For years, email was the go-to channel for outreach, delivering higher response rates and more booked calls than any other method. But in the past 12-18 months, LinkedIn has staged a comeback – and in many cases, is now outperforming email when it comes to reply rates. For recruitment agency owners and marketing teams, the question isn’t simply which channel to use. The better question is: how do you combine them for maximum impact?
A multi-channel approach means you’re not putting all your eggs in one basket. By securing both a prospect’s email address and their LinkedIn URL, you can engage with them where they’re most active – and ensure that if one channel misses, the other can catch the opportunity. In practical terms, this means:
- Reaching out first on LinkedIn to create familiarity.
- Following up via email if no response is received.
- Tailoring your message to the platform, rather than sending the same copy-and-paste outreach everywhere.
This flexibility also means that if you can only find one point of contact for a prospect, they can still be part of your outreach sequence. There are many tools that allow outreach via email or via LinkedIn, but fewer that handle both in one workflow – one we’ve found particularly useful for this is Lemlist.
The latest recruitment industry data shows average LinkedIn InMail reply rates are now 18-25%, outperforming cold email outreach at 8.5%. The platform’s built-in social cues – profile views, connection requests, and post engagement – make the approach feel warmer and less intrusive. When someone accepts your LinkedIn invitation, you have a clear signal they’re at least open to hearing from you.
Industry Average Reply Rates: Email vs. LinkedIn
By contrast, an unsolicited email lands in their inbox with no preamble, making it feel more like an interruption. This is especially relevant for candidate sourcing, where LinkedIn – and InMails in particular – consistently outperforms email. For client and business development outreach, both channels can work well, especially when used in tandem. And while the current data clearly shows LinkedIn’s edge, it’s important not to abandon email entirely. Outreach trends are cyclical – just as email once dominated before LinkedIn’s resurgence, there’s every chance it will rebound in the future. Maintaining a presence on both channels ensures you’re not caught off guard when the balance shifts again.
It’s also important to recognise the gap between personalised and fully automated outreach. Highly targeted, well-written messages will almost always outperform generic automation. Industry averages for fully automated campaigns are far lower – around 1% reply rates for email and 5% for LinkedIn – yet even at this automated level, the same pattern holds true: LinkedIn consistently outperforms email.
The medium matters, but so does the effort put into making your outreach relevant and human.
One of the most common mistakes agencies make is using identical copy across channels. The tone and expectations on LinkedIn and email are different.
Its important to tailor your outreach to the sending platform, as well as making it more relevant and human
- LinkedIn works best for lighter, conversational messages that reference mutual connections, industry trends, or recent activity on the platform.
- Email is ideal for more detailed value propositions, case studies, and clear calls-to-action – but should still avoid sounding like a corporate brochure.
On LinkedIn, a formal pitch can feel out of place, whereas on email, a message that’s too casual may lack credibility. Matching tone to channel isn’t just polite – it directly affects your conversion rates.
An effective outreach sequence could look something like this:
- Short, relevant, and non-salesy LinkedIn connection request.
- Light, context-led LinkedIn message if they accept.
- Tailored email that builds on your LinkedIn intro if no reply within a week.
- Occasional sharing of relevant posts or articles on LinkedIn to keep yourself visible without spamming inboxes.
