LinkedIn Legal Marketing: Vanity v Sanity

LinkedIn Legal Marketing circles in the UK have been awash this week with ‘influencer’ humble brags. This follows the publication of the latest legal influencer ratings. One where the methodology is, apparently, ranking score = number of likes + 4 x comments received on LinkedIn in the past 3 months.

However, is that not really rather meaningless and vacuous? It is aimed at the dopamine hits that so many become unhealthily addicted to on social media. Where likes and hits become some form of validation. Where users (not all I hasten to add) have to post inanely and regularly to get the hits they crave and, now, the scores and rankings that the LinkedIn Legal marketing agents ‘reward’ them with.

‘Influencers’ Bubble

Most of these ‘influencers’ live in a bubble of self congratulatory circuity. It is not real and beneficial LinkedIn Legal Marketing.

There is more to LinkedIn than that.

There is an old saying that “turnover is vanity, profit is sanity“.

Likewise, on LinkedIn, likes/comments are vanity and actual Return on Investment (ROI) is sanity.

ROI in LinkedIn Legal Marketing

That ROI is more likely to be achieved by lawyers who reach outside their immediate bubble (of lawyers they know and those legal marketers) to potential clients and other referral sources and other lawyers they may wish to hire.

Yes, you will potentially get work/referrals from your immediate circle of connections. I do. That circle is best at Dunbar’s number of 150, so don’t think you need vast follower numbers.

However, there is a whole world outside that circle. That is where LinkedIn paid advertising and hiring comes into its own for real beneficial LinkedIn Legal Marketing. That is where you can see real ROI without spending days on end posting inane nonsense for likes. Ignore that at your peril. You won’t be expecting or looking for likes or comments on those adverts. You will be looking for responses to calls for action.

Oh, and if you don’t want to be included in a rankings charade, and you have intimated that fact, your wishes should be respected.

We have been here before!

I have blogged previously about the problems with social media ranking tables for lawyers:

• Law Firm Twitteratigate – The Whole Story
• The Lawyer excludes Scotland and top Twegals from UK Legal Twitter list! #Twitteratigate2
• UK Law Firms with Klout – A Clearer Picture

15 years later and some, unfortunately, do not appear to have learned how pointless these really are.

Reactions to LinkedIn Legal Marketing: Vanity v Sanity

On LinkedIn the following comments have been made:-

Andrew Kearney (Barrister, Chartered Arbitrator, CMC Registered Mediator, Adjudicator. Opinions personal.):

I can’t attest to how to get ROI but I’m with you on inane slop and influencers. I fell for the dopamine to a degree last quarter – having not asked or tried I found myself branded a legal linkedinfluencer. It was basically because of one post and that wasn’t even about law. I took the mickey out of it straight away – I wish I could find that post now that my predicted demise has come about. But even having lampooned it, I found myself checking LI more often because of it.

Me:

Thanks Andrew. I agree that if you have not asked to take part you shouldn’t get a label attached to you. And I’m with you on that one post that can be an outlier. That happened to me once on Twitter (when it was Twitter) with a post about broken benches in George Square, Glasgow after an old firm football match!

Andrew Kearney:

I honestly can’t remember whether I may have signed up in the past. My one post was about Starmer and aid – it got traction somehow.

Me:

I know that you don’t need to ‘sign up’ to be dragged into it!

Andrew Kearney:

One of the things that I find mildly interesting about the way these rankings appear to be compiled is that a thoughtful post about a niche area of law, which gets maybe 15 or 20 interesting comments from others who mainly lurk but find the topic interesting enough to add their own comments about nuance and personal experience is (as I understand the ‘ranking’ system) less ‘valuable’ than a photo of a family pet with 21 “love it” and “how cute” responses from other ‘influencers’.

I guess that’s inherent in a numbers based ranking system, and maybe I’ve misunderstood the system.

Kieran McGaughey (Procurement lawyer and training provider | Providing legal advice and training on UK public procurement law | Helping organisations to apply the new Procurement Act):

Andrew Kearney – you’ve hit the nail on the head for me, Andrew. Quality over quantity, as they say!

