It depends on what it means to you.

Yesterday I was at a corporate beachevent. Before some of the activities started, one of the speakers announced this was not a networking event thereby insinuating that networking is a bad thing. I think some of the speaker’s feelings were due to Dutch culture where sticking your head out is frowned up. Being average is the norm. Networking is also often regarded as a form of egoism, because others become tools and assets in the quest for one’s personal enhancement. People become impersonal, because they serve one’s purpose.

However, this is in my opinion a completely wrong view of networking. It is one that will not survive in a 2.0 world where giving becomes much more the norm. Networking 2.0 is not about egoism or impersonally building a network of assets. It’s foremost about listening to other people and a sharing of information, both online as offline. Being real and authentic is a much better networking competence than crookedly taking advantage of other people. When we look at people with big networks, do they have these because they give and share or because they take advantage of others? Seth Godin comes to mind for instance. Why do so many sites link to his blog? Not just because he is a good marketer, but he shares his knowledge for free by having a blog and creating free ebooks. Darwin has said the strongest survive, but 2.0 proves more and more that the kindest survive.

As one great Vaisnava saints has said: “Sincerity is invincible,” and that counts for networking as well. Networking is thus as dirty as your own intention of doing it.

Vote or submit article to: