|
|
|
|
|
|
by burnte
702 days ago
|
|
|
> That correlation between connections and being good/bad it's utterly useless. Would you take more into consideration a person who has more connections than other even tho they have the same resume? Would I? No, but I also have never once looked at someone's LinkedIn when in the hiring process. I used to carefully curate who I connected with so that when looking at my connections, you could see it was a list of respected people in their fields, but I had barely over 100. Several recruiters told me point blank that doesn't matter at all. So I stopped bothering to care about my LI profile and connections, and suddenly had a LOT more activity with recruiters when I added more connections. Seemed quantity is truly valued over quality there. > Saying this cause connections can be fakely increased so it's a dumb metric that shows pretty much nothing. Yes, that was my point. > Would think it's more useful seeing how that person expresses themselves or which posts shares rather than how many people has accepted into their "network". You would think so, yes, but it's not how things work in the end. |
|
|
Maybe a high number of connections causes a better first-impression, but if the candidate does not know how to write or articulate a word makes things much harder. Overall, seeing how a person expresses their ideas in their natural language gives you a better impression of how a person thinks/operates.
Which in the end matters, cause you are dealing with persons, not statistics.
For first instance recruiters, having a large number of people in your LI can get you into the first recruitment stage, but you won't pass if you don't know how to communicate, express and confront ideas, that's how it works.