Every few weeks a client sends me a screenshot of a recommendation they’ve just received, asking if it’s good. Nine times out of ten it’s warm, well-intentioned, and completely forgettable — three sentences of general praise that could be copy-pasted onto any profile in any industry without anyone noticing the swap. The person writing it clearly respects the recipient. It just doesn’t do any actual work for them.
I saw this clearly with Kavya, a client transitioning from individual-contributor UX design into a design-management track. She had eleven recommendations on her profile — more than most people bother collecting — and every single one said some version of “talented designer, great to collaborate with, always delivers.” A hiring manager evaluating her for a management role learned nothing from any of them about whether she could actually lead a team, mentor juniors, or manage stakeholder pushback, which was exactly what that next role required proof of.
The real problem isn’t that people are too polite to write something useful — it’s that almost nobody is given a structure to follow, so they default to safe, generic adjectives. Once you give someone a specific project to anchor to, the entire quality of what they write changes.
Why Most Recommendations Say Nothing At All
Employer-review platform data consistently suggests that recruiters treat vague, adjective-only endorsements as low-signal — they’re too easy to write for anyone, about anyone, and reviewers know it. What moves the needle is specificity: a named project, a described challenge, a result. This mirrors how strong performance reviews work in most well-run organisations — general praise gets discounted, concrete examples get remembered.
The reason most recommendations fail isn’t a lack of goodwill from the person writing them. It’s that the request itself is usually generic — a default LinkedIn prompt or a one-line “hey can you write me a recommendation” — which gives the writer nothing to anchor to except vague positive feelings. Ask a specific question, get a specific answer. Ask a vague one, get “great to work with.”
This is where Clarity Before Strategy™ applies directly: before you request or write a single recommendation, you need clarity on exactly which project, outcome, or working relationship you want it to speak to. Skipping that step is why so many well-earned recommendations end up reading like form letters.
The Direction: A Structure for Requesting and Writing
The fix works on both sides of the exchange — how you ask for a recommendation, and how you write one for someone else. Both come down to the same principle: anchor to one specific, real situation instead of asking for a general character reference.
Cover Different Working Relationships
- Aim for four to six recommendations spanning different relationships — a former manager, a peer, a direct report if you’ve managed people, and a client or external stakeholder where relevant.
- Prioritise people who saw your actual day-to-day work over senior contacts you’ve only met briefly at events.
- Ask right after finishing a project together, or shortly after leaving a role, while the specifics are still fresh for both of you.
- Don’t mass-request from your entire network at once — a handful of detailed recommendations beats a wave of rushed, generic ones.
Give Them Something to Anchor To
- Replace LinkedIn’s default request text with a short personal note naming the specific project or period you’d like them to focus on.
- Remind them of one or two concrete details — a deadline you hit together, a problem you solved — to jog their memory and make writing easier.
- Give them an easy out — “no pressure if now isn’t a good time” — which paradoxically increases response quality from people who do say yes.
- Offer to draft a starting point they can freely edit, especially for busy senior colleagues who want to help but are short on time.
One Project, One Result, Real Specifics
- Open with the working relationship and context — how you know the person and in what capacity, in one sentence.
- Anchor the middle to one specific project, challenge, or period rather than a general career summary.
- Include a concrete detail or result wherever honestly possible — a number, a named outcome, a specific behaviour observed under pressure.
- Close with a clear, honest statement of what type of role or team they’d excel in next — this is often the most useful line for a reader.
Write for Others the Same Way
- When someone asks you for a recommendation, apply the same structure — anchor to a specific project, not general praise.
- Avoid writing a recommendation purely as a reciprocal swap for one you received — readers can often tell, and it weakens both.
- Keep a running note of specific projects and moments worth mentioning about close colleagues, so you’re never starting from a blank page when asked.
- If you genuinely can’t speak to specifics for someone, it’s fairer to decline than to write something vague that helps no one.
What This Looks Like When It’s Done Right
A Quick Self-Check Before You Request or Write One
Frequently Asked Questions
Quality outweighs quantity, but four to six strong, specific recommendations covering different working relationships — a manager, a peer, a direct report, a client — give a more complete picture than a dozen generic ones from the same context. A profile with two or three specific, detailed recommendations often reads stronger than one with fifteen short, vague ones, because reviewers can tell within seconds which category a recommendation falls into. Prioritise getting a few genuinely detailed ones over mass-requesting from your entire network at once.
Ask specifically, not generically — instead of LinkedIn’s default request text, send a short personal note naming the project or period you’d like them to focus on, which makes writing it far easier for them too. Give them an easy out by saying “no pressure if now isn’t a good time,” and pick people who saw your work directly rather than senior contacts you’ve only met briefly. The best time to ask is right after finishing a project together or shortly after leaving a role, while the specifics are still fresh for both of you.
It’s common practice and generally acceptable, especially for busy senior colleagues who want to help but are short on time — offer a draft as an optional starting point, not a final text they must use as-is. Be clear that they should edit it freely to match their own voice and add anything you missed, since a recommendation that reads like it wasn’t written by the actual person loses credibility with anyone who notices the mismatch. This approach works best when the draft is genuinely specific to your real work together, not a generic template repurposed for everyone.
Yes, wherever honestly possible — a recommendation that says someone “grew the team’s output” is far weaker than one that says they “cut client onboarding time by a third while managing a team of six.” Specific, verifiable details make a recommendation read as credible testimony rather than polite praise, and they give a reader something concrete to remember about the person being recommended. If exact figures aren’t available or appropriate to share, a specific example or named project still outperforms vague adjectives like “hardworking” or “great to work with.”
Recruiters and hiring managers commonly report reviewing recommendations as a secondary signal, particularly when deciding between similarly qualified final-round candidates, though they rarely function as the primary factor. A specific, detailed recommendation can reinforce claims made elsewhere on a profile or in an interview, while a vague or clearly reciprocal-sounding one adds little and can occasionally raise questions about authenticity. Treat recommendations as supporting evidence for your profile’s overall narrative, not as a replacement for a strong headline, about section, and experience history.
