and-blood real world for what it is.

5) Techapropism - Appropriation of computer terminology to describe real-life experiences. Have you caught yourself talking to your friends about what you did based on the clicks you made and the links you saw in your feed? That's a classic instance of Techaproprism. Observe why you feel inclined to share them. What is your need?

I would love to learn more from your experiences in relationships and networking. What resonated with you? I am all ears.

Since the new LinkedIn UI doesn't help me see who shared my articles, it would be great if you could tag me when you are sharing this article. That would help me join the dialogue you are facilitating based on this article.

Line Break Image Credits: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook Notes (his recent one about saving the planet with Facebook)

A different version of this article was published a year ago here.