LinkedIn Tip #2: Take Time to Link Strategically

This second post in the series of tips on making the best possible use of LinkedIn recommends that you adopt from the outset a strategic approach to linking to other people, both in terms of those you invite to connect and those who invite you.

That means that, before you invite anyone to connect with you, it is essential to think carefully about what kind of network you would like to have and what that means for how you build it.

It means taking time to develop a strategy that is right for you and your business or career objectives and how being on LinkedIn can help you achieve those objectives

LinkedIn logoLinkedIn is not Facebook or Twitter where the “friend” or “follower” words have fairly loose connotations. LinkedIn is a professional network and there is at least an official expectation on the part of LinkedIn that the people you connect with will be people you know and trust, as explained in this para from LinkedIn’s help pages:

LinkedIn believes that when it comes to building your network, it is all about the quality of the connections and not about the quantity of connections. Your network should be centered on quality of knowledge, resources, skills and advocacy that LinkedIn can help unlock.

There are a couple of practical challenges in implementing this. First, there is the fact that while recommending that approach, LinkedIn also provides the tools to start inviting people and you could be inclined to start using them straight away. The help screen on this says:

LinkedIn provides the Build Your Network feature on your homepage to help you build your network of connections. This feature helps you identify and send invitations to colleagues and classmates as well as contacts from your address books that may already be using LinkedIn.

Nothing wrong with that, but there is a risk, as I say, for people new to LinkedIn, of using the inviting tools straight away, without first thinking through the implications. I would find that paragraph more in line with LinkedIn’s official approach if it said something like “identify and send invitations selectively to colleagues…”

As for inviting contacts from an address book, I don’t know about you but I do know that I have a lot of email addresses in my address book of people I know hardly or not at all and some of people I don’t actually want or need in my professional network.

LinkedIn for Recruiting bookThe second challenge is that if you ask someone for advice, or join a LinkedIn-related group or forum, you could well be receiving advice to the effect that the official LinkedIn line on this topic is impractical or that it does not make good business sense, that the smart thing to do is to build as large a first level network as you can, so that you will then have access to more and more people in the larger network. This approach is sometimes described as “digging the well before you are thirsty”. Put another way, the argument is that it is better to have all the connections you might possibly need, as soon as you can, for the day when you actually need one of those connections.

If you have been on a LinkedIn-related group or forum or read blog posts which go into the subject of how to make best use of LinkedIn, you may have come across discussions of this issue, sometimes called the “quality versus quantity” debate. Although I think that description is too limited and does not accommodate the various nuances in any serious discussion of the matter, it does tend to be the standard framework of discussion about how many people you should aim to have in your first level of LinkedIn connections.

In LinkedIn for Recruiting, co-authored by Bill Vick and me, we explained the common usage of these terms  as follows (p 17):

  • “quality” in the sense of a small, tight network of people one can work with, know and trust, or
  • “quantity” as in a lot of people, who can provide a great deal of access.

My own preference is to choose the “quality” approach and be very selective, which means I have a much smaller first level network, 495 as of today – and that has taken several years to build – compared with networkd of friends of mine who have first level networks in the thousands and for whom the concept of a first level network being too big is laughable.

Mind you, my comparatively small, tight network of 495 people gives me the capacity, through introductions along the LinkedIn network of trusted relationships, to connect potentially with over nine and a quarter million people who are at most only two more removes of connection from me.

my LinkedIn network as at 7 April 2009

But I acknowledge that other, often very successful people have a different view. Actually, ane friend – a recruiting headhunter – told me bluntly over a coffee one day not so long ago that I was “wrong” in even trying to present a case for the more selective, “quality”-focused approach. I am not wanting to say here that my way is better than theirs. And I doubt that even the most determined advocates of having the largest first level network possible would say they are not interested in quality.

I doubt that the “quality versus quantity” debate will ever be resolved on one side or another. In fact, I believe that it is not so much a matter of two distinct “sides” as positions along a spectrum.

What I do know is that it makes sense to pause before you send out invitations to a whole bunch of people, inviting them to join you on LinkedIn, and first think through, strategically, how you want LinkedIn to work for you. Then think about who, in your circle of known, trusted professional connections, you would like to have as your initial group of connections, and invite them to start the ball rolling. You may well find that a number of them are already on LinkedIn and will be pleased to see you there too.

You can send out more invitations as often as you choose. Once you have an initial group set up it will be easy to invite more, which seems to me a much more congenial approach than inviting a huge number at first and then having to drop some of them later because their being on your list doesn’t suit you.

And then, before you invite anyone, think about how you would like to be invited if the boot was on the other foot.

Would you be happy to receive the boilerplate invitation?

I’d like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn.

Or would you like something a bit more personal, perhaps with something in it about why that person would like you to do that, perhaps something about how that might be of benefit to you, perhaps an offer by them to be of assistance in helping them with their networking, should you need that at some stage?

