{"id":46855,"date":"2021-08-31T11:30:27","date_gmt":"2021-08-31T15:30:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/?p=46855"},"modified":"2021-09-01T11:40:33","modified_gmt":"2021-09-01T15:40:33","slug":"how-to-build-a-network","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/how-to-build-a-network\/","title":{"rendered":"How to Build a Network: Be a Giver"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Do you want to level up your networking game? What is the key to building strong, personal ties? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to Adam Grant, the author of Give and Take<\/em>, the key to building a social network is to be a giver<\/a>. Grant explains that takers and matchers usually have small networks because recipients either feel like they’re being manipulated, or the give-take relationship is a quid pro quo. Givers, on the other hand, grow large networks because they give to many people, not knowing who might be helpful down the road.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Keep reading for tips on how to build a network<\/a>, according to psychologist Adam Grant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

How Givers Build Networks<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

If you want to know how to build a network, take Adam Grant’s advice. Networks provide private information, diverse skills<\/a>, and power. Givers tend to create more helpful networks than matchers or takers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The core of why giving works in building networks is that you can\u2019t perfectly predict who will be useful to you in the future<\/strong>. Someone you help might unpredictably become your boss or client in the future. If you selectively target only people you believe will help you, you ignore all the unproven people whose connections would have turned out to be helpful. Plus, because most people professionally tend to be matchers, the \u201clower status\u201d people you help as a giver tend to really appreciate your giving.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In contrast, takers and matchers take advantage of the reciprocity tendency. They offer favors to people whose help they want in the future. But there are two downsides to this approach. First, the recipients often feel like they\u2019re being manipulated<\/strong>. This ends up feeling like a transaction more than a meaningful gesture. Second, matchers tend to build smaller networks than givers or takers, because they help only people for whom there is an immediate benefit. Thus, matchers tend to have a smaller network of ties that are made up of quid pro quo relationships<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good.\u201d<\/strong> \u2013 Samuel Johnson<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Weak Ties and Dormant Ties<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Your social networks are composed of strong ties and weak ties. Strong ties are people whom you\u2019re very close to, people you might invite over for dinner. Weak ties are acquaintances, people you know on a casual basis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Surprisingly, people are much more likely to benefit from weak ties than from strong ties (like your close colleagues and best friends). Strong ties tend to be people belonging to the same group whom you interact with consistently, thus limiting access to new ideas. In contrast, weak ties provide access to information and people from different niches, facilitating creation of new leads.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Adam Grant introduces a type of a weak tie<\/a> \u2013 a dormant tie<\/strong>, someone whom you used to see often but have since lost touch with. Givers and takers both tend to have more dormant ties than matchers, as explained above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But takers and matchers are disadvantaged in reactivating dormant ties. <\/p>\n\n\n\n