I recently came across a LinkedIn post by an immigrant living in Europe, who was desperately seeking a job to avoid being asked to leave within the next year. The post was made after that year had elapsed, and sadly, he still hadn't found employment.

At one point, he resorted to using the "Open to Work" tag on his LinkedIn profile. However, he mentioned he’s removing the tag, not because he had secured a job, but because he wasn't sure if it had served any purpose despite having it up for a very long time, and he believed it had put him at a disadvantage.

According to LinkedIn, more than 33 million users are currently using the “Open to Work” tag which was introduced during the pandemic in June 2020 to ease job-seekers' efforts in securing employment.

Although the platform can’t ascertain how many job offers have resulted from using the tag, it claims that those who have it are twice as likely to get messaged by recruiters.

Contrary to the optimism displayed by the professional networking platform, I've read numerous think pieces and articles discussing the "Open to Work" tag, many of which are negative and further heighten users’ scepticism.

"Is LinkedIn's Open to Work tag good or bad?" is a question that ranks well on Google. While I hold no opinion about it, this poster's story was the closest I came to understanding any possible risk associated with the tag.

This led me to conduct an experiment and test the effectiveness of the "Open to Work" banner.

The idea sounded great, but I hesitated for a moment and considered the potential repercussions.

What would non-editorial team members think? What impression would competing companies form about my workplace? How would I handle being approached without revealing my true intentions? What if I received an offer that was hard to resist?

These worrying questions stayed with me, but I went ahead, with high hopes for the outcome.

I set out to measure metrics like profile views, the types of people who viewed my profile (the much LinkedIn reveals to free users), connection requests, job offers, and recruiter messages.

My experiment would be a success if I got at least one message from a recruiter.

Setting up the "Open to Work" tag was quite easy. I went to my profile, clicked on my display photo, selected the option to change the frame, chose the "Open to Work" frame, and proceeded to apply my settings.

The default is to make the tag visible to everyone on LinkedIn. Back on my profile, I noticed a section where I could change my "Open to Work" settings. There, I chose the job titles I was open to, my preferred location, employment type (part-time, full-time, contract, internship, or temporary), industries I was interested in, and who could see the banner. To settle some of my nerves, I chose “Recruiters only”.

I should also mention that, before adding the tag, I optimised my profile by updating my headline, banner, skills, and summary. However, I didn't update the recommendation and endorsement sections.

Weeks before setting up the “Open to work” tag, I conducted a LinkedIn poll to get a better understanding of people's perception of the tag.

Five of the 20 respondents considered it a red flag, 1 believed it worked like magic, and 14 were indifferent. Interestingly, I could not see the tag on any of the respondents' profiles. Two respondents spoke with me. I also sought the opinion of a Nigerian HR professional.

After setting up the "Open to Work" tag, I immediately started monitoring my LinkedIn profile's metrics.

I didn't notice any immediate changes in profile views or engagement on the first day, but the following day showed a significant spike in followership — a 1,067% increase from the previous day, the highest my profile had seen in the past 365 days.

However, I should note that this spike coincided with the day I published my top-performing post for the week, making it difficult to entirely attribute the increase solely to the "Open to Work" tag.

Also, the followership surge does not seem to be commensurate with the impressions the article got. My best-performing article over the same period has 8x impressions and didn't result in increased followership.

Over the two-week period, my profile views did not show any remarkable increase like the followership, as they only increased by four. As a free LinkedIn user, the platform provides limited information about who viewed my profile.

Despite this, I received notifications twice within the two weeks indicating that two of the four had recruiter titles. This was an encouraging sign, but it didn't lead to any direct messages or job offers.

The two sources are not expressly against using the banner but discourage it for those who are currently engaged. One respondent highlighted perception as their reason, explaining that some employers might see the tag as an indication of a lack of commitment to a current role or desperation to leave, which could be perceived negatively.

Agreeing with this, the other respondent proposed that employed candidates looking to switch jobs displaying the tag might seem unprofessional. She, however, suggested the use of a service request feature instead, especially for mid-level executives.

From the perspective of an HR professional, who has been a hiring manager for 15+ years, the tag might be perceived as a sign of desperation especially in this part of the world, and could send a wrong message to potential employers, particularly if the individual is currently employed.

Based on my observations, it appears that recruiters, like all humans, are influenced by biases. And if using the tag rubs them off the wrong way, then, a job-seeker shouldn't take chances with these biases.

While recruiters are always on the lookout for potential candidates, the "Open to Work" tag might be a turn-off for some. In this case, the perception might be, "If no one else wants you, why should I?"

This sentiment aligns with my previous findings that recruiters often rely on referrals and poaching to fill roles they consider high-quality.

Instead of using the tag, the hiring manager recommends alternative strategies such as cold messaging recruiters, optimising the LinkedIn profile, leveraging one's network for referrals, and actively building meaningful connections.

Making an intelligently-crafted LinkedIn post indicating interest in certain roles could be a more effective strategy.

Despite the negative perceptions, there are strong arguments against discriminating against the use of the "Open to Work" feature. Critics argue that the bias against the tag is unjustified and stems from cognitive biases that should not be perpetuated.

Publicly indicating job-seeking status on LinkedIn, the world's most-used professional platform, should not imply a lack of desirability or qualification.

Also, the idea that being currently unemployed or openly seeking a job equates to being less qualified than employed counterparts is fundamentally flawed and discriminatory.

While it was challenging, it wasn’t impossible to find an example to support the critics’ argument. An extensive Internet search revealed that someone claimed to receive a job offer a few days after putting up the tag.

Ultimately, I'm not able to reach a conclusive opinion about the "Open to Work" tag considering some limitations discovered during the experiment.

Visibility settings: Selecting visible to "Recruiters only" may have impacted my chances. Recruiters in this case are subscribers of the LinkedIn Recruiter service. Subscribing to this service costs between $170 - $270 monthly for the lowest package. What are the chances that there are more recruiters subscribed to this package in my location?

Duration: It can be argued that two weeks isn't sufficient to confirm this hypothesis. Perhaps a month or longer would have been ideal to gather comprehensive data and observe any meaningful trends.

Profile optimisation: Not updating my endorsement and recommendation sections may have limited my profile's attractiveness. Full optimisation of these sections could potentially increase visibility and interest from recruiters.

Sample size: Being the only person running this experiment may not provide a comprehensive view of the general perception of the "Open to Work" tag. A larger sample size with more people from other industries would be more representative and offer more robust insights.

I’ve been able to establish that the "Open to Work" tag on LinkedIn remains a contentious feature with divided opinions on its effectiveness. The mixed reactions from my poll and the feedback I received highlight the nuanced perspectives surrounding this feature.

My observations, however, do not confirm whether the tag encourages any bias. I could only establish that the tag doesn’t guarantee that a recruiter will reach out.

Have you ever used the 'Open to Work' tag on LinkedIn? If so, what was your experience like?