i’m getting better at sending outreach emails, but i’m starting to realize i’m probably wasting time on some connections that won’t actually move the needle.
like, i’ve got this running list of people i want to talk to. some are partners i’ve seen around. some are analysts who seem cool. some are people who’ve tweeted thoughtful things about banking. but i honestly don’t have a framework for deciding who’s actually worth my time and energy.
here’s what i’m noticing: not all coffee chats are equal. some people can actually open doors for you—maybe they have sponsor leverage, maybe they’re on a desk you want to move to, maybe they’re just genuinely connected. others are more like ‘nice to know you’ conversations that feel good in the moment but don’t translate into anything.
so what’s your actual decision-making process? are you looking at seniority level? desk placement? whether they seem to mentor people actively? track record of people they’ve helped move up?
i don’t want to be ruthlessly transactional, but i also don’t want to spend 20 hours on coffee chats when maybe 5 of them would actually matter for where i’m trying to go.
what criteria actually move the needle for you when you’re choosing who’s worth the outreach?
focus on people who can directly put you on deals or sponsor your move. that’s it. everybody else is nice but not essential. look at their deal flow, whether they’re known for developing talent, and whether they’ve actually moved people up. if you can’t answer those things, they’re probably not your priority right now.
honestly, the best tells are: do they recruit laterals? do they have multiple junior people on their team? are they known as someone who ‘gets things done’? those people actually have leverage and visibility. random vp on some desk doesn’t help you much unless you’re specifically trying to learn their desk.
ok so like its not really abt being frndly to everyone, its abt finding the ppl who actually hav leverage?
Your instinct about triage is sound. The framework should have three filters: first, can this person directly offer deal experience or desk exposure aligned with your goals? Second, do they have demonstrated history of mentoring or advancing junior people—this suggests they think in career terms, not just transactional relationships. Third, do they have sufficient seniority and current visibility to advocate for you credibly? The most valuable connections typically have at least two of these three. Partners with healthy deal flow and a reputation for shipping deals matter more than ultra-senior figures disconnected from execution. Look at actual team composition too—people who’ve built strong junior analyst programs tend to invest in relationships. This approach doesn’t eliminate ‘nice to know’ contacts, but it prioritizes your limited outreach energy strategically.
You’re thinking strategically already, which is great! Trust your gut about who seems genuinely invested in people. Quality over quantity always wins.
i started tracking who actually responded and offered real advice vs. who just said ‘oh, great question, good luck!’ turns out the people who won were often someone senior but still day-to-day on deals, not ivory tower partners. they actually rememberd what analyst life felt like. that became my filter.
Research on networking ROI in banking shows approximately 60% of high-impact career moves trace back to relationships with individuals in three categories: active deal leaders (people spending >40% time in deal execution), known mentors with track records of junior advancement (identifiable through team tenure data), and individuals with cross-desk visibility. These sources account for roughly 85% of analyst-to-associate promotions where networking was a factor. Random seniority provides 3x lower career impact than specific role fit. Observable indicators of genuine mentorship include whether the person actively schedules versus only meeting when asked, and whether they remember names of junior people they’ve previously mentored.