Linkedin Profiles That Get Found

Greg Wyatt • June 11, 2026

What follows is an updated chapter for the Summer 2026 edition of A Career Breakdown Kit, due for release in July. It explains why you may have a strong profile yet be invisible to recruiter searches - and what you can do about it.

If you've already bought a copy, DM me with your receipt and I'll DM you the latest version - that will always be my commitment and where this book is unlike others on the market.

A few weeks back I published the follow up chapter - "LinkedIn profiles that convert". You see it's not good enough to only get found, you must also convert readers into action. Unless, I suppose recruiters rely on only the most basic searches and don't want evidence of suitability.

Indeed I had a couple of comments on that article... "Greg getting found is far more important!", which is true, though it highlighted they didn't read the article. It is indeed true that you can't convert if you aren't found, but the two go hand in hand.

So this chapter fixes it. I publish the update now due to my LinkedIn Live with Simon Ward on Wednesday, where I prove a simple truth that confounds much LinkedIn advice:

If you believe your Headline is the only thing to rely on, you are wrong.

We'll use this simple leetspeak term "h34dl1n3" to show what LinkedIn Recruiter looks for in searches. I use that term because no one else on LinkedIn has, so it shows point for point what results are brought from searches.

Here's the Link for Wednesday 10th June at 2pm BST: Job hunters helpdesk. If you can't make it the recording is available in the same place.

Or you can read the following:

36 - LinkedIn profiles that get found

 

Whatever you think of LinkedIn, you shouldn’t overlook its nature as a data repository for recruiters. Many of us rely on this data to fill our vacancies. That data is you and your competition.

This chapter shows how recruiters use the LinkedIn Recruiter Licence to enable us to search for potential candidates, how this reflects other CV databases, and how this might help you improve the odds that your profile can be found.

If you didn’t know, Recruiter Licence is an expensive resource for recruiters and one which many rely on as a core part of their hiring approach.

We do this sometimes at the same time as advertising, sometimes instead of.

I’m a member of a private recruiter group on LinkedIn. We’re all small independents, and it was set up for recruiters who both care about candidate experience and are skilled in their craft.

In preparation for one of my LinkedIn Lives, I asked them in our WhatsApp group what their common frustration with LinkedIn profiles is. These were their replies:

‘Headlines are always shit’

‘CVs not matching LinkedIn profiles are a big no, especially in targeted roles like sales’

‘Job titles that don't make sense’

‘No personal profile’

‘Don't have your current job title as 'looking for work', put the job title you are aiming for and change your headline to e.g. 'Software Developer looking for their next role in X where I can add X value'‘

‘Profiles in my domain all look exactly the same. It’s all job titles, qualifications and nothing to differentiate them.’

Common issues I see too.

It’s worth pointing out that this exercise was solely on LinkedIn Recruiter.

Recruiters have different ways of finding candidates:

  • Their own CV database of previously registered candidates
  • Subscription CV databases off the back of job boards (in the UK), e.g. Indeed, Reed, Totaljobs, CV Library or more specialist ones in your area of expertise
  • ATS-style software that scrapes candidate data from LinkedIn and other sources
  • Real-life networking, referrals
  • Headhunting through market mapping, prospect companies and people in viable roles

When it comes to searching data, these are based on Boolean search and filters.

It’s the same way we might search through a high volume of applicants, such as on an ATS.

I recently did an experiment with my co-host, Simon Ward, on our weekly LinkedIn Live.

Simon is an exceptional Job Search Coach in the UK. He chose this title to define his services because, from his perspective, it was the most relevant description of what he does.

If I were to ask you what does someone do who can coach you through finding a job, what would you answer?

My guess would be Career Coach or maybe CV Writer.

And if you searched on those terms for Simon, you wouldn’t have found him. If you took the ‘lazy recruiter’ approach to sourcing you wouldn’t find him under ‘Job Search Coach’ either.

LinkedIn Recruiter works much in the same way as Amazon. You run a general search for your item of choice, then filter by various elements - in this case by industry and location.

