I’ve been trying to network for summer analyst roles and everyone keeps telling me to “be strategic” about who I reach out to. But when I sit down and start organizing spreadsheets with names, titles, and banks, it feels weirdly mechanical. I know I should be doing this—targeting specific groups, alumni from my school, people in roles I actually want. The veterans in here always talk about being intentional, and I get it. But I’m wondering: how do you keep it from feeling like you’re just grinding through a list on a checklist? Do you personalize every single outreach, or do you build templates? And when you’re targeting maybe 50-100 people across different banks and teams, how do you actually manage that without losing the human part of it? I feel like there’s a balance between being data-driven and not sounding like a bot in your emails. How do you guys handle this?
The key is segmentation within your list. Rather than treating all 100 contacts identically, bucket them by category—alumni at your target bank, peers from conferences, alumni in roles you want. This allows you to create 3-4 core templates rather than 100 unique emails. For each segment, you personalize the first paragraph with one specific detail: a mutual connection, a deal they worked on, or an article they published. The remaining 70% of the email stays consistent. Track open rates and response patterns by segment. You’ll discover that your alumni segment converts at 40%, while cold peers at 15%. This data informs where you focus follow-up energy. Tools like HubSpot or even structured spreadsheets let you automate tracking without sacrificing authenticity in the actual message.
ngl, most ppl are doing this wrong and then wondering why they get ignored. you need like 15-20 real targets, not 100. quality over quantity always wins. pick people where you actually have a hook—same school, same club, mutual friend. the spreadsheet thing is fine but don’t get lost in it. one template with a personalized opener and you’re golden. everyone knows ur reaching out to a bunch ppl anyway, just don’t make it obvious yr not putting effort in.
ooh this is exactly what iv been worried about!! i like ur idea of segmenting tho, that makes so much more sence. so u basically personalize just the opening? that actually seems way less overwhelming than trying to customize evry single msg. ty for this!
What you’re experiencing is the tension between scale and authenticity—a very real challenge in professional networking. The most effective approach I’ve seen involves a hybrid model. Begin with 15-20 primary targets where you have genuine overlap or connection points. Reach out individually and meaningfully to these. Then, expand your list to 50-75 secondary contacts, where you use a structured template with meaningful but brief personalization. The critical insight is that your primary list converts at 3-4x the rate of your secondary list, so focus your genuine effort there. Your spreadsheet should track not just contacts, but the strength of your connection to each person. This visual reminder prevents the mechanical feeling—you’re always aware of the human relationship, even as you scale.
You’ve got this! Start with people you genuinely connect with, then template smartly. Personalization matters where it counts. You’re already thinking about this right—that’s half the battle!
I went through this exact thing my summer before analyst recruit. I made a list of like 80 people and tried to customize everything, burned out after two weeks. Then I talked to a mentor who told me to just focus on 10 solid people I actually had connections with. That sounds crazy, but he was right. I got three coffee chats from those 10, which turned into two internship conversations. The templated stuff to the other 70? Maybe one response. The emotional energy of the personalized outreach just hits different, you know?
also nobody cares how many ppl ur contacting. they care if u actually sound interested in talking to THEM specifically. so yeah, templates are fine but make sure the first thing u write shows u actually know who they r. that’s it. that’s the whole game.
One additional metric to track: response time delta. Measure how long it takes to get responses from cold contacts versus warm contacts (alumni, mutual connections). In data I’ve seen, warm introductions average 48-72 hours; cold contacts average 7-10 days if they respond at all. This reinforces that even if your template captures scale, your effort allocation should favor warm paths first. You’re not being inefficient—you’re being strategically intelligent about where personalization creates measurable returns.