Me:

Andrew Kearney – Yes, spot on. Strangely, pets in unlikely AI generated settings appear flavour of the month at the moment in the ‘influencers’ like circle 🤷‍♂️

-+-+-+-+-+-

Kevin Wheeler (BD consultant and coach … helping professional services firms to grow key clients and win new business. EMCC accredited coach.):

Agree with this Brian Inkster Lots of lawyers are going about using LI in the wrong way or with the wrong expectations. 😉

Andrew Kearney (Barrister, Chartered Arbitrator, CMC Registered Mediator, Adjudicator. Opinions personal.):

I bet I’m one of them from a pure BD perspective 😊

Me:

Thanks Kevin. And strangely some legal marketers are not steering them in the right direction 🤷‍♂️

Kevin Wheeler:

Not me. 😂

Helen Burness(Marketing strategist for the legal world’s doers, thinkers & change makers | Brand, strategy & LinkedIn | Visibility with purpose | Saltmarsh founder | HelenSquared co-founder | Strategic, creative and on your side.):

Kevin Wheeler that’s why proper, ethical training on how to use the platform is so important wouldn’t you say?

-+-+-+-+-+-

Ralph Riddiough FRSA (Director, and Head of Corporate, at Holmes Mackillop Solicitors):

Possibly but does the algorithm use BODMAS?

Me:

Doubt it!

-+-+-+-+-+-

Helen Burness(Marketing strategist for the legal world’s doers, thinkers & change makers | Brand, strategy & LinkedIn | Visibility with purpose | Saltmarsh founder | HelenSquared co-founder | Strategic, creative and on your side.):

Ooh Brian – spicey!!! 🌶️🌶️🌶️ Have you read the report? Beyond the metrics there is some great analysis on lawyers using the platform for all sorts of reasons. Actually a lot of the discussion on Thursday night was around its power to connect with stakeholders and team, not just clients. It’s also a really nice supportive community of folk all lifting each other up on their professional journeys, like we used to do on Twitter. That said of course you have to understand what your goals are with the platform and ensure you are achieving them. For me, if I don’t have pipeline and leads, I am not achieving those. But not every lawyer on here will have those goals.

Me:

Someone had to say it 🙂 🍿. I have, of course, read the report 🧐. I always do detailed proper (no AI involved) research before writing my posts 😉. I also see what some of those mentioned in the report post on here on a daily basis 🙄. I think a lot have no idea what their goals are and assume, wrongly, that it has to be about likes. It doesn’t.

All lawyers who want to develop business should, of course, have pipeline and leads as a goal. If they don’t need to, because work is handed to them on a plate (although that might not always be the case), then wasting their time on here getting a higher ‘ranking’ might not be a good ROI. Concentrating on the client work or going for a walk or reading a book might well be a better use of their time.

Yes, there can be all sorts of reasons for being on here and each to their own. But lawyers should not be led astray and misguided by any need to collect medals 🥇 🥈 🥉

Helen Burness:

I honestly don’t think the report / rankings leads people astray. Surely intelligent lawyers are not so easily seduced! But it is lovely recognition for those who show up regularly on here to build visibility, trust and credibility. The solution of course if this is a worry is for firm’s to invest in proper, ethical training which supports its people to understand and use the platform in the right way. Cough cough.

Me:

If success on LinkedIn is portrayed as a score linked to likes and comments then, in my humble opinion, it does indeed mislead. Social media, unfortunately, does seduce with the dopamine hits that I refer to in my post. Many intelligent people are still seduced. You can build visibility, trust and credibility on here without following a specific methodology that I, and others, see flaws in. My post is highlighting to avoid tunnel vision. Lawyers should do their own thing (bearing in mind sanity v vanity) and avoid herd mentality 🐏 🐑 🐑 🐑 🐑 🐑

Helen Burness:

I think the point of the report is showing there is no methodology or one way to use the platform – appreciate the point around likes and impressions, that’s why i am a big fan of the new metrics on posts which as a business owner is a much truer metric of buying intent.

Me:

If that was the point of the report it would not state a specific “methodology” to obtain a score and hence a ranking. It does just that. This is where it fails. If the approach was more holistic that would be another matter. Also, as I say in my post, it ignores a whole side of LinkedIn marketing that can, in my experience, be very beneficial to law firms.

Helen Burness:

I take your point. The methodology is what it is, and engagement-weighted rankings will always favour certain styles of content and certain networks. Where I think it still has value is that it surfaces people who are consistently building visibility and community, which for many lawyers is part of the trust-building cycle that leads to work. Completely agree paid is another powerful lever, especially for firms with clear targeting and budget. Different tools, different outcomes innit.

Me:

Also there are some that comment regularly on posts of others but may not actually post so much themselves. That can still be powerful and they should not be forgotten as, unfortunately, this specific methodology does.

