I’m trying to break into PM from a non-technical background and I keep running into this wall: there’s so much advice out there about networking—coffee chats, APM programs, LinkedIn cold outreach, informational interviews—but I have no way to know which of these actually moves the needle until I’ve already invested weeks or months into the wrong approach.
I’ve been lurking here for a bit and I see veterans talking about what actually worked for them, but I want to flip that. Before I start systematically reaching out to people, I want to map out which networking strategies have the highest probability of leading somewhere real. Like, is it better to focus on APM alumni from specific programs? Should I be targeting particular companies or just any PM? Should my first message be asking for 20 minutes or should I be more specific about what I need?
I feel like I’m sitting on the edge of either doing this really efficiently or spending three months networking and ending up nowhere. What are the actual signals that tell you a networking move is worth doubling down on versus cutting?
The most reliable signal is response rate combined with conversation depth. If you’re getting replies to roughly 20-30% of thoughtful outreach, you’re in a healthy range. The real validation comes when someone actually engages substantively—they reference something you said, ask you follow-up questions, or suggest concrete next steps. I’ve found that non-technical candidates who succeed focus on one or two networking channels thoroughly rather than spreading themselves thin across five. Pick APM alumni from programs taking non-tech backgrounds, or identify PMs who’ve written about their hiring philosophy publicly. Then measure: are conversations leading to referrals, introductions to other PMs, or concrete feedback on your resume? That’s your north star.
honestly most networking “strategies” are just fancy procrastination. the real answer is that you validate by doing it, not planning it. pick 10 people, reach out, see who bites. if nobody responds you did something wrong—either your message sucks or you’re targeting the wrong people. most folks waste way too much time optimizing their approach when they shld just start. the signal that matters? someone actually agrees to talk. everything else is just noise.
You need to establish baseline metrics before scaling any channel. Start with a small cohort of 15-20 cold outreach attempts across two channels—say, APM alumni and direct PM cold email. Track response rates, conversation outcomes (coffee chat confirmed, advice given, no response, rejection), and downstream results (referral, interview invite, dead end). Most cold outreach converts at 5-15% response rate and perhaps 10-20% of those become actionable connections. If a specific angle—like targeting ex-bankers-turned-PMs—converts significantly higher, that’s your validation signal to double down there. Anything below 5% suggests your targeting or messaging needs adjustment.
ooh this is such a smart way to think abt it! maybe start rly small like 10 ppl and see what happens? then u can adjust what’s working before doing 100 outreaches. honestly tracking responses wld help u figure out the pattern
I went through this exact paralysis last year. What finally clicked for me was just picking one channel—I chose APM alumni from programs I was applying to—and committing to 20 genuine conversations before I even judged if it was working. By conversation twelve, I started getting pattern recognition. Three people asked about my resume in similar ways, one connected me to someone at their old PM team, and I realized the signal was just… engagement that built on itself. Once I saw that momentum, everything else became noise. The validation wasn’t a spreadsheet—it was just noticing when someone’s interest felt genuine.
You’re already thinking about this the right way by asking the question! Start small, track what feels good, and adjust. You’ve totally got this!