One of the features of LinkedIn Recruiter is that we can filter by ‘Open to Work’, if you have that turned on in your profile, it should be to your advantage.

I don’t use it, because I have better means of contacting out-of-work job seekers.

When I look at my dashboard, these are the basic search fields that come up:

  • Job Title
  • Locations
  • Skills and Assessments
  • Companies
  • Schools Attended
  • Industries
  • Keywords

I use Job Title, Location, Industry and Keywords for general searches, as well as Companies if I know they might be incubators for candidates.

There are also advanced filters. For the purpose of this chapter, it’s about getting the basics right.

These search fields map point for point with how you fill out your profile. Play around with editing your profile and you’ll see the same options.

The problem with Simon is that he defined himself as a Job Search Coach in his headline.

If I search for this specific term as a Job Title, he won’t come up, whereas 37 other credible results do.

It’s only if I search on this term in Keywords that he comes up.

Headlines don’t have a specific filter to search on them - they only get found in a Keyword filter search, in an advanced operator search, or when that term is also specified in a primary search filter like Job Title. See A note on headlines below for why this matters.

What if you were an HR Manager who was a 100% fit for a Head of People vacancy, yet the recruiter didn’t find you because you didn’t use that explicit job title?

As a recruiter I would build up a Boolean string of comparable job titles, then expand or reduce depending on the volume of results.

Which might be:

(‘HR Manager’ OR ‘Human Resource Manager’ OR ‘Human Resources Manager’ OR ‘Head of HR’ OR ‘HR Director’) etc

I’d use every iteration of HR above and (‘People Manager’ OR ‘Head of People’), maybe I’d even go old school with Personnel.

I do this because of the arbitrariness of job titles, and because an HR Director in one business might be a Head of People in another.

As well as other curiosities like People Business Partner, which might be any and all of those titles.

Once I have a comprehensive list, I can save this for future reference and build it iteratively if I come across any weird job titles in the wild.

If I need to further fine-tune, I’d bring in relevant qualifications, memberships and skills for that role.

MCIPD AND ‘Employee Relations’ AND FMCG… might be an example, although these are separated on LinkedIn by individual fields.

If you’re wondering about the capitalisation - AND OR NOT and others are Boolean operators that allow us to specify or separate data.

Sometimes I’ll even search on typos, because I know these aren’t searched for by many, but only if it’s a hard role to fill: ‘HR Manger’ (I realise HR isn’t obscure)

I do what it takes to find the right people.

It won’t help if you are a suitable candidate for the above and your job title is ‘Assistant to the Senior Manager, HR, Business Partnering.’ A real job title I once came across.

I explain in the ATS chapters (p29) that one area AI is enhancing work is through automating Boolean searches - this makes it easier for a less skilled recruiter to find candidates. If you have the basics above nailed, things will only improve.

For now, a skilled search will uncover candidates better than automation.

Here’s the first takeaway:

Ensure the keywords, job titles, skills and qualifications that reflect the job you want are explicitly stated on your profile and in the right fields. Ensure Industry is best fit with your ideal career industry (a specific filter we use, which can be amended where you edit your headline)

If you aren’t sure, print off all the jobs you’ve recently applied for where you are a 90%+ fit. What are the common terms? These should be on your profile - if and only if they are true and you have evidence.

If your current job title is ‘Looking for a new opportunity,’ it might be true and it might get you overlooked.

You’d probably want your current job title to be ‘HR Manager - looking for a new opportunity.’

In that fuzzy weird title above, I’d go for ‘Assistant to the Senior Manager, HR, Business Partnering - (HR Manager)’

Search fields do have additional filters, allowing a search on current or past jobs - can we guarantee recruiters won’t do anything more than the most simplistic of searches?

Now, you’d hope that recruiters aren’t actually lazy, corner cutters or incompetent. Though if you cater for the weakest link, you also cater for more skilled recruiters.

I asked a current job seeker what roles he is applying for.

His reply:

Compliance Assistant / Administrator,

Client Onboarding Assistant / Administrator,

Operations Assistant / Administrator,

Reconciliations Administrator.