Helen Burness:

Yes I always say in training posting is but one part of this – having a strong commenting strategy is a great way to be visible and meet people. Some people may never post, but they are very good at doing business in the quieter spaces. But to be fair to Si and his team, they are but a small team crunching through lots of data, I am not sure they would be able to take everyone’s comments into consideration as well!

Me:

Indeed. But this fact highlights the problem with a specific methodology that favours some over others for no good reason. The same was true, as I have highlighted in the past, with Twitter rankings and Klout scores. Ultimately, why I think people should take such lists with a very large pinch of salt.

Helen Burness:

Well personally it gets me buy in for law firms / lawyers actually understanding the value of the platform and getting proper training and coaching so I am always going to love it!

Me:

So really all just a legal marketers’ marketing ploy to reel gullible lawyers in! 😉

Helen Burness:

If it helps “gullible lawyers” access ethical, experienced training that helps them grow professionally then yes I guess?

-+-+-+-+-+-

Clotilde Iaia-Polak (Private Client & UHNW Legal Advisor | Managing Partner, Yungo Law | Estate Planning – Business Continuity – High-Value Divorce | Right of Audience – Abu Dhabi Family Civil Court | DIFC Part I Practitioner):

And, to finish your sentence, “cash is reality.” I personally find legal marketing on other platforms yields a much higher ROI and, as you justly said, I don’t need a big following there. I simply need to be active in the community and present when needed. I find LinkedIn more useful for keeping in touch with colleagues and clients — a kind of modern Yellow Pages. You need to be here so people can find you, validate your existence, and see what your real clients — those who referred them to you — have graciously said about you. But I find the influencers LinkedIn charts interesting to understand trends and fun, a bit like the Oscars. No one watches the whole thing but we talk about it for a few days and watch a few good movies as a result.

Me:

Thanks for those thoughts. I can remember when we advertised in the Yellow Pages! Then with the advent of the internet it started to shrink in size until it was no more. But now there are so many different places on the internet that we all have to vie for attention at. As you say you have to find the right/best one(s) for you to make the effort worthwhile.

-+-+-+-+-+-

Law Firm Marketing Summit:

Interesting analysis.

-+-+-+-+-+-

Simon P MARSHALL (Helping law firms win business through world-class legal marketing | Founder, TBD Marketing | Follow for LinkedIn and legal marketing tips):

Thanks, Brian. You should come and join us at the next event at A&O on April 16th and find out what it’s all about.

You would have loved the enthusiasm in the room on Thursday, the people meeting like old friends, the work referrals that have taken place, the conflicts that have been sent to others. It was utterly utterly joyous.

The rankings are a means to an end. And that end is a better connected, mentally healthy, respectful, diverse and joyful legal profession. Oh and you get to have a badge sometimes for all your hard work.

Let me know. You can sign up here and I’ll save you a spot next to me.

https://www.tbdmarketing.co.uk/dates-for-your-diary-2026/

Me:

Thanks for the invite. I am, however, well aware of the work referrals that take place and the conflicts sent to others via social media. As a very early adopter and advocate of using social media and someone who has written articles and spoken at events about it over many years, I know the power of it. That has been going on for years. It is nothing new.

I was also a co-instigator, with Linda Cheung, of the first legal Tweetups for ‘Twegals’ (15 years ago) that took place in London and elsewhere. They were joyous events too. But they did not rely on rankings as a means to connect. They worked through being connected on a social media platform and all being included without feeling there was a pecking order in the room.

I’m all for networking both online and most importantly offline. But we shouldn’t need ranking tables to hang that on.

#Lex2011Tweetup: When Virtual became IRL (In Real Life)

Jade Gani (Founder & CEO at Circe Law Ltd | Chair of Lifetime Lawyers | Law Society Wills & Equity Committee Member | Multi-National Award-Winning Solicitor | Top Indies Legal LinkedInfluencer |) [displaying a Legal LinkedInfluencer badge]:

Brian Inkster – you do know you don’t have to rank to come to the networking events, right? Everyone is welcome… the rankings are merely recognition of consistent content creation that people like to engage with.

Me:

Jade Gani – I have a ‘ranking’ (albeit against my will) so wasn’t expecting to be excluded. Whilst good that everyone is welcome it is like a private members club with two tiers: the members (with their rankings) and the guests (without any). The latter group might not feel quite as welcome as the former group. You don’t need a ranking to know that you create content that others engage with. That is self evident.

Jade Gani:

Except anyone can be a guest and anyone can become a member, if they work at it. So your comparison is flawed. You don’t need to have a ranking to know lots of things about yourself, but recognition for a job well done never hurt anyone.

