Hacker News Reader

Comment by getmeinrn | Hacker News Reader

Networking is an enormous time sink, where 95% of your interactions are unfruitful, but you have to pretend to be enjoying them anyways. Maybe you find one connection that is worthwhile, and of that one connection, you have to carefully nurture it, without giving off the "this is the one important connection" vibes, because people can smell that a mile away. And sometimes that connection evaporates under mysterious causes. It's pointless. I truly can't justify wasting my time doing it when I could be producing things that anonymous people appreciate and rely on. I'd rather serve them than waste my time playing delicate social/power games with people in my proximity that I don't even relate to. At least when you serve anonymous people, they're generally honest about the quality of your work. You can't rely on anyone in these networks to be honest with you like an anonymous person can.

View on HN

Networking isn't necessarily and generally shouldn't be about formal NETWORKING events and doing "delicate social/power games" as you put it. You just work with people, talk to them at conferences, join activity groups that you're interested in, etc. Every job I've had since grad school (admittedly not a lot) has come through people I've known professionally in some capacity.

As a counter point, only 1 of the 5 tech jobs in my career have come through a connection. It can be done, and in the long run I think it's better for personal and professional growth to get opportunities that way. Not to mention that every time you get an opportunity through a connection, you're potentially screwing over someone else more qualified, without a connection.

I think the key point here is that there is "networking" as in making friends with people you spend meaningful time with vs "Networking" in the sense of going to parties or meetups in hopes of shaking hands with and BSing with someone for 5 minutes and linking in with them- and this seems to be the type that most push.

Most of the important networking happens naturally and is never a forced thing. I worked with a group about 20 years ago now, doing some stuff that was groundbreaking and we all still keep in touch and will absolutely vouch for one another and get each other jobs if we need to, but not once did I ever think about my time with them as networking. Same with some other jobs as well. But that DBA guy on another team that I was constantly having to pull teeth with to get any work out of that sent me a linkedin request? Its probably better for him that I forget his name and give him a second chance then remember how mediocre I felt he was.

I have been to conferences, and spoken at my share of them, and there are always "Networking" events around these, and even when I was actively hiring and looking around the room- with something to offer!- none of these resulted in any meaningful or long lasting relationships.

Yes, having a network is important. But the way to build it is to earn the trust, respect, and friendship of those around you. I mean I guess you can push this along a bit by going to happy hour and trying to bond a bit, but networking to me is 95% an organic thing and not something you should force, especially in tech.

I guess a caveat to that is that some people have to- and should- work to be generally likable. I have known some very smart people I would really prefer to never have to work with again.

>I guess a caveat to that is that some people have to- and should- work to be generally likable. I have known some very smart people I would really prefer to never have to work with again.

I think you hit on something here. When someone is viewed as generally unlikable, excluding them is contagious. No matter how hard they work at it, it will always be socially easy and acceptable by the in-group to exclude them. There is relatively no pressure on the in-group to work at being more accepting towards "unlikable" people, like there is for those people to "work to be likable." People are extremely unforgiving in social interactions.

"you're potentially taking X outta more-qualified Y's hands"

Why is this limitation mindset present in some people and not others? I understand quite fully that there is a difference in mindset between growth/limitation but... you're not "Taking a job" if they're more qualified and better-suited, the employer can hire them instead of you, but they didn't. It's not a zero sum world.

I've been part of different hiring processes long enough to see just how many people get hired because they know somebody on the team, when there were other candidates who were as qualified or more qualified. When we can hire 1 person, my experience is that it is 1000% biased towards knowing somebody. Sure, if there is an undefined number of open reqs, you can argue that there is still space for the more qualified, unconnected applicants. But when you're dealing with a finite number of open reqs, there's actually not, and it is a zero sum game.

Well, pretty much most people know that interviews aren't a great way to assess signal--certainly at the margins. So as long as someone seems qualified, a team member who has actually worked with them in some capacity who vouches for them tilts the scales quite a bit.

Yep, and if you've ever worked with someone who is a "dud" but leveraged their connections to get the position, you'll know how frustrating it is to realize you're competing with this outsized advantage.

"Knows someone" means that the someone they know liked them enough to recommend them. Hiring an unknown person with more skills is taking a gamble on personality?

How are you defining this? You made cold outreach to the companies for job postings you saw adverts for?

