We're noticing a trend with our clients: CEOs and Presidents at $300k+ are shying away from LinkedIn.
Some don't have or want a LinkedIn profile, some are minimizing their profiles, and some are eliminating their profiles.
Their reasons: They don't want to be overexposed, and they don't want to look desperate. They want to appear discreet, passive, confident, and confidential.
This begs a few questions about why this trend is emerging:
It's not clear – they have a mixed message. LinkedIn is promoted as a business-oriented social networking site for professionals to exchange information, ideas and opportunities. On the LinkedIn About Us page they note: LinkedIn represents a valuable demographic for marketers with an affluent & influential membership.
Did you notice the conflict?
A “professional” is a person that "follows an occupation as a means of livelihood," and everyone has an occupation of one sort of another. LinkedIn’s “professional” membership as of June 2011 included 1,200 Dishwashers, 1,500 Ushers, 3,800 Janitors, 3,900 Waiters, 7,000 Laborers, 10,000 Waitresses, 27,000 Customer Service Representatives, 29,000 Bartenders, 42,000 Cashiers, 80,000 Photographers, 130,000 Clerks, 136,000 Secretaries, 172,000 Nurses, 251,000 Agents, 255,000 Technicians, 749,000 Coordinators and 1.3 million Assistants. Most would not think of these "professionals" as "affluent and influential."
One of our clients, an upper-six-figure CEO, commented: "LinkedIn has lost all its luster and become totally overused … especially now that people link it to their Facebook or Twitter [pages] and overcrowd those profiles too. The special interest groups on LinkedIn are also less than interesting, except for overzealous junior people who are trying to look smart."
There were 445,000 CEOs and 962,000 Presidents on LinkedIn as of June 2011. When we do the math for participation compared to the workforce, it appears that CEOs and Presidents are 3 times less likely than others to use LinkedIn.
This may be part of the reason that we're seeing our $300k+ clients shy away from LinkedIn - most of our clients are Presidents and CEOs.
One would think (perhaps hope) that CEOs and Presidents use LinkedIn primarily for networking - as the LinkedIn banner says, "to exchange information, ideas and opportunities." It appears however that 90% of CEOs and Presidents on LinkedIn are looking for a job or looking for work.
This may also be part of the reason our $300k+ clients are shying away from LinkedIn - it's looks somewhat like a resume posting site for job-seekers. They don't want to appear desperate with their resume (the LinkedIn equivalent) posted for everyone to see, as if they're looking for a job.
The headline for LinkedIn Recruiter (the section for employers and recruiters) says, "Source the best passive candidates with LinkedIn's Corporate Recruitment Solutions." Recruiters and employers use this resource for a fee.
Like it or not, some recruiters and employers discriminate against the unemployed. They argue (behind closed doors only of course) that there must be something wrong with an unemployed person - perhaps that person is in the bottom 10% of performers and that's why they're unemployed. As a result, they look for passive candidates.
This begs the question: if a passive candidate at $300k+ is interested in "career opportunities" or "job inquiries" or both, should they tell? Should the whole world know? Should their LinkedIn profile look like a resume? It just seems like you can't do both with a straight face. You're either active or passive, and your LinkedIn profile demonstrates your intentions. Recruiters and employers can tell ... like the old saying, if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's a duck.
This may also be part of the reason our $300k+ clients are shying away from LinkedIn. If LinkedIn is more job-seeking than business networking, it doesn't help our clients appear discreet, passive, confident, and confidential.
Since their main revenue stream is coming from HR departments and search firms, one could argue that their motive is simple: to profit from selling member profiles so employers and search firms can find the best candidate at the lowest cost.
Maybe this is another reason $300k+ executives are shying away from LinkedIn ... they don't want to "be found" with the masses and "auctioned off" to the lowest bidder. They'd rather go directly to the decision-maker most likely to hire them.
We're just noticing a trend - there will always be different strokes for different folks.
Go to http://jobbait.com/a/linkedin.html for the rest of our analysis, including: How should you manage your LinkedIn profile at $300k+ to look passive and discrete?
You’ll also find comments from readers, including those who agree and disagree with our analysis.
No comments:
Post a Comment