So I’m halfway through my first year as an analyst at a mid-market shop, and I keep hearing the same thing from senior guys: “make sure you’re building relationships.” But here’s what nobody explains—what does that actually mean when you’re pulling 80-hour weeks?
I get the general idea. You’re supposed to coffee chat with VPs, maybe grab drinks with associates, stay visible to the senior bankers who actually make the call on promotions. But I’m genuinely confused about the difference between just being a solid performer on deals and actually networking strategically. Are these things separate? Do they need to be?
I’ve noticed a few analysts around me seem to be moving faster even though their deal work isn’t obviously better. The only difference I can spot is they seem to know more senior people and get pulled into better projects. Is that just coincidence, or is there an actual strategy here I’m not seeing?
What’s the real gap between grinding analytically versus building the right relationships? And if they’re both equally important, how are you actually supposed to prioritize one over the other when you barely have time to sleep?
You’ve identified the core tension many analysts miss. Performance on deals is your baseline—it keeps you employed and credible. But relationships determine your trajectory. Here’s what separates analysts who move faster: they make the quality of their relationships visible to decision-makers. When a VP works with you on a pitch, they remember how you thought, not just whether you got the models right. Start small—after a deal closes, send a thoughtful message to one senior person reflecting on something specific you learned. Attend the optional firm events, not as networking theater but to have genuine conversations. The analysts moving fastest treat their network like a second full-time job during analyst years, even if it’s just 5-10 strategic conversations monthly. Your grind matters, but your grind becomes invisible if nobody senior actually knows the person behind it.
lol here’s the honest take: your deal work matters exactly until the day your vp decides it’s promotion time, and then it suddenly doesn’t matter nearly as much as whether someone senior fights for you. i’ve seen average analysts get bumped bc they had a sponsor; i’ve seen brilliant analysts stall bc they were just faceless deal-grinders. the gap? visibility and advocacy. you can be the smartest guy in the room on excel, but if the deciding partners don’t know your name, you’re toast. spend 20% of your non-sleep time building actual relationships w ppl who matter.
this is such a good question! i think it’s both tbh—u need solid work and relationships. like, the work gets u noticed, but relationships turn that into actual opportunities. maybe start w just one mentor and go from there?
You’re already asking the right question, which means you’re ahead! Your grind matters AND your relationships do. The great news? They feed each other when you’re intentional about it. You’ve got this!
I had this exact realization about 8 months in. I was doing solid work but felt invisible. Then I got pulled onto a pitch by an older associate I’d grabbed coffee with once, and suddenly I was in rooms where decisions were actually happening. That one relationship changed everything because I wasn’t just another analyst anymore—I was their guy. Started being way more intentional after that. The grind gets you in the door, but relationships get you promoted.
Research on career progression in banking shows that analysts who make associate on the first cycle tend to have 40-50% better network visibility than those who wait. That doesn’t mean their deal work is better—it means they’ve built 8-12 meaningful relationships with decision-makers. The specific mechanism: your performance makes you credible, but your network makes you visible. Without visibility, performance is discounted. Most analysts underestimate how much of the promotion decision happens in hallway conversations between senior bankers before the formal review even starts.