How Important Is LinkedIn Nowadays?

Hey All

I recently have been in the market for a new employer after nearly 3 years with my current one. Historically I have ever only applied using Seek and eventually have got responses, interviews and a job within a reasonable period. That is to say, employers were responding to me and that was not for anything incredibly senior. Now, the only difference is my seniority level has changed slightly (gone up), with my title now including the word manager. I have never had a LinkedIn profile (call me old fashioned but I feel it has made everything about a person very public).

When I recently applied for my desired roles over the last 3 months (sent about 20 applications using Seek), I have not got a single call back from any HR team. This is the first time this has happened. In fact all I have is what seems to be automatic rejection emails, and in most cases, not even that. These are not customer service, hospitality or casual roles. This is a senior level role with my experience being almost 12 years.

For those in the job market, or hiring managers, or in HR, what has changed over the last 3 years? Has it reached the stage where a proper cover letter written in perfect English along with a traditional resume sent through Seek is no longer suitable? Are companies hiring 100% through LinkedIn now? Why are they bothering to send jobs to Seek then?

I'm very much surprised and demoralised after my recent experience. On speaking with a couple of associates, they reckon that there has been a major shift to only hire through LinkedIn and are not looking at applications sent via other means. Potentially also, hirers are not even looking at applicants without LinkedIn.

I'd be happy to hear your experiences and suggestions.

Related Stores



  • +12

    Maybe there were more suitable candidates for the positions you applied for?

    • Thats not out of the question obviously. However, we're talking very experienced in my field and not just any applicant. Previously I have been at least called for a quick chat. Also, question remains if the "more suitable candidates" are people who have applied through LinkedIn. Maybe sifting through Seek resumes is difficult all of a sudden for employers now?

      • +15

        You are jumping to a LOT of conclusions here.
        "Im not getting called back must be a Linkedin thing".

        If you're a manager then show some leadership and responsibility.
        Assume it's you. Get your resume updated again. Go read SEEKs articles from recruiters and employers to see what they expect to see. Make some phone calls and send some emails to some of those rejections to ask for feedback on why you missed out.

        Linkedin is a great tool, and yes it's being used more. But anyone with an ad on SEEK spent hundreds of dollars to have it there and it is absolutely where they are hiring people. I look at a lot of applications and CVs. If you're not getting called by anyone you need to make changes to your documents, not look for someone to blame.

  • +1

    I think seek is still the primary resource, from what I've experienced. I even had a seek profile and got a call from a headhunter that reviewed a 2yr old resume :D i updated that fairly quickly. I also have a linkedin and haven't got any hits on that, I started it mainly to grow connections, as I wanted a job in another state in 2yrs. Linkedin is basically your resume but people can endorse your skills and get written references.

    How strong is your resume and skills VS the roles your applying for?

    Again talking from my experience with chatting to HR's and employers, most bigger business will have programs that sift through the resumes for them and shortlist, by using key words that are fit for the role. Usually when applying for job XYZ you should be taking the key words form the job ad and fitting them into your resume to help this. I've been told format isn't a huge thing with these software's but that could be varied.

    Probably wouldn't hurt to get your resume "serviced" by a professional, to ensure your 100% covered and "swinging with your best bat"

    • My skills are within 75% of the roles I'm applying for so its pretty good although a bit of a stretch in some cases.
      Thanks for your help.

  • +16

    We still advertise and hire through Seek, but for a senior position we would always check the profile in LinkedIn. What we are looking for is to see if the information matches and to know who we might have in common. There are far too many instances of exaggerated CVs and it's a waste of time interviewing people who look good on paper, but are absolute sh*t.

    Through LinkedIn in, if we find common people, we can run our own quick background checks by calling them and asking if they know you and what do they think of you before deciding if we'll call you in for an interview.

    If you don't have many common connections, in our company atleast, that would mean we won't bring you in for an interview as we've been in our area of expertise for over 20 years and know most people in the country.

    • +5

      Through LinkedIn in, if we find common people, we can run our own quick background checks by calling them and asking if they know you and what do they think of you before deciding if we'll call you in for an interview.

      That is extremely fraught and not really being of equal opportunity for your candidates.

      If you don't have many common connections, in our company atleast, that would mean we won't bring you in for an interview as we've been in our area of expertise for over 20 years and know most people in the country.

