[gregdoesit]

Former engineering manager here. LinkedIn is useful to get “sourced” for jobs. Sourcing refers to recruiters proactively searching for qualified candidates for a given job.

The first place recruiters go to source for positions - especially for those that are harder to fill - is LinkedIn.

So no: you absolutely don’t need to have LinkedIn to get hired if you apply directly. LinkedIn makes it easier for companies to find and contact you.

Anecdotally, my last three jobs in my career have come from LinkedIn outreaches (Skype, Skyscanner, Uber). These were opportunities I would have not come across, as I was not actively looking, but they found me at the right moment. Before I always applied directly.

[ineptech]

Ditto. I work for a big company with several FT recruiters, and AFAICT the only thing they do to look for new candidates is spam people on linkedin.

[illwrks]

100% agree.

There are a lot of business comms and networkers on linked as well as your standard social network content, in but the greatest value is what it provides to recruiters.

Recruiters use linked in as a 'direct sourcing' (head hunting) tool. LinkedIn provides a recruiter with a whole recruitment toolset to make their jobs very easy.

[zffr]

The flip side of this is that LinkedIn can sometimes bring you lots of unwanted messages from recruiters offering worse jobs that also pay less than what you currently make

[josteink]

Sure. But you’re not obliged to respond or take on the offer.

[summertime42]

Thank you for putting a verb to that! I didn't know the correct term, but I got a sense that recruiters are always 'looking' for people.