LinkedIn profile ·
LinkedIn recommendations: how to ask for them and how to write ones that are worth something
The LinkedIn recommendations section looks like a relic: a corner of the profile where in the mid 2010s people traded formal praise, and which by 2020 many had written off. In 2026 it matters again, precisely because the rest of the profile has become suspect. In a context where the headline, the About section and even the banner could be AI generated, a recommendation signed by another person is one of the few signals a reader can verify.
This guide covers both sides: how to ask for recommendations that count (and who to ask), and how to write one for someone else without falling into the bland template almost everybody signs. With examples of what works in 2026 and what reads as empty text within three seconds.
By Sheena de PunkVoice · Edited by Mario Pérez
Why recommendations matter again in 2026
Through the last decade the recommendations section lost weight because the content inside got professionalised in the bad sense: generic praise, interchangeable templates, zero friction. An advanced reader ignored them because they knew they were requested out of obligation and written in two minutes.
In 2026, with the rest of the profile under suspicion of having been written by AI, a well written recommendation reads instantly as a verifiable human signal. It shows the name and photo of whoever signed it, their job title, their company, and one click is enough to check that the person exists and has a real relationship with the recommended profile. No other part of the profile offers that level of traceability.
LinkedIn's internal search started weighting them again too: profiles with two or three specific, recent recommendations rank better in the results recruiters and B2B buyers see than profiles with a brilliant About section but no human signatures on top. The cheap signal became expensive again.
Who to ask for recommendations so they are worth something
The classic mistake is asking a lot of people with very little criteria. Four or five very specific recommendations from the right people count for far more than fifteen generic ones from former colleagues you barely shared a project with.
The right people are those with something concrete to say about your work. A former direct manager who assigned you projects and saw the results. A client for whom you solved something specific and measurable. A colleague you shared a hard decision with. A supplier you negotiated non-trivial terms with. Each of them can write a paragraph with details nobody else could invent.
The wrong people are those who can only repeat generalities: people who know you socially but not professionally, fellow students from a course, contacts from events who barely saw you work. Their recommendation, however well intentioned, reads as a template and lowers your section's average quality.
How to ask so the person writes something useful
LinkedIn's standard request message ("would you mind writing a recommendation?") produces, at best, template text. The reason is not bad will, it is that the person does not know what to say, and with no concrete material they fall back on generic formulas. The solution is to give them material.
A message that works includes three elements: a specific reminder of the project or period you shared (an anecdote, a decision, a result), a suggestion of two or three points it would be useful to touch on (not drafted text, just prompts), and an explicit instruction on length (four or five sentences is usually enough). That format lowers the friction for the writer and raises the quality of the final text enormously.
A real example: "Enrique, would you mind writing me a LinkedIn recommendation? I was thinking mainly of the X project at Y, when we decided to change approach halfway through and it worked out. If it fits, four or five sentences mentioning how I handled the change with the team and the result we got. It does not need to be long, I would rather have something concrete than general praise. Thanks."
How to write a recommendation the other person wants to show off
When you are the one writing, you have a rare opportunity: in three paragraphs you can produce something the recommended person will display in the most read section of their profile for years. It is worth doing well.
A recommendation someone wants to show off has three parts: verifiable context (where, when, what you worked on together and in what relationship), a concrete anecdote (a decision, a result, a difficult situation, with at least one nameable detail only you can cite), and your own professional judgement (what you think the person does better than average, with no empty adjectives, with an example of the behaviour you observed).
The same pattern works for any relationship. A client can write the context ("we hired Marta in 2024 to redesign our invoicing process"), the anecdote ("she spotted a duplication we had been carrying for two years and saved us six weeks of work a quarter") and the judgement ("what I value about her is that she asks more than she proposes at the start, which is why the solution fits instead of crashing"). That text gets read in full, remembered and shown off.
The four antipatterns that make a recommendation useless
These are the most repeated in the recommendations section since 2018 and the ones an advanced reader in 2026 ignores within three seconds. If your recommendation, requested or written, falls into any of them, start again.
- Abstract praise with no example: "a great professional", "an excellent colleague", "always willing to help". With no anecdote behind them, those sentences read as a template.
- Repeating the profile's headline: if the recommendation repeats what the About section already says, it cancels out its function as contrast. Bring angles the profile itself cannot provide.
- Excessive length with no substance: twelve line recommendations where the last ten circle the same compliment. Better five sentences with meat than twelve with air.
- A recent date for an old relationship: if the last recommendation is eight years old, it conveys that nobody has seen you work for eight years. One or two updated in the last two years changes that reading.
How many recommendations to have and how often to refresh them
The number that works in 2026 is between three and seven well chosen recommendations. Fewer than three looks thin; more than seven saturates and lowers the average quality (eyes read the first two or three and discard the rest). The first should be the strongest, because it is the only one many readers ever read.
The healthy cadence is one recommendation every six or nine months, no more. When you finish a big project, when you close an important client collaboration, when a stint as a manager or mentor ends. Asking for them in batches every two years always produces worse texts because the details have already faded for the person writing.
The periodic review worth doing is reading them top to bottom once a year and hiding (not deleting, LinkedIn lets you hide without removing) the ones that no longer reflect your current work well. A recommendation from a role you left five years ago can confuse more than it adds.
How to write an About section that works for you while you sleep
The verifiable human signal no AI can manufacture
At a moment when the rest of the profile might be generated, retouched or translated by models, the recommendations section is the only one that remains, literally, another named person's word. That signal grows more valuable the more suspect the feed becomes.
Looking after the section does not cost much: four or five concrete recommendations from the right people, written with verifiable anecdotes, and an annual review to keep it clean. In exchange, it is the part of the profile that most raises conversion among people reading you without knowing you, and the only one that in 2026 defends itself.