Now Premium on LinkedIn: Full Names of 3rd level & Group Connections

Posted at October 3, 2010

LinkedIn_Premium 2 I had an associate with a free LinkedIn account contact me late last week complaining about how he could no longer see the full names of his LinkedIn search results for 3rd degree connections – his results only showed the first initial of the last name. Furthermore, he claimed that LinkedIn had started charging for the ability to see the full names of 3rd degree connections in search results.

My first reaction was extreme confusion.

I hadn’t heard or seen anything to support his experience or claims. Had I missed a major announcement or blog post? Not one of the few thousand+ recruiters that I follow on Twitter had tweeted about it, at least not that I saw, but it’s safe to assume that if this person’s claims were accurate, news would spread like wildfire.

Interestingly, I just ran a search on Twitter (@4:00 EST 10/3/2010) for [LinkedIn last names] and only found 1 tweet that could be possibly referencing it. Certainly odd if this massive change from LinkedIn really was taking root.

LinkedIn_Last_Initial_5

Am I the only person searching LinkedIn on the weekend?

I digress.

My second reaction was to quickly run a couple of test searches with my free account, sorted my results by 3rd degree + everyone else, and I was able to see the full names of everyone in the results.

Odd.

However, I’ve seen LinkedIn roll out changes to only to select groups/individuals first before rolling them out to everyone, and my spidey-sense was telling me this might be one of those instances.

So I asked for some screenshots to see exactly what he was encountering. He sent me 3 screenshots confirming exactly what he claimed. I was still confused, because as of Saturday, 10/2 – I could still see full names of 3rd degree connections.

However, as I sat down to write this post at 4:00 EST on 10/3/2010, I found I could no longer see the full names of 3rd degree connections with my free account.

New LinkedIn Search Result View of 3rd Degree Connections

For people searching LinkedIn with a free account, this is what your view will look like when viewing search results that are 3rd degree connections:

LinkedIn_No_Last_Name_1

This is what you will see when you view a profile of a 3rd degree connection with a free LinkedIn account:

LinkedIn_No_Last_Name_2

When you click on (See Full Name), this is what you get:

LinkedIn_No_Last_Names_3

Groups Too?

Notice how is says that you need to upgrade to see the full names of search results of people who are only connected to you through 1 or more groups.

That certainly seems to be the case when searching from the People/Advanced Search form:

LinkedIn_No_Last_Name_Group_Results_2

However, I did find that when I ran a search from inside a group, I could see full names – I am not connected directly to these people:

LinkedIn_No_Last_Name_Group_Search

I would not expect that to last for long.

What’s the Price tag?

For a limited time only (until 10/19/2010), the cost to see full names of 3rd degree connections is $59.95/month. The standard cost for this level of access is $99.95.

Click here to lock in the $59.95/month rate and also save $179.85 by getting 3 months free for prepaying for the year.

From what I just found regarding a comparison of accounts (see image below), it appears that anything less than the Talent Finder / Executive accounts will not afford you the ability to view last names of 3rd degree and group connections. I am aware that as of the time of this post, some of you have the $24.95 account and are telling me you can still see the last names of 3rd degree connections. Be aware that this may not last long as the changes may not have affected you yet. If you have a LinkedIn account below the Talent Finder / Executive level, please conduct some tests and let me know if you can see the full names of 3rd degree and group connections – I’d greatly appreciate it!

Okay, but Can I Still X-Ray LinkedIn?

Power users of LinkedIn free accounts, you can breathe easy now.

Yes, you can still X-Ray LinkedIn and see the full names of anyone with a public profile, regardless of your level of connection. However, many have been wondering if and when this may no longer be the case…

Quite interestingly, this change seems to have thwarted Irina’s brilliant name reveal technique at and beyond the 3rd degree. For those of you who know what I am talking about – run some tests and let me know if you find anything different.

Are You Surprised by this Change?

The last time I checked, LinkedIn is a for-profit company.

For those of us who heavily leverage LinkedIn’s functionality for free to make money, we shouldn’t really be surprised by this kind of change. In fact, I know I and many others were actually waiting for this, or at least something similar to this to happen.

The people who use LinkedIn for free and specifically target 3rd degree connections are likely in sales and/or recruiting and are at least trying to use LinkedIn to make money. The average “Joe” or “Jane” who is using LinkedIn simply for social networking and not hard-core business development or recruiting isn’t likely to be adversely affected by these changes. In fact, they may not even notice this change.

What’s your reaction?

Update! 10/12/10

It turns out that anyone with any level of Premium account prior to the change will still be able to view the full names of 3rd degree and group connections. The only option for people who currently have a free account is to upgrade to a minimum of the $99.95/month account level.

LinkedIn_Grandfather_Clause

http://www.researchgoddess.com Amybeth Hale

Nice scoop, Glen! And I agree with your last couple of paragraphs – those who would be surprised and/or dismayed by this really shouldn’t be. People need to understand that ‘free’ isn’t really free – someone has to pay somewhere! And if a product or service remains free for too long, its resources will eventually be drained and it will not be able to operate for very long, thus resulting in a parasitic relationship where the parasitic entity kills the host. We’d all do well to remember this about all of the tools, products, and services we enjoy at little to no cost.
Andy Logan

Not overly surprised about that change and bearing in mind we have had it good for well over a couple of years now thats for certain.

The other good thing, is that if your willing to spend the money you have an advantage over someone with a free acount as you can see the last name, previously the benefit only being Inmails being able to be sent. Certaintly from my point of view that wasnt enough to consider upgrading, as I am more than happy to pick up the phone and try my luck via switch.
http://www.recruitingtools.com Ryan Leary

It’s a buisiness and they have every right. The crappy part is that they’ve are now preventing real people who count on LinkedIn to find a job the ability to be found.

We can always find a work around, but for the 99% of the sources out there that will not, the job seekers will feel the brunt of this.

Money needs to be made, but to build the network like this and than pull the carpet out is shitty. Imagine if Facebook did this? This shows the total disconnect from LI leadership to its users.
http://www.booleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

Update to all – I have had one person respond directly to me so far saying that she “has the $24.95 per month option with LinkedIn and so far I can still see the full names.” If anyone else can double check this to 3rd degree connections tomorrow (10/4/2010), once the change is more likely to affect all users globally, please comment regarding your findings. I and many others would greatly appreciate it – thanks!
http://www.mysensay.com Omowale Casselle

Glen,

Not surprised by this change at all. As you said, LinkedIn is a for-profit company. If they have taken a close look at site usage and found that this information is valuable for members (especially those who can make money from that info), then they should take advantage of the opportunity to monetize that value. In my opinion, this is a great way of making it possible to continue to invest in the innovations that the 75M+ members around the globe have found so valuable.

Omowale
http://thehumanracehorses.com Michael VanDervort

I wonder if these types of changes will open the door for a potential LinkedIn competitor like Gist to grab some market share?
Medhavi

Saw your article as soon as it was posted. Everything comes free or at lower cost in the beginning and once they get a good hold in the market, they start charging or increasing cost slowly and steadily. So it was obvious that something like this would happen sooner or later. Was amused to see the way Linkedin has found a way to encourage people to either add more connections or buy premium account by showing only the initial of the last name and hiding rest of the letters for 3rd Degree and group connections. If they wanted they could have completely concealed the last name. But SLOWLY and STEADILY is the mantra. Approximately 89 percent of my connections are 3rd degree; so if I have see their last name the best alternative would be the second option recommended by Linkedin.

Thanks to X-ray technique

However current free services might not be free in the future..
http://www.wordpress.mrlinkedin.com Mark Williams

This has been coming for a while, I noticed the first sign of change when the filtering became ’3rd and everyone else’ which I thought was strange and since then the emphasis on the description ‘network’ has been orientated toward 1st and 2nd tier.
This change is not universal yet. As with all functional changes on LinkedIn it is gradually being rolled out across all users.
If you are using LinkedIn as a business development tool or to find a job then ‘visibility’ is key – you need to make sure that people can find you and so this is a frustrating backward step for many.
I would suggest that the best way around this is to put your surname as the first word in your professional headline.
Petervb

It could have been coming, but for jobseekers like me 24,95 already is a huge sum. 60 dollars per month is a total ripoff in my opinion. Linkedin is no Maserati, just a website, which by no means can charge as much as my monthly gasbill. When this is going to stay this will mean linkedin has passed its sellbydate big time and many users will find better affordable solutions.
Olivier Zanchetta

This will also prevent most people from building their network.
I was kind of expecting this to happen, but surely only giving both names to the most expensive accounts is a risky move.
What will happen if you pay, and most of the people stop using the network. It will become redundant.
Still this is going to bolster the number of paid accounts, but only for the beginning. I foresee other networks going ahead.
Xing’s downfall was becoming a paying service
Brandon Brewster

As of 8:11 am on 10/4 I can still see the full names of 3rd degree connections with the 24.95 account.
Charles Bretz

Glen –

As of 7:47 CST I can still see full names of 3rd degree individuals with the $49.95/month Business Plus account. I’ll let you know when the ability disappears for me.

Charles
Laura Sehres

Bummer. Although, I’m not terribly surprised. Any for profit business strategy would include increasing your user base, increasing your user base’s reliance on the product, and then charging for some of the most sought after features.
http://jobs.jpatrick.com/ Daren Mongello dmongello (at) jpatrick.com

Nice read Glen.

I wonder if outfits that provide LinkedIn connection services like TopLinked / OpenNetworker just got a very nice holiday present?

Cheers,
Daren J Mongello
http://jobs.jpatrick.com/
http://www.grantalexanderus.com Matt Kerr

Glen, They have not pulled the plug on 3rd degree last names for those with a business plus account ($49.99 per month). I have one and I can still see the names in third degree and I can also see those beyond using Irina’s trick. Wonder if this will change on 10/19?

Matt Kerr
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jkimacir Jung Kim

Not being able to search full names of 3rd Degree Connections eradicates the sourcer’s ability to find the corporate email addresses of the individuals you’d like to reach out to. You’ll have to cross-reference with other tools.
Dan Ostrower

As many have pointed out they are surely within their “rights” to do this. But that doesn’t make it smart. Free users are not free loaders. LinkedIn gets something from them: namely the social graph on top of which their entire business is built. This particular change makes it less likely that people will build networks (Hmmm…Do I know this guy? Should I send an invite? Might be the wrong person?) and thus undermines the value of what LinkedIn is trying to create. They must make money from the social network they build, but a better way is to add valuable new functionality, not take away existing core functionality.
Alex

This is BS. $60 is too much. They display ads on their site already. What’s the point of creating and updating your profile on LinkedIn if people can’t easily find you?
Maureen

I just checked it out. I have the 49.95 per month subscription and you only see the First Name on 3rd Degree and Group Connections.
Sandy

I don’t mind paying but I believe that LinkedIn got it wrong with their pricing strategy. Having to pay 60 $ – and then 100 $ a month after the initial offer finishes, just to see the names of the people in your groups is too expensive for most of the current free users, who would probably gladly upgrade for this capability if the pricing was better studied. (InMails are mostly for recruiters, a lot of whom already are on paying accounts I guess, and the other features such as Profile Organiser ect don’t really hold much value).

Viadeo offers something similar for less than 10 euros per month, even as low as 4 euros depending on the duration of the subscription you choose ! And they don’t place google-type ads on their pages, not Direct Ads, nor special communications from partners directly in your inbox….

I wonder if group owners still see the names of all their group members even if they are not connected ? I’m also wondering how LI thinks this is going to help the people who are looking for a job and subscribed to their JobSeeker package…. is their name visible or not ?

Also, how are we supposed to create trust and maintain our community alive in the groups if we don’t see each other’s names ?