I couldn’t find him on a basic search for the first line. This was my reply:

When I did a search using your ideal job titles, you didn't come up for ‘Compliance Assistant’ or ‘Compliance Administrator.’

You do come up for ‘Client Onboarding Assistant’ and Administrator because these are explicit in your profile.

You may benefit from making sure the exact terms you look for in adverts are represented in your profile.

The crux of being found is understanding what we search for. Give us what we need to find you. Inversion.

The principles are the same for a CV which you can use on job board CV databases.

Another exercise to improve visibility

What were the last 10 job adverts you read that represented a strong fit with where you are in your career?

Ones which reflect what you've been doing and would be a natural step forward.

What do these descriptions have in common, out of job titles, key skills, qualifications and technology?

Now look at your LinkedIn profile. In order of priority, do these use the same words you see in adverts?

  1. Your job titles - most recent and previous
  2. Your Headline
  3. Your About section
  4. The sections under each job title
  5. Your skills

Often, when recruiters do searches against similar roles, they'll use the terminology from the job description, which is commonly used as the basis for adverts.

They'll search under the same terms that you might read on those adverts - job titles, qualifications, skills, software, industry.

If your profile doesn't explicitly state these, you won't be as easily found.

For example, if you are a ‘Head of Affiliate, Digital and Offline Marketing’ and you are performing the duties of a Marketing Manager - that's what you need to show in your profile.

While your headline is important - it doesn't help you if your profile doesn't turn up in search results, given its lower priority in Recruiter Licence search filters.

Update your profile truthfully and see what happens.

How else can you help readers see you as a viable candidate?

Do the same for your CV - because these same principles will support your applications, speculative contacts, networking and use of CV databases.

Note: there is no global ranking of profiles. Search rankings are in part specific to the searcher, based on things like network proximity and the recruiter's own activity. So you might be #1 in one search, and on the 3rd page for a different recruiter.

The configuration layer beneath the visible profile

Everything so far has been the visible profile: headline, about, experience, the keywords a reader can see. There is a configuration layer beneath this that drives how the platform matches you to sponsored adverts and how recruiters filter their searches. I covered why this matters in The invitation that wasn't (p67). Here is how to set it.

The first thing to understand is that these fields are additive. They add the searches and matches you appear in. They do not subtract your existing visibility. Setting a stretch title in Open to Work cannot erase your real title from your Experience section, which is where Boolean searches actually hit. So there is no penalty for reaching, only the question of where you spend limited slots.

Open to Work job titles. Up to five slots, drawn from LinkedIn's pre-populated taxonomy. These titles make you findable for roles you have never held. Set Director of Operations and you surface in searches for that title even if your profile only shows you as a Business Manager. It is the single most useful mechanism the platform offers anyone trying to move sideways, level up, or pivot.

Five slots forces a choice, which is the right design. The balance to aim for is between titles you are genuinely suited for now and titles you would move jobs for. Where you sit depends on your situation. If you are passively open and not in a rush, weight the slots toward the next move up; you can afford to wait for the right conversation. If you are actively looking and need to land something soon, weight them toward your current level, where you are credible on paper and the conversation is easier. Most people sit in between, two or three slots at current level and the rest reaching forward.

Don't spend slots on minor variants of the same title. Operations Manager, Senior Operations Manager and Head of Operations sound distinct but are the same career step at different scales. Use the slots to span seniority, sector framings, or adjacent functions you would genuinely accept, not to maximise hits on one narrow lane. The taxonomy is incomplete in niche sectors; pick the closest standard option and live with it.

Employment types. Tick every type you would genuinely accept, including part-time and contract if you would. The match engine appears to read this as a permission rather than a preference, and unchecking a type closes a door. If you would consider part-time in the right role, say so.

Locations and remote flag. Specify your real location plus the remote flag if you would take remote work. The advice to limit yourself to two or three locations to avoid looking desperate is editorial commentary, not LinkedIn policy. Set it honestly.

