Why aren't more people on LinkedIn with enough information for someone to find them. 15

[SandwichEngine]

I have a paid LinkedIn account so I can message anyone, whether or not they're connected to me. I want to search for people with a variety of specific skill sets and give them a raise while allowing them to work from home. All anyone has to do to get consistent raises far beyond what one employer will give to retain someone is to just make themselves findable on LinkedIn. It frustrates me so much that the vast majority of people don't do this and I don't understand why.

Granted, I'm not giving this advice to people that work for me but I would think this would be common knowledge by now and also would be part of Engineering 101 at university.

 

[driftLimiter]

Perhaps there is a better forum for this post... I am not fully understanding how you just give random people on linkednIn raises but sign me up!

 

[BridgeSmith]

I think the OP is 1) Trying to recruit people to work from home for his or her company, and 2) complaining that not enough people on Linked-in include contact information, so despite having a "paid account", he or she is not able to contact enough people to try recruit them.

Maybe people don't have their contact information listed publicly on Linked-in because they're not interested in getting job offers from random people they don't know.

Rod Smith, P.E., The artist formerly known as HotRod10

 

[rb1957]

I'm surprised people are on Linked In ??


another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[271828]

I was on there for several years. Got nothing out of it, and got tired of the "look at me" posts from a few on my contact list. Deleted my account about a year ago. Haven't missed it.

 

[SandwichEngine]

I'm not giving random people raises. I'm giving people raises with very particular industry, program and job experience. If someone happens to have the exact experience I need, I'm going to have to give them a better deal than they're currently getting to bring them on board.

This is true of any job but I'm in structural engineering so that's why I'm posting here.

Think of it this way: If I'm looking for a whatever level structural engineer with a particular background and experience using some programs that my company uses, I have a few options to try to get that person. I can do a job posting online, I can use a head hunter, or I can try to find them myself on LinkedIn.

If I do a job posting, I'm only getting people who are not happy at their current role. Maybe it's the employer's fault or maybe it's their fault but either way, I want to bring in people who feel very appreciated by their current company. I have a much better shot at them being very appreciated by me.

Head hunters cost a lot. Anywhere from 20%-40% of the first year's salary is what they charge. They also will mostly be dealing in people who are unhappy at their current situation.

What's far more preferable is for me to be able to search in LinkedIn, find people with the exact experience I need and engage them that way. I guess very few in the position to get hired think about it from the other side.

I don't need contact information on LinkedIn. I can direct message them IF I can find them.

The only value to LinkedIn, in my opinion, is for recruiting. Either to recruit people or to get recruited to a better situation. Lots of people out there trying to post about personal/religious/political crap and that part of it sucks. However, almost everyone is either in the position to recruit others or get recruited to a better situation and that's why everyone should have an account. Especially an account with enough information for people to find you and give you a raise.

 

[IceNine]

I'm not interested in getting hounded by people trying to recruit me. That's why I don't have an account.

 

[BridgeSmith]

However, almost everyone is either in the position to recruit others or get recruited to a better situation and that's why everyone should have an account.

I think you're waaaaay overestimating how many people are interested in getting recruited to a supposedly better situation. You may think, or at least try to convince others, that your company is so much better than any other, but if it was really that great, you wouldn't be having to work so hard at recruiting people; they'd be contacting you.

Rod Smith, P.E., The artist formerly known as HotRod10

 

[SandwichEngine]

BridgeSmith,

My thought is that if someone got ahold of you because they were looking for someone with your exact skill set and experience, you have a conversation. I'm not going to make just anyone an offer and not every offer I make will get accepted. Maybe we're not a good fit but if I'm you, I want to have those options.

I'm not saying that the company I work for is the best ever. But it is hopefully the best ever for some number of particularly qualified people. We're growing like crazy and finding people with the exact experience we want, rather than having to train from scratch, is the preference. We're kind of a niche part of the structural engineering profession so pros with the exact qualifications, are much more scarce than standard structural engineers.

For example, I'm extremely happy with my current role and am not on the market but I once got contacted by a recruiter for an VP of engineering job where she said the pay was in the mid 6 figures? Like $500k per year? I had a conversation with her. Pay was really in the mid $100s and I didn't like a bunch of other stuff so I ended the communication. But what if there is some job out there paying that or have whatever super cool perks like the company paying for routine travel to Europe where you can take your family and stay extra? I don't know if a job like that exists for me but I at least want to be findable.

