How to Get Ahead When You Hate Networking
Networking is important
for career growth but not everyone loves it.
Eric, an executive at
a city firm, developed close ties with an associate partner while working on a
special project. The relationship was envied by many of his cohort who saw it
as a major asset for future advancement. However, once the project concluded,
so did the regular contact and, as Eric did little to cultivate the
relationship, it faded over time. “He should be important for me,” Eric noted
later, “But since I see a network as something which happens naturally and not
artificially, I didn’t really try to keep him.”
Eric’s attitude may
seem odd but it is evidence that, even in today’s network-mad world, people are
very different in their attitudes about chasing influential contacts and in the
importance they place on work relationships when preparing their career
strategies.
More than one way to
build a relationship
A
great deal of research points to the benefits of social networks to create the
practical “get-me-ahead” ties instrumental for pushing ahead professional
careers. It would be fair, given the weight of research, to ask how do
people who aren’t passionate about networking survive? And what can firms
do to help them access and leverage the knowledge that comes from developing
professional relationships? In an effort to answer these questions, we
identified approximately 100 recently-promoted professionals in the areas of
auditing, consulting and law, and over the ensuing 12-16 months studied the
way they developed their portfolio of professional contacts and, more generally,
how they went about networking.
Surprisingly,
we found that having a “networking” strategy did not necessarily mean having a
penchant for it. In fact, the respondents’ basic attitudes and values with
regards to networking differed profoundly. While some clearly had an affinity
for developing business relationships and a natural talent for schmoozing,
others were uncomfortable networking and a third group refused to take part in
a practice they found both manipulative and sleazy.
In our research, we
labelled these three groups the Players, the Moderates and the Purists.
Players: Relational
entrepreneurs
Players genuinely
enjoy meeting people and are strategic in their approach, thinking several
moves ahead and creating contacts well before they are needed. In general,
Players are socially hyperactive, attending office events, seminars, talks,
dinners, etc.; actively branching out in a way that helps them to become
“brokers” in the firm, promoting the cross-flow of ideas (as well as raising
their own visibility). In our study, we found that Players went out of their
way to find common ground and establish rapport outside the immediate work
context. They understood the benefits of maintaining ties with lead partners,
as well peers who could be used to provide emotional support or exchange
strategic information and high-performing subordinates with an eye to ensuring
that top talent will return to their team in the future.
Moderates show
balance and prudence
Despite the
advantages of aggressive networking, the biggest cluster of executives in our
study were the Moderates; individuals who appreciate networking but are wary of
its power. Moderates’ relationship-building tends to emerge from ongoing tasks
and joint work experience, with contacts maintained once a given job is over.
They seek opportunities to exploit useful relationships but are less likely to
ask for targeted favours such as “recommend me to partner X” or
“get me on project Y”.
We also found that,
lacking a pro-active approach to cultivating new contacts, Moderates’ networks,
unlike Players’ ever-expanding Rolodex, have a propensity to shrink over time.
Purists seek
different connections
The third group, the
Purists, find the whole networking process arduous and less important for their
career objectives, which are focused on developing expertise and making an
impact on their industry as a professional rather than climbing the partnership
ladder. Eric, whose experience we noted above, is an example of a Purist, as is
Gerald, a young consultant who believes networking is mostly artificial, done
by posers who want to get ahead. Purists like Gerald and Eric, believe
networking should come naturally. They may initiate a new contact, but only
when their job or task requires it, and without a long-term ‘angle’ or the
desire to tunnel their way into powerful parts of the organisation.
They prize content
and the self-sufficiency of their expertise rather than “having connections”
and tend to let contacts fade. Their relational energy is focused on their
team, stoking team motivation. They are also relatively active when it comes to
managing client contacts, considering them an important channel through which
the real quality of their work can be recognised. They tend to be wary,
however, of too much contact with superiors who are often perceived as a
potential source of complication and unpredictability.
Despite their
reluctance to schmooze, Purists are not social losers or “geeks”. Like all the
individuals who took part in our study, they had recently been promoted, a sign
of competence and a signal of trust from their respective professional service
firms. They do, however, face disadvantages. During the course of our research,
we saw Purists’ networks shrink. Even more worrisome, at the end of the study
they expressed the least organisational commitment and, to a lesser extent, the
least integration with peers. The general risk is that they may end-up
“drifting away” within the firm, and become much less substantial actors on the
firm’s stage than their competence would suggest.
If purists end up
leaving the company, their departure can be mistakenly attributed to a lack of
capability rather than what it is: A failure to embed them in the firm’s
culture.
Leveraging Purists’
commitment and expertise
Companies that lose
Purists risk missing out on the full benefits they can bring.
In our study, they
had the least dense networks, which meant they were the most likely to have
interesting opportunities for creating new ties. Connecting people who can help
one another is a great way to make a difference in any company.
Purists also tend to
have a professionalism and dedication to the task. They love the work-at-hand,
not the schmooze. Clever managers can leverage this to help Purists develop
their networks.
One of the best ways
that we know to develop a strong, authentic network is to add value to the
people around you, to offer to help others before you need it yourself.
Reframing networking in this more altruistic light may better fit with the
sensibilities and values of Purist professionals.
Another
way managers can help Purists pursue the contacts needed for the channelling of
knowledge and resources is to make referrals or share their own social capital.
Recent research has
found that a subordinate connected to a well-networked boss will outperform
peers.
HR managers can also
encourage relationship building and exploit corporate relationships by
expanding task-based networking opportunities and actively looking at ways to
reduce the disdain some employees may feel for overt networking events. This
could be by highlighting Purists’ expertise for internal leverage or building
the event around some aspect of the work at hand, such as bringing in a
cross-department special speaker, or holding a seminar or symposium.
Firms should also
scan their performance management systems for bias. While no company we know of
measures and rewards employee networking for its own sake, internal performance
review systems that inadvertently encourage the accumulation of contacts risk
putting the equally valuable but less socially-overt members offside.
Developing networking
attitudes
Our research gave us
a taste of the overwhelming sense of resentment brewing in the minds of many
professionals about the exploits of Players. And, while there is an element of
sour grapes towards movers and shakers who indulge in self-promotion, there is
the legitimate concern that Players too easily subscribe to the worst of
Machiavelli’s school of tactics, and focus first and foremost on their
self-preservation and not the firm’s broader good.
With this in mind,
Players too, should consider some self-reflective questions when it comes to
networking activity: Are they really helping the firm? What are their motives?
And how will their actions be perceived?
It is also important
to note that networking profiles are not forever fixed. Humans can learn and
adapt. While making a move from Purist to Player is quite rare, people can make
adjustments as to how they go about establishing and maintaining social
relations in their work settings. Like any change, however, it takes awareness
of an individual’s current state and some ideas for where it is they want to
go.
Read more at http://knowledge.insead.edu/leadership-organisations/how-to-get-ahead-when-you-hate-networking-5020?utm_source=INSEAD+Knowledge&utm_campaign=1c75c72b38-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_11_10&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e079141ebb-1c75c72b38-249840429#8IjHWDv8Q4u6eG17.99
No comments:
Post a Comment