      So much for diversity in hiring.

      • +13

        What's this got to do with diversity. The people we have belong to all ethnic background and we have 50% female as well. Having the right skills is the key criteria. What your ethnic,racial, gender, etc is is completely irrelevant. How do we assess the right skills - through references we trust.

        • +14

          I'm not talking diversity of ethnicity/gender. I'm talking diversity of people from different professional backgrounds. You get all the same "types" if you just hire from within industry.

          How do we assess the right skills - through references we trust.

          References are important. But just cold calling common connections on people you might hire isn't going to be the bulletproof answer either. There are many ways to "assess the right skills" through conversation/interview/testing which is better than what does ol' mate Joe think about candidate X.

          • +13

            @serpserpserp: Yeah that's so incredibly fked on a few levels.
            But MrHyde's job is strictly in the best interests of the company. It's cheaper, less time consuming and safer to hire someone that a lot of references can vouch for than take a chance at hiring a new person with no connections.

            What annoys the fk out of me about that is if I'm an immigrant, or from out of state, or a new grad, or worked at only one or two places all my life, I am definitely getting shafted.

            I've seen my fair share of managers with well padded CVs and connections come in and do a shit job at a project. What I've seen happen is that they're snakes who are VERY good at weaseling their way out of trouble because they're very charismatic.

            Unfortunately bullshitting and good connections is how you get up in the world, and it works well to get through the hiring practices employed by MrHyde.

            • +1

              @Blitzfx: It does depend on the role. A highly niche technical area or a senior role, common network trumps everything. If you are going to pay someone 150-200k, you sure as hell want to ensure that person is capable.

              For grad roles, we have gone down the Seek route and as someone else said, for one job, we get 300-400 applicants - so sifting through them to find the person with the right motivation and passion to learn is a challenge.

              Unfortunately, our processes are a bit against new immigrants. We have hired a few and each of them was through a network connection as well.

              We believe in our methods as the results speak for themselves. Our company is young - 6 years old and we have grown from 2 to 25 people. We have not had to fire anyone so far due to not being skilled or suitable for the role. We've only had 2 people leave to join other places. Our customers keep coming back to us, so we know we are doing a good job for them.

              • -1

                @MrHyde: Unfortunately the company who believes "Unfortunately, our processes are a bit against new immigrants" will never going to be next Microsoft or Google ! Your company is no good then Pauline Hanson !

        • You say you have 50% female; is that a quota or a company attempt to address gender inequality?

          • @Resin: No quota. No specific program to address gender inequality. Just hiring the best available person for the job when a position becomes available.

      • +1

        I have once posted a job ad on Seek hiring one person and received 300 resumes in a week. As I'm only interested in interviewing may be up to 5 candidates it makes sense to speak to the people with common relationships first. But I agree that this is not fair and how newly arrived immigrants are supposed to find jobs if all the HRs hire like this.

        • I have once posted a job ad on Seek hiring one person and received 300 resumes in a week

          Unless this is truly an entry level job with no skills required. I often question the job description writing ability of HR/Hiring Manager. I've had to have heavy input into some JD's simply because it was not specific enough in what they wanted from a candidate. Sometimes you need to write a long JD to get exactly what you are after. any specific technical role or management/sales role should be detailed so you aren't getting every Joe Schmo looking for a job applying.

      • +2

        Diversity has no place in hiring mate. The job goes to the person who is most qualified.

        If you had to spend your own money on hiring someone to work for you, you would not look at their gender, ethnicity, nationality, sexual lifestyle, or any other nonsense. Don't expect other people to do it with their money. They want someone who will bring in the most money. If that happens to be a straight white Male, so be it.

        • If you had to spend your own money on hiring someone to work for you, you would not look at their gender, ethnicity, nationality, sexual lifestyle

          Not sure who's post you were referring to, but I wasn't talking about diversity in that respect. I said it was from a professional background perspective. I even clarified above.

          • +1

            @serpserpserp: Ditto, but I still find it a silly notion. Employers want to hire the most profitable and productive worker. Any measure that stops them from doing that (such as by hiring people from different areas for the sake of seeming diverse) is detrimental.

            • +2

              @SlavOz: There's a difference between seeming diverse, and actually bringing a diverse set of attitudes, experiences and skillets into the organisation. Profitability and productivity aren't necessarily correlated to technical expertise either. There's research associated with the benefits of diversity in a workforce, if you care to look into it.

