E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Laura Umfer
Laura Umfer, a psychologist from Tampa, Fla., recently upgraded her LinkedIn photo.
Do you still have a drawing of an egg as your Twitter profile photo?
It’s the default option if you don’t upload an image yourself. And if you have it on your profile you may be missing out on an opportunity to get more followers on the micro-blogging site.
Turns out, having a photograph may improve your chances of getting noticed on social media sites, such as Twitter and LinkedIn, and that may in turn help you land a job, or boost your career.
“People like to see a picture of you,” said Miriam Salpeter, a career coach and author of “Social Networking for Career Success.”
By adding a photo you make yourself look hip and willing to really engage in social media, she added. Indeed, some statistics suggest that adding a photo to your profile does make a difference, according to Krista Canfield, a spokeswoman for LinkedIn.
“We do know that folks who have a photo are seven times more likely to have their profile viewed in general than folks who don’t have a photo,” Canfield said.
And Dan Zarrella, social media scientist for marketing software firm Hubspot, found that people on Twitter who use a profile photo have more than six times the followers of those who don’t. “If you’re walking around a cocktail party and you have a brown paper bag on your head some people wouldn’t talk to you,” he joked.
Just having a photo, however, is no guarantee you’ll become a social media darling. A bad photo of you could have the opposite impact, stressed career coach Salpeter:
“I encourage my clients to use a professional photo, in color.”
Less than a year ago, Laura Umfer, a clinical psychologist from Tampa, Fla., decided to change her LinkedIn photo.
“I had a photo that I took myself with a digital camera,” she said. But the image wasn’t professional looking, so Umfer arranged for her picture to be taken by a professional photographer.
Umfer, who refuses to even share the old photo, isn’t sure how the new one has impacted her business, but she has received many compliments on it.
“Looks do make a difference, whether people want to admit it or not, so I’m sure it has an impact at times,” she said. “People make judgments based on pictures. It’s human nature. Not everyone is willing to look beyond it, and I decided it was worth getting a professional picture knowing this about people.”
Looks can matter when it comes to how hiring managers perceive applicants, according to recent research done by professors at the University of Houston and Rice University.
Things like facial disfigurements, scars, and birthmarks can draw away from an applicant’s true potential, said Juan Madera a professor who focuses on human resource management at the University of Houston and was co-author of the study.
“People have a negative reaction, and that’s human nature,” he maintained.
The research also found that the more people get to know individuals with such facial issues, the more they forget about the imperfections. Unfortunately, he added, if a photo puts off a hiring manager, you won’t have the luxury of having that person get to know who you really are.
But University of Texas at Austin Economist Daniel Hamermesh, who is author of “Beauty Pays,” notes that it’s now difficult not to include a photo of yourself, given how common profile pictures are becoming on social media sites.
“Who would be the first job-seeker to include his or her picture? Answer: A gorgeous person,” he explained. “Then the rest of the job-seekers notice this and think: ‘Aha, if I don’t put my picture on, employers or onlookers will think I’m one of the ugliest without a picture included.’”
So the bottom line, he said is “unless you are incredibly ugly, don’t bypass it if most of the other people are posting photos.”
There could also be legal problems for hiring managers who see the photos of job applicants. Images allow them to see a person’s race, disability, or age, said Rosemary Gousman, managing partner at employment law firm Fisher & Phillips.
Most employers, she continued, don’t discriminate based on an individual’s looks, but there are managers out there who pick candidates not based on qualifications, but on attractiveness. That reality, she added, could pose legal issues for an employer.
“You, as an employer, are better off not knowing,” she stressed.
Steve Langerud -- a workplace consultant who is also the director of professional opportunities at DePauw University -- said there are pros and cons when deciding whether to use a photo.
On the plus side, people remember pictures, he said, noting that the image becomes “part of your brand.” On the other hand, you could be disqualified because of a photo, he added.
And even if you decide not to include a photo of yourself on a social media site, unless you have intentionally worked to keep your picture out of all electronic searches, any employer can find a picture of you with a simple Internet search, Langerud said.
If you want the best avatar, Salpeter offers the following tips:
- Look friendly and approachable. Sometimes, when taking a ‘serious’ picture, people forget to smile. The resulting photo lacks personality or the subject appears mean and inaccessible. Look at your picture and ask yourself: “Would I want to go to lunch with this person?”
- Be natural. Your picture should look like you on a good day. When someone sees it, he or she should be able to focus on you, and not your makeup, jewelry, unbuttoned shirt, or loud tie. Choose solid colors, subtle accessories, and clothing appropriate for your industry.
- Consider having a professional photo taken, but at the very least make sure your picture is not blurry or too dark to really make out your features once it is uploaded and sized.
In the end a photo is very subjective, she stressed:
“Some people think they look fabulous when cleavage is showing.”
The key is to find someone who can give you honest feedback before you post that new photo.
Leave a Comment:
Someone needs to fire the headline writer and/or proofreader.
And lets not forget:
If only they could've messed up the last word too and crammed in yet another 'profile'.
At least they update their mistakes quickly.