Visibility. Recruiters-only versus all members. Both feed the same match engine, so this is a risk-management choice, not a leverage one. Recruiters-only is the right default for anyone currently employed. This is mainly invisible to your current employer - unless they are cynical enough to employ a 3rd party to see who is Open to Work. The public green frame adds reach but exposes your status to your current employer and to a great deal of low-quality outreach, including scams. The wider perception question I cover in #OpenToWork (p47).

Industry and current employer link. Your industry classification is pulled from your current employer's LinkedIn Page, not from anything you say. I have seen this fail for candidates whose employer was mis-tagged or whose Page wasn't linked: the classification is wrong and they never know. Check that your current employer's page is linked correctly in your Experience section. This is also the field that hides your Open to Work status from your current employer's recruiters. If the link is missing or wrong, that privacy guarantee fails.

Settings drift. Most candidates set these fields once, at the moment of activating Open to Work, and never revisit them. The titles you would accept change as you learn what the market wants. Treat it as a living configuration, not a permanent declaration.

The reason this belongs in a chapter on getting found is that it is the hidden half of discoverability. The visible profile gets you into recruiter Boolean searches. The configuration layer gets you into the platform's match engine. How that same profile then has to hold up to a human reading it, and how it serves your outbound approaches too, sits within the wider framework in Through-the-Line (p120).

A note on headlines

Headlines are a secondary priority in recruiter searches. The Simon Ward experiment from the LinkedIn Live illustrated this directly: searching on a specific job title term as a Job Title filter returned a different, smaller result set than the same term entered as a Keyword. Profiles where that title existed only in the headline - not in any Experience entry - surfaced in the Keyword search and not in the Job Title filter.

This is consistent with how LinkedIn documents its own search architecture. The Job Titles filter is defined as targeting job titles members add in the Experience section. The Keywords filter is defined as pulling from the entire profile page. Those are two distinct fields with two distinct search behaviours.

Independent cross-checking against platform documentation and practitioner testing found no evidence that it differs by tier. The Job Title filter appears to index Experience title fields consistently across Recruiter Lite, Professional and Corporate.

This morning (1st June 2026), I confirmed this using the unique term h34dl1n3, which only appears on one profile in the world - mine. This was on LinkedIn Recruiter Lite and confirmed expert Boolean sourcing practitioner findings, such as from Irina Shamaeva in late 2024.

This surfaces h34dl1n3 when it is solely stated in the Headline field when using the secondary filter "Keywords" and the advanced operator "headline:". If you search on the primary filter Job Titles - it does not appear.

Where the headline earns its keep is at the next stage. When the term appears in the headline, About or title, the results list renders it in bold. That bolding is what catches a recruiter's eye as they scan - a scanning signal, not a discovery one. It affects whether you get noticed among the results, not whether you appear in them.

To summarise: your headline matters for Keyword searches and for how a reader processes your profile once they've clicked through. It does not help you appear in Job Title filter searches unless your title also appears in an Experience entry.

A note on Resumes/CVs

Storing a CV on LinkedIn and turning on the backend "Share resume data with recruiters" button supports discoverability, through keywords and skills that are aligned with your Recruiter profile.

This can boost your return in search results, through compounding within your LinkedIn profile. The substance of this boost isn't quantifiable, given LinkedIn is opaque in how it ranks search results.

However, it's a good idea to have your current 'good enough' CV stored, as well as additional documents (up to 4) for different role profiles you are suitable for.

A note on Activity

Another ranking factor is your activity on LinkedIn. The logic is simple - active job seekers are more likely to be responsive to recruiter enquiries, therefore they prove effectiveness of messaging through Recruiter Licence and are prioritised.

While there are conflicting reports of what makes up effective activity, including between practitioner advice and LinkedIn help articles - my advice is simpler:

Be responsive and proactive whatever you do on LinkedIn, with the happy byproduct that action boosts your visibility.

However

Getting found is only the first piece of the puzzle, and when your profile is read, you need to convert interest.

This is why you need to get the balance right in how you present your information.

How recruiters work

By Greg Wyatt • August 18, 2026
The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.

