STRATEGY 4

Build Diverse and
Solid Relationships

We may have all come on different ships, but we’re in the same boat now.

—Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

RELATIONSHIPS represent the entry point to the second dimension of Black Faces in White Places: society. As we first discussed in the Introduction, this dimension leads to the following question: Is society colorblind? While the answer is a resounding “No,” if you agree with us that the African-American identity and culture are assets (Strategy 1), then you agree that seeing color in our society helps us see the full beauty of our society.

We do not desire a world that is color-blind. Quite to the contrary, we desire a world that fully acknowledges color and embraces difference, but does not discriminate based on race, ethnicity, religion, sex, disability, or sexual orientation. In this kind of environment people can enjoy learning from, connecting with, and working with people who are different from them on the issues that collectively affect them.

African Americans can help move society forward by building solid relationships with diverse people across the globe, but the work needed to realize this kind of world starts within each of us.

Figure 4–1. The path to greatness (Strategy 4).

Personal Diversity

Diversity is the difference between individuals and among groups. This difference could be along several lines, including the “Big 9” social identifiers discussed in Strategy 1 (race, class, gender, sexual orientation, physical ability, ethnicity, language, age, and religion) and much, much more, including different ways of thinking. The arguments for leveraging diversity have traditionally been applied to organizations, particularly corporations. We refer to this as organizational diversity. Computer maker Dell expresses its reasons for encouraging diversity in this way:

By continuing to drive diversity initiatives throughout our organization, we harness each individual’s full potential, provide the best customer experience [by better understanding their needs], tap the best and brightest talent, improve our company’s results, become a better place to work, and further our global citizenship efforts in the many cultures we call home. (emphasis ours)¹

(We note, however, that as of this writing, Dell did not have any African Americans on its executive leadership team.)

The first step for organizations that want to achieve these outcomes is to foster a more inclusive work environment that not only acknowledges and respects differences, but also celebrates differences and taps into them as a source of competitive advantage. Corporations, schools, nonprofit organizations, faith-based groups, and other work, learning, and spiritual organizations must be more receptive and more responsive to people of different backgrounds, including people of color, and view their differences as an asset, not a liability.

In Strategy 1, we made a similar argument from an individual perspective. We discussed the importance of seeing your identity—those things that make you unique (and also make you different)—as perhaps your most valuable asset. Now we take that concept one step further to make the case for personal diversity. We can modify Dell’s diversity statement and apply it to ourselves to provide an individual blueprint:

By continuing to drive diversity initiatives throughout my personal and professional life, I harness my full potential, provide the best human experience by better understanding others’ needs, tap the best and brightest talent in others, improve my personal results, become a better person to know, and further my global citizenship efforts in the many cultures outside my home.

The reality is that we tend to associate with people who are like us or reflect our identity. We often trust others who have similar racial and ethnic backgrounds, grew up in the same or similar neighborhoods, attended the same college or training school, and share affiliations like religion, fraternities and sororities, community organizations, and professions.

If you are an African-American lawyer who went to UCLA and works in a private equity firm, you are more likely to spend time with other African Americans, other UCLA graduates, and other private equity professionals. There’s nothing wrong with that. We (the authors) do it all of the time; we sometimes need to do it for affirmation, or reinforcement, or just to enjoy life (e.g., by enjoying an exclusively “Black moment” or a “Black event”).

We are not suggesting that you have the most diverse personal and professional network. But we are suggesting that you have diversity within your personal and professional network. Just like you have to move beyond your comfort zone to pursue meaningful and diverse experiences (as discussed in Strategy 2), you must also move beyond your comfort zone to build meaningful and diverse relationships with people that are not like you. This places you in a unique and powerful position to then leverage personal diversity.

Leveraging personal diversity means operating seamlessly and naturally within many different contexts. You are able to interact with different people more comfortably because you have a greater appreciation of their cultural norms. You’re able to work with different teams more productively as a result of previous experiences. You’re able to walk in different circles more effectively because you’ve done it before—even if the circumstances or the context are somewhat different. You’re able to play the game, or even different games, because you are not new to the game. In essence, Strategy 4 is yet another way of promoting the ideals of Strategy 2.

