LinkedIn Profile Search Engine Optimization / SEO

Posted by | November 15, 2010 | LinkedIn, LinkedIn SEO | 22 Comments

I recently wrote about what happens when you search for yourself on LinkedIn.

Now I’d like to address what happens when people don’t search for you by name, but rather try to find people like you using “regular” keywords and titles.

When it comes to Internet search, the goal for most people and companies is to be on the first page of search results for your keywords, and ideally #1 if at all possible.

When you search LinkedIn with the titles you have on your profile and keywords you’ve mentioned in your metro area, do you show up in the first 10 results?

Have you ever wondered if there was anything you could do to positively affect your ranking in search results when someone searches LinkedIn looking for people like you? Have you seen heavily keyword-loaded LinkedIn profiles and wondered if it really does any good?

You could get lost in all of the YouTube videos and blog posts on the subject of LinkedIn profile optimization, but most of it is pure speculation.

Before I go into some detail as to what I think is going on with LinkedIn search ranking and what you might be able to do to positively affect your ranking, I’d like to show you a little experiment I’ve run and ask you to do something similar and see what happens.

You have searched or have had someone else search LinkedIn by the titles and keywords you used on your profile to see where you rank, haven’t you?

Analyze Your LinkedIn Search Ranking for Title and Keywords

I searched in a 25 mile radius of my zip code with these three words in the title field, selecting current: vice president recruiting, and I sorted by keywords. If you’re logged in, this link should take you to the search. I am not sure about what you get, but I get 10 results, and I am dead last. :-)

Here is a brief analysis of the keyword count of the top 5 results that I see in comparison to my LinkedIn profile:

Result #1

  • VP – 4 mentions (LinkedIn seems to give positive hits on “VP” when you search for “Vice”)
  • Vice – 0 mentions
  • Recruiting – 9 mentions

Result #2

  • VP – 2 mentions
  • Vice – 0 mentions
  • Recruiting – 12 mentions

Result #3

  • VP – 0 mentions
  • Vice – 3 mentions
  • Recruiting – 3 mentions

Result #4 (Had 0 connections, by the way)

  • VP – 2 mentions
  • Vice – 0 mentions
  • Recruiting 2 mentions

Result #5

  • VP – 3 mentions
  • Vice – 0 mentions
  • Recruiting – 3 mentions

Result #10 – last result = me

  • VP – 5 mentions
  • Vice – 6 mentions
  • Recruiting – 40+

Yes, I sorted by keywords. Does the order of these results make any sense to you? They certainly don’t based on any standard keyword relevance ranking.

As a frame of reference, here’s my experience section, showing you I didn’t even go out of my way to load up on the word “recruiting” in my profile – they’re legitimate mentions, not keyword spam.

And yet, I am somehow last, behind results like these, ranked #3 and #5 respectively:

Really?

Yes – those are the full profiles.

Does LinkedIn Favor Less Activity and Fewer Connections?

In a word, no.

I’ve had a few people respond to my previous post suggesting that perhaps LinkedIn’s algorithm favors profiles with less connections and activity. For example, Jodi Raines commented that, “If the purpose of the algorithm is to increase the depth of the Linked in experience, it would be weighted to promote those with less activity and smaller networks first. It does seem counter intuitive, but from a marketing perspective it makes sense. The heavy user is already savvy and will find the person he’s seeking,… the lower frequency user may need a boost to help them get more entrenched. This is still ‘freemium” for the most part, and encouraging more participation by the new or less frequent users does make sense.”

I must say that although the idea that LinkedIn might be weighing and ranking search results to promote those with less activity and smaller networks first (and thus “penalizing” more active users and those with larger networks) can seem to make sense.

However, favoring profiles of people with smaller networks and less activity does not achieve the goal of searching LinkedIn (or any site or network), which is to find the most relevant people/results. If the most relevant result for any given person searching LinkedIn happens to be someone with a large network and a great deal of activity, does it make sense to not have that profile ranked as the #1 result, ahead of those that are less relevant to the searcher, but just happen to be less active and have smaller LinkedIn networks?

Not only does it not make sense, from my extensive LinkedIn searching experiments, I don’t see any consistent pattern of favoring less active profiles with people with smaller networks. Do you?

LinkedIn Favors “Relevant” Profiles in Search Ranking

Sounds obvious, right?

Not so fast.

