Hey Friend!

It’s been a minute. 3 months to be exact. A lot has happened during that time but not much has changed (if that makes any sense). I’ve been on LinkedIn and like most of you, I watched my impressions tank.

For a while there, some of my posts barely cleared 1,000 impressions. I was getting the kind of numbers that make you wonder if LinkedIn shadow-banned you or if your content just stopped resonating with anyone. It was frustrating, especially when I knew the content was solid.

I had two choices: I could complain about the algorithm like everyone else was doing, or I could actually figure out what works now. I chose the second option.

I read every algorithm report I could get my hands on. I studied what LinkedIn themselves published about their shift to topic-based distribution. I paid attention to what was working for other creators; not just in my HR/TA, but across the platform. And then I started running my own experiments.

These weren't random experiments either. I was intentional about testing different formats, different styles, different hooks, different topics — and I paid close attention to what the data was telling me after each post.

Today I’m sharing what I learned from six posts that hit 5-figure impressions in the last 30 days.

One quick note: I'm not including video posts in this breakdown. Shocking, I know. But it’s not because my video content isn’t performing. My video content is actually performing incredibly well right now, but I wanted to focus on formats that most people can quickly test. Plus, I’m getting ready to run some experiments with my video content and want to share those results. I'll do a separate breakdown on video soon.

But before we dive-in, check out this week’s partner below. A simple click from you lets our partners know you read this newsletter and helps keep it free! 💖

Picture this. A buyer opens ChatGPT and asks for a recommendation in your category. Your competitor's name comes up. Yours doesn't. And that buyer never makes it to your website.

That's happening right now in markets everywhere. And most teams don't know it's happening because it never shows up in their analytics.

HubSpot AEO shows you exactly where your brand stands in AI search, where competitors are getting recommended instead of you, and tells you specifically what to fix. No expertise needed.

Try it free for 28 days. Just $50 a month after.

This one genuinely surprised me. I'd been spending time on Threads and noticed a specific format that was absolutely crushing over there: simple, curiosity-driven questions that invited people to share their own stories. There was no teaching happening in these posts, no hot takes being delivered, just genuine curiosity from the person posting.

So I decided to adapt that format for my LinkedIn audience. I asked recruiters to share the weirdest reasons hiring managers had ever given them for rejecting a candidate.

And people really showed up. The comments section turned into this incredible thread of absurd, frustrating, and sometimes hilarious stories that people had clearly been waiting to tell.

The lesson here is that humans are scrolling LinkedIn just like they scroll every other platform. You don't have to be "professional" in some stiff, corporate way; you just have to be human. Sometimes the best content is the content that gets out of the way and lets your audience do the talking.

This post didn't come out of nowhere, it came directly from Post 1. The reason I asked the question to begin with, was because I was working on a video script for my brand partner, Lavalier by Textio, and I wanted to include examples other than my own.

After that engagement question blew up, I went back and read through all 200+ comments. I started noticing patterns in what people were sharing. The same absurd, biased reasons kept coming up over and over again: looks, vibes, names, clothes. I realized I had stumbled onto a topic that people genuinely cared about and wanted to talk about.

So I repurposed what I'd learned. I took the best responses from that comment section, added a compelling data point (68% of hiring managers admit their decisions are influenced by factors completely unrelated to job performance), and turned the whole thing into a carousel that people could swipe through.

Here's the part that really matters: this was a sponsored post. Sponsored posts typically generate 30% - 50% less organic engagement. But this one performed incredibly well organically.

If you know anything about how LinkedIn works, you know that carousels can't actually be boosted on the platform. There's no paid amplification option for that format. So every single impression this post got was earned through the content itself, not through ad spend.

The lesson here is that your comments section is an absolute goldmine for content ideas. If people are passionate enough to respond to something you posted, they're probably passionate enough to engage with a deeper dive on that same topic. Pay attention to what your audience is already telling you they care about.

This was technically a podcast promo post, but it didn't read like one at all.

I opened with a story-driven hook that created immediate intrigue: "People thought Jillian O'Malior had lost it." Right away, you want to know more. Who is this person? What did she do? Why did people think she'd lost it?