I ask because if recruiters were involved they are often power networkers that will unashamedly ask the people you know, "who do you know that would be good for this job."

My cofounder got two jobs because after they rejected me I told the agent they should hire him instead and they did.

Still, why constrain yourself to strict meritocracy when you can instead get ahead with some social tricks? If you're not cheating, you're not trying.

This, in fact I suspect that these in person power networking events are (no offense to those who participate) a market for lemons, in the sense that only people in need of a job/career change/etc are going to them. People who already have a jobs and networks, at least among those I know, wouldn’t go to these events. Maybe they would if they were hiring, but probably they’d be more likely to go to a job fair than a more open ended networking event, since the hit rate would be higher.

Former bosses and coworkers, friends from college, etc are great additions to my network. I was never going out of my way “to network” with them, they’re connections I built from going out in the world and doing stuff. Random people on LinkedIn or who I met once and exchanged GitHubs or LinkedIn with, unless they were actively trying to hire people, have never been valuable IME, despite them being actively “networking.”

Not even networking events per se, but I've been at many local cheap/free conferences because I was interested in some of the topics, was speaking, etc. And, especially if the industry was in a bit of the doldrums at the time, you'd have a ton of people intent on exchanging LinkedIns or trading business cards and fairly obviously solely there to try to get a lead to a job somewhere.

Entirely this.

"Networking" has been indispensable in every aspect of my career. I hate the term "networking", though, because it implies it's some kind of special activity. It's not. It just means maintaining professional relationships. You "network" every day when you're working with your teammates, for instance.

Networking events are, in my experience, a pointless waste of time.

OP started out talking about plumbers; if you want to meet plumbers (or their friends) at networking events, you're going to have to start attending builder's conferences.

And even if you do that, the people you're likely to meet will be businessmen, not tradesmen. Tradesmen work, and when they're not working, they're either getting training or they're on holiday. They don't do "events".

I used to feel this way but now I am in a position where I professionally depend on my "network," and I got very good at it by completely changing the way I think about it.

I mostly don't talk to people when I don't gel with them personally. When I'm at something like a conference, I talk to people whose work I have legitimate questions about, and ask them earnestly wanting to learn from them. I'm a curious person and I like talking about things I've learned, so this is the best way for me to find people I can really get along with.

I put more thought and effort into my relationships with people that I can relate to and enjoy talking to. I also put thought and effort into thinking about ways I can help them or make their lives better.

I also put effort into asking people I trust for advice or help on things I care about. I share my own knowledge and thoughts freely.

Since I hate small-talk and dislike introducing myself to random people, I lean on the people I know who are "connectors," people who enjoy making introductions and being at the center of social circles. I go out of my way to thank them for good introductions.

I also just once every few months go through my list of contacts on chat apps and see who I haven't spoken to in a long time and ask them how they're doing.

All of that seems to be enough to maintain a healthy professional network, and none of it feels bad or cheap, and in fact it mostly makes me feel happy and good.

>I truly can't justify wasting my time doing it when I could be producing things that anonymous people appreciate and rely on.

On the other hand, anonymity just means people take and take from you, and there is less of a human mechanism to sympathize with (on both sides of the equation). It's oh so common to see a creator start to despise their audience because the more savory people are just that damaging to their mentality.

I think it really depends on what your goal is. I think "true networking" feels no different from making a close friend, finding someone you share passions, goals, and missions with. Someone you can call to grab lunch with out of the blue for no special occasion without feeling awkward. But in professional standpoints, you don't need a lifelong buddy if your goal is simply to get a new job or a promotion. I guess being honest with that can help cut that tension.

Unrelated note, but I feel like the concept of "networking", in general, is something that introverts have come up with to explain/emulate something that extroverts do naturally, and since the behaviors of networking aren't a natural priority for introverts, the efforts are doomed to fail. What I mean by this is: introverts will observe extroverts and think, "hmm, what are they doing that makes them successful?" and see that the extroverts are getting opportunities and advice and recommendations through their circle of acquaintances, and think "wow, if I do that I'll be successful", and thus try to optimize directly for the result (i.e. meeting important people and maintaining "relationships" with them) instead of the things that lead to the result (i.e. enjoying meeting and hanging out with random people).

