introduction” feature - It’s a waste of time! And it makes you lazy. If you have a name, city company name and title, you should not need any more information to pick up the telephone and ask for this person by name. Besides, if you still need an introduction to speak to someone, once you have all of their work information…then perhaps it’s time to reconsider professions.
The whole point of the LinkedIn introduction is that it infers trust and there is a lot of value in this feature for introductions, I don't see how it makes you look lazy. Sure if you are an old fashioned head hunter pick up the phone and call me (a passive candidate) blind, but if I also get an introduction from one of my best friends saying that I need to network with this recruiter in my niche I am going to respond to that recommendation before I answer your cold call which by the way is interrupting my busy day and quite annoying to a candidate that is busy at work. In today’s modern era it is disrespectful of your candidate’s time to call me and expect me to have a conversation with someone I don't know from Adam.
As a corporate recruiter here is how I use all 50 of my LinkedIn introductions every month. I am connected with all of my companies employees and when we need to know hire a new software engineer I go through all of our current software engineers profiles and when I find a possible candidate I send our employee an "introduction" request which allows them to qualify whether or not that the candidate might be a fit for our company and the position. This tactic spurs on employee referrals because often employees are too busy to go through their LinkedIn network pro-actively and employee's tend to only refer active job seekers and not think of the passive candidates that are in their network.
What do you think?
If you share these beliefs or want to discuss this more I encourage you to connect with me on Linkedin.
d, etc., then I would definitely ask for an introduction, but I probably wouldn't do it via LinkedIn. I'd just send that person an email and ask that they introduce me via email, which is what they are always happy to do.
I am a fairly open networker on LinkedIn, so am connected to many people that I don't know well, if at all, and those are the people that I would not ask for an introduction, because they don't know me, so I feel it puts them in an awkward position because I feel that an introduction is an endorsement of sorts. Again, this is just my opinion and how I do it. So, in this case, I would seek to contact that person either via an inmail, or an email or call and introduce myself.
Interestingly, this question has been posed on LinkedIn, and I was surprised to see that a vast majority of potential candidates prefer not to be contacted via 'introductions' because of confidentiality reasons. They don't want a trail of people knowing that they may be 'looking', especially if they are really not that active. This made sense to me because a job search is a very personal thing, especially if you are considering making a move but are not sure, and still sort of like the job you're in. You don't want to jeopardize what you have.
Another thing to consider also is timeliness. Many people are not on LinkedIn as often as we are, so if you wait around for an introduction, you could miss the boat completely. I've had inmail responses come in many months after I've sent the initial mail. Which is another reason why I prefer email or direct call. You also have to consider that while you are waiting around for an introduction or inmail response, you could lose out when that candidate is called directly by another recruiter and they get them in first.
Just my two cents.…