That tension carried through the entire post. I told the story of how what looked like a public breakdown was actually the complete opposite; she wasn't losing control of her life, she was finally taking control of it for the first time. The narrative had a real arc to it, with conflict and resolution, and that's what kept people reading all the way to the end.

I like how Stanley, my AI LinkedIn coach put it:

The lesson here is pretty straightforward: strong narratives still win on LinkedIn. If you can create genuine tension and then deliver a satisfying resolution, people will stick with you until the last line. The key is making them actually care about what happens next.

This one didn’t quite hit 5-figure impressions, but it was pretty close. It was also a podcast promo post, but it didn't feel like one because I led with a contrarian take that got people fired up before they even knew an episode was involved.

You've probably seen the advice floating around LinkedIn: "Close your job posting after 100 applicants." It sounds smart and efficient and data-driven. It sounds like the kind of thing a savvy recruiter would do.

But I opened the post by calling it out: 100 applicants of what, exactly? 100 people who didn't bother reading the job description? 100 spray-and-pray applications from people who aren't remotely qualified?

Then I brought in Bradley Clark from Article, who I'd just interviewed on the Workfluencer Podcast. He said something that made me want to stand up and clap: he doesn't close jobs after hitting some arbitrary number. He closes them when he has enough viable candidates; people who could actually get hired. And if he doesn't have enough, he goes back and asks what's broken instead of just reposting and hoping for the best.

The lesson here is that podcast promos don't have to feel like podcast promos. If you lead with a strong opinion that gets people nodding (or arguing) before they realize you're promoting something, you've already won. The episode becomes the payoff, not the pitch.

This post had absolutely nothing to do with my usual content pillars, and that's actually what makes it interesting.

I don't typically post about LinkedIn etiquette or connection culture or anything like that. But someone I know had just gotten burned in a really frustrating way; they hired a freelance video editor specifically because they saw that person was connected to me on LinkedIn. They assumed the connection meant something. That editor took their money and never delivered any work.

I was genuinely frustrated when I heard about it, so I wrote about it. The post had a strong opinion at its core, clear stakes that people could understand, and actionable advice about what to do instead (reach out to me directly if you need a referral — don't just assume a LinkedIn connection means I'm vouching for someone).

The lesson here is that structure matters more than staying perfectly in your lane. This post worked because the formula was solid: opinion plus stakes plus what to do instead. Even content that's completely outside your usual content pillars can perform really well if the underlying structure is right. Just don’t overdo it!

This post was me taking everything I'd learned from Post 1 and pushing it even further.

It was Loving Day, the anniversary of the Supreme Court case that legalized interracial marriage in the United States. Normally I'd do some kind of tribute post honoring Mildred and Richard Loving, but this year I wanted to try something different.

Instead of looking backward, I asked people to share their present-day experiences. I asked folks in interracial relationships to tell me the most unhinged thing a "well-meaning" person had ever said to them about their relationship.

It was the same engagement-question format that had worked so well in Post 1; ask a question, then drop an "I'll go first..." comment sharing my own story to get the conversation started. But this time I adapted it for a culturally relevant moment that was personal to me. That combination of timeliness plus vulnerability plus an open invitation to share created exactly the kind of engagement I was hoping for.

The lesson here is that when you find a format that works, you should iterate on it. Adapt it to different contexts. Push it further and see what else it can do. This engagement-question style might actually become one of my signature formats going forward, and that only happened because I was paying attention to what was already working and asking myself how I could build on it instead of constantly chasing something new.

Here's what all of this comes down to:

LinkedIn has moved to a topic-based algorithm.

Your content doesn't automatically get served to your followers anymore. The old model — post something, your network sees it — is gone. Now you have to earn the right for the algorithm to push your post every single time.

That means:

What works for me might not work for you. My audience, my niche, my voice; they're all specific to me. You'll need to run your own experiments.

But complaining about the algorithm definitely won't work for anyone.

Stop blaming. Start experimenting. 💖

 Until next time.