By the time J.R. accepted a job at drugmaker Merck & Co. in 1996, the number of African-American employees was growing and some were breaking into the upper echelons of the corporation. J.R. spent three summers interning at Merck and, from that experience, had formed valuable relationships with other interns and full-time employees of many races and backgrounds. Many of those relationships allowed him to perform well at Merck, but those weren’t the only important relationships. Forming a bond with Merck’s blue-collar workforce, in addition to having a good relationship with the traditional office workers (the so-called “white-collar” staffers), enhanced J.R.’s experience in a number of ways, as he explains:

The only thing that separates you during the day is that some of us are wearing suits and some of us are wearing uniforms, but at the end of the day we are all Black. We would go to each other’s houses. We would go and hang out. There were some events, like somebody retiring, [when] we all came together to celebrate. One benefit [was] that a lot of those older Black employees had been there a long time. They knew the real deal. They knew what happened in the past. They knew who had treated who well and who to watch out for. They would tell us things like, “See him smiling in your face right now, but ten years ago, this happened.…” So there was some knowledge transfer going on.

African Americans have always been called upon to “code switch,” that is, adapt our behaviors to cultures other than our own. In America, that has historically meant learning the game and playing the game of the majority, white culture. But in a global, diverse society, and in a United States where minorities are the majority, we will be increasingly called upon to code-switch according to an even wider array of norms, standards, and customs. You cannot reshape America if you do not have an appreciation of the diversity that is reflected in America. It’s not about “us” learning more about “them.” And it’s not even about “them” learning more about “us.” It’s about cultural reciprocity—creating a culture where everyone sees the value in learning more about one another.

Leveraging personal diversity is essentially a process, not a product. It is an ongoing, never-ending process by which awareness, understanding, and connectedness to others enhances us. It should come as no surprise that the basic building block for personal diversity is also the basic building block for the strategies put forth in Part II: relationships.

Relationship Building

In The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen Covey introduces a metaphor for building solid relationships that we have found to be extremely powerful: “the emotional bank account.” A financial bank account tallies how much money you have stored in a bank. The emotional bank account describes how much trust you have stored in a relationship. And much like a financial bank account accepts monetary deposits that increase savings (and withdrawals that decrease savings), the emotional bank account experiences deposits that build trust (and withdrawals that degrade trust). Meaningful and productive relationships are predicated upon ongoing and regular deposits in the emotional bank account.

We make deposits to the emotional bank account through acts of kindness, compassion, thoughtfulness, and love. For example, the following are six major deposits suggested by Covey:

Understand the individual. Learn what is important to the individual (i.e., what constitutes a deposit to them).

Attend to the little things. Remember that little things (i.e., gestures, courtesies, gifts) mean a lot; little things are really big things.

Keep commitments. Say what you mean and mean what you say.

Clarify expectations. Make expectations clear and explicit, and share them up-front.

Show personal integrity. Conform your actions to your words; be loyal to those who are not present.

Apologize sincerely when you make a withdrawal. “Fess up” when you mess up.

The emotional bank account is central to our discussion here because it portrays exactly how interactions with others can evolve from networking to connecting to clicking.

In his book, Click: Ten Truths for Building Extraordinary Relationships (McGraw-Hill, 2008), relationship-building icon George Fraser writes that relationships often start with networking, or “identifying those with whom you wish to build new relationships.” The next phase is connecting, or “finding, cultivating, nurturing, and building [solid] relationships.” Finally, things begin clicking when the people in the relationship begin “adding special value to each other and creating synergy.” Part II of this book is about networking and connecting. Parts III and IV are about clicking and synergizing.

Black Enterprise founder Earl Graves speaks to the importance of relationship building when he says “networking is a social-first, business-second activity.” Having a business card and networking is not relationship building. Although they can both lead to relationship building, at the end of the day, only relationship building is relationship building, and it is based on the following basic principles:

Invest in your relationships. You truly reap what you sow. Unless you are willing to commit the time it takes to nurture, develop, and maintain relationships, you cannot expect to enjoy any returns.

Seek relationships that promote mutual gain. Relationship building is about giving, not just taking. Seek out opportunities to be helpful to others because what goes around does indeed come back around. You ultimately get out what you put into your network.

Honor and respect all relationships. While some relationships may be more useful than others, they are all valuable. So be nice to people on your way up, because you may see those same people again under different circumstances.

