

Linkedin Recommendations Are Junk - lenidot
http://moniker.net/2013/08/06/linkedin-recommendations-are-junk/

======
dsaber
I think that's a bit of a hyperbole. If I'm asked by someone for a
recommendation, but I'm not comfortable recommending him/her, chances are I
will simply ignore the request. If I do write a recommendation, it will most
likely be on things the positive things I've seen about the person.

Assuming people in general approach recommendations in the same way, LinkedIn
recommendations are good at identifying strengths of a person, but not
weaknesses. In that aspect, they're not total junk.

Obviously, I wouldn't base hiring decisions on LinkedIn recommendations, just
like I won't base such decisions on letter references, but they can be a small
factor that influences the overall decision (after an on-site interview for
example).

------
incision
I think the author is making a bad analogy and ignoring the general function
of recommendations. Of course they're all positive and lacking nuance. It's
one to one vouching that both parties agree to, not review or analysis.

That said, I'd say they are certainly junk, just not necessarily for the
reasons stated.

As I see it, LinkedIn makes junk of itself by being way too cluttered with the
products of non-stop demands to engage in all sorts of empty actions. LinkedIn
is an ugly rolodex, not a network.

------
misterbwong
Stock recommendations are not really analogous to resume/linkedin
recommendations. People expect stock analysts to provide unbiased, objective
assessments of stocks. There is an expectation of positive bias when a person
shows a recommendation on his/her linkedin profile.

There are two sources of "signal" in this case: The content of the
recommendation as well as the very existence of a recommendation. Not
recommending people only addresses the first.

------
oh
Even junkier: endorsements.

~~~
socalnate1
Agreed, I am constantly endorsed for things I have no skill or experience at,
or by people who hardly know me.

------
fecak
It's called a recommendation. Generally speaking, when people recommend
something,it's a positive. References might include a negative, so long as you
ask a question that allows for a negative answer. When doing references, I
usually ask for a potential 'area for improvement' so I am fairly certain to
get at least one potential concern.

Being that the person requesting controls whether the recommendation is
published, we shouldn't expect to see much negative. A well-written
recommendation (even on LinkedIn), written by someone with some level of
industry credibility, can actually be a fairly powerful tool to get noticed.

------
hitsurume
I don't think Recommendations are junk because when you write one for someone,
you are vouching that you believe they can do a good job and had a positive
experience working with them. As for why you don't see negative
recommendations, I would never write a negative one, I just wouldn't write
them one at all.

------
lenidot
I wrote a followup blog post on this:

[http://problemflow.com/blog/2013/08/07/linkedin-
recommendati...](http://problemflow.com/blog/2013/08/07/linkedin-
recommendation-incentives/)

------
jeffehobbs
It's almost like Linkedin is complete and absolute garbage in general. Almost
like it was a venereal disease that no one asked for nor wanted, more than an
actual website.

------
mailslot
You can say the same thing about references. When I see a stellar
recommendation, that's when it makes a difference.

------
milesskorpen
Given that users can hide recommendations, I'd never expect to see a negative
one.

------
michaelochurch
At first, I liked LinkedIn because it provided some transparency into peoples'
career trajectories. One could compare what one was doing at a certain age to
well-known people and see if one was on a right track, or should be trading up
jobs soon. It had value. There was data there. "Hey, at age X I should have
title Y." Granted, it was focused around something that's total and utter
bullshit (job titles and professional status) but it made it easier to decode
the bullshit.

Now, though, everyone's polluting the channels with nonsense. Why would I care
that Bob has 37 endorsements for "APIs"? That doesn't mean anything.

Besides, social proof is for malakas. If anyone turned me down because I
didn't have enough endorsements on a website, I'd laugh that person off the
fucking bricks.

~~~
tocomment
What are the correct titles for various ages in your opinion?

I'm trying to figure out how to advance past senior developer myself.

~~~
michaelochurch
I'm not sure. I think that if you want to be a pure technologist, titles don't
mean as much, because anything beyond Sr. Engineer isn't standardized across
companies, and if you're good at what you do, that say more than any title
history.

If you want to take the management path, you should have some kind of
management title by 32 and Director by 36.

------
jdubya
So what.

------
flagnog
Not only that, the skills stuff is junk too - I have people endorsing me for
skills that they have no clue of whether or not I posess them, nor how well I
exercise them.

~~~
brimanning
What? I'm always happy when people see that my mom endorsed me for knowing
HTML5. /s