Anyways – for me the problem is the opposite – as an independent consultant and trainer, I want my name to be seen on LinkedIn… so I’ll probably find a workaround, like for example :
1- placing my full name in the First Name section of my profile
2 – placing my full name in my professional header
3 – placing my full name in my summary
4 – requesting people writing recommendations about me to start with “Recommendation about (Jane Smith)”
5 – placing my full name in the Contact Settings section next to my email
6 – placing my full name in the Weblink section (“Jane Smith blog” or “Jane Smith website”)

… just saying, if people want their name to show on their profile, they will find a way…. not sure if this is really LinkedIn’s smartest move… And obviously they did not communicate about this at all… always the black hole !
Ollezaza

I’m (still) unemployed, am a early adopter and frequent user of LI, I spend more time on there than on any other social network, and I have no financial interest in sourcing or sales — point is, I see absolutely nothing wrong with this new “feature” and the charging for it.

(I’m willing to accept that the pricing scheme might not be “elegant”)

As a user/jobseeker, seeing info on 3rd Degree contacts is a nice-to-have at best, and an annoyance at worst.

The following is going to be incendiary, so flame away…

As noted above, these changes mostly affect those in sourcing and sales. To you I say: sorry, free ride is over. You’ve been riding a magic carpet, making money — for FREE, not sharing any of your proceeds with LinkedIn — and now that the ride is over, you’re mad because you’ve become entitled. Sorry, if you don’t wanna pay, get off and walk. Walking (for now) is still free.

I think it is telling, if the 1st tweet listed above is true, that most last names on LI are not of Anglo-European origin. There’s a large probability that those contacts are mostly H1B visas. If you as a sourcer have been focusing your recruitment BUSINESS towards H1B Visas, then we all know what you’ve been doing (hint: the notorious Cohen & Grigsby video), and I have even less sympathy for you having to pay for your egregiousness.

If you’re an open networker, then you should be reminded that LinkedIn philosophically disagrees with your practice. If you need access to grow your network beyond 500 contacts, then pay for the privilege. Yes, it’s a privilege, not a right.

If you’re not happy with LinkedIn, then go find another magic carpet.
http://thearn.net Andrea Mitchell

I finally checked and I can still see last names with the $25 per month Business Account.

I tend to agree with the comments above. Linkedin has a right to charge for the use of their product and it’s not unreasonable for them to make these changes. Also it’s a really useful product, as evidenced by the millions of people using it. That said, 60USD per month seems like a lot of money, especially when you aren’t working in USD (Australian dollars for me). I think I will be reserving judgement (and payment) until I see how it affects day to day sourcing.
Anonymous

Thanks for all of your insight. I noticed this today and was directed to your blog. I thought I saw some that were 3rd connections and I saw their info. Maybe part of it depends on settings of how people can see you?
Barbara K

Forgot to put my name.
Thanks for all of your insight. I noticed this today and was directed to your blog. I thought I saw some that were 3rd connections and I saw their info. Maybe part of it depends on settings of how people can see you?
Medhavi

I second Daniel’s thoughts. Linkedin should definitely make money from the social network they build, which I am sure they are; but not by taking away existing core functionalities. Come up with new additional features and charge for it. No problem! At least this would not affect already existing members and users of Linkedin.

If linkedin continues this way then it would be more of a paying job board for recruiters. It would also affect those who want recruiters to find them on professional networking sites than on any job portal.

I am sure it would affect other professionals as well.
Mike Auton

We are exploring ways to exploit LI via direct searches on Bing, it seems to work rather well so far.

This will force changes for many individuals and companies in the way they use the site, but I am sure LI have been discussing this for months now.
Dancespirit

Linkedin is dead anyway just use any of the other social tools. Linkedin is commiting suicide with this my 2cents
Anonymous

I have never had a need for 3rd degree contacts anyway. They’re always far removed from my first degree contacts. Linkedin is invaluable and will always be leading the way in Professional networking. If you are a normal professional networker, you should experience no disadvantage, but if you were using Linkedin to make money then you should give back.
Scott

