What LinkedIn's Algorithm Team Actually Said

A while back, the Editor-in-Chief of Entrepreneur Magazine sat down with LinkedIn's Editor-in-Chief and Director of Product for a conversation about how the platform's algorithm actually works, and it was one of the more candid things I've seen anyone at LinkedIn say publicly on the topic.

The short version: content that provides knowledge and value performs best. Which, on its face, sounds obvious, but the framing underneath it is the interesting part.

One line that stuck with me, from LinkedIn's Editor-in-Chief: when something goes viral on the platform, that's treated internally as a signal to investigate, not celebrate. Virality, in other words, isn't the goal. If anything, it's closer to a yellow flag.

They were also refreshingly direct about the tension a lot of creators feel: yes, likes and followers can be useful for brand-building, and yes, they can translate into business. But the platform's stated focus isn't "reach as many people as possible." It's "reach the right people."

I've believed something close to this for a long time, mostly because I've watched it play out in my own numbers. My average post impressions dropped noticeably over a six-month stretch, something a lot of creators were noticing around the same time. But my engagement rate went up, and I started seeing a lot more of the same familiar faces showing up in my comments, post after post.

To me, that's the actual signal worth paying attention to. Not "how many people saw this," but "are the right people sticking around, conversation after conversation."

If you're optimizing for impressions, you might be optimizing for the wrong thing. The platform itself seems to agree.

Originally posted on Linkedin. Join the conversation here.

Hi5,

LD 🌶️