# MBA Networking Tracker: [Your name, recruiting season YYYY]

> A tracker for MBA recruiting conversations: a contact pipeline with clear stages, a touchpoint log, a follow-up
> cadence with date formulas, conversion metrics computed from the pipeline, a weekly review routine and privacy rules
> for the personal data you hold. It is for MBA students networking toward internships and full-time roles, and works
> for structured and off-cycle tracks.
> Source basis: research on social ties and job search (Granovetter 1973; Rajkumar et al. 2022) and on gratitude and
> question-asking in conversations (Grant and Gino 2010; Huang et al. 2017), written in our own words.
> Replace every [bracketed] value and every row marked *Example*. This is a planning aid, not career advice; all
> people, firms and numbers in the examples are invented.

<!--
Guidance: How to use this template
- Add a contact when you first identify them, not when they reply. The pipeline only measures conversion if it includes the people who did not answer.
- Move each contact through the stages in section 2 and log every touchpoint in section 3 on the day it happens.
- Let formulas set the follow-up dates (section 4). Review the "due" list in a 15-minute weekly session (section 6).
- Prepare each conversation with mba/mba-coffee-chat-notes and keep the strategy, target list and hours budget in mba/mba-recruiting-plan.
- Related templates: mba/mba-recruiting-plan, mba/mba-coffee-chat-notes, mba/mba-alumni-network-plan, mba/mba-fit-stories, mba/mba-case-interview-prep, mba/mba-post-mba-career-plan, career/interview-prep
-->

## Document control

<!-- Guidance: One tracker per season. Archive it, do not delete it: the contacts become your alumni network (mba/mba-alumni-network-plan). -->

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Document ID | [NET-2026-01] |
| Student | [Your name] |
| Season | [Summer internship YYYY] |
| Primary and secondary track | [Strategy consulting; tech product] |
| Version | [0.1] |
| Last updated | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Reviewed by | [Career coach, for feedback only] |
| Classification | Personal, private: contains other people's personal data |

## 1. Why track networking

<!-- Guidance: Read once. The tracker is a memory aid and a measuring tool, not a scoreboard. -->

Networking in recruiting is structured information gathering: you learn what a job is really like, test whether you
fit, and give people who influence hiring a chance to know you. Without a record, students forget who said what,
follow up too late or twice, and cannot tell whether their outreach works. A tracker fixes all three. It also turns a
vague feeling ("nobody answers") into numbers you can act on: a low reply rate points to the message or the list; a
low rate of conversations turning into advocates points to preparation and follow-up.

Research supports breadth with some depth. Acquaintances often carry job information that close friends do not
(Granovetter 1973), and a large field experiment found moderately weak ties the most useful for job mobility
(Rajkumar et al. 2022). Asking follow-up questions makes conversation partners like you more (Huang et al. 2017), and
an expression of thanks makes people more willing to help again (Grant and Gino 2010). The cadence in section 4 puts
these findings into routine.

## 2. Contact pipeline

<!-- Guidance: One row per person. Stage values must match the list exactly so the formulas in section 5 count them. -->

Stages: **Identified**, **Outreach sent**, **Replied**, **Conversation held**, **Advocate** (offered a referral,
introduction or internal word), **Closed** (no reply after two nudges, or not relevant).

| ID | Name | Employer and role | Track | Source (how found) | Tie | Stage | Last touch | Next action | Next date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NET-001 *Example* | Daniel Mwangi | Firm A, consultant (MBA hire) | Consulting | School alumni directory | Weak | Advocate | 2026-10-05 | Update after first round | 2026-11-04 |
| NET-002 *Example* | Sofia Lindqvist | Firm A, manager | Consulting | Introduced by NET-001 | Weak | Conversation held | 2026-10-12 | Thank-you sent; update | 2026-11-11 |
| NET-003 *Example* | Hiro Tanaka | Firm D, product manager | Tech | Second-year classmate | Medium | Replied | 2026-10-09 | Confirm time | 2026-10-14 |
| NET-004 *Example* | Leila Haddad | Firm B, consultant | Consulting | Club event | Weak | Outreach sent | 2026-10-01 | Nudge | 2026-10-08 |
| [NET-nnn] | [Name] | [Employer, role] | [ ] | [ ] | [Strong, medium, weak] | [Stage] | YYYY-MM-DD | [ ] | [formula] |

```mermaid
stateDiagram-v2
  [*] --> Identified
  Identified --> OutreachSent: message sent
  OutreachSent --> Replied: answer
  OutreachSent --> Closed: no reply after two nudges
  Replied --> ConversationHeld: chat takes place
  ConversationHeld --> Advocate: offers referral or introduction
  ConversationHeld --> ConversationHeld: periodic update
  Advocate --> [*]
  Closed --> [*]
```

