It is fascinating to look at how people function in their unique social and cultural environments. If you look at different parts of history, particularly any time before the 20th Century, you’ll make some interesting observations. This is, of course, prior to when we were globally connected by telephones, satellites, and the internet. It is even before the convenience of motorized vehicles. In those times, you can see that people tended to be geographically isolated. They clustered together in their immediate family groups, having the security of some shared resources, and the potential for mutual support. As you move beyond the intimate family circles, people had their small neighborhoods, with “closer” neighbors that they might associate with.
Moving a bit further out, you could find the village or regional community. Within that community, there were specialized resources that everyone relied on to fill particular needs. People came to those experts to carry out the work that they were unable to do themselves. This might include someone like the blacksmith or the wainwright, or perhaps someone that sold specialized supplies. If you had a problem, or a gap in your knowledge or skills, you gradually moved outside your circle until you found someone that could help. Without those connections to the specializations, you could find yourself in trouble. Or you did without.
I’d argue that for all of our globalization and technological advancements, we aren’t all that different in the 21st Century. Where centuries ago, the “simple” farmer had a wider and more diverse skillset, in today’s world, we’ve hyperspecialized ourselves. Sure, we have the world at our fingertips, and we are more technologically advanced, but now, without the intricate resource networks that connect us all, we quickly find ourselves in difficulty.
Networks
I’m a big fan of networks, don’t get me wrong. If you felt the earlier commentary was a criticism of our current, modern society, please don’t think that. Networks are absolutely brilliant. Networks allow us to develop new and unique skills, without being hobbled by a need to know everything. We can focus on areas where we have innate skills or interests, developing knowledge and experience where it matters to us. When we come up against something that needs specialized knowledge, we can find someone that can do it quicker, smarter, and more efficiently. We can spend our time where we are best suited, and temporarily parachute someone in to help where it is needed.
Networks can be social, skill or resource-based, or they can be knowledge-based. Networks give us a chance for a first, second, or third opinion. Networks can provide support or encouragement. Networks can motivate us. Networks can save us heartache and troubles, by pre-emptively redirecting us away from pitfalls, or they can drop a rope down to help us out of them.
Cultivating Networks
For the most part, networks don’t just magically appear or develop on their own. There needs to be some initial trigger that creates the connection between the parts of the network. Over time, with work and effort, the ties are strengthened, multiplied, and the strength of the network increases. One of the beauties of a network is that each part of the network doesn’t have to know all of the other parts. You might know one or two or three of the other parts, or you might at least know that they exist, but it is the connections that increase the strength of the network, not the number of connections an individual part has to other parts.
In a network, you might only know A and B, but A knows C and F, B knows D and E, and as a result, you have connections to C, D, E, and F. It’s network magic.
I think that cultivating networks is a give and take process. The more that you contribute to your ties, and add new ties, the stronger the overall net becomes. If you never connect with the parts, the ties wither and weaken.
Some networks can be started by joining a particular group. For example, as a result of membership in an association or organization, you gain access to a network, which you can now contribute to and expand.
Since it is impossible to know everything, it is worth knowing others. The combined knowledge of the network will vastly surpass your own, individual knowledge.
Maybe know less about stuff, but make sure that you know more people instead.
On point again, Rob. Generations ago, success was largely about who you knew (“Bob’s your uncle”). When we moved into knowledge-based work, nepotism was displaced by what you knew. Now it is both.
You nailed it when you wrote, “Since it is impossible to know everything, it is worth knowing others. The combined knowledge of the network will vastly surpass your own, individual knowledge.” Well said.