Why Do LinkedIn InMails have such a low response rate?


Last night I moderated a panel discussion on Sourcing Strategies at Quirky in New York. This was sourcing from an attraction and engagement perspective — Shally or Glen were not on my panel — so no boolean magic.

Our magic involved creating conversations through new-generation technologies: Elizabeth Shillo SVP Sales (Dice OpenWeb), Daniel Chait, Co-founder (Greenhouse.io), Brin McCagg, Founder (RecruitiFi), John Hassett Senior Sales Manager Search and Staffing (LInkedIn); old-school "picking up the telephone" Chad Astmann, Partner, Head of North American Asset Management (Heidrick & Struggles). To balance out the panel, Jason Medley, Director of Talent Acquisition at Quirky provided a recruiting practitioner's perspective regarding "shinny new objects" and hiring for a fast-growing New York technology company. (Check out more information regarding the event and pictures of Quirky here).

But here's the "meat and potatoes" of this post. In my prep call with John Hassett at LinkedIn, I mentioned that many recruiters I talk with complain about the miserably low response rate to InMails. Turns out, there's a good reason for this. Here's an InMail one of John's high-performing account executives received:

Subject: Account Manager Opportunity (Looking for Leaders)


Dear Blank,

As an Account Manager in the “ Blank” department, you will be responsible for providing support to company’s external job distribution customers. Serving as the primary support point-of-contact, The Account Manager will communicate with clients on a daily basis (phone/email/in-person) and be responsible for the continued success of the account. The ideal candidate is a well organized individual with exceptional communication skills who is able to multi-task and prioritize in a fast-paced technology environment.

Primary Objectives:
The efficient and accurate execution of the Account Manager duties is the key to ensuring that client expectations are met by providing support to customer related cases. The Account Manager offers product knowledge, solutions, and support to his/her clients and ensures accuracy and continued success.

Responsibilities:
Provide day-to-day support for all current clients
Help on-board and train new clients on the client system
Ensure accuracy of all services...

View Recruiter’s LinkedIn profile

Obviously, we've removed the name of the perpetrator of this InMail. (We don't want to embarrass anyone.) Is it any wonder InMails like this have a ZERO response rate from HighPros? This could have been sent by any company, anywhere. Who wrote this, the legal department? There's no personality, no personalization, nothing to compel any passive candidate to respond. The company that sent this happens to be a very cool, very fast growing New York tech firm. However, you would never know if from this generic, anemic job description.

You want high-potential passive candidate to respond to your InMails? Make them PERSONAL. Talk to them on a personal level. Identify with their interests and passions. Let them know this is a personal message written specifically to them, and for them. Be respectful of who they are — not just what they are.

This InMail really is Exhibit A in a Crime Scene: Posting this job req on a company career portal, job board, Indeed… anywhere is criminal. Who will respond? My Guess? Out-of-work or wanna-be account execs. Candidates who lost their jobs because they didn't measure up, didn't work, didn't represent their employer in a positive light.

Views: 1700

Comment by Kelly Mead, SPHR on July 11, 2014 at 8:57am

Great post Peter!  I completely agree with you.  If you want me to respond, engage me in conversation.  Sending a generic computer-generated sounding message just makes me hit the delete button.

Comment by Keith Halperin on July 14, 2014 at 7:38pm

Sorry I'm late to the party, but there's a much simpler reason:

Most of the people who indicate they're open to  a new job AREN'T OPEN- not to your job, not to ANY job. Why is this? I was informed quite awhile ago by my then-client LI Rep that  the "being open to new opportunities" tab is an "OPT OUT" setting- you have to indicate that you're NOT interested to be taken off. Consequently, there appear to be far more people open to new opportunities than there actually are.

Imagine if you will: every 30 days you had to refresh an "opt-in" setting for any of the things you'd be open to . You'd have a very small fraction of current LI members showing up in searches, but you'd have a much higher chance of getting a response, and wouldn't be wasting your time and InMail credits on people who at best get back with you and say they're not looking for anything (thus using up one of your InMail credits).

Next major recruiting question, please...

Keith

Comment by Pam Sisson on August 22, 2014 at 1:55pm

I agree that inmails such as the one you used as an example SHOULD be ignored.  However, for what it's worth, I write very personal, specific messages and still get a very low response rate, even from people I'm connected to.  I think LinkedIn has been so overused by recruiters, some of whom are very like the perpetrator described above, that people are on LinkedIn - but not at all engaged with any activity on LinkedIn.

Comment

You need to be a member of RecruitingBlogs to add comments!

Join RecruitingBlogs

Subscribe

All the recruiting news you see here, delivered straight to your inbox.

Just enter your e-mail address below

Webinar

RecruitingBlogs on Twitter

© 2024   All Rights Reserved   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service