The common thread across any deposits into the emotional bank account (including those examples listed previously) is that they adhere to the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.” When we treat people the way that we would want to be treated (regardless of how they treat us), several positive things happen. We engender a higher level of trust. We implicitly encourage others to treat people similarly, as a result of our example. We naturally allow people to feel “safe” in their interactions with us and with others. And we move one step closer to manifesting the highest level of solidarity that can exist between two people: unconditional love.

Three Compelling Ideas about Relationships

People who regularly interact with one another, or are otherwise connected, are part of the same network. There are three compelling ideas about the patterns of relationships and networks in society, how social connections happen, and how they bring advantages to those who know how to use them.

We discussed the first idea, “six degrees of separation,” in the introduction to Part II to illustrate how our entire world is interconnected. By the end of this chapter, you’ll learn more about two other ideas. The second idea, “the strength of weak ties,” turns the notion that the most valuable relationships are with the people closest to you on its head. Finally, the third compelling idea, “bridging network gaps,” explains why some people are more likely to be at the right place, at the right time, with the right information, and because of this synergy they are able to wield a great deal of influence.

A basic understanding of these three ideas is central to Strategy 4, as each concept is key to producing extraordinary results.

The Strength of Weak Ties

People often marvel at the length of their longest friendships. We (the authors) have been friends for over twenty years. And we have benefited from our relationship personally, through an enduring friendship that includes mutual love and support, and even financially, through our joint business ventures.

Still, we find that often, the people you know the least can actually help you the most. This idea may seem counterintuitive, and you may be asking yourself, “Why is that?”

The answer is simple and lies in the fact that information tends to circulate within groups as opposed to between groups. Since the people you know very well (your strong ties) tend to know each other, those within your inner circle tend to know the same things. For example, if one of your friends is aware of a job opening, it is very likely that your other friends are also aware of the same opening. It also explains why you may receive the same e-mail several times.

By contrast, if someone with whom you are loosely acquainted (your weak ties) holds information, then it is more likely the information is unique. The old classmate you bump into at the airport may know about a job opening that your friends don’t. Information that is of greatest potential value to you is often held by people you do not know very well. Information from these sources tends to be nonredundant and distinct.

STRONG AND WEAK TIES

As shown in Figure 4–2, we can think of relationships along a continuum based on our level of familiarity and the frequency of our interactions. The key to understanding the strength of weak ties is in first understanding the difference between weak ties, which lie on the left side of the continuum, and strong ties, which lie on the right side of the continuum.

Strong Ties: Close Relationships. Some relationships are stronger than others. By “strong” we mean how close the relationship is between you and the other person and how often you communicate with them. We usually have stronger bonds with family members than nonrelatives because we have a shared background and history. We also tend to have stronger relationships with people we have known for a long time than with people we have just met or who are passing acquaintances. Relatives, close friends, longtime associates, and people you speak with on a regular basis are all examples of strong ties. Strong ties are characterized by a high level of familiarity and a high frequency of interaction.

Figure 4–2. The continuum of relationships.

James Coleman (1926–1995) is well regarded as a pioneer in mathematical sociology. His studies influenced U.S. education policy. Coleman saw the significance of a network as being a “net” of support for the members of a network that needed that support. The best example was a strong family unit. If one person was in need of extra assistance, it was the responsibility of the family unit to take care of that person. In this sense, he believed that the network was essential for social support.

Strong relationships bolster the ability for this type of network to be effective in achieving one’s goals or positive outcomes in society. This is what Coleman called “social capital.” Social capital is the value associated with the network of connections that you have. More specifically, it is bonding social capital because its value is in how the people in the network stick together to support one another.

We also have strong relationships outside of our family: namely, our friends. Friends are the people we call for advice; we spend lots of time with them when we hang out. Friends can be classmates, neighbors, and colleagues.

Weak Ties: Distant Relationships. By comparison, there are other people in your life that are best described as a relatively “weak” tie: a distant relationship. A friend-of-a-friend you only see by chance; a fellow member of an organization you sometimes cross paths with at the annual national conference; a colleague working overseas whom you may reach out to from time to time—all are examples of weak ties. Weak ties are characterized by a low level of familiarity and a low frequency of interaction. These people are not as well known to you, and you may not be as comfortable with them as with your strong ties. You are also not likely to be in regular contact with them. Yet these weak ties have information that may be the most useful to you in pursuit of your goals.