Nobody wants an ugly in the office, so upload your pic. lol
Unfortunately, my photo has been known to induce vomiting.
But hey, I may be short, overweight and ugly, but I still have most of my hair and both of my teeth ... one of which I brush on occasion.
Darrel - At least you're a guy. It's OK for a guy to be short, fat & ugly, especially if you have $$$, but all three of those things are considered a crime if you're a woman.
Are you serious? The picture that Laura Umfer uses on LinkedIn isn't professional looking at ALL - especially for a psychologist. Long, flowing hair and a low-cut blouse beneath the blazer sends the wrong message.
Apparently she's soliciting for a late night hookup instead of a broader client base.
Damn baptist, judgmental much? She looks professional enough to me. Not every businesswoman wears a pantsuit and puts her hair in a bun.
I didn't think her blouse was low cut--not sure how that can be interpretated--no cleavage! However, I do agree with the sloppy hair - all she would have needed to do was to comb it back off her shoulders for a more professional look.
Oh, good idea! A tale: while being in charge of law clerk recruitment, the finalists for interviews had pictures snapped in the lobby before the interview process started. So, how many women, people of color, etc. do you think were hired for these lucrative clerking positions (that held a path to become an associate)? I know that the white males got in the door first; and only when I demanded that this idiocy stop, that no photos be taken, did the old farts on top pick clerks on the bases of transcripts, resume, etc.
And I think in California it is against equal employment code. So, I'm sure it makes no difference in the right to starve states.
You're so angry. Don't worry it will be ok. It's pointless to get angry about human nature because it will never change. Looks sell. Always have, always will. So only upload a photo if you're hot. Otherwise upload someone else's. HA!
Raised by Wolves - Come to Boulder Colorado - Run by Women for Women.
Oh, I no longer work. I am retired, LOL, on social security. I am angry, Steve, but not about all of the racist bosses in my past, rather that it still goes on.
While a photo may be a plus in getting noticed, it really is a poor substitute for profiles artfully written by someone obviously intelligent. The real work of getting a job is what has happened over a period of years through education, job experience and initiative. A photo takes only an hour or two to do well. Just think of the "pretty" Hollywood folks and then consider how they come across in interviews. There's a lot of disconnect between "pretty" and intelligent just as there is with "ugly" and stupid.
Laura - shoot me an email! I need your services.
WHAT? We were just told less than a year ago, NEVER send a picture with a resume'.
So now less than 6 months later the rules have changed. THIS reporter better check with the colleges and universities on this one. Conduct rules in business can not change that fast.
It is true that you don't want a picture on your resume. Been that way since at least the 80s, so people who do are seen as outdated. Picture on social media is different. Social media is just that - social. It's so common for people to have a picture that the ones who don't are seen as unfriendly or unapproachable. At least in the case of LinkedIn, that's not the image you want if you're using it to find a job.
Are your writers insane or just dumb?!?
If you upload a photo and you look "too old", too fat, too not my type, then your resume' and qualifications won't even be considered. This is the easiest way to practice discrimination!
It's bad enough the unemployed face credit checks (not many have financially survived intact) and in order to get a job, several IDIOT HR people won't hire you if you're unemployed (so you can't get hope to get your credit fixed by paying debts off), let's just give them one more tool to discriminate against us.
FOOLS.
Social media sure makes people do stupid stuff.
14 million people are out of work and currently receiving benefits, many others already have exhausted their 99 weeks. It is those individuals over 45 years old or better, whom employers will not hire because of their age. The uploading of a picture is suggested in the article for everyone needing a job and is simply not good advice. An employer should consider interviewing a candidate based solely on their experience and skills, not based on appearance from an online image. It appears many eemployers have already gone way beyond good business ethics, in their search for applicants to interview.
"Need a job? Upload a pic!"
Quite possibly the worst advice I've ever seen from a professional website intending to assist job seekers. You're asking individuals to offer their photos to employers as if it's a casting call at a Hollywood studio - where the employer is going after a certain "look." Anyone outside a certain category - whether male, female, black, white, green-with-yellow-spots, etc - is going to be viewed - literally - and judged on nothing more than their appearance.
An individual deserves to be judged on the content of their character and qualifications, not on the quality of their headshots.
Take aways:
1) If you are physically attractive - including a photo can be beneficial.
Wow - sure am glad that we now have confirmation from experts that physically attractive people can benefit from being physically attractive.
2) Laura Umfer has a great picture for Match.com - she is attractive - and I suppose its good for business. As a guy if I am going to lay on a couch and talk to someone for an hour it may has well be a hot shrink rather than an ugly one...
3) But in the end if you don't play the game people will think you are hiding your picture because you have a face only your mom would love.
Again - thanks for the great expert advice on matters that the human race has known about for a long, long time...
Even participating by posting this message is a form of support that I would wish not to do, but I cannot let this pass. What kind of neediness has been bred into people in the past two decades that requires them now to have Facebook and Twitter accounts and causes them to feel an inner compulsion to hang on every pithy 144 character message from total strangers with whom they have one-sided, vicarious relationships? I am much older than the people who thrive on this stuff, and I frankly don't understand what has happened to human nature such that an individual cannot bear to be out of contact with 10,000 of his best friends for the slightest moment.