              • @say_wat: I can agree with that. The problem is the word you chose to articulate your point with. Using the word "diversity" in a discussion about hiring is always going to evoke controversy, even if you only meant technical/professional diversity. Unfortunately it's a word that's been hijacked and weaponized by the left-wing radicals who are too often given the spotlight in public debates.

    • +1

      "Through LinkedIn in, if we find common people, we can run our own quick background checks by calling them and asking if they know you and what do they think of you before deciding if we'll call you in for an interview."

      How prevalent is this? I have no doubt this does happen, although bordering on illegal. I had always thought Australia's privacy laws prohibit doing these kind of checks without the candidate's explicit permission?

      "If you don't have many common connections, in our company atleast, that would mean we won't bring you in for an interview as we've been in our area of expertise for over 20 years and know most people in the country."

      Clear case of "Who you know"

      • +7

        Well, anything you publish on Linked In is public information. It could be a privacy violation as the company really shouldn't reveal that someone is looking for another job. However, it does happen. You are more likely to get a true reference check from someone you know that someone who the candidate puts forward. I feel anyone the candidate puts forward is not even worth talking to as they would have been specifically picked to say good things about the candidate. I know a lot of places will only accept your immediate current manager as a reference. I also know of people who gave fake references of their personal friends instead.

        Australia is a small place - reputation matters. I am more likely to hire someone who I have worked with before or someone I have worked with and trust gives them a thumbs up over someone I haven't met or is not well known in the industry. This is especially true where the number of professionals in our niche area is not even 100.

        As an example, a customer of mine was hiring for a position and came across a CV that said they worked on a particular project a few years ago using a piece of technology and said that they were a lead architect and the whole project was successful due to them. The customer knew that I worked on the same project and was one of the architects on it and called me up to ask if I knew that person and would I recommend them. Turns out I didn't know that person and he never worked on the project - he made it all up to look like he had experience in that technology. These kind of example is unfortunately very common.

        I was also recently told by another customer that they received a CV from a candidate that looked a lot like mine. I was obviously not sent the CV or the name of the candidate; but provided with some key terms from the CV that helped me identify that it was a copy and paste from my Linked In. I told the customer to have a look at my Linked In. The recruitment company that put the candidate forward also got a black mark against their name for not properly vetting the candidates.

        • +11

          Wow seriously you ring random people to get feedback without potential candidate's consent?

          You logic that Linkendin is a public forum and therefore you can contact common people for a feedback is absolutely absurd. With your logic, any company can start sending marketing stuff by messaging either on Facebook or LinkedIn. However it doesn't work this way and the consent is a must.

          I am sure the Privacy Commission will love you.

          • +2

            @Ash-Say: I can't see how different this would be to talking to a mate over a drink and saying, "Hey, we got this guy XAX applying for a role with us. I remember you worked in the same company and department a while back, do you think he's a good hire?"

            I wouldn't say there's anything illegal about that. People and companies need to be able to check objective references. Otherwise, candidates can just filter out anybody among their ex-colleagues who has the potential to provide negative feedback (no matter how true that feedback might be) and the company ends up wasting time and resources.

            • +4

              @jatyap: I understand your point of view but I don't agree. What's stopping an ex-colleague to provide negative feedback just because he had a grudge against you for not receiving a promotion or ex-colleague was himself a shit worker and they were kicked out for disturbing the team balance. This practice will also extend to current colleagues so it is critical that the consent is sought.

              Also what if this colleague tells your Manager that they have been approached by a recruiter for a reference check when you were not even looking or applied for a job. Your manager may not even tell you about their discussion with a colleague but this will definitely create a progress hindrance if your Manager had some plans to give you some promotion or bonus(manager's discretion only).

              In my opinion, this is BS and illegal practice and must not be followed.

              • @Ash-Say: I think that's why being part of a network is very important. If only one person within that network gives a negative review, while all others are exceedingly positive, the hiring manager will then be able to see that the negative feedback was an outlier.