Me:

I don’t think the comparison is flawed at all. With most private member clubs anyone can come in, if invited/signed in by a member. Same with the ‘influencer’ meet-ups.

If those invitees want to become a member then they need to meet the ‘clubs’ requirements to do so i.e. likes + 4 x comments = score. High enough a score and you are in.

That formula, though, does not necessarily equate to “a job well done” for the reasons given by me in my blog post and by others in the comments on here.

I agree no one is likely to be hurt by it. I am simply drawing attention to what, I consider, to be the futility of it and why sanity is, in my opinion, better than vanity when it comes to LinkedIn legal marketing.

Linda Cheung (Innovation & Intrapreneurship Advisor | Non-Executive Director):

Brian Inkster – 15 years – it’s flashed by! And yes, we continue to share similar sentiments 🤗
When I’m coaching Innovate UK ICURe Entrepreneurial Leads, the topic of vanity posting always comes up. Hundreds of likes can create a buzz, but have zero impact… while one thoughtful comment that leads to one meaningful conversation can be the catalyst for commercialisation success ✨
For me, it’s never been about rankings or dopamine hits. It’s not about posting for views. It’s about relationships, relevance, and real outcomes – helping innovators unlock LinkedIn to get their innovations out into the world 🚀
Brilliant to see this being discussed so clearly here.

Me:

Well said! Viral posts can also be exhausting (I am having difficulty keeping up with all the comments on this post!) and exacerbate the negativity of any actual ROI arising from them. As someone put it better than me on Bluesky:

-+-+-+-+-+-

Alexander Low (Building Tomorrow’s Rainmakers, Today : Professionals Who Drive Growth.):

👀

-+-+-+-+-+-

Victoria Moffatt ChartPR (Non-practising solicitor, founder and MD of LexRex Communications. Legal PR, Chambers and Partners and Legal 500 specialist. At LexRex – we help law firms to grow.):

Interesting and well considered thoughts as ever Brian.

Me:

Thanks Victoria 🙂

-+-+-+-+-+-

Patrick McCann (My focus is the future resilience of City law: governance, talent pipelines, and trust. Chief Executive, City of London Law Society Co-CEO, City Century Co-Founder, SWSQF He/Him 🏳️‍🌈):

Gosh, what a post to post, particularly with the AI-generated image (I note you refrain from using AI to generate text content).

For me, it’s all about why you’re on this platform and how you want people to engage with you. Whenever I am looking to instruct a laywer, plug and play or otherwise, I do look at how that lawyer presents themselves to potential clients. I for sure expect expertise. But also an indication that the lawyer is someone with whom I would want to work – collaborative, contributive, robust but positive, can influence others, that sort of thing. LinkedIn posts can help with that.

Some lawyers post content that would mean I would never instruct them – negative, combative, rude, arrogant, y’know the sort of thing?

Lawyers, layers.

Dorjan Myrtja (Divorce & Family Law Associate Solicitor at Knights PLC):

Gosh, a somewhat condescending response (the image is exactly that- an image, with little (if any) text or narrative).
The author appears simply to be expressing a personal view (evidently based on a topic he has experience in) which he is, of course, entitled to do and not be reproached for it. I am not inclined to agree with some of the things he has said, particularly as I am a frequent user of LI, but respect his views, nonetheless.

Me:

Patrick McCann – I wondered if there would be a “gosh” or two when I pressed ‘publish’! There have been quite a few. However, it would appear that I have simply said what many others were thinking 🙂

I find GenAI sometimes useful for image generation, but I wouldn’t, as you say, use it for text. They say a picture paints a thousand words 😉

You might also be wary of the lawyers who are continually posting for likes + comments = rankings and wonder whether/when they will have time to do the work you need doing?

-+-+-+-+-+-

John McCarthy (Helping Law Firm & Legal Tech Owners unlock £100K extra profit in 6 months, build a highly profitable, valuable business & plan for exit with the PROFIT System. DM me “SUMMIT” to boost your profits!):

Couldn’t agree more Brian Inkster
This whole “LinkedInfluencer” thing feels a bit like self-licking lollipop activity:
lots of dopamine, lots of applause, very little nutritional value 😉
We’re all human. Likes & comments feel nice. No judgement there.
LinkedIn is brilliant for networking, staying visible, referrals, reconnecting with old colleagues, even the occasional humble brag or bit of self-PR.
All totally fine.
The problem starts when vanity metrics get confused with commercial outcomes.
If your goal is to feel good, be visible to peers, or be part of a supportive community, go for it.
Likes and comments might be a perfectly acceptable KPI.
But if your goal is generating pipeline, clients & revenue, posting mainly for your peer group and chasing engagement just doesn’t cut it anymore.
You need a better strategy:
– identifying who you want to work with, who you need to connect with
– understanding their problems, providing value
– what posts & conversations lead to calls
– how activity turns into revenue
KPIs could include target-market connections, conversations started, calls booked, clients won.
Revenue generated vs how much time is spent on Linked In – not applause!
Vanity vs sanity.
Different goals, different measures.

