For Better LinkedIn InMail Results Embrace Your Inner Mad Scientist

Many InMail users get stuck in a rut. Their response rate is stuck at three percent or six percent or sixteen percent, but it’s stuck at that number.  So I will ask them what they have tried doing differently. And invariably I get the response, “huh? What do you mean?”

That is because they don’t do anything differently. They send out the same message over and over. They think they have arrived at some ceiling response rate and this is as good as it’s ever going to get.  They don’t think about why their response rate is what it is.

They should be experimenting.  

They should take each sentence and look at it both on it’s own and in its fit with the rest of the message. They should ask “what is this sentence accomplishing?”

Is it too fat?  Too many words? For example: “In essence the core of your problem is not enough money for new initiatives” can become “Your problem is not enough money for new initiatives” or even “You need more money for new initiatives.” A more direct statement in half the words.

Or a sentence may be too thin, lack backup, read awkwardly, or not fit with the rest of the message.  

I found in one message that it made a difference if I referred to the recipient by name at the start of a sentence versus the end of the sentence.

The call to action may be too weak, or conversely, too unrealistic given the message.

And results should be tracked. Nothing is worse than going, “we did well back in January.  Now, which message was that?”

I have five core building blocks  in my InMail programs and one of them is constant experimentation.

So shake things up a little. You might be surprised.