Corporate circles, particularly in Asia, are perceived to be old boys clubs, and Sri Lanka is no exception. These small groups of ‘insiders’ enjoy disproportionate access to capital and information, ensuring that access to such groups remains in high demand. Access can only be gained via an introduction made by an existing insider, reinforcing the age-old adage that ‘it’s not what you know that counts, but who you know’. Networking is thus seen as a critical component for success in businesses, politics or academia. But does ‘who you know’ matter as much in today’s hyper connected world?
Many technologists believe that the value of ‘who you know’ has peaked and is now easily eclipsed by the value of ‘what you know’. They point out that LinkedIn, Facebook and Google are far better connectors than any agent, broker or middleman. These roles were crucial to society in previous generations as they bridged the gap between entrepreneurs/experts and people who had the means to help them achieve their ambitions. While connectors undoubtedly still play an important role in businesses, digital channels are increasingly eating into their market share by aggregating a wider pool of potential contacts with up-to-date individual data. LinkedIn, with its directory of professional business profiles, is a perfect example of how technology can one-up even the most well-connected broker.
Besides technology, this cultural shift is visible to some extent in current leaders in the corporate world and politics. Many business leaders looked up to by society today are far more reclusive and less sociable than their peers from a few decades ago. Steve Jobs, Elon Musk and Warren Buffett relied far more on insights and intellect than their ability to build relationships. The current US President Barack Obama is known to have an aloof, distant and somewhat professorial personality compared to the typical backslapping politicians of yesteryear. In comparison, his predecessors Bill Clinton and George Bush Senior are widely acknowledged as some of most charismatic presidents in history, able to connect with whoever they met instantly. Of course, politicians are regularly revealed to be singularly uninformed about the very issues they champion passionately. While the typical backslapping politician is becoming a rarity, it is difficult to imagine that less sociable personalities are succeeding due to superior knowledge. The average person performs quite poorly at assessing the expertise of a subject matter expert (as this requires them to be quite knowledgeable themselves). Hence, in many instances, we use the confidence of the speaker as a reliable proxy for judging their expertise on the subject. This is the psychological loophole that con men and politicians regularly use to dupe the masses – by appearing extremely confident, they create the illusion of competence.
That said, technology has made it easier to assess true expertise, allowing experts to be recognised more readily. For example, scanning a person’s LinkedIn profile or blog provides a quick overview of their experience and skills. Going a step further, websites such as Quora allow experts to amass social proof of their knowledge by leveraging a crowdsourced ‘ranking’ mechanism for quality of contributions. The availability of an online identity that is somewhat difficult to manipulate is crucial for facilitating contact between unknown parties. In a world where a quick internet search can reveal whether a person is who they claim to be, unknown parties can connect and even do business, with less reliance on middlemen to create the trust required for such cold connections to work.
The flipside of this technological upheaval is that people with power and capital to turn ideas into reality have far too many people reaching out to them on a daily basis. Some diligent digging around on the internet might reveal which of these requests are worth replying to, but is too cumbersome to be practical. Hence, an introduction through a mutual acquaintance – preferably with high credibility – still remains the most effective way of reaching people in positions of power. While this leaves us somewhat back in the vicinity of square one (that who you know counts more), it is undeniable that technology has made a dent in this age-old belief.