Weak Ties vs Strong Ties
Your best friend won’t get you your next job. A former colleague you barely remember will.
This counterintuitive finding comes from sociologist Mark Granovetter’s 1973 study “The Strength of Weak Ties” (Granovetter, 1973)—one of the most cited papers in social science. It reveals why the people you know casually matter more than you think.
The Core Insight
Strong ties are your close relationships—family, best friends, close colleagues. You talk frequently, share information, and move in similar circles.
Weak ties are acquaintances—former coworkers, friends of friends, people you met at a conference once. Infrequent contact, different social circles.
Granovetter found that people were far more likely to find jobs through weak ties than strong ties. Not because weak ties care more, but because they have access to different information.
Why Weak Ties Matter
Information bridges. Your strong ties know what you know. They read the same news, hear the same gossip, move in the same circles. Weak ties bridge you to entirely different networks with non-redundant information.
Opportunity distribution. Job openings, investment opportunities, introductions—these flow through networks. Strong ties share information you already have. Weak ties share information you don’t.
The paradox: The people least likely to help you directly are most likely to connect you to opportunities you’d never find otherwise.
Strong Ties: Different Value
Strong ties aren’t useless—they serve different functions.
Strong ties: emotional support, crisis help, deep trust, someone to call at 3am. But they know what you know, move in circles you move in, hear news you’ve already heard.
Weak ties: novel information, unexpected opportunities, bridges to other worlds. But they won’t show up when things fall apart.
Strong ties get you through crises. Weak ties get you opportunities.
You need both. The mistake is neglecting either.
The Modern Problem
Social media has inverted the natural ratio.
We’ve expanded weak ties (thousands of followers) while letting strong ties atrophy (no one to call at 3am). Quantity over quality.
But we’ve also made weak ties weaker. A LinkedIn connection isn’t a real weak tie—there’s no actual relationship. True weak ties require at least one meaningful interaction.
The result: More connections than ever. Less social capital than ever.
What This Means for You
Your next job probably comes from someone you haven’t talked to in months. That former colleague, the person you met at a conference, the college friend who’s now in a different industry. Maintain those relationships—even casually. A message once a year keeps the bridge open.
Don’t confuse followers with weak ties. A LinkedIn connection or Instagram follow isn’t a weak tie—there’s no actual relationship. True weak ties require at least one meaningful interaction.
Dormant ties are gold. People you used to know but haven’t contacted in years combine the best of both worlds: trust from the previous relationship, plus novel information from divergent paths. That college friend you haven’t talked to in five years is now in a completely different world with completely different connections. That’s the point.
Reaching out to dormant ties is less awkward than you think. People like being remembered.
The Balance
Invest deeply in 5-15 strong ties—the people you’d call in crisis (see Dunbar’s Number).
Maintain a broader network of 50-150 weak ties with occasional contact.
Understand that each serves different needs. Don’t feel guilty about large acquaintance networks—weak ties aren’t failed friendships. They’re a different kind of relationship, serving a different purpose.
Related
- Dunbar’s Number — Cognitive limits on relationship layers
- Social Capital — Your network as an asset
- Network Strategically — The protocol
Your close friends share your world. Your acquaintances bridge you to other worlds.
Both matter. Most people over-invest in one and neglect the other.