<div class="text-justify">

I had an onsite training session today, which is rare and a reminder of how much I like being in a physical room with someone. There is just so much more connection, as there is less distraction. I only see this client once every two months, so it is a bit different to the weekly ones, but it works for what we are looking to do. In general, it is about career growth through identifying gaps wherever they appear, and then taking steps to fill them. Today, we spent most of the time talking about *networking.*


![image.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/tarazkp/243zVJBUnu6ffjfzqkDP862zE6nSHtaaH4iTrcjL8SY7Wa3kEgH8Bq4wfZ9phPWYxMUsK.png)


> Sounds douchey. 

But I think that is because it has been overused in the wrong ways, where it is seen as some kind of social mingling to rub shoulders and hand out business cards in a lame attempt to get one's name out there to sell something. But building a solid professional network is more like building a reference group of trusted people across a diverse range of skillsets and positions. It is like building an informal organization, and like all organizations, it works on trade. Sharing of value. This means that to build a personal network of value, an individual also has to have something to trade, to be able to provide value to the network.

This is easier said than done, especially since in general, when building a professional network, it is going to also need to include people who are higher up the food chain at the company. The trade here is generally the kind of thing that helps them get where they are looking to go, which is generally by helping them hit their milestones in some way. 

But we were talking a little about different ways to do this, and a handy and simple example came back to mind that I have used in the past as to why it is important to have the network spread widely enough. 

> Imagine a round casting net spread out on the ground and the goal is to lift it all up off the ground. If you pick up the edge, to get it off the ground it will take lifting it the diameter measurement to get it off the ground. You can half this by picking it up in the middle, which means lifting it the radius. However, the more lifting points and the further they are spread across the net, the less height is required. Essentially, the effort is spread, with no single point needing to do too much work to make an impact. 

For me, that is a good visualization of a healthy network, because it also visualizes that they would also have to be pulling in the same direction upward, even if they aren't quite pulling at the same time. In a lot of organizations of significant size, people might not be collaborating well together, and some might be standing on the net itself, making lifting it entirely off the ground impossible. But while there is no perfect network, if a personal network is built on mutual gains of some sort and shared trust, there tends to be pretty good results, because it is in no one's best interest to stand on the net. 

What I find interesting is that while a small group of people like my client are putting in the effort to improve their networking abilities, many others are lessening theirs. It is interesting because as people wind back their own personal networks, it will make the ones of those who spend time building theirs, even more valuable. It is an investment thing, where if there is something of value but the bar is high to get it, it provides a premium. And I suspect that in the future, some people will claim that it is is "unfair" that others have a network to leverage. 

> They already are.

For example, a topic came up of equal opportunity in the workplace regardless of background, and someone mentioned that it might not be fair that people who choose to work remotely and don't come into the office, miss out on opportunity for advancement. In general though, the people who are often remote, might be doing their job well, they aren't usually building that network actively to help others and, that network isn't as "personal", it is transactional. People only talk when they want something.

Many disagree with me on this and will argue that they aren't like that. But at least from my own observations over the last four years of many people working remotely, it is very much like that. Even the most active ones, are generally building their network like they would at a "networking event", only shaking hands when they want to get something for themselves, even if they have nothing to trade. 

But as said in the opening line. I value face to face interactions, because there is *more value in them* than across screens. The screens are great at times and for some usecases, especially if distance is an issue, but if someone isn't willing to spend twenty minutes to get to work occasionally to connect with others over a coffee, that tells something about them too, right? 

Out of sight, out of mind. 

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]


</div>