                As for the issue about the reference check information coming to the manager, it's going to happen with or without LinkedIn. In fact, with LinkedIn, colleagues can give recommendations without being approached, which means that recruiters can scan through your profile without actively engaging them. I would hope though, that the majority of professionals are discreet enough to maintain some sort of delicadezza in this situation, but given the competitiveness of today's job market, I wouldn't be surprised if a rival attempted to make use of that sort of information to bring somebody down.

          • @Ash-Say: If I chose to put my information on LinkedIn then I would expect that information might be tested if I apply for a job.

            How is asking whether candidate X is a good worker breaching someone's privacy? Which section of the Privacy Act is that breaching? Are they disclosing any personal details such as their address, TFN etc?

            You can't eat your cake and have it too!

        • This is very relevant. We are part of an industry where, if you're anyone of note, you can find out about potential candidates. LinkedIn helps know who are interesting connections to "have a beer and a chat with".

          Of course, you'd talk to a few sources to avoid someone who simply has a grudge, but it's worthwhile doing it this way, and if someone isn't liked by many people, they're not likely to be a good fit anyway.

          Most recruiters are of no use anyway. The good ones know not to bullshit and provide quality candidates, but I'm always more impressed by someone approaching us directly and with a good reason.

          Your reputation is as important as anything else. I keep telling this to people I mentor. Always do the right thing regardless.

    • Why bother advertising then, just phone these connections and ask them to recommend some candidates to approach.

      • that is also a very common thing to do, we do that all the time where I work. It however is not always effective as often people aren't actually aware of people that are actively seeking employment elsewhere as many do not advertise the fact too colleagues.

  • +12

    A LinkedIn profile won't matter if the hiring manager knows you, either directly, or through someone else in the organisation.

    Otherwise, it is very common for hiring managers to check an applicant's LinkedIn profile, and if you don't have a profile, but another candidate has a profile, then it is quite possible that the manager will prefer the other candidate.

    • Fair point. Just having a profile seems to be the minimum standard rather than a traditional cover letter and resume.

  • +5

    I think LinkedIn is pretty important. I find roughly a 50-50 split across recruiters approaching me on seek and linkedin (work in IT - job in high demand). I'm not sure about other industries/roles, but I find I get on average contact at least once a week by recruiters across both.

    With position descriptions I've seen - if you can fill 70% of it, you are overqualified.

    Have you only recently become a manager? Is that why there's maybe no responses? You may need to try again after having more "official" experience (in 6 months or so). Or on the flip-side are you overqualified?

    Or you may need to redo your resume if they aren't biting at all.

    • Personally I have never applied to ads by recruiters maybe because I've had much better luck and less time wastage by going direct to companies. So I dont know how good is it that recruiters are approaching every week.
      My current role is a manager role and I was hired as one 3 years ago. I'm again looking for a slightly senior manager role, so if anything I'm ever so slightly under qualified for the roles I have applied for, but within 75% of the requirements.
      However, can you explain this statement further: "With position descriptions I've seen - if you can fill 70% of it, you are overqualified."
      Thank you for your comments.

      • I've noticed that a lot of job ads if not all of them are targeted at a superman which likely doesn't exist.

        Probably looking for one person to fill multiple gaps.

        If there's a list of 10 skills they are looking for, 4 would likely be the minimum and if you have 7 or 8 you'd be at the top of the candidates.

        I've never seen anyone fill a job description having a perfect match.

        I should mention I'm a senior IT computer programmer and have been part of the hiring process for an organisation for the past few years. Also this comes from my own experience as a job seeker doing contract jobs too.

        Edit: About 9 in 10 jobs from recruiters are rubbish or irrelevant in my experience.

        Edit2: Management is probably a different thing to normal jobs. It could just be an age thing. If you are in your 30s people may think you are inexperienced even if you can do the job. Or they may think your team won't respect you.

  • +6

    A LinkedIn profile will improve your probabilities of being noticed.

    I get contacted via LinkedIn and receive invitations for roles even though I’m not active on LinkedIn.

  • +28

    If I'm after a good a laugh I go on LinkedIn and read some of the exaggerated crap my co-workers have written about themselves.

    • +7

      Same. I work in a monopoly so there is no one else looking at their shitty self proclaimed greatness. It's all just ego stroking.

      • +11

        The worst thing is they stroke each others ego. Even the clerical people are on there verifying the "skills" of other people when they wouldn't even have a clue what they do.

        • +2

          I knew people in my previous job who did that. (profanity) (profanity) is what I would describe them as. The lack of integrity some people show is just pathetic.