Renowned sociologist Mark Granovetter derived the idea of “the strength of weak ties” from several studies in the 1970s about how people found their jobs. In one study, he asked many people who had recently received a job where they heard about this job. The majority of people learned about it from a weak tie.

So what does this tell us? Well, first don’t discount casual acquaintances—you never know who might help you. Second, we need to develop and continually use a method to contact and remain connected to the weak ties in our networks. This is an important concept to understand and one that we’ll circle back to a bit later, but before we do that, we must explain the final compelling idea: “network gaps.”

Bridging Network Gaps

Let’s consider the case of Jamal and Imani. They are employees of the same organization. They have equal talent and really only differ in their network ties. As illustrated in Figure 4–3, the shape of their networks is different—and that’s not a bad thing, if they have different goals. Each network can assist them in achieving different kinds of outcomes.

Figure 4–3. The case of Jamal and Imani.

In looking at their networks, consider whose network is better for:

Resource pooling (or bringing people together to achieve a goal)

Autonomy (or not being controlled by others; being independent)

Diverse information (or finding out what you need to know to navigate relationships and get projects done)

Loyalty (knowing who you can trust, who will work hard with you or for you—in other words, who “has your back”)

Advancement (knowing who will prepare, recommend, and give you opportunities to grow and prosper)

The shape of each employee’s network gives us the answers to these questions. Notice the closeness of the points on Jamal’s network. His network is dense—many of the people know one another and some relationships overlap. This kind of network is excellent for pooling resources and for loyalty, because there is some trust and cohesion. Trust is built up greatly in dense networks, and accountability is built into the network because all of the people know each other.

Now take another look at Imani’s network. There are fewer points on Imani’s network and they are spread farther apart. There is not nearly as much interconnection. Imani’s network is sparse, which makes it great for gaining autonomy and diverse information, since the contacts do not overlap.

Sociologist and business professor Ronald Burt studied the careers of thousands of business people who were making their way through a corporation. He cataloged their career paths, salaries, promotions, performance ratings, and all of their connections to other employees in the company. Several patterns were observed:

In large networks of people (such as companies and nonprofits), gaps between departments, units, and divisions naturally emerged in the organization: teams that did not talk to each other, groups that did not communicate with each other, or people who were unaware of each other, for example. These gaps represent disconnects in the information flow across the organization.

There were key people in the organizations who bridged these disconnected parts or who were connected to people across their organization.

Those key people tended to have earlier promotions, higher salaries, and higher performance ratings than others at the same rank.

Experts such as Burt, Coleman, and Granovetter argue that the arrangement of the people and organizations within your network can be a predictor of your professional and personal success. How is it possible to predict the success of an individual based upon her network? Because the structure and other characteristics of a person’s network can be compared to the structure and characteristics of other people’s networks, we can trace positive outcomes back to the structure of her network.

Burt’s theory of how social capital is built is based upon the idea that people who reach across the gaps in the network structure of their organization have a competitive advantage. This is bridging social capital, and it is related to how you connect people or groups that do not usually talk to one another through your network. The basis of the competitive advantage for those who effectively bridge network gaps is twofold: (1) the speed by which they receive critical information, and (2) the ability they have to control the type of projects they receive or the type of work they create.

The advantages that people derive from bridging network gaps are centered on information and control. Along the lines of the former, bridging network gaps translates into expanded access to information and ideas, improved timing and speed of receiving information, and increased opportunities for referrals. The best network will give you advantages because your network will give you right information at the right time. With respect to the latter, bridging network gaps provides an opportunity to have a disproportionate say in whose interests are served in completing a project or program. The best network will give you many opportunities to broker connections between people, groups, and organizations. Here is J.R.’s story about the importance of networking:

I remember the first time I really thought about the power of having a good network: I was at my first convention of the National Society of Black Engineers [NSBE] during my sophomore year and looking for an internship at the career fair. I turned down one aisle and I saw a familiar face: Tracy Joyner. I had met Tracy the previous year when she was one of the officers at the Rutgers Chapter of NSBE. Tracy was someone that both Randal and I looked up to because she exemplified where we wanted to go. She was working at Merck & Co. and doing well. I told her I was looking for an internship and she said she would introduce me to the person who was the internship program coordinator for her plant site, Andrea Turner. I remember to this day what she said when she introduced me: “Andrea, here is one of our fantastic engineering students from Rutgers. Can you tell him more about the internship program?” I didn’t know Andrea, but because of Tracy’s referral, I was in the door.