From my informal observations in grad school, a lot of introverts' attempts to "network" end up being disasters where they gather people's contact information, make an odd attempt at "maintaining" a connection with people out of thin air, and the relationship eventually fades away. My grad school actually tried "teaching" networking to us, and I haven't met anyone for whom this approach worked, because I don't think it's possible to teach a personality trait. On the other hand, I've observed that extroverts will make a lot of friends and naturally engage in reciprocal relationships even with acquaintances and don't really put what feels like "effort" into nurturing those relationships.

This difference in priorities reflects in what "networking" looks like for these groups of people:

Introvert - go to a "networking event" once in a blue moon, smile through the awkwardness, hope to connect with someone who can directly help you, collect some LinkedIns, look for the important people, send a DM or two on LinkedIn, ghosted or never talk to those people again

Extrovert - go to some event, grab drinks, talk with a bunch of random people, hit it off with some people regardless of how important they are and invite them to things (e.g. going out, or for some kind of hobby) or get invited to things, hang out with new friend/acquaintance later as previously agreed upon and maybe even bring them into your own social circle, after making many such friend/acquaintances you are now at most 2 degrees removed from someone important / who can directly help you

This is all to say that if networking doesn't come "naturally", it doesn't make sense to intentionally engage in the behaviors of it, as this commits the error of optimizing for the wrong things (like getting people's contact info and hoping for a positive outcome), instead of doing what comes naturally to extroverts (i.e. just making friends without a particular aim where the friend-making is itself the positive outcome). Unfortunately, this means accepting the downside of having lower access to opportunities than extroverted peers, or pursuing different types of opportunities altogether.

>On the other hand, I've observed that extroverts will make a lot of friends and naturally engage in reciprocal relationships even with acquaintances and don't really put what feels like "effort" into nurturing those relationships.

To give a practical example, early in my career I had a hard time talking up people. Senior folks seemed intimidating, and junior colleagues seemed to have it easier than I did. But I found it was easier to talk to new hires as they arrived, because they didn't know a lot of people themselves. I was the more "established" person in their eyes, so I became their go-to guy for questions and advice. I then built up good connections with an increasing number of new hires, which made me the go-to guy for senior folks looking to connect with juniors. Before I knew it, I had all those reciprocal relationships and a network in which I had a strong reputation. No social gamesmanship at all.

>This is all to say that if networking doesn't come "naturally", it doesn't make sense to intentionally engage in the behaviors of it, as this commits the error of optimizing for the wrong things instead of doing what comes naturally to extroverts

I hate to say it but you may have a point here. I read the example in the article and what goes on in my head is "Do I REALLY want to go to parties just to meet friends who may or may not know a good plumber in the area?" Or worse, "Romantically involve myself in someone to get access to their friend group so maybe one of them knows a good plumber?"

And I guess that's the point. This sounds like work and unnecessary effort to me, wheras it's just a "natural" side effect of something an extrovert would typically enjoy. I've always been the shopper that comes in with a list and doesn't waiver unless I genuinely forgot to list something I intended to. I guess that mentality isn't the best in networking unless I myself am valuable.

You could try being the kind of person people want favor/approval from by providing some kind of service instead? Organizing some sort of event could be good if you can find a good fit for your interests - you'll be doing a thing that you want or working to accomplish something important to you and it'll naturally provide opportunities for beneficial social interactions.

Or something else - I think you can avoid the antiutility of transparently socializing as a means to an ends by identifying a situation where your purpose is aligned with your intention, and the socialization is a bonus.

> You could try being the kind of person people want favor/approval from by providing some kind of service instead?

Unfortunately the people who open PRs against my open-source code are the same kind of people with the same problems. :P

>identifying a situation where your purpose is aligned with your intention, and the socialization is a bonus.

you know, I thought conventions would be the answer to this for me back in college. But the half dozen or so I went to seemed to have had the same results: cool for some slightly more intimate small talk, but not necessarily for making friends. People already come with friends and have established groups, so they aren't necessarily there for that either (Or you know, there are professional conferences and we end up back at this topic: have a bunch of business cards we maybe follow up on with once).

But yeah, I have another plan once the dust settles on my current situation: There's a few OS repos out there that would knock out 3 birds with one stone if I could start contributing, so I'll see how "internet networking" goes.

>You could try being the kind of person people want favor/approval from by providing some kind of service instead?

Possible, but I don't have any services that come to mind. Just your typical geek into tech, games, and anime.

