Being the youngest attendee (by about 10 years) at a recent conference meant that I spent a considerable amount of time observing the interactions between the more experienced engineers and businessmen. As with many social interactions, there seems to be a formula for such discussions:
- Exchange pleasantries, handshakes & (if appropriate) business cards.
- Ask where the other person is based or "where that accent is from."
Image courtesy bucklava on FlickrShare - Eventually get around to asking what one another do.
- Acknowledge that your organization needs their offering, can fill their need, or has similar technical interests.
- Make agreements to contact the other person to maintain a business contact, acquire their services, or provide them your own.
- Shake hands, and move away with a slight nod.
The formula for networking
The interesting thing for me was noting that, in order to discuss the business you are both there to discuss, you must first (a) indicate how experienced you are, and (b) show that you understand the industry. If you can't satisfy these steps, then you end up stumped at Step 2, which is inevitably followed by an awkward excuse, a gentle nod and a quick exit. The take home message here is that some reactions only go one way:
Tell me why I should listen to you, then tell me what you have to say.
We are constantly reminded about the importance of market knowledge and experience, so I got thinking about a business barrier I now refer to as The Credibility Threshold. Enter our beloved activation energy graph:
Input enough energy and your reaction begins, but don't put enough in, and pfft...nothing. No bond can be formed, no product produced, and no (pardon the cheese) chemistry occurs.
But now replace our activation energy with activation credibility, and the interaction above makes a little more sense. We need to put enough energy into the relationship before it is going to produce the end product we are seeking.
In short this means that we need to 'talk the talk' in order to network effectively.
Gain industry knowledge to build credibility
Obviously ChEnected is a great place for finding out Chem Eng information, but for more industry-specific knowledge you may need to be more creative. Here are some of the methods I use to keep up-to-date:
- Going to local seminars through Engineers Australia and IChemE (you can do this through AIChE - check out your local chapter);
- Taking advantage of conversations with my colleagues and bosses who see different aspects of projects, have more experience, etc.;
- Reading industry RSS feeds on my daily commute (if you have a smartphone, then I recommend NewsRoom);
- Following Twitter users who post interesting industry information (e.g., I follow a number of oil companies, energy news outlets, and Chem Eng related posters);
- Reading industry publications (if you're an AIChE member, then CEP is a good place to start); and
- Staying in contact with previous colleagues (through lunches, phone calls, e-mails and LinkedIn - preferably in that order).
Yes, this takes some effort, but the payoff is the ability to break through the credibility threshold. This opens up opportunities to discuss interesting information, make business contacts or build good industry relationships.
Oh, and see how the use of a catalyst means that less energy is required? Find a good mentor or champion to be your catalyst. It'll be the best career move you ever make.
Comments
The term network itself implies that there are nodes through which information between entities flows. These are common points of interest that are requisite to a fruitful exchange. The quandary in new potential relationships is mining the experiences and "what do you do" to find the reference. A good way to handle that with engineers is to try to cipher through the small talk to get to the part about what they like to do and what is fun. Even shy folks and introverted types will immediately loosen up and help the discovery phase of the networking. Sometimes, you can't shut an engineer off though so be warned!
Sorry, Robert. I accidentally posted a new comment instead of a reply (which may not notify you directly). Reply below.
I completely agree with you, Teresa, and I appreciate you commenting! Listening, and being genuinely involved in the other person's world is absolutely fundamental in networking, but I'd add that the best listening skills often only work when you ask the right questions. In my experience, professionals seem to range from good to poor on listening skills, but that good questioners number very few.
Your last point made me laugh, Robert! You are right that the best way to get to a comfortable area of conversation is to reach some common ground, but often filtering to that is the hardest part. Most people can only focus easily on their hobby or their projects, and it is hard to determine someone else's interests if you are only invested in understanding your own. The part of the conversation that I left out in the list above was the going around in circles about "where is your accent from... oh I worked there on this project... oh I worked for that client too... etc." which eventually led to common ground for the professionals I was observing. Once there, the discussion is easy, but that dance of questioning and determining nodes seems highly dependent on whether or not you know the business talk. Thanks very much for commenting, and I like your networking 'visual.'
Agree. Americans are very competitive and I am no exception to that rule. In foreign social circles where networking opportunities exist, it's nature to unwittingly compete, i.e., define our worth and value to society by asking or offering up "what we do". As chemical engineer, I am very proud of my profession and the things I have been able to accomplish and so I will try to establish this as a common node. The neat thing about being a ChE is that there are lots of peripheral satellites of interest that orbit this core node and - I think - an ability to locate and share the strong advantages we have to establish likability, trust, interest and a solid network across multiple professions. I mean, just scan the blog entries here. Everything from management techniques to nanotechnology. Diversity much?
It's interesting that you say it is an American trait, Teresa. I certainly noticed the American tendency to align one's profession with their own worth when I lived there, and I think Robert is right - it could be based in some form of pride (or perhaps competition). I know I have pride associated with Chem Eng for all the reasons that Robert mentioned! The interesting thing, though, is that the conference I mentioned in the post was actually in Singapore with mostly British and S.E. Asian expats and professionals. It seemed as though it was still the aim of most of the conversations to get around to some type of "business connection" rather than simply common ground. I did note, however, that the best connection I made (and maintained thereafter) was with a fellow who was uninterested in speaking about our desk jobs. It took a number of follow-up emails to eventually reveal what we each 'do' to one another, but by then we had enough common ground to appreciate each other despite whether or not we could exchange services.
Ahhh, networking and how to do it. Really good topic Aurian and glad to see so many people chime in. I agree with the a lot of the point you brought up about getting more educated for keeping up to date. It seems (in my opinion) that there's a slow uptake to the number of chemEs who use twitter regularly. I know there are a lot out there but it's not as much of a "given" at AIChE meetings as it is at a lot of other conferences I've been to. I don't think it's an end-all-be-all but it certainly can give a professional a good sense on buzz in a particular profession, including chemical engineering.
I often wonder why that is, John (or in the same breath why it is so hard to get us to participate on boards like ChEnected, too). Many of my professional friends refuse to use Twitter because of the celebrity-gossip stigma that is attached to it. When I explain how I use it they become interested, but they still think it's a glorified Facebook status updater. The only people who understand its worth as a news outlet are those who already use it! Perhaps as it becomes more mainstream, it'll catch on with engineers.
It's also worth mentioning that this form of the post doesn't contain one of the critical points of discussion that I observed at this conference (and possibly the most important for this post to be relevant!). Between steps 2 and 3 are the following steps (which I must have accidentally edited out somehow...?): 2a. Share a story of working in the discussed location. 2b. Discuss the business environment and developments in one of the locations. These steps are the ones that put the emphasis on understanding the industry and educating yourself, which was essentially the point I was trying to make.
Walking up to a group of people is certainly difficult, and there is nothing that makes you feel more awkward than introducing yourself and having people stare at you! It's much easier if you are one-on-one to begin. I'm the same - sometimes I'm on my game, and networking is effortless. Asking the right questions seems easy, and finding points to further engage on is almost like fun! Then there are times when it seems like pulling teeth to find anything to talk about that interests both of you. I've always thought that it was my introvert side taking over, but who knows!
Found your site on Bing...Great post! I look forward to reading more from your site.