About six weeks ago I spent time updating my information on Linked In, the popular networking and job search site. I was told it was very important that I spend time on Linked In, but I must admit that when I compared notes with people, I was humbled (or maybe humiliated). Some of my colleagues have several hundred people in their networks whereas I had about 25. The common wisdom is apparently “Network or not work”.
So is this true? Jon Piccoult in his article “Networks Too Big for Their Own Good”, comments that the quality of these connections has been greatly diluted. As I begin to add to the list of people who I’ve had significant interaction with in business, worked with on not-for-profit boards, or assisted with fundraisers, it was a relief to hear some validation that quality, not size matters when it comes to our professional networks:
“IS your company searching for proactive, enterprising people who take the bull by the horns and get things done? These people aren’t constrained by their networks. They’ve taken real initiative, researched your company, identified executives in their area of interest, and sent those people unsolicited résumés and thoughtful, genuine messages of interest. They’re the ones who have pinned their hopes on a belief that meritocracy deserves a place not just in a company’s dealings with its employees, but also in its search for new talent.” (Piccoult, NYT column Preoccupations, Oct 17, 2009)
So, the hopeful message is networking is important, we need to nurture these relationships with care and over time, but in the end it’s our raw talent that will make the difference.
