We've noticed the growing popularity of capturing recommendations from former supervisors and peers, especially to display on LinkedIn. Virtually all come across more as a tribute than a professional recommendation, going on and one about what a great person the subject is... how he/she is a superb leader, strategic thinker, self starter, team oriented... blah, blah, blah.
Two problems with this: First, what are the odds someone is going to post or advertise anything less than a stellar reference on themself... which makes the recommendation somewhat suspect in the first place. Second, the recommendations tend to be way too generic, lacking substance and speficity. How many times do you need people to say you "are a great person"?
Try this and see if it doesn't lend greater credibility to your recommendations. Let's imagine "John", a former VP Sales for a national builder... wants to add recommendations to his LinkedIn page or resume. Rather than make a blanket request to former peers and supervisors, he asks his Controller friend to write about a specific project they worked on together which demonstrated strong financial analysis acumen. Next, he gets his VP Construction friend to write specifically about John's construction knowledge. Following this pattern, John's former Division President might speak to his understanding of the broader P&L picture. A former Sales Representative writes about John's training and management abilities.
Whenever possible, these "recommenders" should include specific examples or projects, as that is what makes the believable. Otherwise, the entire concept of getting recommendations becomes a revolving mutual admiration society.
No comments:
Post a Comment