social networks in large companies

i came to realize it gradually over the course of past few years, but i could not quite articulate it until i read this passage in “slack” by tom demarco:

Surprisingly, the stars approached their work in ways that were not very different from the ways their peers did. As a purely mechanical matter, they did the same work pretty much the same way as everyone else. But there were marked differences in how they managed their networks of connections, liaisons to fellow workers whose cooperation was required to get anything done. For example, people tended to return the stars’ telephone calls much more quickly. So a star, on average, would receive answers in twenty minutes, while the norm for the whole laboratory was more like four hours. Why did they get better attention from coworkers and colleagues? There was no obvious answer, but they did. Clearly, the stars had long before taken whatever steps were necessary to establish good connections. They had spread around favors, been responsive themselves, nursed relationships, seen to other people’s essential human needs.

granted, all disclaimers apply - one has to work in a role that requires interaction with other people to get stuff done, the organization should be large enough, etc.

my experience confirms this - in large organizations you have to know the right people to get stuff done. in my recent role i was fortunate enough to get into the team where i acquired the connections in a span of several months. then you just maintain those relationships: be sincere, make it natural (and believe it!) - you do favors for people because you care about the stuff they need to get done, and only subsequently they reciprocate (perhaps i am too sensitive to this, but it is nails-on-the-chalkboard obvious when folks are shmoozing and try to conceal it; in which case it takes a certain charisma to get away with it).

the reality is that in large organizations no matter what process-improving application/organization is in place, unless you know the people, you will struggle to get anything done. with the right people in place the process is useful, but merely as a documentation/fallback/cya/retrospecting device that is parallel to actual work (disclaimer: given highly motivated, conscious, caring people).

i’ve seen both ends of the spectrum with new people - folks that managed to piss everyone off in their first few days and then were left in the vacuum; others that were unfortunate to end up in a team that did not proactively and eagerly grow their novice; this is why we made a point to provide as much support as possible for our (welcome) new hires in order for them to establish these relationships (e.g. proudly introduce them as members of our team, bootstrap them with piles of wiki entries that include addresses and names among other things).

ideally, of course, process will be reduced to become as effective as possible, just like personal connections will be a benefit, but not a requirement for getting stuff done. perhaps it is just a corporate aberration; in any case it took me a while to actually consciously acknowledge its importance.