## 3. Touchpoint log

<!-- Guidance: One row per interaction, including emails and event conversations. Keep it factual: what you asked, what you learned, what you promised. -->

| Date | Contact ID | Channel | What happened | What I learned | What I promised | Done |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-01 *Example* | NET-004 | Email | First outreach, 80 words, referenced the club panel | [ ] | [ ] | Y |
| 2026-10-05 *Example* | NET-001 | Video call, 25 min | Coffee chat, notes in mba/mba-coffee-chat-notes CCN-003 | Healthcare practice staffs MBA hires on hospital cost projects | Send a short note on my operations project | Y |
| 2026-10-06 *Example* | NET-001 | Email | Thank-you plus project note | [ ] | Update after first round | Y |
| YYYY-MM-DD | [NET-nnn] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] |

## 4. Follow-up cadence

<!-- Guidance: Use formulas for every date. With the last-touch date in column H, the next date is set by the stage. -->

| Situation | Action | Timing | Excel (last touch in H2) | *Example* |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outreach with no reply | One short nudge, then close after a second | 7 days, then 7 more | `=H2+7` | Sent 2026-10-01, nudge 2026-10-08 |
| Conversation held | Thank-you message with one specific point | Within 1 day | `=H2+1` | Chat 2026-10-05, thanks by 2026-10-06 |
| After the thank-you | Update with news or a useful item | About 30 days | `=H2+30` | Chat 2026-10-05, update 2026-11-04 |
| Long-term | Brief check-in | About 90 days | `=H2+90` | Chat 2026-10-05, check-in 2027-01-03 |
| Before an application or interview | Tell the advocate, ask nothing new | 1 to 2 weeks before | `=deadline-10` | [ ] |
| After any result | Thank and inform, whatever the outcome | Within 2 days | `=result+2` | [ ] |

A single formula can set the next date from the stage:
`=IF(G2="Outreach sent",H2+7,IF(G2="Conversation held",H2+30,IF(G2="Advocate",H2+30,"")))`. A "due" flag:
`=AND(J2<>"",J2<=TODAY())`.

## 5. Conversion metrics

<!-- Guidance: Compute from the pipeline with COUNTIF; never type a rate by hand. Count a contact at every stage it has reached, so use a "highest stage reached" column. -->

Add a column with the highest stage reached as a number (1 Identified to 5 Advocate), then count contacts at or above
each stage with `=COUNTIF(K:K,">="&n)`. *Example:* Amara Okafor's pipeline after six weeks.

| Stage | Contacts | Rate from previous stage | Rate per outreach | Excel |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identified | 60 | | | `=COUNTIF(K:K,">=1")` |
| Outreach sent | 48 | 80.0% | 100.0% | `=B3/B2` |
| Replied | 26 | 54.2% | 54.2% | `=B4/B3` |
| Conversation held | 21 | 80.8% | 43.8% | `=B5/B4`, `=B5/$B$3` |
| Advocate | 7 | 33.3% | 14.6% | `=B6/B5`, `=B6/$B$3` |
| Interview invitations (same employers) | 5 | | 10.4% | `=B7/$B$3` |

Interview invitations are listed separately because an invitation can come without an advocate; the share per
outreach is a rough yield, not a causal effect of networking.

By employer:

| Employer | Outreach | Replies | Conversations | Advocates | Interviews | Reply rate | Conversations per outreach | Advocates per conversation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Firm A *Example* | 14 | 8 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 57.1% | 50.0% | 42.9% |
| Firm B *Example* | 12 | 6 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 50.0% | 41.7% | 40.0% |
| Firm D *Example* | 12 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 58.3% | 41.7% | 20.0% |
| Off-cycle start-ups *Example* | 10 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 50.0% | 40.0% | 25.0% |
| **Total** | **48** | **26** | **21** | **7** | **5** | **54.2%** | **43.8%** | **33.3%** |

