LinkedIn profiles not trusted by recruiters

Only eight per cent of HR heads fully believe the LinkedIn profiles they see, while 29% feel that they are at least less honest than a CV.

On top of that, more than a third (37%) claim that LinkedIn recommendations aren’t of much value as they are often simply swapped and nearly half (47%) see endorsements on the channel as unreliable. 

 These are some of the shortcomings limiting LinkedIn’s role in senior executive recruitment, according to new research.

The study was carried out on behalf of Norrie Johnston Recruitment and spoke to HR heads of 100 major UK organisations. The research found that despite its phenomenal growth, LinkedIn is not spawning an era of DIY executive recruitment.

Despite the findings LinkedIn is significantly transforming some aspects of executive recruitment.

 According to the research report An Executive Recruitment Game Changer? LinkedIn has a number of limitations. 

While 31% have advertised posts on the channel, only four per cent say LinkedIn advertising is ideal for senior executive roles commanding a salary in excess of £70,000.

Some argue that direct advertising on LinkedIn doesn’t provide anonymity for the would-be employer or candidate, with 41% believing that this is why such senior executives prefer applying for posts through a recruitment agency. 

A third of the HR heads studied say that while LinkedIn now has over 300 million members, many senior executives are not regularly using LinkedIn, so the channel cannot be relied on to reach them.

Over one in four (26%) argue that LinkedIn is simply not used widely enough by senior personnel in certain countries; as a result, some valuable international talent cannot be effectively reached by it.

Almost half (48%) also argue that recruitment isn’t a numbers game and that simply accessing a massive free pool of candidates can be a false economy. Indeed 25% say that wading through such candidate volumes consumes a huge amount of internal team time. 

Norrie Johnston, MD of Norrie Johnston Recruitment, sums up why these limitations matter: “When companies are searching for senior executives they want the certainty that they will get a shortlist of qualified, well matched candidates in a predictable timeframe. LinkedIn may offer many benefits but it simply cannot guarantee such a result – and that’s why recruitment firms still have a role to play. That’s not to say LinkedIn isn’t exerting a powerful influence, or that recruitment firms can afford to ignore how it has changed things – but LinkedIn isn’t a substitute.”


Comments (9)

  • Abbie
    Abbie
    Sat, 21 Mar 2015 6:32pm GMT
    Personally, My LinkedIn profile is almost an exact replica of my CV, but I am able to use CV to reflect additional job experience that is less relevant to my job search, to display my education and current undertakings that otherwise would not fit on my ~2 page CV.
  • Sian Vernon
    Sian Vernon
    Tue, 17 Mar 2015 1:12pm GMT
    With respect, Norrie Johnson of Norrie Johnson Recruitment is, of course, going to extol the virtues of consultant based recruitment! On the other side of the fence, LinkedIn and other similar networks will completely change the face of recruitment, already is and at a fraction of the cost
  • Martin Ellis
    Martin Ellis
    Sat, 14 Mar 2015 8:06am GMT
    Self-serving nonsense.
  • Headlamp
    Headlamp
    Fri, 13 Mar 2015 2:51pm GMT
    Or put it another way.....according to the findings

    63% claim that LinkedIn recommendations are of value.

    Over half (53%% (the majority) see endorsements on the channel as reliable.

    69% have advertised posts on the channel, and ninety six per cent say LinkedIn advertising is ideal for senior executive roles commanding a salary in excess of £70,000.

    53% prefer applying for posts not through a recruitment agency.

    74% believe LI is used widely by senior people and perhaps 75% think it's a valuable use of time to wade through CV's.

    These issues are not the problem with LI - only 50% of UK executives are using LI and most 'engage' with it (on average) about twice a month. 60% of all approaches are simply ignored. Its functionality as a recruitment resource is fatally flawed as a recruiter has no idea when or how the candidate last engaged with the site. Its functionality and UX basically suck.

  • Sam
    Sam
    Fri, 13 Mar 2015 2:48pm GMT
    Self promotion by the agency concerned, they know they have a broken business model which isn't sustainable in the long run so are looking to bad mouth any competition whichever way they can.

You are currently previewing this article.

This is the last preview available to you for the next 30 days.

To access more news, features, columns and opinions every day, create a free myGrapevine account.