http://ripples.typepad.com/ripples/2006/06/networking_made.html

***Begin Quote***

Networking is the process of extending your network of friends. It is not a matter of running around passing out business cards.
 
***End Quote***

Nah, I don't like that definition at all.

I do agree that it's not passing out business cards. It's also NOT collecting a lot of them either.

Any more than doing the LinkedIn version of the Vulcan mind meld with a grazillion people is networking.

I would define "networking" differently.

IMHO

Networking is an ongoing conversation between two people for the purpose of exchanging information about mutually agreed topics. It's characterized by the personal meetings or at least communications as needed.

There's an implied agreement that each participant is responsible for what they get out of it. There are no guarantees or warranties. It's a best effort.

There are certain unwritten rules. The initiator is not allowed to ask for a job, a loan, or an excessive amount of time. The receptor is obligated to give full attention, honest feedback, and follow through on anything promised.

When a face to face networking meeting occurs, I believe it is best when it is very scripted and short (less than 30 minutes). The initiator is expected to have familiarized themselves with the public persona of the receptor. The receptor is expected to have reviewed any documentation that the initiator has supplied in advance. After hello, the initiator asks the receptor to explain their current scope (5 minutes). The receptor then asks the initiator to describe what they are looking for and their unique value proposition. The initiator gives their long version of their elevator speech (5 minutes). The receptor then comments upon it (5 minutes). The initiator is then expected to ask two or three questions (5 minutes). Then the initiator concludes by asking for the names of two people who could help him, thanks the receptor for his time, and leaves. Thirty minutes tops UNLESS the receptor extend it.
 
There maybe a perceived disparity between the two people in organizational stature, education level, age, or experience (i.e., overall work history; industry focused; skills). Whether a greater or lesser, everyone wins in networking. At the very least, even if there is nothing that one person could possibly do (e.g., a new college accounting graduate networking with an old F500 cfo), there is the psychological benefit from helping. Or, perhaps the greater is "paying back ghosts" (i.e., releasing self-imposed obligations for past help received when there was a similar disparity). Those "ghosts" provided help to the now greater, who was the lesser then, and couldn't reciprocate. That kind of help comes with its own obligation that an individual carries in their soul. Like a karmic debt, it needs to be discharged. Also, the lesser can help the greater improve on their thinking, mental models, or coaching skills without recognizing it. The benefits to the greater are not always obvious even to the greater person. The lesser isn't imposing on the greater because there was mutual agreement to meet.

So if we think about the model of data, information (data in context), knowledge (actionable information), and wisdom (understanding the nuances of knowledge), the networking parties operate on any, or all, of the four levels. It can result in the exchanging, sharing, or developing new insights to their mutual or individual benefits.

Networking is that ongoing conversation inside a personal relationship between two individuals to their mutual benefit.

IMHO