I have seen groups of three or four young people walking side by side down a sidewalk, each "conversing" with other people who are not with them via texting. Forgetting for the moment that they prefer to ignore the people who took the time to be with them physically, consider that they choose to text someone rather than to make a call to them. They are obviously engaged in a conversation of sorts as text messages fly back and forth, so why not talk on the phone? That is, after all, one of its chief features.
I read that teens who were interviewed about this precise matter indicated that the reason they choose to text is that they can control the conversation. They don't have to talk about things they don't want to discuss, and they can limit the conversation. Gee, if I didn't know any better, I would say that such is nothing more than thinly disguised antisocial behavior that seems to cross the border into the land of narcissism.
Although I make my career in computer programming, there are personal standards which I will not violate, and one such standard is to focus my attention on the people who have taken the trouble to visit with me in person. The other is to lift the phone and call someone instead of texting them. If I am asking them to give me some attention remotely, the least I can do to reciprocate is to allow them to speak with me and to expect myself to give them room to be themselves, even if it means that the conversation strays off course for awhile. I would hope they would give me the same latitude when I require it.
Skill set, education, and experience are all that should matter. How can people know that they weren't discriminated against based on appearance? How is this different than asking race, age, gender, etc on an application?
Go USA-851295, I agree with your sentiment about removing opportunities for discrimination from the job hunting process, and clearly, providing a picture gives ample opportunity to a bigoted recruiter or HR person to stop one's application in its tracks if the photo belies some personal attribute that is disliked by the recipient. That said, however, I think that skill set, education, and experience are not all that matter. In fact, I think they actually take a back seat to another attribute - character. There is an old adage in the recruiting business that says, "Hire for character, train for skills." When companies focus just on skills, education, and experience, they are buying a pig in a poke. They really don't know much about the disposition of the person, how he works with other people, his attitude toward authority, his willingness to accept compromise, and his ability to cooperate in a larger venture. This attribute often has much more of an impact on a department's bottom line that the person's education, experience, or skills. While a person may be a great Java programmer, have a B.S. in computer engineering, and five years of work experience, he usually has to be retrained to do things in a certain way in a new company. There is no single standard for doing things in every company; each company has a different process and different protocols. Moreover, many companies make an investment to train employees to do new jobs that require new skills because they value the character and integrity of their people more than just their ability to write some computer code or to drive a forklift.
So, I do agree that discrimination is a sign of knuckle dragging Neaderthals in the business world, and it would be stupid to give people who delight in being both dense and bigoted any opportunity to do what they wish with impunity. At the same time, there are more important bases that need to be covered during the hiring process that require a face to face interview. Unfortunately, that allows covert discrimination to take place and to be excused under the guise of having failed a highly subjective interview.
Content of character is a given. A picture doesn't do much in the way of judging that.
if one is physically attractive or has a professional looking photo, it does not hurt to post it in order to make the application stand out
Photos on Linkedin are so small I doubt anyone can make them out. Once they get that fixed it might help to upload a photo. Facebook is much better for photos.
While I was unemployed for 8 months I sent out 163 resumes with no response. And I had a great resume and great employment history. I was getting depressed. Then, I added a photo of myself on my resume at my sisters suggestion and sent out another 10 resumes. I got 3 calls and a job offer in 3 weeks. It can work.
Not recommended for African-Americans, African-Canadians, or African anything in the U.S. job market. When it's well documented that [white] hiring managers will hire a white person with a criminal background before they would hire an African-American with no criminal background, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to disregard this article's recommendation.
Not recommended for African-Americans, African-Canadians, or African anything in the U.S. job market. When it's well documented that [white] hiring managers will hire a white person with a criminal background before they would hire an African-American with no criminal background, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to disregard this article's recommendation.
I have worked for the Workforce Centers and currently work for a College Career Center. One of the first things we do when reviewing resumes are tell them not to include anything personal like pictures, birth date, religion, race, etc. If that is included employers are not even suppose to look at the resume since it leaves them open to law suits if the person feels like they did not get the job because of these. Not sure if this has changed but as of today doing walk-in resume reviews that is what we are still telling students.
"I never forget a face. But in your case I'll make an exception!" — Groucho Marx
Oh yea, upload your racial profile, I mean photo. The writer of this article needs to put her brain in gear.
"Deserves to be judged on the content of their character and qualifications"- yes in an ideal world, but we don't live in an ideal world. Don't be a fool. This isn't about being politically correct, it's about getting a job. If you look "normal" and are on the average to above average scale on looks, it's a fantastic idea. I can tell you from first hand experience that when I was a hiring manager, if I had two candidates that were essentially identical, I'd hire the one that came across more appealing personally. Humans make personality judments based on looks. It shouldn't be that way, but it is. Plenty of studies have been done on this. First impressions are a big deal, and lets face it, we all make judgements whether its consciously or subconsciously. If you can make yourself look professional and clean cut, that's one less thing the hiring manager needs to worry about. You are going to get called first over someone with a similar background that doesn't have a picture. It's not fair but it's simple human nature.