The word “relevance,” according to the Merriam Webster dictionary, is “the ability (as of an information retrieval system) to retrieve material that satisfies the needs of the user.”

No one but you (the user) can ultimately determine relevance, because systems, search engines and LinkedIn cannot and do not know what satisfies your information needs.

Based on something I found in LinkedIn’s FAQs, it appears that LinkedIn favors results that other people have found to be “relevant.”  Read the entire answer carefully, paying close attention to the highlighted sections:

Interesting, yes?

So how can LinkedIn determine which profiles may be more relevant to you?

After some late night conversations with Eric Jaquith on the matter and reading the above answer from LinkedIn over and over, I think I’ve figured this out, at least for the most part.

If your LinkedIn profile is keyword-loaded and you are pulled up in many searches, that’s only good if the people who are pulling you up in their search results actually click on and view your profile.

If your LinkedIn profile comes up in a lot of searches, but most people don’t look at your profile from the results page and decide to click and view your entire profile, LinkedIn’s algorithm makes a note that you were not as relevant as the search results that actually were opened and viewed.

This can happen to people who try to cover too much ground in their LinkedIn profile and use terms that can be ambiguous and non-specific in describing their skills and experience – words which can be returned by people looking for the words you mention, but not people like you. That makes your profile what is known as a “false positive” result – the words match, but you’re not a match for what the searcher is looking for.

LinkedIn Profile Search Optimization

If you want to ensure that you rank highly in the search results of people who are looking for people with your skills and experience in your metro area, you need to be very thoughtful with regard to what terms you use in your LinkedIn profile, and keyword-loading doesn’t work like most people assume it would.

Your best bet is to try and use words that are highly specific to your skills, experience and expertise, and ideally – words that are not very ambiguous.

Ambiguous terms can have different meanings to different people. Try to avoid terms that people who do something other than what you’ve been primarily responsible for in your career could use as well.

For example, when I recently reviewed my own LinkedIn profile, I decided to remove all of the specific technologies I have ever recruited for. For quite some time, sections of my LinkedIn profile made mention of several software development languages, databases and business intelligence solutions (and much more) where I described the types of professionals I have been responsible for recruiting.

Having terms like Java, Oracle and Cognos on my LinkedIn profile meant that people searching for Java, Oracle and/or Cognos professionals could return my profile in their search results. However, the mentions of their search terms in my profile would be “false positive” hits, and I would not be a relevant match for their search – and they could easily see this from my headline in the search results and thus most would never click on and open my profile.

This would send a signal to LinkedIn’s algorithm that I am not a relevant result – not just to that one person, but in general. That’s my interpretation of what information LinkedIn has shared online – if anyone from LinkedIn would like to confirm or deny this… :-)

The more ambiguous a term, the more likely it becomes that people will pull your profile up in their searches, but you won’t be what they are looking for – which means they are not likely to click on and view your profile. Each time that happens, LinkedIn’s algorithm thinks you are less relevant.

This makes it especially challenging to “crack the code” of LinkedIn’s search optimization, because it is going to be different for each person. Ultimately, when you create your LinkedIn profile, you have to think like someone who is looking for someone like you, with your specific skills, experience and expertise, and the words that they would use to conduct a search.

Then, you have to make sure that what they can see in the listing of the search results, which includes at least your headline (basic view) and could also include your current and previous titles along with a few words (expanded or custom view), will entice them (i.e., appear relevant enough) to click on and view your profile, thus sending a note to LinkedIn’s algorithm that you are more relevant than profiles that were not clicked on and opened.

I’m Still a Little Confused, Are You?

So, even if I accept my own interpretation of LinkedIn’s search ranking explanation, I am still confused – specifically by my dead-last showing in search results for the words in my current title in my metro area.

I can’t imagine that many of the other 9 profiles that were returned (especially the ones with next to no information and typos in their headline!) were found and clicked on by more people than clicked on my profile.

Perhaps my low ranking had something to do with the various technologies I had previously listed in my profile which could have realistically driven down my relevance ranking to LinkedIn’s algorithm whenever I showed up in search results as a false positive.

I hope so, because I have since made some changes to my LinkedIn profile and I will be seeing if my ranking changes over time. If it does – I’ll let you know.

Perform Your Own LinkedIn Search Ranking Analysis

If you haven’t done so already, I strongly suggest that you perform some LinkedIn search ranking analyses, specifically searching LinkedIn for local profiles using words you mention in your title fields and experience descriptions to see where you rank. Let me know if you find anything interesting (or alarming, like I did!) and please do share any insights you have.