Another scenario is just jobs that allow work from home. I was able to get two of my current best structural engineers because that was important to them. One has a PhD wife in education who needs to be able to relocate for work. The other has a wife that's a traveling physical therapist. Both of their previous jobs wouldn't allow work from home.

I get not wanting to get hit up by recruiters all the time, but me? I want to be the one picking from as many options as possible. Not being unfindable and having few.

I'm surprised to hear that others don't agree. Maybe that explains why so few people make themselves findable on LinkedIn.

 

[ThomasH]

I have an account but not because I want to be recruited. For me Linkedin is a way of keeping up with where friends and former colleagues work. It is also a way to get (to some extent) relevant professional news.

There is actually a setting in Linkedin that can be used to signal "Opentowork". I have never used it but still get the occasional call from recruiters. An assumption that everybody on Linkedin is there to be recruited. In my opinion, that is just wrong.

Thomas

 

[rb1957]

I guess you're seeing why head hunters charge so much ...

but I also challenge your basic premise. You want to attract "happy workers" (rather then ones who are disillusioned or delusional). But why would someone happy with their workplace want to move to you ? They're happy because they are appreciated and valued, how can you attract them without making them feel that they're "betraying" a positive relationship.

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[SandwichEngine]

rb1957,

There's nothing wrong with leaving a company for a better opportunity. It's simply business. It's not personal and it's definitely not a betrayal. The companies that people work for don't have any problem firing or laying off great employees if they feel it's in their best interests and that isn't a betrayal either. It's just business.

If you're well appreciated at your current job, that also doesn't mean you wouldn't be more happy somewhere else. I would say that's a reflection that you're good at what you do. That's the kind of person I want. My company may not be what's best for that person, but maybe we are.

At my first job, it was super corporate and it didn't matter if you had the best idea on earth, the answer was always the same: That's a great idea but corporate will do it their way. And that's the last anyone ever heard about it. I was extremely well appreciated and compensated and at the time and would dismiss recruiters out of hand. One day though, someone contacting me who worked with people I'd previously worked with saying I want you specifically, not just someone with your qualifications. I decided to at least honor that with a phone call. It was very tempting but I felt like I was betraying my original company so I contacted my mentor. He said; you feel like that the first time you switch jobs but you never do again. Told me the stuff from above about how it's just business. He was right. I'm now much more appreciated and compensated at the current job and I can make all engineering policy by just declaring it. No corporate red tape.

Maybe that will be the case for someone and maybe not. Has a lot to do with personality fit and what people want to do. I just don't know why people wouldn't want to know what their options are.

Another thing about knowing your options is that it helps you appreciate what you have when you have it good. I've spoken with several recruiters over the years since I've been with the new company. Every time, after hearing what they have to say, I either decline to continue or after I tell them my details, they tell me I wouldn't be a candidate because it would be a step down for me. Feels good to know I'm in a great place.

 

[rb1957]

but if you're happy and you know it ... you wouldn't want to change ... unless there's some new element that would make you happier.

and if you're happy and appreciated then you will have invested with your employer a fair amount of personal commitment, beyond the purely commercial relationship.
a happy marriage doesn't break up for no reason.

At your first job (as you describe it) you weren't appreciated. The disinterest in your suggestions shows this, and became I suspect the reason you left. I suspect you liked the work, the co-workers, etc but ultimately not being able to affect change was the reason you responded to the offer. The cynic in me thinks that maybe the guy who made this offer talked to people you worked with and picked up on this dissidence, and so could bait his offer.
Your current(?) job (as you describe it) gives you more ability to make change, to shape the future which is something you want.

I'm happy you've found a good fit for yourself.

"I just don't know why people wouldn't want to know what their options are." it comes down to personality, when I was active in the job market so (older) guys would say "I don't want offers, it means I have to make a decision" ... and I suspect you wouldn't want these peoplepersonalities with you.

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[MotorCity]

Not everyone on LinkedIn uses the site as a job hunting tool. Personally, I use it for networking, keeping in touch with former colleagues and co-workers, and seeing what the competition is working on. Before the pandemic, I did not mind occasionally being solicited by head hunters on LinkedIn. I would simply say thanks, but no thanks. Now I get contacted by so many head hunters on LinkedIn it has become an annoyance. My favorite is when they will ask you to pass along the position to anyone you know.....Yes, let me do your job for you so that you can get a payday. In any case, it is a job hunter's market right now. So alot of people may be willing to leave a position for slightly more pay. The problem is that they keep job hopping every time someone dangles a slightly bigger carrot in front of them. I learned a long time ago that its not all about pay. Yes its important but to me so are other things like job security, the company culture, if you enjoy your work, etc.

