LinkedIn? I’m out.
“It’s not what you know, it’s who you know”—an old cliché that finds itself firmly in the present. Having reached the level of studying for a master’s degree, I had hoped that finding a job in global health might depend a lot more on what you know, but I now wonder if that’s truly the case.
Networking, it seems, has woven itself into the tapestry of our modern life. Whether you’re finding out about exclusive job vacancies or seeking to gain an edge over your competitors, networking has become part and parcel of the recruitment process. Tune in to any online careers talk and a host of bright, young, qualified things will tell you how they got their job via an alumnus, or a friend of a friend, or other virtuous connection. You’ve likely heard a variation on the words ‘humanitarian bubble’ or ‘EU gang’ mentioned in a similar vein. In a way, it’s exciting—finding amazing job opportunities in the field you’re passionate about sounds very appealing. So why does LinkedIn freak me out?
In theory, I can see the myriad advantages: a move away from ‘boys’ clubs’ towards virtual, global networks open to every background; opportunities for my international classmates to connect with leaders in their field from all over the world; and the potential to push forward the decolonisation of global health, through the recruitment of researchers from the study setting. And I’ll admit, on a personal note, online networking does appeal to me much more than a face-to-face ‘mixer’.
Yet, this all still sits uneasy with me. While initially I thought I might be an online pariah, it turns out I’m not the only one: conversations with classmates have mostly involved concerns around the ethics of networking. Ask anyone how they would identify the right applicant for a job and they’ll likely respond along the lines of qualifications, competence, communication skills … all components that can be assessed via applications, interviews, and aptitude tests. By encouraging the forging of connections outside of this established process, are we moving away from a system based on meritocracy? In theory, the recruitment process exists to ensure an equal playing field, so why are we striving to make it less equal by working around it? Yes, the process could be more equitable, but I can’t help but think that networking might be going in the wrong direction.
Then there’s the squirmy feeling of ‘connecting’ with someone to serve your own needs. Sure, you might adopt more of a “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” mentality, or believe in some sort of karmic order whereby helping others now will help you out in the future. Google “I don’t like networking” and you’ll find hundreds of pages on why you’re doing it wrong: you should be forging relationships, making friendships, and volunteering at an organisation (where you just might happen to bump into your future employer). It’s all about displaying your great communication style and your burning ambition. Still feel squirmy? I’d argue that’s because all of these activities are networking in cheap disguise.
Moral considerations aside, we should question whether the accepted benefits of LinkedIn are evenly distributed. In the US, 50% of college graduates use LinkedIn, whilst only 9% of people with a high-school education or less use the site. Moreover, 44% of American users take home over $75,000 per year. A cynic might suggest that LinkedIn helps to make the rich richer and keep the employed … employed. Added to this is the question of whether LinkedIn is accessible to all; there are multiple reasons why the thought of messaging an old school friend out of the blue might leave you in a cold sweat.
It’s hard to pinpoint where my opinion falls here. I don’t judge others for using LinkedIn—it is definitely here to stay and I want my peers to find their dream jobs. I’d go so far as to say I often wish I had the gumption to use it myself. Perhaps society has wandered too far into individualism for me to do without it. But for now, you can find me browsing jobs sites with my head firmly in the sand.