Amidst shrinking opportunities comes what most of us have heard many a times – the power of networks – or otherwise referred to as connections. I usually have a problem with the word connections. The many or rare occasions I have heard it used, it gives the connotation of ‘using influence to gain opportunities or favour.’ And yes – there is some level of truth behind the misconception. But should this always be case? I do not think so. I think that connections if well used can and should open genuine doors that you wouldn’t otherwise have known about but if you did the probability of getting through are close to none. Connections are not necessarily about asking for preferential treatment or advantages – but rather being given the platform to be seen through the door so you can prove that you deserve to be inside in the room. There is something special about networks which is the tendency to associate with or want to work with people with whom you have built trust. It is human nature to trust third parties within our network in the hopes that birds of a feather flock together, than go scouting for trust from complete strangers.

I am one of those people who prefer to hit a contact and find out what an opportunity is all about. I find it as being strategic rather than ill-intended getting an upper hand. There are situations, at least in my experience, where you miss out on great opportunities because you simply never knew or heard about them early enough. A regular catch-up phone call could have easily given you access to that information. While it is good to give everyone an equal playing field meaning nobody gets an upper advantage because they knew somebody within a network – I also believe that it is good to reach prospective outstanding candidates and encourage them to submit their applications for available opportunities. It is easier to have a few strong proposals than hundreds of irrelevant and sometimes displaced applications. Let’s face it, sometimes we submit applications for opportunities that we are not qualified for because it gives us hope in knowing that our records exist in a system somewhere and anything could happen.

While I am a strong believer in the power of networks to provide firsthand market intelligence, I have recently come across networks – who either due to a misunderstanding of connections or genuinely out of bad experiences are very unreciprocating when it comes to leveraging on network referrals. It could also be out of fear of risking own reputation, as I gathered from a friend who mentioned that nobody wants things to go wrong and be blamed for having made the referral.  This rings a bell of a recent experience in which a network was contacted with the aim to recommend a candidate for a role because the candidate matched the profile and had strong skillset. There was no malice or special favour intended in the referral move.  However, the impression gathered by the recipient was that their network was asking for a special consideration outside meritocracy – which is the exact word that was used in the conversation.  This was quite embarrassing and bruising. Because the referee happens to a be a person of honor known for upholding integrity. So much that they would not go out of their way to make non-merited references if they had no first-hand experience of the ethics and quality of work output of the party they are recommending for due process consideration.

Caught up in the above discussion, I was unsure of the advice to give. I am person who equally believes in competency-based offers rather than rewarding cronies, it doesn’t matter how close or powerful the subject is. So, when a network gives you a reply to insinuate that you were seeking preferential treatment, it makes you question yourself endlessly. For example, has your sense of integrity failed the moral test? Has your understanding of how things should work in a transparent world been wrong all along? Is the world too corrupted that it is no longer possible to make genuine referrals, so bad that if you tried to nominate or mention credible resources – you are seen as the propagator of rotten eggs within the broken system? I am usually of the opinion that there is no need to pursue a rigorous but blind process if there is room to make use of well researched or justified minimum shortlists – it saves everyone the human and commercial resources while enhancing process efficiency, if you ask me. Is it always the right thing to do? Maybe or maybe not – but if transparent and backed by institutional policy – then there is no harm in doing so. I also believe that time and space define a lot of things but are often overlooked.

With or without ‘connections’, outstanding talents will always shine at the right time or space. Networks help to enhance the visibility chances which is not a bad thing and should not be regretted or be considered as embarrassing.

Networks exist for a reason, and it doesn’t hurt to reach out and make inquiries that do not amount to collusion or seeking advantageous information. Networks are valuable to the extent that we make them work correctly. For as long you are not gaining any special treatment or favours, it is okay make referrals of great experts or service providers. You have a first-hand experience of their performance or delivery standards and can therefore articulate their competency better than expecting a computer-based algorithm to run through and pick the best candidates. Human intelligence will always remain smarter than we think or imagine – nothing – not even artificial intelligence can replace that.

Until the next post, happy moments leveraging on the power of your networks without getting it twisted.