Recently, many of us are being endorsed and endorsing other people’s skills. I asked many of my friends to endorse me, and they have. Indeed, I endorsed their skills. I started to wonder if “Endorsement” holds any value. I did some research on the Internet, and I failed to find any strategic value being defined by LinkedIn.
In my opinion, “Endorsement” has no value and no credibility. The reason is simple: friends will always endorse friends. I have neither case studies nor external research to cite. My reasoning is purely based on intuitive reasoning and peer feedback.
Alternatively, it seems to have helped LinkedIn more than the members. It most certainly has increased LinkedIn traffic and user session length (LinkedIn has not released this data yet).
My personal feeling is that “Endorsement” is LinkedIn’s version of a “Game”. We should call it “The Endorsement Game” by LinkedIn. It helps entertain members through skill endorsement.
My major concern is this: I hope LinkedIn will not use it in search ranking criteria.
What are your thoughts?
I agree with you, so to make it credible, I will only endorse people that I know for a fact hold that skill. Everyone should follow the same recommendation, because your own credibility is on the line. If you start endorsing people that claim to hold a skill and don’t, it will maks the endorser look bad as well. Very good point Ninos!
Thank you Boris and Cristian Mihai.
I think that their goal IS to use this for search criteria… I know you are hoping not but I think that this allows individuals like me to search for “social thinker” and find someone in my network. People don’t normally like the idea of #tags but in short, it helps us better acquaint ourselves with others and I personally think that the endorsement is, in short, the new way of #tags on LinkedIn.
Do you think that they will push the wrong person of interest if they use these endorsements?
@Nathaniel Yes I do think the wrong person of interest maybe pushed, due to the credibility of the Endorsements. If someone is very social and has many friends, then he will be able to get so many endorsements from his friends. It is a question of credibility: Will that mean the person is truly skilled?
As you have noted, you have not conducted “scientific research” to arrive at your theory: Endorsements don’t necessary equate to a true measure of an individual’s skill/ability. Yet, I would argue, on your behalf, that your theory is “good”. The evidence I would present is: 1) You are using an empirical method (inference) through observation of the “Endorsement Game” in play (you should copyright that!); 2) You are putting it out to the public (well, that it a stretch, a social science community [i.e. behavioral psychologist] would be the “right” public, 3) Your conclusions are uncertain (an important component of a good theory is that it should be falsifiable); and 4) The content is important to a general subject (basically, it effects many). So, you have successfully put your audience on “guard” and made them aware to use logic and due diligence when information is being disseminated. Kudos!
TYPO ALERT… NECESSARY = NECESSARILY