The rest is history. I gave Andrea my resume, filled out an application, interviewed on site a few weeks later, and got the job. That’s the power of networks.

THE THREE TYPES OF NETWORKS

Every person’s network is different. The structure of your network obviously has implications in terms of your access to social capital, but it can also lead to different outcomes. In the case of Jamal and Imani, we learned the difference between dense and sparse networks. There’s a third type of network, too: a borrowed network (see Figure 4–4). We’ll now explain all three network types in more detail and show how you can network and strategically build relationships, using specific game-changing strategies, in these contexts.

Dense Networks. A dense network is a small network that is tightly connected. It is perhaps more easily described as a small network where everyone knows everybody else. These networks are ideal in fostering support among members of the network.

Figure 4–4. Three types of networks.

Families are often dense networks. Networks of friends are typically dense as well. Because of the strong communication channels, dense networks are great for communicating complex information. Dense networks are central to our discussion of group relationships in Strategy 6: Find Strength in Numbers, because they enable these groups to function most effectively. The high level of trust that is typical of dense networks works extremely well for getting things done.

But because everyone knows what everyone else knows, dense networks tend to circulate redundant information. Because information is widely disseminated, there is little to no opportunity to control activities or shape the flow of information. Furthermore, because members are so tightly connected or bonded, there is little to no opportunity to bridge network gaps. As a result, access to social capital in dense networks is limited.

Sparse Networks. A sparse network is a large network with several independent relationships. Because members of the network are generally isolated from one another, several opportunities emerge: the opportunity to obtain nonredundant, unique, and valuable information from members of the network; the opportunity to control activities, broker information, and broker opportunities among members of the network; the opportunity to shape the flow of information between members of the network; and the opportunity to bridge the gaps between members of the network (i.e., bridging social capital) for mutual gain. As a result, access to social capital in sparse networks is high.

If you work in an organization with several departments or satellite offices, the relationships among people are likely to reflect a sparse network. The people within each department or office may know each other well. This is a dense network. However, if there are no tight connections across all of the departments or offices, the overall organization probably resembles a sparse network. Sparse networks are effective for obtaining diverse information, advancing your career or agenda through intrapreneurship (Strategy 7) and entrepreneurship (Strategy 8), and seizing opportunities for synergy and scale (Strategy 9).

Borrowed Networks. A borrowed network is a network with relationships that are primarily dependent on a second party. Relationships are initiated indirectly through another contact, as opposed to your establishing relationships directly.

For example, let’s assume Dwayne is new to his organization and is assigned to work for Stacey, a manager who is well connected to several people at their organization. If Stacey introduces Dwayne to her contacts and they eventually say, “Yeah, I know Dwayne. I met him through Stacey,” then Dwayne is borrowing Stacey’s network. His relationships with Stacey’s contacts are dependent on knowing her.

Borrowed networks can be a very efficient way to expand your own network. It saves time and effort when someone is willing to broker connections to people they have worked to establish relationships with over a long time. It is much easier to establish a relationship with someone indirectly through a mutual bond (i.e., an introduction or referral) than to try to do so directly without any such context. The network you borrow could be dense or sparse—or even borrowed. In this instance, your network becomes only as good as the network you are borrowing. As a result, access to social capital in borrowed networks is dependent.

Of course, the goal in borrowing anyone’s network is to ultimately establish your own direct relationships so that you are no longer dependent on the broker. We’ll discuss the role of mentors in making these kinds of connections and the possibilities they can lead to in Strategy 5: Seek the Wisdom of Others.

The final thing to know about the three types of networks is that they are not always separate and distinct. For example, you could have a dense network within your department, a sparse network across your organization, and a borrowed network of certain senior-level executives through your supervisor, all at the same time.

Game-Changing Strategies for Networking
and Relationship Building

Now that you understand the three compelling ideas about relationships—“six degrees of separation,” “the strength of weak ties,” and “network gaps”—and the three types of networks, we’ll show you how to put these ideas into practice with three valuable game-changing strategies that leverage these concepts and tie them together.