 

[Retrograde]

I'm not giving random people raises.

I think you misunderstood what BridgeSmith was saying. You are the "random person", not the people you are trying to recruit.

 

[AaronMcD]

I was on LinkedIn. Somehow they messed up and locked me out of my account. I tried to get back in and they messaged me a link to someone else's account to reset my password. I've not tried getting back on since then. Never used it much anyway.

http://www.hellodwell.design

 

[SandwichEngine]

Rb1957,

You're wrong that I was somehow unhappy or malcontent at my previous job. They had policies where there was a maximum raise you could get and only 1 per year. I almost always got more than the supposed max and got multiple per year several times. Also,they stood by me when I went through a very hard personal situation thar impacted my work. That's why I was originally so loyal and struggled with the feeling of "betraying" the trust they had in me. The issue with not being able to make any changes that corporate didn't come up with sucked but it was the same for everyone and it being my first job, I didn't know it could be this different.

I was very happy and appreciated there but it just turned out that there were/are better opportunities sometimes.

I'm really surprised at the overall sentiment on this sub that if you're in a good position, you should not be ammenable to a great one. Makes me think I'm talking to a bunch of small business owners who are trying to convince a great employee that the appreciation they currently receive is always going to be better than more money/opportunity.

But when the research results don't support your hypothesis, your hypothesis was wrong. My hypothesis was that engineers hadn't thought about the fact that making themselves findable could result in a better situation and if they did, most would do so. This thread indicates that is wrong. Engineers don't want to be found. If they like their good situation, they don't want to hear about others.

It's not how I think anymore but it appears to be the consensus.

 

[IRstuff]

Perfect is the enemy of good enough; pay alone is not enough to make most engineers jump, that might work for hourly employees.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[3DDave]

The OP hypothesis is flawed. The basis that there is a quantifiably better situation is the first gross error, even if that quantity is base salary as it doesn't include any other costs to pursue that salary. The second gross error is that there is no way to guarantee a "better" opportunity. In most cases a giant improvement is only available because the hiring company has an unstable business practice and is hiding it. They may feel that getting "the best people" (there's a phrase that brings the gag reflex) will solve their self-inflicted problems and that spending more will get them "the best people."

What seems to tick off the OP is that there are people who refuse to provide free market-research material, which is mainly why I left LinkedIn. Companies want a better way to cut existing pay by looking at similarly qualified people with lower salaries; they don't need to hire those people, they are just to supply ammunition to hammer their employees. The other was terrible leads. I mentioned on LinkedIn that, among other things, I'd used "C" to generate a variety of mechanical engineering programs - kept getting morons who wanted me for a C developer job. They don't read for content - they read for keywords.

Desperate employers mainly deserve the bad situation they find themselves in - spending less time examining candidates than they spend looking at a new car; setting unrealistic goals; simply lying about the work and the compensation. Notice that when companies post job openings they don't also publish the resumes (anonymized) and salaries of all the people working there so that an applicant can see how the company treats their employees. They don't include market research about housing costs, taxes, et al, even though they clearly have access to that information.

 

[SandwichEngine]

Well again, this thread has taught me that I'm the outlier here-someone who wants to be findable and presented with options. Maybe more to the point, I'm someone who hasn't had experience bad companies that want to exploit me and it sounds like the rest of this sub has.

The overall consensus of mistrust for anyone looking to hire makes me think that dubious hiring and business practices are very common. Otherwise, why would seemingly everyone jump to untrusting conclusions over the simple need of a company to hire more people. I'm sorry that you all have experienced those bad practices but it also makes me appreciate that I haven't had to. It honestly does answer my question. Why don't more structural engineers make themselves findable? Because they've mostly all had experiences with terrible companies and now that they find themselves in a good spot with a reputable employer where they are appreciated, they are very hesitant to risk that. Considering that there appears to be a high prevalence of companies of ill repute, this makes tons of sense.

Please though, enough with posting theories about what dubious intentions a company seeking to hire may have: looking to replace good workers with newer and cheaper ones, setting unrealistic goals, employer is desperate, etc. I'm sure that and whatever other bad company practices have happened to you all in the past. However, please consider that a growing and successful company obviously needs to hire and there's nothing suspicious about that. Even companies that aren't growing need to hire from time to time. Again, nothing suspicious about that. All of you either were once hired or have been looking to hire. Goodness!