    • +4

      The insufferably pretentious humble brags are too much to bear though

      • +1

        LinkedIn is no worse than traditional resumes when it comes to people bullshitting about themselves. You can write false crap anywhere.

    • Yeah true. I've noticed this too, which is why I think there are so many upvotes.
      You see people who essentially have no job experience make it seem like they've been doing very important things.
      I've even seen memes about this, it must be common.

  • +1

    LinkedIn is important now days. Recruiters want to see a picture of you, see that you have lots of connections and glean anything else positive that you might not have put forward on your application.

    I suggest just putting up a strawman LinkedIn page just to show that you are at least in the 21st century. Just put the very high level information in there. And get your connections up.

    As for your job hunting: Last 3 months of the year are always slow. So don't get too discouraged. Places often list roles, then postpone hiring until new year, or fill internally.

    I would also say that the preferred method of job applying would be the following: Direct from the website of the job advertiser, LinkedIn Applying, Seek. It can be very hard to get success from Seek direct applications.

    Also make sure you are tailoring resume/cover letter for each role. Just because you are experienced now doesn't mean anything. Just means you tick one of many boxes, but you need to show them you tick every box plus more.

    Good luck!

    • Thank you for your response. I know I am skilled and controversial statement follows considering I'm from a brown coloured race, looking at my picture potentially rules me out before people even go through it. At least with Seek, they are looking at my resume and then I have the chance to shine at the interview. However, your point is correct and I should have a basic profile setup as a formality to keep up with the times I guess.
      Appreciate your tips as well. Thank you it does give me some motivation.

      • +9

        I'm from a brown coloured race, looking at my picture potentially rules me out before people even go through it.

        White privilege is very real but don't focus on this. Remember many other people of different ethnicities get the jobs you are going for every day too. Go out there and get the best professional looking photo of yourself and own your identity. Hiding it doesn't help anybody and besides, do you really want to waste your time getting an interview for a company that is prejudice against people because of the colour of their skin? Let them rule you out early, instead of wasting your time and then ruling you out due to their prejudice. I'd rather interview for a company that knows my full story before I get to an interview.

        • -1

          White privilege eh? Check your racist attitude at the door buddy.

          • +1


            Check your racist attitude at the door buddy.

            It isn't a racist term? It happens to be a term steeped in academic studies.


            • +1

              @serpserpserp: The notion of white privilege collectively stereotypes an entire race of people as being powerful or successful, while inexcusably assuming they hold evil or prejudiced desires. There is no other way to accurately describe this mindset other than "tolerated racism".

              Meanwhile, my life is no better off just because I can buy a band-aid which more closely resembles my skin colour. The package said "results may vary" but I'm yet to see the privilege kick in.

            • @serpserpserp: Ah yes steeped in academic studies which can never be racist right?

              Do you also subscribe to Mankind Quarterly? You may also enjoy their academic banter.

              • @meowbert: lol if you can't recognize that white people have an advantage in this western society they created you are burying your head in the sand.

                It isn't racism, it is the way of the world.

                People seem to think that "privilege" means that they will be given some sort of extra leg up in life if they are white. What they don't realize is that this leg up has already been provided at birth by not being born in some of the worst 3rd world countries in the world that still have segregation or informal segregation between difference races that puts anyone that isn't white at a disadvantage.

                • -1

                  @serpserpserp: That's not what it means. Maybe read your obtuse wikipedia article before responding next time to avoid further embarrassment.

                  • @meowbert: The Wikipedia article describes both sides of the argument. There is obviously a lot of angst around the term because white people don't like the idea. I get that, it is an uncomfortable bias.

      • +2

        I am brown skinned as well and I guess it depends on your industry. I'm in IT and majority of the people in IT are from the sub-continent. I don't think race is that much a factor. I barely even look at the name or photo when looking at candidates. English and proper grammar matters and I said above, your network matters. There are too much low quality candidates that apply and a common network helps narrow that down.

        • +8

          There are too many….. Grammar please

      • +2

        Perhaps start by changing your attitude. Maybe you're not getting called back because you're not seeing something objectively wrong with your application and instead choose to put it down to racism. This is a lazy, toxic way to see the world. You're assuming the worst of a potential employer so how do you expect them to assume the best in you?