Thanks!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

About Glen Cathey

Glen Cathey is a sourcing and recruiting thought leader with over 16 years of experience working in large staffing agency and global RPO environments (>1,000 recruiters and nearly 100,000 hires annually). Starting out his career as a top producing recruiter, he quickly advanced into senior management roles and now currently serves as the SVP of Strategic Talent Acquisition and Innovation for Kforce, working out of their renowned National Recruiting Center with over 300 recruiters. Often requested to speak on sourcing and recruiting best practices, trends and strategies, Glen has traveled internationally to present at many talent acquisition conferences (5X LinkedIn Talent Connect - U.S. '10, '11, '12, Toronto '12, London '12, 2X Australasian Talent Conference - Sydney & Melbourne '11, '12, 6X SourceCon, 2X TruLondon, 2X HCI) and is regularly requested to present to companies (e.g., PwC, Deloitte, Intel, Booz Allen Hamilton, Citigroup, etc.). This blog is his personal passion and does not represent the views or opinions of anyone other than himself.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention LinkedIn Profile Search Engine Optimization / SEO -- Topsy.com

  • http://linkedin.com/in/jaquith Eric Jaquith

    If only your friends and family search your name and then always select your profile, then you have a 100% search to selection percentage.This is a how a new profile can gain a lot of new traffic. Lets test this concept on an existing account, MINE. Please search for: “Atlanta contract recruiter jaquith” (remove the quotes) in the standard people search box in the upper right corner. If enough people do this, my profile might begin to move up. I believe this is only one of many factors that linkedin uses for relevance. Thanks Glen for another insightful article. You are the best.

  • http://www.booleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

    @ Eric – done. :-) Interesting to see you as the second of 2 results. My search result:selection ratio typically hovers around 85% – 90%, which you would think is strong…but it doesn’t seem to help me in the search rankings.

    There is definitely a lot more going on with LinkedIn’s relevancy ranking algorithm than this one factor, but it’s perhaps the best insight we have based on what little information LinkedIn has published/shared on the subject.

    Anyone have additional insight?

  • http://www.linkedin.com/in/garycozin gary cozin

    Just a comment, Glen:

    On a basic LI account as I have, on the right side of your home page there is a section heading that says “Who’s viewed your profile?” It indicates how often in past few days you’ve showed up in search results. Would be another way to tell if your profile has the right ‘key words’, ‘buzz words,’ etc to see if your profile comes up oftern in searches-

  • Matt

    I just searched “Recruiting Sourcer” which is my work title and I came up #1 of 2,100 results most of which had the same title…no idea why. I wont complain :)

  • Amanda

    Perhaps it’s the curiosity factor that drives the high “click rate” on the first 9 profiles… with less information showing on the results page – the more likely I am to click on the profile to see if there’s any additional information. I still might not consider them “relevant” to my search but I’ve satisfied my curiosity and – if your theory is correct, just made that person more “relevant for everyone else.”

    In this case it pays to be less informative and more mysterious it seems…

  • http://www.recruit2.com Jacco Valkenburg

    @Glen I can confirm that when I execute your search, you’re on the last spot (10/10).

    So I tried a global search on a job title in my profile, “Global Recruitment Project Manager”, including the quotes for an exact match. This results in 5 hits and the first impression is that it’s sorted on inactivity.

    I’m on the last spot again. Interestingly, the last 2 results have a paid account (I have a Pro account). But the least active seems to be number 2, an user with 6 connections and who is not currently open to receiving Introductions or InMail.

    I think we can cross out the relevance hypothesis. The number of views of my profile (1065) is almost the same as the number of hits in search results (1086).

    Hope this helps to solve the mystery!

  • Pingback: Buzz Words to Use on a Resume’ | Professionals Over 40: Careers & More

  • Lynda

    I’m fascinated by this and have just wasted far too much time doing my own test searches.

    Interestingly, I think I’ve found a pattern not previously mentioned: In the searches I’ve done, those folks who repeatedly use “LinkedIn” in the profile are getting WAY higher page rankings within a Linked In search than I. Even when I put in my EXACT profile title, I come out below those who pad their profile with “LinkedIn” references.

    Interesting, huh?

    I’m here: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/lynda-watts/24/293/a81

  • Lynda

    PS: Actually, now I’m not coming up in ANY of my searches, or at least not within the first 5 pages.