I don’t actually have a problem when people I know well and respect send me one of those “off the shelf” invitations. But I often wonder how many thousands, maybe millions of LinkedIn boilerplate invitations go unanswered, because the sender chose to not take a little time to craft something a bit more personal. That’s not to say every invitation has to be crafted personally to the individual recipient, but that even a general message you send out should be something that looks like it could come from you rather than being the standard invitation provided by LinkedIn.

The next post in this series, a week or so from now, will be about how to create invitations that have more likelihood of success, not just in getting people to accept your invitation, but in helping you build a strong, mutually helpful network on LinkedIn.

In the meantime, I welcome comments, suggestions and success stories about how to think through your strategy for building your LinkedIn network.

Other tips in this series:

Tip #1: Review Your Profile Regularly

Tip #3: Give Useful Recommendations

LinkedIn Tip #1: Review Your Profile Regularly

This is the first in a series of weekly posts in which I’ll be sharing some tips on how to use LinkedIn to good effect. This week’s tip is about having a well-crafted, up to date profile. And that includes paying close attention to keywords.

The idea of a series of LinkedIn tips has been prompted by my experience, over the past couple of weeks, of getting requests for advice and suggestions on how best to use LinkedIn to help grow your business or network. In each instance found myself writing more in reply than I think was expected.

Then I reminded myself that I have spent a lot of time studying and writing about LinkedIn. In fact it’s not long ago that my colleague Bill Vick and I were working on the second edition, now available, of our book LinkedIn for Recruiting (update June 2010: as LinkedIn has since gone through more changes, the printed book is no longer sale, but the e-book version is available free of charge for research purposes). So it stands to reason there are things about LinkedIn that I may take as given, but which could well be news to a lot of people.

LinkedIn for Recruiting book cover

The book is based on interviews with top gun recruiters, sourcers and other industry specialists. And while the interviews and the book focus on the recruiting industry, a great proportion of the insights and advice is more generally applicable.

When we started the review I wondered whether what had been written a couple of years ago might be out of date. In fact it became pretty clear to me in the review process that the fundamental principles for smart use of LinkedIn that we drew from those interviews still provide a sound basis for getting value from the platform and network. While a lot has changed with LinkedIn and how it operates since we first researched and wrote that book, some basic principles have endured.

One of the principles that has endured is the importance of having a well-crafted, polished profile. And part of that exercise is to make sure to include the key words which describe or point to our talents and specialties, thus increasing the likelihood that we will be found by people searching on LinkedIn.

Joe Pelayo, one of the top Executive Recruiters in the United States, said in being interviewed for LinkedIn for Recruiting:

“The most important thing people neglect is their LinkedIn profile.” (p 74)

Just over a year ago I posted here, recommending a LinkedIn profile makeover and linking to Guy Kawasaki’s benchmark post, from early in 2007, on the subject.

Re-reading those posts now, I notice that neither of them mentions explicitly the importance of keywords.

In LinkedIn for Recruiting, leading Internet research expert Suzi Tonini explained the importance of keywords in your LinkedIn profile:

“List your strengths and accomplishments. And use keywords. Keywords are important anywhere on the Internet. As many keywords as apply to your industry, background, accomplishments, whatever you’ve done – put them in there. Then anybody who wants to network with you will be able to find you easier.” (p 14)

As well as helping with your findability on LinkedIn via general search engines such as Google, choosing and using good keywords will give you a big advantage in terms of searches from directly within the LinkedIn platform.

Remember also to review your profile regularly, especially when you change jobs or roles.

And a simple but important part of the editing process should be to customize your profile link (essentially the Web address of your profile) from the standard issue format to the more user-friendly format http://www.linkedin.com/in/yourname. Then put that in the signature block for your email and in other places online or offline where you have the opportunity to share your link. Clarence Klopfstein provides a simple, clear explanation of how to customize your profile link.

For anyone unfamiliar with how to edit their LinkedIn profile, the LinkedIn help section provides some basic instructions.

If you have a LinkedIn success story to share, I hope you will do so here, with a comment and if appropriate a link in the comment. And if you have a question about how you can best improve your LinkedIn profile page, I will do my best to answer or find someone else who will do so.

Other tips in this series:

Tip # 2: Take Time to Link Strategically

Tip # 3: Give Useful Recommendations

LinkedIn for Recruiting and Gratitude

LinkedIn for Recruiting book

Promo alert. This post is about the new edition of a book I co-authored. And about gratitude.

With Thanksgiving a few days from now, I’m feeling very grateful about the release, over the weekend just past, of the second edition of LinkedIn for Recruiting, “the roadmap for recruiters using LInkedIn”.

I’m grateful especially to my co-author, recruiting industry legend Bill Vick and to the recruiting industry leaders who shared their experiences and ideas very generously in a ground-breaking series of interviews with Bill, interviews from which the book was drawn and the recordings of which are available to purchasers of the book.

I’m grateful to our publisher Mitchell Levy and everyone involved in the behind the scenes work, on design, editing, proofing and distribution, at Mitchell’s company, Quick2Publish.

Above all, I’m grateful to all those people who have bought the book and in the process have given us the confidence to undertake a complete revision and produce this second edition.