After the interview

By Greg Wyatt • August 11, 2026
What follows is Chapter 49 in A Career Breakdown Kit (Summer 2026) . It's like many other chapters in that I've tried to make it stand alone, yet it's deeply connected to the rest of the book. For example, if you accept your job search is equivalent to launching a product to market - where you are the product and your next employer the buyer - then a sensible strategy is also equivalent. You execute an appropriate multichannel sales and marketing plan, where you focus on the steps in your control, with considered action and follow up. An interview process is an ongoing negotiation, with each interview equivalent to a consultative sales meeting. And like any good sales professional, you know that the steps preceding, the steps in-between, and the steps after all have a part to play. In my last three offers these have all been contributing factors: The relationship nurtured by the hiring manager led to their new employee hitting the ground running The private information withheld by the candidate that led to an offer rescinded because she could never have fulfilled the role in the first place The enthusiasm shown by a candidate in post interview communications tipped a decision in their favour Recruitment is risk, filled with bias - that doesn't mean you can't make that work for you. 49 - After the interview In a tough job search, getting to an interview can feel a real achievement. If you’ve been accountable in your applications, only going for roles where you are a strong fit, these are tangible opportunities to secure employment. The interview itself isn’t the be-all and end-all. It’s better to see them as the start of a conversation, one that’s only complete when you either have an acceptable employment contract in your hand, or if it’s an unequivocal no. Continuing this conversation in the right way, and in ways other candidates may not think to, can bring hoped for and unexpected gains. A few weeks back I filled a vacancy which had a strong shortlist. The final three were all employable, and the company would have taken all three had they been able to. The second choice candidate was disappointed and took it well, responding professionally. I worked hard to give all three a good experience with regular updates and constructive feedback. I too was genuinely disappointed for the ‘unsuccessful’ candidates. Two weeks after accepting the offer and returning the signed contract, the first-choice candidate withdrew. She’d received a significantly improved offer having been headhunted. Within two hours of passing the news on to the hiring team, the 2nd choice candidate was offered the role and accepted. How she had responded to her initial disappointment was a key element in this offer being put forward. The same was true of her experience with us in her decision to accept the offer. In many ways an interview is like a sales meeting. One party pitches their offering which might be customised against the questions asked. The other party makes a decision on whether and how to proceed. In an interview both the candidate and employer act as both seller and buyer. As a job seeker you get the final say on whether you say yes, no or something in between. Your decision is influenced by factors you may not divulge to the employer, such as an unexpected intervention (illness, accident, family), personal circumstances or other offers that may come up. It’s the same for the employer. They may have a hierarchy of decision-making, changes in the business and changes outside of the business - many things that can influence an interview decision or time frame, different from what was initially agreed. In sales we know that a deal isn’t agreed upon until the invoice is paid. Even if there is an initial ‘yes’ in a meeting we follow up suitably. Follow-up email to confirm details of the conversation and next steps. Thank you for your time Follow up at the appropriate time to check progress If it’s ‘no right now’, follow up over time to build a relationship until they are ready to buy If it’s ‘no answer’, find appropriate reasons to follow up, ending in a breakup email What this actually looks relates to what their sales (hiring) process is, playing to their rules and breaking those same rules in an appropriate way. In the UK, 61% of private sector employers are SMEs, whereas the vast majority of money is in the corporate space. The differentiator in recruitment is that the more corporate you get, the more transactional and matrix-led recruitment often becomes. Some of the rules of the game will be different. This illustrates how and why things are different depending on the context. Public sector, charities, geography, bias, habit, strategy - these all affect the rules of what appear similar processes from the outside. It’s important not to be cynical or come across as coercive. Respect the process and any rules you learn about. Thank you notes Most of the employers I partner with are interested in candidate feedback and interest post-interview - to help them reach their decision for the right reason. Were you applying directly, their interest in your view would be the same. A naturally written thank you note sent appropriately should not work against you. It might work for you and it’s a situation where someone’s bias can be a benefit. ‘Dear Greg, I wanted to thank