        Employers only care about one colour and that's the colour of money.

        Privilige check - I'm white, but I have a name that is a massacre of the English language and instantly reveals that I'm not from an English speaking country.

        • I never said I'm not getting call backs because of race (I actually believe my application is drowned in hundreds of other Seek applications). All I said that LinkedIn makes the race very obvious, but as @serpserpserp rightly commented, better to reveal that upfront to avoid wasting my time.

          • -1

            @coffeeinstance: The fact that you think your race matters is where your attitude falters. You've pre-emptively made excuses to fail or convinced yourself that you're a victim before you've even attempted to get a job, based on some ridiculous ultra-woke hysteria. This is either diminishing your confidence or making you unaware of your own objective shortcomings.

            You'll do yourself a world of good by completely emptying your mind of any attempts to blame others and instead focus 100% on yourself. Best of luck with that.

  • +3

    As you grow higher in the organisational heirarchy, its no longer; what you know that matters, but who you know. My early career job application experience was very similar, applying on company/internet websites. But over the years, as I grew in seniority and titles continued to add up to my job profile, it became increasingly obvious that applying through websites never gave me the desired result.

    Don't be too disheartened by your application experience, its not a judgement on your skills. It may just be a simple case of far too many people applying for too few "Management roles" and the chances of the recruiter knowing someone they have worked with in the past are way higher for senior roles. Additionally you usually have very few candidates called in for interviews at senior positions as it requires even senior people in the organisation to conduct the interview.

    Linked in that aspect was quite important, It helped showcase my skills, in few instances allowed recruiters head hunt me for specific roles, at other times use some newtwork connections within an organisation for opportunities.

    • +1

      Thanks for your reply. I think your response makes sense - roles getting filled outside of Seek through contacts, and my application is mostly rejected without anyone even going through it. However, this makes having LinkedIn somewhat necessary.

      • From my experience, LinkedIn is a must. As others have said it shows you are living in the 21st century and are happy to show your true self and don't have anything to hide.
        It gives your application more strength.

  • -2

    My wife works with 'high level' managers and if she doesn't include a (short) powerpoint presentation with her reports and strategies they simply don't comprehend what they are looking at. So try including a powerpoint with your resume, or MS paint if you are targeting a CEO role.

    • +4

      or MS paint if you are targeting a CEO role


      CEOs aren't being hired through linkedin. They're being headhunted.

    • +2

      It'll be a pretty funny CEO if they apply using MS Paint.

    • lols, looks like we've got a couple of CEO's and manager here. Get back to work you bums.

  • -2

    over the last 3 months … all I have is what seems to be automatic rejection emails, and in most cases, not even that

    Did you call them for feedback?

    … definition of insanity: doing same thing and expecting different result

    • Mate I think feedback option only comes in if we have had at least a chat. The feedback is always in the rejection email. "Unfortunately we have had other candidates that better meet our needs". However, we all know this is generic, so calling and getting feedback is pointless.

      • I'm talking about HR who screen applications to next stage. I'm not talking about feedback from hiring mgr.

    • +1

      Did you call them for feedback?

      You realize that most recruiters on Seek either a) don't provide a phone number or b) never answer their phone or return calls.

      Over the years I have called many people on Seek even just to chat about roles (like the Ad asks me to) but none every call me back unless I have been a top candidate for the role.

  • +2

    As for me, my last 3 jobs were all from direct linked in messages sent by someone for quick chat, interviews and joining after that. But I guess this is because I have a huge network (genuine links, not adding anyone coming my way) and people have openings everywhere

    I have had poor experience with seek so far.

  • +1

    I don't have a LinkedIn but yes it's very important these days from what I have been told from HR people and other colleagues. Definitely set one up (I still have to as well…).

  • +2

    Your whole post is framed on “It’s not me, it’s the system”.

    Majority of recruitment is now based on attitude and fit (and obviously skill), but there is a focus on attitude.

    If your applications are written like your post, then I understand the rejections. But I can only comment on information before me.

    • +3

      But cover letter with perfect English did you not read.

    • -1

      +1 for common sense. I don't want to be mean but OP needs some serious attitude adjustment for his own good. It's tragic that so many potentially talented people fall for the bullshit notion that the world owes you something, or that your shortcomings are the result of a system built by racists.

