Consistency is the most overrated word in LinkedIn advice
Someone I know lost his job almost a year ago. Since then, he’s posted on LinkedIn nearly every day. He has kept going with a discipline very few people can sustain.
However, after a year, most of his posts still receive around two likes, and he is still looking for work.
By the standards of most LinkedIn advice, he is doing everything right because he shows up even when he has little to say. Yet his consistency has proved only that he can follow a schedule.
I work as a personal branding expert at Sumea Social, and I can see the effort behind his posts, which is why I feel bad when I read them. They are clean enough to publish, but they rarely contain an opinion that could only come from him.
So why do LinkedIn experts keep preaching consistency?
In defence of showing up
People usually give up too early. After a few weeks with little response, they decide LinkedIn does not work for them. Building recognition takes longer, so consistency protects a sensible strategy from impatience.
Regular publishing also keeps someone top of mind, even when an individual post does not start a conversation or move directly towards a commercial goal. That is fine because personal branding is a long game, and familiarity builds gradually.
Publishing also teaches you what works. You start noticing which subjects attract the right readers and which ideas lead somewhere useful. This is knowledge you can only gain after your work is public.
All of this is true. Consistency helps people stay visible and gives them evidence to learn from. The advice fails when discipline replaces judgement.
The distance between good and great
The man I know has built the habit. His posts still feel about 70 per cent finished. A lesson from his previous job becomes another familiar observation. A quote he liked that morning becomes a post that almost anyone could have written.
For professionals, a good enough post is a poor trade because it takes time and still gives a recruiter or potential client very little evidence of how the person thinks. Worse, it can even make years of experience sound ordinary.
The industry sometimes even treats a missed posting day as a risk. But I think publishing an interchangeable or basic idea carries the greater risk. A professional reputation deserves a higher standard than “good enough”.
Common sense should interrupt the schedule whenever I know I would scroll past the same post from someone else. Publishing it at 70 per cent will not make the idea stronger.
Please consult common sense before publishing
At Sumea Social, many of our clients publish once a week or sometimes even less. Their posts receive replies because each one contains something they would defend in a meeting. I would rather help someone publish one memorable idea than fill a week with content we would scroll past ourselves.
For me, being 100 per cent happy means the central idea deserves to carry your name. Minor imperfections can survive, while a generic opinion needs more work before it becomes public.
When I see his next post, I will probably feel the same frustration. His discipline deserves a better outcome. I wish he would give himself permission to skip tomorrow and spend the time developing one opinion that only he could write. One clear view would give the reader more than another completed publishing target.
One strong post would tell a hiring manager far more than another month of consistency. Common sense decides whether there is anything worth being consistent about.
Written by Romy Abdallah