ESTABLISH THE RIGHT NETWORK FOR THE RIGHT NEED AT THE RIGHT TIME

There are benefits to all types of networks. At every stage in your career, and particularly during the early stages, establishing a dense network within your team, group, department, or area is important because it can help build credibility with your peers. A dense network contributes to having solid relationships with people with whom you interact regularly.

When you need to establish more influential or powerful relationships that would be difficult to broker directly, a borrowed network will be of tremendous benefit. For example, if you are at the mid-stage of your career and you are looking to establish relationships with key decision makers or executive-level sponsors, those connections may be most effectively brokered through a current or past manager, supervisor, mentor, or supporter who has already established those ties. We will elaborate on this strategy in the next chapter.

Finally, at every stage in your career you should seek to establish a sparse network as well. This type of network will be particularly helpful when you are looking to connect people or organizations for mutual gain, bridge network gaps to promote more coordinated efforts, or achieve some form of synergy. This idea will be explored more fully in Strategy 9: Synergize and Reach Scale.

We refer to this approach as strategic networking, or establishing the right network for the right need at the right time. This approach is in keeping with Strategy 3, which dealt with strategic career management and the importance of identifying the right job assignment for the right need at the right time. And it has parallels in Strategies 5 and 6, which, respectively, deal with strategic mentoring and strategic organizational involvement.

MAINTAIN A DIVERSE NETWORK AT ALL TIMES

Our discussion about personal diversity, “the strength of weak ties,” and the benefits of a sparse network clearly suggest there is value in developing diverse and broad relationships: in other words, a network comprised of meaningful ties across various lines of difference (i.e., race, gender, ethnicity, religion, etc.). It is from these relationships that diverse and broad information can flow and rich opportunities present themselves to bridge network gaps.

Further evidence can be found in David Thomas and John Gabarro’s study of minority executives and minority managers. Thomas and Gabarro found that the networks of the minority executives who reached the C-suite tended to be more ethnically diverse (with strong ties to both minorities and non-minorities) when compared to the networks of the minority managers who reached a plateau in their careers and never reached the C-suite. The networks of the minority managers tended to be more uniform (exclusively African American or exclusively white).

Maintaining a diverse network means disciplining yourself to build diversity into your relationships. We realize that it may not happen naturally, especially depending on the environment where you work. If so, you will need to be proactive about taking steps to foster your own personal diversity. It could mean attending events comprised of diverse people; joining organizations with members who are dissimilar to you; and even arranging meetings or lunches with colleagues of different backgrounds. Any opportunity that you have to talk to and interact with people who are not like you should be a welcome opportunity to expand your network and your horizons.

BORROW SOMEONE ELSE’S NETWORK TO BUILD YOUR OWN

The same type of network can produce different outcomes for different types of people. Ronald Burt found, in his studies, that men with sparse networks are more likely to get early promotions, whereas women and new hires tend to get early promotions when they have a borrowed network. Think about that for a moment. Why does a sparse network better serve men while a borrowed network better serves women and new hires?

Women and new hires may face particular challenges to establishing credibility in environments that are traditionally male-dominated and that associate age with experience. Hence, Burt groups women and new hires under the term “outsiders.” However, when these so-called outsiders established strong ties to a mentor or sponsor with a more powerful or influential network (i.e., when they established a borrowed network), they were able to overcome these challenges. The mentor or sponsor was helpful not only in validating their abilities but also advocating on their behalf for new opportunities.

Given these findings, how do they relate to people of color? A similar conclusion can be drawn for so-called minorities. In many environments, particularly those where people of color are underrepresented and may face particular challenges to establishing credibility, we believe that we, too, can be interpreted as “outsiders” who may similarly benefit at times from a borrowed network. The same could be true for someone who has been with a company for several years but has just transitioned to a completely new department or division. The key is to eventually make the borrowed connections your connections—to translate what may begin as indirect and distant acquaintances into direct and close relationships. When you are an “outsider” you are often best served by borrowing the network of someone who is well connected as a means to ultimately build your own network.

This is a natural segue to Strategy 5, where we will discuss a range of developmental relationships, including mentors and protégés, which can help you along these lines and beyond.