I knew Linkedin is GREEDY company, but I did not imagine this.
Richard

I learned a fairly simple and quick trick yesterday, besides using Google or Bing to “site search” for the person’s full name by copying/pasting some of their private LinkedIn profile info into Google or Bing. If you are looking at a 3rd degree connection’s LinkedIn profile and can’t see their full last name, try clicking on one of the people who display in the “Viewers of this profile also viewed” section (bottom-right of page). After doing this, the person who’s last name you were originally trying to find will now display in the “Viewers of this profile also viewed” section. This works about 90% of the time. Another trick is to click on one of the “Recommendations” that the person has either given or received, do so will usually result in that person appearing in the “Viewers of this profile also viewed” section.
Richard

LinkedIn is preparing to go public in 2011. Currently they are valued at close to $2B, but not generating enough revenue to justify this valuation. In short, they need revenue and they need it badly. Expect the trend to continue (paying for professional use).
Anonymous

Stop posting this stuff. linkedin will find it and make the changes so there are no loopholes.
Rachel

As of 10/8 I can still see full names of 3rd degree connections with the $24.95/month account. However, when searching a few days ago, I came across one name that appeared with First Name, Last Initial only. All other 3rd degree connections were totally visible. Strange.
Nitin

I agree with Richard that using “Viewers of this profile also viewed” section solve this problem most of the time
http://www.booleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

Thank you for all of the great comments!

I find it interesting that people with $24.95 accounts can see last names of 3rd degree connections. From my free account, when I click on “see full name,” the $59.95 (until 10/19)/$99.95 account is recommended, and it’s difficult to tell from the account comparison charts if any other level of account enables you to see last names of 3rd degree connections and group connections.

Now I am curious to know if someone signs up for a $24.95 account today, if they are able to see full names of all connections…I wonder if existing $24.95 and $49.95 accounts have been “grandfathered” in but accounts established after 10.3.2010 will not be able to view last names of 3rd and group connections?

@Richard and Nitin, while leveraging the “Viewers of this profile also viewed” section to reveal the last names of 3rd degree connections can work, I must not be as fortunate as either of you, as it has worked less than 50% of the time for me, including a recent barrage of attempts on my part. In most cases, the original person I am interested in does not show up the the “Viewers of this profile also viewed” section.

However, if a 3rd degree or group-only connection has any profile activity, you’ll notice that their full name is shown on that portion of their profile on each update, on the right side underneath the big square ad. Doh!

You can also use recommendations to view the person’s full name, by clicking through to the people’s profiles who have recommended your target profile and/or the people the person you’re targeting has recommended. While these methods always work, of course not everyone has activity or recommendations. Thus nothing is as fast and effective as Binging them. Irina has figured out a few additional methods of revealing the last names of 3rd degree and group connections that I will not publish directly here – you should check out one of her LinkedIn webinars (or just ask her really nicely).

If anyone goes from a free account to a $24.95 account, on or after 10.9.2010, please let us know if you can see the full names of all levels of connections. Thanks!
Ricardo

OK, so LI is looking for money; aren’t we all???

Has anyone else notices their settings have changed as well? Check your settings under Personal Information; Name & Location. Is your Display Name option checked for the full name, or First Name and Last Initial? Mine is set for full name so I would expect it to display as I requested.
http://www.booleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

Update: It turns out that anyone with any level of Premium account prior to the change will still be able to view the full names of 3rd degree and group connections. The only option for people who currently have a free account is to upgrade to a minimum of the $99.95/month account level. See the end of the original post – I’ve posted the communication being sent out from LinkedIn to pre-existing Premium account holders.

@Ricardo – regardless of how you choose to display your name, if you are a 3rd degree connection for someone else, they will not be able to see your full name.
Pingback: LinkedIn Tips for Seeing Full Names of 3rd Degree Connections
http://www.netmagellan.com/ Ash Nallawalla

I have the $60/year Personal Plus account and am not a recruiter, salesperson, or jobseeker. I am a fan of LI and I write about it once in a while in articles.