      Another thing I cannot comprehend is after 12 years of experience, how OP does not have close contacts in his industry. Need to change the way you approach things ASAP

      • Just to clarify. My comment about ‘the system’ had nothing to do with race, but rather the OPs belief that lack of LinkedIn was the reason he isn’t getting invited to interviews. IMO the OPs attitude contributes.

        Again, can only comment based on info presented by OP

  • +1

    For me, Linkedin depends on the job field.

    I've worked in two completely different fields, one being health before moving to Data Analytics in Insurance.

    Linkedin was completely worthless to me as a health professional, generally anyone with a degree would get an interview and the best interview would get the job.

    However in Insurance, I've been contacted on Linkedin about 3 times, including my current position where I was asked if I would consider interviewing for a role which I did and got.

    But I'd say 99% of the time, those who meet the criteria and don't get an interview is because their resume is terrible.

    • I agree - the requirement for LinkedIn is pretty industry dependent. It's much more important in professional services industries compared to others, but it seems that more and more industries are moving towards LinkedIn over time.

  • +3

    Had recruiters contact me after a promotion from graduate to engineer but nothing has come about. Linkedin has to be the biggest circle jerk of bullshit stories and profiles. I honestly detest the platform and most people on it however acknowledge it may be useful to find jobs.

  • +3

    "I have never had a LinkedIn profile (call me old fashioned but I feel it has made everything about a person very public)."

    You need to change with the times mate. Almost every shorlisted candidate is now "googled" to really see what type of person you are, other than the crap most people spin in their resumes.

    If i shorted listed you, and you did not have a linkedin profile, that would concern me somewhat, as most "professionals" do nowdays.

  • LinkedIn is the way to go. When I was in the job market in Q4 2019 I updated my resume to include a link to my LinkedIn profile. In one of the exhaustive interview process where I had to present on a case study and on myself, I had a slide on quotes from recommendations for me posted on LinkedIn by me ex-senior managers and colleagues which was well received (had got the job offer)

    In fact its a norm in an interview process that before you talk and meet the hiring managers to visit their profile to understand their experience/ work background and often they would also check in your profile. In one instance where literally within minutes of accepting an offer one of the interview panelists sent me a congratulatory/welcome note on LinkedIn and as well add in request.

    In parallel where there is no doubt in my mind that after your network, LinkedIn is the way to go you also have to realise that for mid-management especially within commerce/finance field the market is extremely competitive, there is definitely a slow down due to economic pressure as well its that time of the year when job market starts to slow down from Oct to dead in January 2-3rd week.

    From personal experience; to share insights I met 12 recruiters in person (Sydney based) from 3rd - 1st week of October, spoke to another 3 over the phone, applied 20 - 30 jobs straight parallel roles and no positive traction with exception to 2 contractual roles which were both offered after 3 rounds of interview for both and eventually got a perm job via network.

    Like property where its seller's market again I would say in job its employer's market.

    • When does the job market pick up again after the new year? Just trying to figure out when I should start focussing on my applications.

      • +1

        Traditionally its supposed to be post January. Having said that its so much about being at the right place at the right time. I have seen and personally experienced when you get recruited in the 3rd week of December when supposedly everything comes to stand still. The other big wave is supposed to be 2-3 weeks post in the new FY as budgets for FTEs etc approved.

    • +1

      When u said u got job via network, what did this actually involve?
      Did u put a status in ur linkedin profile that you are looking for new opportunities, then someone in ur network told u of an opening?

      • Goes without saying that the starting point is to have a strong personal brand for yourself i.e committed, interpersonal and be good in the job. Thereafter stay in touch with your ex-colleagues, junior, parallel and senior with the same respect. You never know where is the next word of mouth or phone call may come from.
        My previous job came from my ex-manager who is a CFO but the whole thing crumbled as new owners had another view. I lost my job but luckily my key stakeholder who was also made redundant there went on to find a new job and reached out to me to offer my current. In between that, I was on job hunt via traditional channels i.e. LinkedIn, Seek etc but nothing works more effectively and efficiently when you go through your network.

  • +1

    LinkedIn has become a key channel for identifying suitable candidates. Hiring managers/recruiters use this as a compliment to existing channels and processes.

