Influence v/s Insight: The curious case of thought leadership on LinkedIn

LinkedIn defines itself as ‘the place to B2B’. It’s where industry leaders, new entrants and everyone in between establish their brand share expertise and engage in meaningful conversations. However, a fine line separates thought leadership that provides genuine insight from influence-driven content designed primarily for visibility and self-promotion.

Many professionals walk that line to attain the status of a thought leader.

It starts young. Students post their portfolios and create catchy posts to gain the attention of potential recruiters. Once on the job, the content creation shifts to milestones to prove one’s mettle and seek better opportunities. The insights are raw — mostly based on personal and often limited experiences. As one moves up the professional ladder, insights get more nuanced and deeper. The content further shifts from personal branding to thought leadership.

However, the learning and sharing curve is not always as linear. Sometimes, the journey accelerates overnight — with posts going viral.

Influence & virality

The algorithm-driven nature of LinkedIn rewards engagement above all else. A provocative opinion or relatable anecdote can quickly get thousands of reactions, while detailed analysis with a niche audience might struggle to gain immediate traction. It often creates an environment where influence, measured in reactions, comments and shares, can be achieved without a corresponding depth of insight, arguably an intangible metric.

This raises a fundamental question: Should professionals aim for virality?

According to LinkedIn content experts and industry observers, professionals who strike a balance between engagement and expertise, using influence to share meaningful insights, are the ones who stand out in the long run.

However, small wins often overshadow long-term goals due to the rise of ephemeral content and diminished attention spans. Often, the long-term growth hinges on the small wins.

Virality can open doors. It helps with visibility, network expansion, and even job opportunities. But does it equate to credibility? Many posts go viral for their storytelling, relatability, or controversy rather than for offering deep, actionable insights. It’s important to note that in the absence of a personal connection, engagement is a key indicator of credibility. In this regard, LinkedIn is just like any other social media platform ruled by virality-chasing influencers.

Influence & incentives

The conversation around influence v/s insights becomes more complex when incentives come into play. What qualifies as a paid post on LinkedIn?

Within a week in January this year, LinkedIn users brought 60 cases to the attention of the Advertising Standards Council of India. The industry body processed 56 out of 60 cases for violations, primarily due to non-disclosure of material connections.

“In recent times, the platform has seen several cases of professionals talking positively about certain products or services and even advertising campaigns without revealing that they are part of a campaign. These practices mislead audiences, who may believe that the views represented by such professionals are unbiased and not influenced by any collaboration,” ASCI said.

Adding to it, Manisha Kapoor, Secretary General and CEO, ASCI, said: “LinkedIn influencers are seasoned professionals and trusted voices in their respective fields; this makes it all the more important for them to lead by example when it comes to responsible influencing.”

Teams at LinkedIn India echo the sentiment. It’s the risk of losing professional credibility that encourages influencers to follow the guidelines. LinkedIn has been advising influencers to use hashtags like #Ad, #Sponsored and #Promotional that indicate the paid partnership clearly. However, ASCI’s take on the matter urges zero ambiguity: “Such disclosures must be clear, upfront, and prominently displayed and not buried within a group of hashtags or links.”

On LinkedIn, engagement-driven influence is a currency. It’s a platform where everyone is always pitching, even when they are posting an Out-of-Office selfie. It requires a more nuanced understanding of a paid post. ASCI phrases it as a material connection.

ASCI states, “A material connection refers to any association between an advertiser and an influencer that could impact the weight or credibility of the influencer's representation.”

However, this material connection can manifest itself in various ways, which may or may not be financial gains. For example:

Employees posting positively and regularly about their company in exchange for incentives.
Leaders endorsing brands where they have a direct or indirect investment without disclosing the connection.
Executives promoting companies to strengthen client relationships or secure future favours.
Consultants advocating for tools or frameworks they have been paid to implement without mentioning their affiliation.
Advisors promoting startups they mentor or have equity in without disclosing it.
Recruiters hyping up a company’s culture while actively trying to place candidates there, benefiting from successful hires.
Current disclosure guidelines focus primarily on direct financial transactions, which are easy for other professionals to spot and flag for ASCI. However, when a professional’s career trajectory is influenced by their social media advocacy, their posts become strategic career moves rather than spontaneous insights. According to LinkedIn experts, the onus lies on the individual to ensure transparency and responsible usage of the platform.

“When brands collaborate with influencers to promote something that may not reflect their genuine opinion, it’s an ad campaign. However, if an influencer shares the same message based on personal experience, it doesn’t qualify as one. Only the influencer knows whether they’ve been paid — and they are responsible for disclosing it,” said an industry observer.

At the back end, LinkedIn is trying to figure out a format like Instagram, where users can tag posts as promotional and sponsored. However, until that’s ready to launch, transparency in content on the platform is dependent on the discretion of the individual influencers.

“You have to balance democratisation of content creation with the responsibility and accountability at the influencer level,” said a LinkedIn expert, sharing insights into the platform’s dilemma. “You don’t want to clamp down on the expression. You want to create an open ecosystem where everyone is welcome to post as long as they adhere to the guidelines.”

Influence and insights

At its core, LinkedIn is a platform built on trust — trust in expertise, in professional networks, and in the value of shared insights. However, in an ecosystem where influence can be engineered and credibility is often measured in likes and shares, the distinction between genuine thought leadership and calculated promotion is increasingly difficult to discern.

Insights are rooted in knowledge, experience, and critical thinking. Influence can be fuelled by visibility, incentives and strategic positioning. When the two align, professionals create a meaningful impact by driving important conversations.

When influence overshadows insight, the platform risks becoming just another space for performative engagement, where virality is mistaken for value. On the flip side, insights without influence can struggle to reach the right audience, limiting their ability to drive meaningful conversations.

According to industry observers, the key is to not pit influence against insight but to recognise that both are necessary for true thought leadership. A professional who can effectively leverage the two has the power to not only generate visibility but also to guide meaningful, informed conversations that have lasting impact.