Most of my "network" is like, I had a job, we went to the pub after work, we got chatting, now we are friends.

It feels weird to even call it a network, that's like LinkedIn speak. People I know through work, university, the gym, etc, all exist on the same level in my mind.

> we went to the pub after work

these days that feels like a very luxurious step to take. Especially when over half the positions I'm looking at are fully remote

Yes, this is a significant reason why I refuse WFH.

I feel pretty bad for the "covid cohort" in universities too.

I agree with the nature of your comment, but I would like to make a small tweak to it: instead of presenting people as "naturally" being introverted or extroverted, I would like to posit that the extroverts you refer to are just more experienced in these kinds of social interactions.

I'm kind of weird because a lot of people see me as being extroverted because I tend to act that way when I'm comfortable with a person. But I'm also the type to magnet to the sole person I know at a party and only occasionally talk to their friends if they speak to me. At the last big social event I went to I probably spent as much time talking to people as I did walking around aimlessly trying to appear busy because I was too afraid to talk to someone new. I don't drink but I can understand why "liquid courage" is so common at socials.

The thing is that we tend to assume if we see a so-called extrovert that they must also not face our same inhibitions. But I have not observed this to be the case. Even people so extroverted they still are in touch with strangers they met abroad on a train (in the time before the internet, no less) share in my feelings of social awkwardness. Conversely, I know people who are much more meek and mild than I who completely excel in a social setting. In both cases, they said the edge they had over me was just experience.

If you think yourself an introvert, think actually about how many times you've tried to talk to people at socials. If you're like me at the last social I went to, then you're getting so much less practice than the guy having twenty awkward conversations.

At least in my case, I am least practiced when it comes to introducing myself to a group of strangers. But I am convinced there is a right combination of words and actions that you have to get a feel for. I needed to ask someone I didn't know a question and a friend of mine went with me; he exchanged a few words that I don't even remember and suddenly I was enough into the conversation that I could get my question out without feeling completely red-faced.

I don't know if you practice presenting slideshows like I do, but when I first practice, I'll do a bunch of 30-second false starts when I present a new slide. I'll start to say something and it will come out wrong or I'll work my way into a corner and get stuck, then I'll restart. Eventually I figure out the right formula for introducing the slide, and the rest usually follows from there.

How you practice socializing is still an open question to me. I know I make it sound easy, but I still have trouble overcoming my fears. Even if I intuitively know the right moves, I lack the confidence to make them. Perhaps my biggest issue is that for a long time I did not approach being social as a learned skill, so I didn't put myself out there. I do believe that with experience most anyone can be the life of the party.

Oof, this ended up being a bunch of words. Whoops.

Edit: one additional thought fragment. Part of what drives my social anxiety is a desire to be accepted by others. For presenting, perhaps this is a strength: I will meticulously choose my words assuming my audience is adversarial and I need to win over their attention and adoration. For socializing, I think it is often more a weakness. Caring so much about presenting myself well ironically causes me to never want to put myself out there because, well, I know I'll be awkward. I still have yet to convince myself emotionally (though I know it logically) that most people I meet will have forgotten me by the end of the event - or they will at least have forgotten the several gaffes I made that keep me up at night.

My experience reflects this strongly! Ironically I performed what you describe as extroverted networking relentlessly by nature with great success for years, went to engineering school as an adult and dutifully attempted to perform 'networking' as it was recommended to me and as a result had almost that exact 'introvert networking' experience.

Like, your description caused me to recoil in horror from remembered embarrassment.

Because of that I think the 'introvert networking' experience is simply following the procedure as described.

I don't really agree. the hard part of networking is being worth talking to for the other person. people will happily overlook a little awkwardness if they think you might be able to help them in the future. you don't have to put in a lot of work to "maintain" the relationship either. just do your best to help them if they ever reach out, and they'll probably be willing to do the same for you.

for me, "networking" is mostly just adding coworkers on LinkedIn. it seemed pointless at first, but a few years later I have first degree connections at most desirable tech companies who would be happy to give me a referral. I find it's usually pretty easy to get a referral even from a second degree connection.

I think you are describing a kind of person who is so good at networking that their network is the main thing of value that they have to offer. this is very hard to achieve as an introverted/shy person, but imo it's not necessary when you have other valuable skills.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com