Excel per row: reply rate `=C2/B2`, conversations per outreach `=D2/B2`, advocates per conversation `=E2/D2`. The
example suggests the outreach messages work (a reply rate above one half) but that conversations at Firm D rarely turn
into advocates: Amara's product questions may be too generic, so she prepares the next two chats with sharper,
product-specific questions.

```vega-lite
{
  "$schema": "https://vega.github.io/schema/vega-lite/v5.json",
  "description": "Networking pipeline counts by stage for a fictional MBA student.",
  "width": 360,
  "height": 200,
  "data": {"values": [
    {"stage": "1 Identified", "contacts": 60}, {"stage": "2 Outreach sent", "contacts": 48},
    {"stage": "3 Replied", "contacts": 26}, {"stage": "4 Conversation held", "contacts": 21},
    {"stage": "5 Advocate", "contacts": 7}
  ]},
  "mark": "bar",
  "encoding": {
    "y": {"field": "stage", "type": "nominal", "title": "Stage"},
    "x": {"field": "contacts", "type": "quantitative", "title": "Contacts"}
  }
}
```

## 6. Weekly review routine

<!-- Guidance: 15 minutes, same time every week. -->

1. Filter for due dates on or before today and send every due follow-up.
2. Log any touchpoint you forgot to record.
3. Recompute the metrics and compare with last week. Change one thing if a rate falls: the message, the list or the
   preparation.
4. Check the volume against the hours budget in mba/mba-recruiting-plan.
5. Close contacts who did not answer two nudges. Do not send a third.

## 7. Privacy and professional conduct

<!-- Guidance: You hold other people's personal data. Treat it as if they could read the tracker. -->

- Record only what you need: name, role, how you met, what you discussed, next step. No personal details they did not
  offer, no private opinions about people.
- Keep the tracker private. Do not share it, export it to a shared drive or paste it into an AI tool that stores
  inputs.
- Never forward a contact's message or name them in an application without their permission.
- Respect a no or no reply. Two nudges is the limit.

## 8. Common mistakes

<!-- Guidance: Read in week one and again mid-season. -->

1. Adding contacts only after they reply, which makes reply rates look perfect and hides the real problem.
2. Sending a long first message; most replies come to short, specific requests.
3. Asking for a referral in the first message.
4. Forgetting the thank-you, or sending a generic one with no specific point.
5. Following up too often, or never after the thank-you.
6. Counting conversations instead of what they produced.
7. Treating advocates as a guarantee; they help you be considered, not hired.
8. Losing the tracker at the end of the season instead of turning it into the alumni plan.

## 9. Self-test

<!-- Guidance: Answer without looking, then check the answer key. -->

1. A student sent 30 messages and had 12 conversations. What is the conversations-per-outreach rate, and what is the
   Excel formula with outreach in B2 and conversations in D2?
2. Why should a contact be added before they reply?
3. What does a high reply rate with a low advocate rate suggest?
4. A chat took place on 2026-11-03. When is the thank-you due and when is the 30-day update?
5. Name two privacy rules for the tracker.

## Sources and further reading

<!-- Guidance: The research explains why the cadence works; your career centre's guidance explains local norms. -->

- Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. *American Journal of Sociology*, 78(6), 1360-1380.
- Rajkumar, K., Saint-Jacques, G., Bojinov, I., Brynjolfsson, E., and Aral, S. (2022). A causal test of the strength of
  weak ties. *Science*, 377(6612), 1304-1310.
- Grant, A. M., and Gino, F. (2010). A little thanks goes a long way: explaining why gratitude expressions motivate
  prosocial behavior. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, 98(6), 946-955.
- Huang, K., Yeomans, M., Brooks, A. W., Minson, J., and Gino, F. (2017). It doesn't hurt to ask: question-asking
  increases liking. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, 113(3), 430-452. Correction published 2025.
- Related templates: mba/mba-recruiting-plan, mba/mba-coffee-chat-notes, mba/mba-alumni-network-plan.

## Answer key

1. 12 / 30 = 40.0%; `=D2/B2`.
2. Otherwise the people who never answered are missing, and the reply rate and conversion rates are overstated.
3. The outreach works but the conversations do not leave a strong impression: improve preparation, questions and
   follow-up.
4. Thank-you by 2026-11-04 (`=H2+1`); update on 2026-12-03 (`=H2+30`).
5. Any two of: record only what you need; keep it private and out of tools that store inputs; never forward or name a
   contact without permission; respect a no.

## Revision history

<!-- Guidance: Add a row when you change stages, formulas or the review routine. -->

| Version | Date | Author | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [Name] | First version from template |
| [0.2] | YYYY-MM-DD | [Name] | [Added interview column after the first round] |

## Standard and licence note

Based on published research on social ties, job search, gratitude and question-asking, cited above. The text,
formulas and examples are original and invented; this template is not affiliated with or endorsed by any school or
employer. Check your career centre's current guidance on networking and recruiting conduct. Template licence: MIT.