    All things equal a candidate with a LinkedIn profile will have a higher chance of being contacted because it:

    1. Improves credibility/trustworthiness of the candidate when used as a CV validation tool
    2. Enhances visibility of contributions/achievements/leadership activities not listed on CV.
    3. Provides an overview of the person's network - a key asset in senior roles

    In my opinion it is better to engage with the platform than to treat it with contempt - it might land you a job.

    • Agree

  • +4

    I work in this sector.

    We advertise 10% of roles on seek & headhunt 90% from LinkedIn. Why? With SEEK we have to deal (and reply to / reject) 200 plus unqualified people which takes lots of time. By headhunting we are only talking to people with this skills. Far more efficient & saves is money in a sector increasingly under higher efficiency pressures.

    LinkedIn is an algorithm based search, you need to be on the first 5 pages (we see 25 people per page). Think like a recruiter (most recruiters flit from agency to internal & back again) and add the right keywords and sectors to your profile then be 'active' on LinkedIn so the algorithm knows your looking for a job. Within a week you will be on page 1 not page 50.

    Lastly, remember many of the talent acquisition teams in big companies are actually a recruitment agency these days (it's called an RPO) so avoiding agency ads can hurt you. Some agencies are skarks, some are outstanding, apply & make your call when you chat to them.

    • +3

      What do u mean by 'active' on linkedin to appear in top search pages?
      Liking other people's posts, sharing motivational quotes, stroking people's ego by commenting on their posts nicely, or other things?

      • Sure.

        All of those things. Like, comment, share, look at their jobs board. The algorithm needs to think you are looking for a job, then it will push you to the front of the list.

        Works like a charm when combined with a well written profile.

        • Thanks for sharing your insight.
          I wonder if "liking other people's posts, sharing motivational quotes, stroking people's ego by commenting on their posts nicely" actually makes your profile to be higher in the search list though.
          Do you know this for sure or you were just guessing? I am interested to know how the algorithm actually works..

          I would've thought what pushes you in front of the list is your status whether you are looking for job (casually, actively looking options) and the keywords in your profile whether it matches what the keywords the searchers are looking for, and nothing to do with how often you like other people's posts, etc.

          Just my guess though!

          • +1

            @OzFrugie: I can't tell you exactly what buttons to push however I've done this with dozens of candidates over the yrs & it works.

            Tried with my best mate recently, we tried to find him in the recruiter platform, literally added a dozen keywords on his profile & made a search to actually find him… he was 20 pages deep.

            For a week he logged in every day, tweaked his profile, looked at the job board, made posts and commented on posts.

            One week later he was on page one for the same search & unsurprisingly recruiters started to call him. He accepted a decent offer six weeks later & I got a cold slab in return :)

            • @Yorkshire-Man: Interesting! Would be interesting to pin out what activity(ies) impact the most amongst "logged in every day, tweaked his profile, looked at the job board, made posts and commented on posts".

              Thanks for sharing

    • Agree with you my current job was a company contacted me directly via LinkedIn before the job ad was posted

  • +2

    Hiring manager here.

    I always look the candidates up on LinkedIn, it's practically 2020 this is how it's done.

    To me LinkedIn being out there in the open means people will be less likely to lie or embellish as it's not a targeted piece of paper but an open profile that their current and former colleagues (as well as bosses) can and will critique.

    • -2

      You'd think so, but based on what I see on my colleagues LinkedIn profiles, it is so full of fluff and other things that aren't true that I just can't see the value in it.

      • +1

        This is where word of mouth comes in. You will almost always know someone, who knows someone, who knows this suspect person. A quick phone call will let you know what type of person they really are, and to avoid. Every industry has its own circles, and as they say, its a small world.

  • -2

    Only important to Baby Boomers (like Facebook.
    So it depends who is hiring

  • +1

    We're currently hiring in seek.

    The number of applications for a single job position on seek are just insane. A lot are just spam where the candidate had not even read the advert.

    Which means, it makes it so much harder to sort the wheat from the chaff.

    An easy to digest cv and cover letter really help. LinkedIn helps - shows that your public profile matches paper and that you have a vast network of people that it is visible to and that are in the industry. A bit like blockchain!

    The more senior the manager role, the more important it is to be able to network and demonstrate your network of people that vouch for you (management is a people function after all).

    It's the nature of the beast in Australia in 2019. You have to show you can fit in.

Login or Join to leave a comment