When Bill and I completed the book for its first edition, published in March 2006, although gratitude would have been an appropriate  emotion, my recollection is that I mainly felt relieved that it was done. It had not been an easy run.

There had been plenty of very late nights and plenty of revisions, to get the book as close as we could to just right.

I must say I was pretty sure we had done a good job when the pre-launch reviews started to come in. Then when I held a printed copy in my hands I experienced a bit more exhilaration, a feeling which was definitely enhanced when the book started selling.

We are now two and a half years down the track and the first edition has kept on selling, which gives me confidence that in its second edition it will continue to be seen as a valuable tool for recruiters.

Then there is the package of bonuses, still available with this second edition.

  • Free $195 job posting on LinkedIn
  • Free $200 software program, Content Manager from Broadlook Technologies
  • Free one month membership at Hireability.com -  a $150 value
  • A 20% discount on any eGrabber.com product -  potential $100 value
  • Password controlled access to the mp3 interviews of those interviewed for the book and
    others.

You can find out more about/buy the book here.

Is LinkedIn Too Busy with Big Deals to Respond to Members?

LinkedIn logo I can remember a time not so long ago when LinkedIn executives and staff were really good about responding to questions and even criticism. Co-founder and sometime VP at LinkedIn Konstantin Guericke used to put an enormous effort into communicating with members on LinkedIn-related groups of which I’ve been a member, including the one of which I’m a moderator, LinkedIn Bloggers. Mario Sundar, whose current title at LinkedIn is Community Evangelist, was another who would respond quickly and thoughtfully.

Seems like those days are gone. At least if my experience and that of a couple of my colleagues is anything to go by.

What prompted these reflections and this post was a message yesterday on Twitter (a “tweet”) by @jowyang, a.k.a. Senior Analyst, Social Computing at Forrester Research, Jeremiah Owyang, drawing attention to LinkedIn’s latest coup in hooking up with CNBC, “enabling users to share and discuss news with their professional networks”.

I commented with my own tweet: great to see LinkedIn making high level deals – pity their staff don’t feel any need to respond to emails any more.

dwtweet4sept08

I hadn’t intended to start a discussion. Just venting, sounding off, as I had recently had a personal experience of what others had told me about not getting responses to communications with LinkedIn.

But Jeremiah replied to my tweet with another of his, as follows: my friend @mariosundar is the Community Manager at LinkedIn, have you talked to him.

jowyangtweet1

That’s when it got tricky.

Because the direct answer would have been, Erm, no, I haven’t talked to Mario, Jeremiah, but interesting that you should mention him because he’s one of the people who hasn’t replied to emails.

Now I do recognize that emails can go astray.

But I had emailed Mario because I had not had a reply from Kay Luo, Senior Director of Corporate Communications and Buzz Marketing at LinkedIn, whom I had emailed at the suggestion of my colleague Bill Vick, about an issue which he and I thought would have been of interest to LinkedIn.

So I’m talking about two emails, one to Kay Luo and one to Mario Sundar.

This was a month ago. No response, not even a form acknowledgement, from either.

A couple of people have encouraged me to blog about the situation. I was reluctant at first, but on reflection I decided maybe by airing the problem there was a chance, slim perhaps but nevertheless a chance, that LinkedIn could lift its game in the member relations department.

Bear in mind I had not emailed LinkedIn as a newbie member asking some question that could have been resolved by checking out the LinkedIn web site. Although I believe that there should be a system in place for even the newest newbie to get some form of response, even an automatically generated one.

LinkedIn for Recruiting book by Bill Vick & Des Walsh No, what I was writing about was to get official clarification about the different kinds of membership LinkedIn offers, so that the update of the book LinkedIn for Recruiting, of which I am co-author with Bill Vick, could be as accurate as possible.

Why did I need clarification? Because the LinkedIn web site is simply confusing on the subject of types of membership.

In the original, current edition of LinkedIn for Recruiting, which was exhaustively vetted (more than once) by LinkedIn, we listed four types of membership:

  • Personal (free)
  • Business
  • Business Plus and
  • Business Pro.

Working on the update, I found on the LinkedIn site a chart for comparing account types,  which compares Business, Business Plus and Corporate Services (the last-mentioned did not exist at the time the book was published originally :

LinkedIn Account Type comparison

So what had happened to the Pro account type?

Well, evidently it had not gone away, because under “Account & Settings” on my Linkedin home page I was able to pull up another chart with membership types, still showing a Pro account as an option.

LinkedIn Account Options table

Note also that neither of those tables lists Personal Plus ($60 a year) which I have.

So was this something you think I might have expected at least something along the lines of “thanks for bringing that to our attention, we’ll get back to you soon”? In fact, wasn’t this something that someone would feel concerned enough about to investigate and take some action so as to clear up the apparent anomaly?

You would have thought, wouldn’t you?

Maybe they’ve done something.  But they haven’t told me. Haven’t, as I say, even acknowledged that I wrote.

Not a dicky bird, not a peep.

So is it LinkedIn policy not to reply to emails? Is it that people are just too busy with new mega-deals? Is there something wrong with their email system?

Anyone?