Me:

Thanks John 🙂

-+-+-+-+-+-

James Allen (Executive Coach for Senior Lawyers | Sustainable Authority (Without Burnout) | Former Commercial Solicitor):

Ah, so this is what has caused quite a kerfuffle 😁

Me:

Need one of those, over social media ranking lists, every 15 years or so 😉 https://thetimeblawg.com/2011/01/23/law-firm-twitteratigate-the-whole-story/

James Allen:

Whodda thunk it, eh !!! 🤣

-+-+-+-+-+-

Angus Walker (Helping you navigate Biodiversity Net Gain #BNG and Development Consent Orders #DCOs. Quizlemaster) [displaying a Legal LinkedInfluencer badge]:

Users ‘have to post inanely’?

Me:

You missed out the bit where I said “not all I hasten to add”. Unfortunately, in the quest for likes and comments to get scores and badges you get, as someone else said on here, quantity rather than quality. That can often, but not always, end up being rather inane.

-+-+-+-+-+-

Darryl Cross (Performance coach for law firm partners | Helping elite professionals break personal records | Builder of high-trust teams) [displaying a Legal LinkedInfluencer badge]:

LinkedIn has over 1 billion users today. I was number 38,742 that joined. I’m on the influencer list, and I think my 23 years of posting, supporting and participating might have something to do with it.

Gaming the system and trying to get clicks can get you on some lists. However, being on such a list doesn’t make you a gamer. If you don’t add value (more important) or receive it, you won’t last long.

The overwhelming majority of people on these lists earned their way by adding to the conversation. Imperfect? Sure. But most on there would continue to participate without the lists, so I’m not sure the point of critiquing a way to recognize them.

Me:

When the score to get on the list is purely linked to likes and comments and encourages overactive posting to potentially get those it does, unfortunately, become somewhat of a game. That does not mean anyone is “gaming the system” just that they have been encouraged to play a game. There is a subtle difference.

Continuing to participate without the lists would be a good idea for many.

Darryl Cross:

That’s a fair perspective.

-+-+-+-+-+-

Lewis McDonald (Global Energy Sector Leader @ Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer | Reliable, Affordable and Sustainable Energy) [displaying a Legal LinkedInfluencer badge]:

It’s such an interesting debate. I guess the only way of knowing is to ask those with high rankings if they are actually benefiting from the increased profile they have with their connections and followers on this platform. For me, the answer is a resounding “yes”. I feel like I’m often front of mind with clients if a pitch opportunity comes up and I also get to connect on topics on the platform which are often used as conversation starters in real life.

The dopamine addiction side of the platform is real and has to be managed with breaks from the platform. In fact, I’m currently exploring “the dark side” of social media and expect to convey my thoughts on it soon, via a new song. Watch this space…

Me:

I think anyone who is on here reasonably regularly will find benefits. However, as I have said before, I think the ranking system and the methodology behind it drives behaviours (in some) that may be less conducive to that goal. I have unfollowed ‘influencers’ because their constant content has been too much to bear. I imagine I will not be alone.

There will be those that are unranked benefiting more than many that are ranked.

It’s bad enough on here at times. I dread to think what “the dark side” looks like!

-+-+-+-+-+-

Amy Cousineau Massey (Employment Solicitor ⚖️| Tenacious Problem Solver 🧩| Friendly yet Feisty 🌶️ | I’m here to navigate your toughest problems for you ⛵) [displaying a Legal LinkedInfluencer badge]:

Ooh, hard disagree from me. It’s gotta be different for everyone. I personally don’t have the budget for paid advertising but can spend my time making connections on here and that works for me. Anything that helps with that visibility is a bonus and the LinkedInfluencers report is free, I dont have to lift a finger and it grabs a lot of attention. 👀

Me:

Difficult to disagree with something if you have never tried it. Although, I appreciate that does not apply to all situations. However, there is little danger or downside involved in giving LinkedIn Legal Marketing alternatives a try. You might be surprised of the benefits you can get with minimal spend. You can then measure ROI and see where there is sanity over vanity. And seldom is anything free. Consider who is actually benefiting from using your data and why.