    I give up (for the day, at least…)

  • Carlos Saenz

    Good Stuff @Glen & @Eric, hats off to the two of you! Did some testing without having someone select my profile and then tried Eric’s recommendation and viola!

  • Shomen

    My observation is that ppl active in the recruting industry are quite busy with services like LinkedIn and probably get high ranking because of their way of registering themselves@linkedin..
    Other ppl like me who tend to extend their own network of interest and activity within managable margins, lets say I am content with 10-20 real contacts obtained through LinkedIn won’t get and won’t need a high ranking. It is part of strategy to be found more difficult and still enjoy the conveniences of such service that linkedin is. If one day I find out the LinkedIn-network is not really useful anymore, just shutdown the ID. Did this already with Facebook. Services like LinkedIn, Facebook and the likes are maybe useful in 1% of the real life contact making for various purposes for me.
    Talking in the real world makes more sense usually.

    Ppl who are too busy with internet networking would not become my employee for instance. So low rankings do make sense ;)

  • Pingback: Are You Easier To Find than a Great Panini Press? « Being Social About Social Media Jobs

  • Pingback: LinkedIn: What's the formula to optimize (SEO) your LinkedIn Profile for search results within LinkedIn? - Quora

  • Pingback: How do you write a good LinkedIn profile? - Quora

  • Wizard Man

    There is a concern with regard to the concept of relevant searches. I spoke with a recruiter who I would classify as a fundamental user of LinkedIn. I write that because when using an example of how this person performs a search for say Project Manager, the title in entered into the People field and away we go… In this case, a search is being conducted “direct” – in other words, the search is for an exact match, any location. Profiles returned from this type of search resulted in profiles with not only search criteria in the profile title, in addition search criteria was found frequently occuring within profiles. Based on your findings, were these searches relevant?

    So now we venture into the Advanced Search. I have not conducted any experiments using Advanced searching with criteria, as area code specific searches vs. general advanced searches using keywords…

    Also, does one’s account type produce different results? For example, would one with a free account produce the same results as one using a paid account? Would you have any data in this category?

    Lastly, I do find it interesting the concept of relevance with respect to what the search engine produces. I have heard more than once, and it pertains to resumes as well, “try to use words that are very specific to your skills, expertise and experience – ideally words that are not very ambiguous.” If one can narrow down words in these categories and tie that to a relevant profile title, one may suspect the number of “hits” would rise – again based on premises described in the analysis in the article.

    Very well written, by the way… Thank you for your insights and research.

  • Anonymous

    I was motivated to write this comment after I added about 100 connections to my LinkedIn profile and slid from #16, i.e. first position on a second page to consecutively 3rd, 4th and so on page: the more relevant people signed up to my network, the lower my profile appeared in the search.

    Let me speculate about several takeaways from this exercise :

    1. LinkedIn gives results that are relevant a particular searcher: by degree of connection, by expertise, by geographical area. I.e., if I search from Russia, I will be shown first people from Russia (it may be affected by previous search preferences, not quite sure). My point is what you see in searching for your profile is not necessarily what a headhunter will see in her search.

    2. As a matter of rule, your first degrees will appear at the top of the search, and your position will be affected by what LinkedIn thinks about your competitiveness against them. Mine, for some reason, is at the bottom of my first degrees.

    3. Apart from what already was mentioned, namely your position maybe affected if people previously clicked on you in their searches, your position maybe affected if people whom your sent invitations saw your profile and accepted them.

    Some food for thought: a 23 y.o. chap, without experience with 10 connections managed to make it into first page. Why? Perhaps LinkedIn, based on its experience with him, thins that he is most relevant to me.Just to reiterate the holy grail of my exercise: after adding 100 connections I lost about 4 pages.

    Pretty cool.

    My profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/bushmanov

  • Pingback: Professional headlines sell: A simple way to improve LinkedIn search

  • http://www.it-sales-leads.com/ Barbara Mckinney

    Sounds helpful and effective tips here since Linkedin is considered as a fertile land for marketers looking for business growth and development. This could mean greater chance for marketers to be seen if they follow these tips of yours. Thanks for sharing :)

  • Pingback: Professional headlines sell: improve your LinkedIn search ranking | THE SOCIAL CMO Blog

  • Pingback: 100+ Free Sourcing & Recruiting Tools, Guides, and Resources

  • Pingback: LinkedIn Profile Optimization