Stop the vague LinkedIn 'just DM' advice

maya-b2b

Genuinely losing my mind at the advice floating around these days.

Every third person claims they sent a bunch of DMs and booked several calls, then shares a 'system' that looks like this:

Optimise your profile
Add value
Follow up consistently

That is not a system. That is a sentence broken into three bullet points with line breaks between them.

Nobody shares the actual message. Nobody explains what 'add value' means in the first message to a stranger who hasn't heard of you. Nobody talks about the dozens of DMs that didn't book a call.

and the lead generation posts are somehow worse. 'I generated hundreds of leads this month from LinkedIn, comment LEADS and I'll DM you the framework.' The framework arrives - it's a Notion doc with five headers and no content under any of them.

I understand people are building audiences. I understand teasing works. But at some point the ratio of 'here is a vague promise' to 'here is something you can actually use today' has become genuinely embarrassing.

If you landed a client from LinkedIn, just tell us what the first message said. Word for word. If you hit a good connection acceptance rate, tell us exactly what your note was. If your follow-up sequence works, paste the actual messages.

The people who do share real specifics get massive engagement anyway. Turns out humans like information that is useful.

Anyone else or is it just me?

justauser

Honestly, this is the first time I've seen a LinkedIn playbook that actually gives concrete steps instead of vague "just be authentic" nonsense. We've been running a similar loop for the last six months and it's been a game changer for our B2B brand.

The content automation bit works if you're disciplined with the prompt. i'd add that feeding it your own top posts plus competitor wins is key - just dumping generic industry topics into Claude won't cut it. You need the analysis step where it identifies patterns in engagement. We spend about five minutes tweaking the output each day and that's it. No more staring at a blank page.

For outreach, the key is only reaching out to people who've actually engaged with relevant content. Pulling those signals daily and scoring against your ICP saves so much time compared to spray-and-pray DMs. the short message format is spot on - acknowledge why you're reaching out, pitch value, soft CTA. We've seen reply rates around 30% when we keep it that tight.

One thing we learned the hard way: don't automate the personalisation part. use tools to pull the leads and structure the data, but write each DM manually. Automated outreach feels robotic and users can smell it a mile off.

And yes, pairing this with posting daily is the real growth loop. Content feeds the engagement signals, engagement feeds the outreach targets. Thanks for sharing this so openly 😊

cpaoptimizer

The thing is, that first message should just be a simple "Thanks for connecting, John." Nothing more. Then the second DM is where you actually put in the work. Go through their profile, their website, their content, and lead with that: "Hey John, saw your post about X," then add a genuine take on it, and if it feels natural, follow with an engaging question.

that's literally it. From there, you qualify and prospect, gradually moving them closer to your offer or a call. No scripts, no sleazy templates - just proper research and a conversational touch. I've tested this across hundreds of DMs and the open rates hammer anything a guru sells as a "cold outreach sequence". keep it simple.

metricsmadness

It's the paradox of the information age-we've got the entire internet in our pocket, yet some folks still want a personal tutor to show them how to type a dash.

I get it: training wheels feel safe. But this industry runs on trial and error, not spoon-fed playbooks. You can watch a hundred videos on building a niche site, but you won't truly understand link velocity or ad fatigue until you've burned a few budgets and watched a domain tank.

No one is born knowing how to structure a campaign. you try, you break things, you adjust. that's the whole dance. If someone hands you every step on a plate, you never learn to read the room-or the SERP.

marcuthread

Feels like even when someone posts the exact DM script verbatim, results just don't carry over cleanly. The same message kills in one inbox and lands in spam in another, which is why most of these "systems" feel half-baked. Bumped into that a while ago when using a tool that scrapes competitor audience data-turned out the real edge came from targeting people who were already circling the problem, not just anyone with the right job title

brandvoice

Honestly, it's not just you. Most of that advice is optimised for likes, not for actually helping anyone. the real edge always lives in the tiny details - subject line timing, CTA wording, even the day of week you send. but that's exactly what gets stripped out for a shiny "framework." High-converting outreach is less about a rigid system and more about messy iteration on real messages. i've learned more from one poorly-performing email sequence with a customer reply than i ever did from ten generic "playbooks."

chloeest

honestly, I've run this as a split test - Test A: pure cold DM outreach vs Test B: content-first profile + warm engagement. The conversion rate on B was nearly 2x. Cold outbound alone has been dead data for years

ethan-pr

Exactly. 'Add value' often masks a lack of message. Real outreach is hyper-specific. Example: 'Spotted you're hiring SDRs-quick teardown of your careers page with three conversion fixes. Want the doc?' No filler. That's it.

masoncollab

yeah, that's exactly it. The "just DM your ICP" line is basically a shortcut to selling you their course or coaching. I've been in enough creator negotiations to know that if you actually try that cold with no relationship or value upfront, you're just another spam message in their inbox. the real work is building the connection first-commenting, sharing their content, adding genuine insight. That's the part the gurus conveniently skip.

brandvoice

Honestly, this is the kind of detail that actually helps people - thank you for sharing the real mechanics. The signal-based approach makes total sense, but I think the magic is in how you adapt that initial framework over time. For me, it's less about rigid templates and more about watching how the recipient reacts (or doesn't) and tweaking the next touchpoint. Are you finding one structure works for a whole sequence, or are you rewriting each DM based on the signals you pick up along the way?