My main use is to see what ex-colleagues are up to and to participate in LI groups, so at this level of access I can still see 3rd level surnames.
Kenneth Ian McLeod

I must admit, I agree with many of the ‘pro-LinkedIN’ comments in that they are a for-profit company and can thus charge for their services. I just do not agree with their pricing options – perhaps an a la carte option where one could select the services they want (like seeing last names, while omiting the organizer etc.) as I am sure, many people only use some of the features of the paid memberships. I personnaly, don’t believe that this is ‘the straw that broke the camel’s back’ in terms of people abandoning LinkedIN, but if the trends keep going in this direction it could be the next step in that direction for future changes.

Ultimatly, LinkedIN is a business – they provide a service that people deem is worthy of payment, so they’ll charge a fee.
http://jobs.jpatrick.com/ Daren Mongello dmongello (at) jpatrick.com

If I were king:

Google would pony up and BUY LinkedIn and then make the network free (with embedded ads of course)
Jo Lunn

I just discovered this new change today and luckily found your blog … I would like to ask the powers that be at LI how they can charge for data that’s user generated???? It’s not their information. The next thing we’ll see is facebook charging to access your own friend’s phone number!!!
http://www.cdrecruiting.com Matt Chiasson

LinkedIn is just too darn greedy – they are not making the grade targeting the advertisers, despite Google showing how this works. Page views count a ton! Sales and recruitment staffers generate the bulk of these page views. And they target them with their offerings, but still they want to root out all the dollars possible, whatever the results. I see LI ever increasing with new members, but over time, only the sales/recruitment types (& group owners) will use daily….others I have chatted with say: “what’s the big deal with LI?” And I agree. Perhaps they should spend some time developing tools to empower their base, instead of whacking them over the head with more ways to pay them. Yeah, I use LI for work, but will never pay them, mainly because every time they “roll” out something, it ain’t pretty and seeks to empower their bottom line as the driver. Just like our glorious banking firms! Here’s a “real” thought – let’s just charge everyone who wants to join LI a flat fee for complete access and be done with the “free riders”. At least people could understand that approach and choose to pay & join – or not. Problem with that? Immediate HUGE decrease in membership. So I agree with LI – bend as many over as possible and insert – hey, it’s the American way! Just ask Wall Street.
http://www.barryjogorman.com Barry O’Gorman

Not that surprising that a private network would look to exploit their database for profit. Does seem to have been done in a sneaky way. More reason for investment in FOAF and related open standards.
Wouter Van Roost

I absolutely love(d) LinkedIn. I am not a professional user but rely on it to maintain a network of professional relationships. As such I have been feeding LinkedIn with information that is highly qualified. I am strongly against this recent move of LinkedIn and I think the argument that it is a “for profit” initiative is irrelevant. The question rather is whether the practice of collecting qualified information for free and then de-grading it in order to be able to make money of the people who handed you that information in the first place is in line with contemporary good practices. Let’s be clear: all companies must create value. But there are other and better ways for LinkedIn to create value. If they want to discuss this with me I would be happy to help them out. But for now I feel like going on a crusade and start a “Free LinkedIn” group on LinkedIn that aims to reverse this “3rd degree” decision. See how many people will become a member… Any takers?
Michelle Rea

Hi Glen, do you have an update on this post? It seems like all people have access to their 3rd degree network again?
http://www.booleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

Michelle – the changes LinkedIn made did not affect anyone’s ability to see their 3rd degree and group-only connections with a free account, but no one can see the full last names of 3rd degree connections – only the first name and last initial. At least that’s all I am able to see – are you using a free LI account?
Sachin Arora

Here is one more LinkedIn Trick.
http://findingreliablesource.wordpress.com/2011/01/23/li-tip-for-exploring-full-name-of-3rd-degree-contacts/
TimM

The problem with this tactic, is that I for one see far less utility to having a LinkedIn account at all. With the college undergrads coming out and using primarily facebook, I think LinkedIn may just paint themselves into a corner- particularly by limiting people’s access to their own groups (why wouldn’t I be able to see the names of people in a professional organization with me?)
Yawolac

I just noticed this. Wouldn’t be a big deal if Linkedin had a monthly price even remotely reasonable. I’ve looked at a premium account, but can’t justify it. Whoever is setting their service level pricing needs to have their head examined.