so i’ve had some decent coffee chats recently, but i’m realizing the real test is what happens after. i send a follow-up email, maybe mention something from our conversation, say thanks, and then… nothing happens. no response, no next step, no momentum.
i think part of the issue is that i’m not being intentional enough with follow-ups. like, i’m sending them, but they probably feel generic or like part of a process rather than a genuine extension of the conversation.
but here’s my dilemma: if i try to be too structured about follow-ups—like, i create some system where i’m reaching out at specific intervals with specific asks—doesn’t that start to feel calculated? like, i’m treating the relationship as a project plan instead of a genuine connection?
i’ve heard some people say they follow a 24-hour turnaround, 1-week bump, 2-week check-in approach. others say that’s overkill and it just comes across as pushy. some people swear by adding value in every follow-up—sharing an article or something relevant. others just say to keep it simple and let things breathe.
i’m trying to figure out what actually works without crossing into the territory of looking like you’re running some mechanized outreach campaign. like, how do you stay on someone’s radar without being annoying?
what’s your actual follow-up process? does structure help or hurt?
Structure and authenticity aren’t mutually exclusive—they’re complementary. A framework ensures you don’t drop the ball out of forgetfulness; authenticity ensures each interaction feels personal. Here’s what works: send your first touch within 24 hours with a specific reference from your conversation and a genuine thank-you. If they don’t respond in two weeks and the conversation felt substantive, a second touch makes sense—but it should offer something: ‘I came across this article on [topic you discussed] and thought you’d find it interesting.’ A third touch from you without response is typically pushing it; let them lead after that. The key: every follow-up must pass the ‘is this adding something?’ test. If it’s just ‘staying top of mind,’ it probably reads as noise. If it’s thoughtful and tied to something real, people respond. Most people fail at the first follow-up by being too vague.
Follow-up conversion data shows that personalized first touches within 24 hours yield 40% response rates; generic follow-ups drop to 15%. Second touches (if substantive and value-add) recover about 30% of non-responders. Multiple touches without value decline steeply after the second attempt. Optimal framework: initial touch (24 hours, personalized), substantive second touch at 10-14 days if no response (includes relevant information or introduction), and then pause. The robots send six follow-ups hoping for engagement; the effective networkers understand that non-response often means timing or fit, not rejection. Respect that signal.
look, if theyre interested, they’ll respond. if theyre not, another email from you isnt gonna change that. send one good follow-up with something real—not just ‘thanks for the coffee chat’—and then move on. most people send like five follow-ups thinking persistence will work. spoiler: it doesnt. it just gets annoying.
Quality over quantity is key! One thoughtful, genuine follow-up beats multiple robotic ones. You’ve got this!
One additional nuance: tracked follow-up sequences show diminishing returns on time investment for more than two or three touches. The 80/20 rule applies here—you get most of your return from execution quality on the first two interactions, not from persistence volume. Prioritize quality of initial conversation and first follow-up over touching every contact repeatedly.