-+-+-+-+-+-

Sofia Parastatidou (ILETA (Legal English Teachers’ Academy)-President/Special Counsel/Barrister;UK Solicitor-Advocate/SQE Private Tutor/Member of Law Society/Legal English Teacher Trainer/Author- Legal English (Pearson)/British Law Academy):

ROI – return on investment which makes me question how many people on the list include those who do not pay for their membership and don’t invest in marketing plans or paying for reach…

Me:

The vast majority I would expect.

-+-+-+-+-+-

Law Firm Ambition:

Ah Brian, one of the joys of running your own firm … lots of people think it, you say/write it. Yes, ROI common sense seems to go out the window in many cases, and posting becomes a major hobby.

Me:

“A major hobby” – A good way of describing it 🙂 I can think of better hobbies to have!

-+-+-+-+-+-

Gary Yantin (Leading sales marketing and BD at Teal Compliance/Co-host of The Exchange podclub/ Community builder/ Legal tech advisor/Compliance/Risk/Legal Education and Training Mountain biker):

With posts like this you’ll be rising up the ranks in no time 😉 😜

Helen Burness (Marketing strategist for the legal world’s doers, thinkers & change makers | Brand, strategy & LinkedIn | Visibility with purpose | Saltmarsh founder | HelenSquared co-founder | Strategic, creative and on your side.):

Gary Yantin – ha ha Gary is on to you Brian Inkster – see you in the next report.

Me:

Helen Burness – I’m in the current one! Albeit against my will. Have you not read it?! 😉

Helen Burness:

Brian Inkster – I apologise, I just found you in the Indies section! Sorry I missed that – if only there was something people could do to make sure people knew….what about a badge 😂

Brian – you will always be a social media OG!

Me:

Helen Burness – Oh, I was given a badge, again against my will. Might have to gift it to a certain President 😂

Will add your final sentence to my Testimonial page alongside the existing OG one from Gav Ward and your Wonka one 😊

Helen Burness:

Brian Inkster – Ok but only if you also include the picture of you in full Life of Brian regalia.

Me:

Helen Burness – Will need to search for that one in my archives!

Me:

Gary Yantin – At the time of writing, this post gives me a ‘score’ of 310! Only 39,214 more ‘points’ needed, which equates to 126.5 more posts like this one to go in the next 10 weeks or so, to potentially get to number one in ‘The Indies’. Think I will give that a miss! Life is too short and I value my sanity 😉

-+-+-+-+-+-

The following was a repost on LinkedIn:

John McCarthy (Helping Law Firm & Legal Tech Owners unlock £100K extra profit in 6 months, build a highly profitable, valuable business & plan for exit with the PROFIT System. DM me “SUMMIT” to boost your profits!):

This got lawyers talking. And it didn’t win a “LinkedInfluencer Badge”.

Brian Inkster has written a spicy but very sensible post on LinkedIn legal marketing, vanity metrics, and the growing obsession with likes, comments and rankings.

(Yes, I can be guilty of checking for those too 😁)

Short version:
– Likes and comments feel good
– Badges look nice on a profile
– None of that automatically equals pipeline, clients or revenue

The bit I really like:
“Turnover is vanity. Profit is sanity. Cash flow is reality.”

Likewise, on LinkedIn:
“Likes and comments are vanity. Target market connections are sanity . ROI is reality.”

LinkedIn is brilliant.
– For networking.
– For referrals.
– For staying visible.
– For reconnecting with colleagues.
– For the occasional humble brag or bit of self-PR. 😁

All totally fine.

The problem starts when vanity metrics get confused with commercial outcomes, especially for lawyers who actually want paid work, not applause.

If your goal is community, visibility, or enjoying the platform, crack on.

If your goal is pipeline, clients and revenue, posting mainly for your peer group and chasing engagement just doesn’t cut it anymore.

You have to be far more intentional now.

Different goals require different strategies.
And very different KPIs.

Worth a read. Worth a debate.

Approx. 80-90% of my business has come from connecting with people on Linked In over the last 8 years (the rest is introductions & referrals).
Only a handful has come through from posting, comments & likes.

My best “engagement” (vanity metrics) are not from “business focused” posts, it’s from the personal/ fun stuff.

So what does that tell you?

What do you like or dislike about LinkedIn?