Why is it always turn to all or nothing. Sides being drawn.
You can be very technically competent and socially engaging, simultaneously.
Social, as in EQ - not meaning having to be a professional client entertainment guru or party type. It’s an EQ ability not just IQ. It’s a bit of both.
Networking isn’t about slapping someone the back and being a goof.
It’s about representing and curating your personal brand, board activity, professional connections and national councils.
It’s staying connected to former colleagues and clients with sincere interest over time.
It’s being helpful when you can with a reference or phone call.
It’s mentoring formally and informally. It’s using technology.
It’s not burning bridges.
It’s is not about golf and dinner meetings and conferences.
That’s perhaps useful as you move towards an engagement or as a post transaction thank you. It’s not networking at all.
It seems like this is all a bit of misconception out there.
I made a comment upthread about importance of networking and staying informed and current. I hope no one interpreted that to mean someone can just schmooze their way to a high income!
If you can’t produce, forget it. I just believe top earners are a combination of hard work, production and connecting with people. Trust me, if H doesn’t deliver what his clients expect, he does not get paid.
I am sure we all know someone who is pretty good at “failing upwards”, almost always with “schmooze” skills and/or good at “kissing up”.
I believe it is a trait that you are born with, not learnable.
Oh, c’mon! It was worse decades ago. If you were a man who came from a certain background, all you had to do was have your father pick up the phone. And your golf game for sure counted for a lot. Why do you think nobody wanted to hire Ruth Bader Ginsberg? It wasn’t because she lacked skill.
I recently received few bottles of great champagne because I helped someone in getting his next job. Does that count? I won’t give recommendations on products or people in my business unless I really believe in it.
I am lucky at my current job I don’t need to schmooze too much. They pretty much let me do what I need to do.
@houndmom - I do think it is important to stay current and relevant. It is easy to get lazy sometimes. I try to go to conferences, talk to other people in the business and read. In my business everything moves so fast, it is very easy to fall behind.
Late to the party but a person I know very well is in M&A and makes well over 300k with base plus commission. He went to podunk Ufor undergrad and his MBA. He is NOT part of the old boy network, doesn’t like sports, BUT he is a fantastic communicator and problem solver. He is very driven but not cutthroat. And he’s smart. He took a circuitous route to get where he is. My point is that for many many people, where you go to school doesn’t matter.
Oh, and he was a finance major and his first job out of college was being a repo man. No lie.
From my observation, high earners of this level are dedicated workaholics with dual set of skills, diverse experiences and analytical abilities, no matter which field they are in.
For future, I doubt medicine is going to stay as lucrative once AI and robotics takes over.
Interesting thread - I agree with post #21. Owners of companies providing HVAC, plumbing, electrical should be making $300K. And they’re going to make more with fewer people going into the trades.
A VP or higher in a large publicly traded US company could easily earn $400K/year - $500K/year in total compensation when you include performance shares, stock options, and annual bonus. It is certainly a high salary but not unheard of.
I don’t think that people are describing what type of skills are needed to build a client base. For most people, not all, the old boys network is long gone. Networking, properly understood, is about service and trust. Networking is what you can give, not what you can get. Imagine you need a lawyer or a doctor or an accountant for something important. Are you going to pick the pompous blowhard who went to Ivy U or are you going to pick the person you trust who is also skilled. You are likely going to pick the person who you have observed giving to others for many years, who you see that other people trust, and who you like and trust also. You will pick the person you trust and that will be based upon your own experience—sure cost and skill and other things matter but the number one aspect is trust. It is the same thing if you are picking for your employer. You are not going to pick your boozy buddy when your job is on the line. So, when I referred to networking it is the hard work of proving to the community that you can be trusted and that involves service to others. Lawyers who do very well financially usually, not always, but usually, have a track record of service and loyalty to others lasting many years. You support your friends in their careers from a young age. You donate and work with charities for years. You show leadership in the community. And you do those things because they are things you care about and you are willing to put aside HBO, or the party, or the sporting event when others are not. Are there connected people who also do well. Yes. But, as I said above, my experience is that high earning lawyers are not tied to a particular school, but a reputation earned over time and a dedication without a specific short term monetary goal. So when we think about our kids leading meaningful lives, and making the best of college years, that is not inconsistent with financial success. We can encourage both at many many universities and colleges with no limit on achievement. I have encouraged my kids to find meaning in life first, to give to others with their activities while aiming high in college and beyond.
@manyloyalties You are correct. People hire today from the internet, from recommendations and from the web site. Knowledge is far more important than whom you know. I recently did a second job for a client. Based on a donation I made years ago of a few hours of my time, I have earned quite a bit (5 figures). Luck or karma? I certainly didn’t do it knowing this, but being a good person matters.
On a separate note, not all people learn or pretend to care about sports. I don’t and neither does my spouse, we have both individually earned in this range ( I no longer work full time so currently make less). I do believe that social skills and cues are very important. For men and women, it’s different. A pleasing personality, someone who cares about others and someone very smart will make more than someone in the same industry without those skills. The interpersonal skills are the most important. Honestly is paramount too. Being trustworthy will go far. And sadly, one has to know that politics exist (unless they own the business). They need to be able to counteract others who aren’t so nice and put themselves out there. This is even true if you own the business.
While I have definitely seen people get jobs in high places due to connections, they rarely stay there very long. They are often the people who jump from company to company. This may depend on the industry. When I was in banking they seemed to stay forever.
@mycupoftea While there are a small subset of people who know the secret handshake, most people at the highest echelons of business care more about what you know and how you can make them successful than any other thing. And to stay at this level, you have to deliver daily. As many cite, sometimes it’s being the rainmaker, sometimes it’s having specific knowledge but in all cases, you must show value or you will be shown the door.
"For most people, not all, the old boys network is long gone. "
The boys’ club is very much alive and well in certain industries. It won’t cover for ineptitude but pair it with competence and it continues to service many males quite well.
I agree wholeheartedly. A few females get a break, but I know of one in particular who was put in place as a sacrificial lamb (turned out poorly for the men who did that, because she ended up being great at her job). The boys’ club is alive and well, and it continues to thrive.
From what if seen, there’s often a significant difference between salary and total compensation. A few examples of some high earners I know:
Software development manager: salary approx. $300k, total comp: $800k
Emergency room doctor: salary N/A, wage approx. $200/hr, total comp: $400-500k
Real estate developer: salary $50k, total comp: $400k
Hedge fund analyst: salary approx. $200k, total comp: variable but significantly higher
This is a very biased and false generalization.
For my doctors, I do look at where he/she went to medical school and where he/she was trained plus recommendations.
Doctors are a different sub set. The relationship is personal but clinical. Many industries are professions but not clinical. There the ug matters little once excellence and competence is determined.
However lots of smart and personable people attend hpysm. However academia medicine science and cs/engineering this is less of a factor. But to get to the c suite or college pres or hospital ceo you best have the total package.
That’s why so many ultimate leaders have a much more varied background. More CEOs from Michigan state than Harvard in the fortune 100. Many more leading scientists and academics per capita from Harvard.
In all other industries, over time, the highest paid bring home the bacon for the company. No margin. No mission.