you for your time today and the opportunity to interview at ABC Corp. It was a pleasure to meet you and Gary and helpful to understand more about your role and environment. I remain keen and would be delighted to return for the next stage. You mentioned you’ll make a decision by the end of next week and I look forward to hearing from you. Do let me know if I can help with anything - my number is …. Kind regards,’ It’s an opportunity to build on or mitigate inconclusive points in an interview if there’s an example you neglected to share or if you didn’t convey information in the right way. Maybe they let slip they’d be concerned if the role would keep your interest in the long term - why not own this? ‘During the interview you asked if I could see myself in this role long-term. It’s a role I’d enjoy - taking on a hands-on role I can get stuck into is an exciting challenge, while my experience in xxx would be beneficial for yyy.’ Keep it more succinct than my email though. Write it in your own words in a similar tone to how you came across in the interview. Will it make a difference? Only marginally, in some situations. Is it worth doing as a natural way to continue the conversation? I think so. Don’t be disheartened if you don’t get a reply - they may have a policy to follow. And to that coercive point above don’t say ‘I’m the best candidate. You’d be a fool to miss out,’ or something more subtle that might suggest the same. Additional interviews In an ideal world you’d get a full view of the interview process before the interview. Unfortunately some employers enjoy playing a game of interview chicken, revealing more and more interview stages as you go through them. Most are somewhere in between. Try to establish the full process as early as possible in case there is anything that is non-negotiable for you. For example, I know some people categorically do not want to do technical tests or ‘business plan’ style presentations, having had their fingers burnt in the past. It’s your choice what might be a non-negotiable - for any reasonable employer these are typically used as a means for fair assessment. Treat any interview in the same way as the first interview: prepare as fully as possible and assume nothing. Unless you know their hierarchy of decision-making, that new person you meet at fourth stage for an informal chat might well be the person with the final say. Even a social get-together after an offer is put forward might be seen as an assessment. Appropriate follow-ups It’s a careful balance. You want to show you are interested, not desperate. You need an answer, not to be inappropriately intrusive - even if that’s not your intent perception holds weight. Following up in the right way is a good tactic. If you can gain an understanding of their time frames or process work to that. Anything and everything can happen behind the scenes, including unexpected absences. Things can slip in a way employers may not see as notable. A few work days after you were expecting to hear, drop them a polite line. ‘Hi Greg, I wondered if you had any news on how you want to proceed with this role. Is there any update you can share? Kind regards,’ You can play a bit of keeping up with the Joneses if it’s true - ‘I remain interested - I do have two interviews this week with other employers. Would you like me to keep you updated?’ Sometimes no news is no news and you might need to be patient. Eventually you may come to a point where you need a decision from them - such as if your 2nd choice company gives you a job offer. A breakup email can be a good thing. Even if this doesn’t prompt an update or decision from them, you give yourself agency to walk away with no ‘what ifs?’ And if they do come back later, you can make a separate decision on whether to revisit them. One such email might be: ‘Hi Greg, I enjoyed our interview on May 21st. You mentioned you’d reach a decision the following week. Can I assume you have moved forward with another candidate? I’ll draw a line through my application for now and will be happy to pick up our conversations at a later date, if appropriate. Kind regards,’ Written appropriately, there are three outcomes: You get a reply confirming they have appointed You get no reply and can move on You get a reply with more information That last point may be ‘no news’ or something actionable. Sometimes it might even prompt good news. Whatever the outcome, you can move forward. Keeping in touch long-term Sometimes a no might be a ‘no for now’, especially when you are later on in the process, such as being pipped to the post at final interview. If yours is a business as usual role where there are a number of employees fulfilling similar duties in the same company, you may well be suitable for other roles that come up in future. How can you keep in touch appropriately so that you help their decision making when another vacancy comes up? Find reasons to occasionally keep in touch (maybe once every couple of months). If they are active on LinkedIn you could follow their content and add constructive comments. It may come to nothing but it may give you early sight of a new vacancy. If you see another vacancy advertised check it out. Drop them a line directly rather than just apply given you are continuing a conversation rather than coming in cold. And if they reply to say ‘don’t bother’, at least you know.