In It Together

Read the campaign story

LinkedIn launched In It Together in the United States in January 2018. A contemporary interview with the brand credits its in-house Creative Studio and BMB. The campaign asked what people worked for, using member stories to broaden the idea of professional success. Rather than only celebrating promotions or senior titles, it made room for different ambitions and reasons for pursuing a particular working life.

LinkedIn’s June announcement documented a European rollout across the UK, Germany and France, while its September account emphasised support from other people along a professional journey. These were developments within the same campaign family, not new independent campaigns. The official posts describe selected member experiences and invitations to participate. They do not show that exposure to the advertising caused a job offer, a useful connection or a change in career prospects.

Editorial interpretation: a network is more understandable when it is described through relationships rather than member counts. A person can recognise the value of encouragement, advice or a relevant introduction without being impressed by the scale of a platform. The question about motivation also gives participants a role in defining the story. They are not merely asked to repeat the advertiser’s preferred definition of ambition or perform a standard version of professional success.

Editorial interpretation: belonging must remain compatible with privacy and choice. A prompt about purpose can become intrusive if people feel obliged to reveal personal hardship, family circumstances or a sensitive career transition. A useful adaptation allows modest, practical answers and does not reward only the most dramatic disclosure. The brand should make the next supportive action clear, while avoiding the suggestion that a public personal story is the price of access to opportunity.

Ask a question with several legitimate answers

Use an invitation that people can answer without accepting your organisation’s hierarchy of success. Test it with participants at different stages and in different types of work. If every answer is edited toward the same inspirational conclusion, the apparent openness becomes cosmetic. Preserve meaningful differences, including goals centred on stability, craft, flexibility or contributing to a team rather than individual status.

Show the relationship doing something useful

A community claim becomes more credible when the story explains a specific exchange: an introduction, a helpful explanation or a piece of feedback. Get permission from everyone whose contribution is identified. Avoid implying that a platform alone created an outcome that depended on many people and circumstances. Make the practical behaviour easy to understand without publishing private conversations or confidential employment information.

Design participation without pressure to disclose

Offer several ways to contribute, including an ordinary work goal or a private response. Explain where submissions may appear and let participants approve the final use. Do not treat a hashtag as blanket permission to republish a person’s story. Keep access to useful resources separate from agreeing to become promotional material, and provide an uncomplicated way to withdraw before publication.

A small test for another brief

Proposed test: a professional association could invite members to describe one modest learning goal and one type of support they can offer, then host an optional, moderated exchange.

Measure whether participants find relevant support, understand how to take part and feel comfortable with the level of disclosure. Count completed useful exchanges separately from submitted stories or reactions.

Stop if people feel pressured to expose private circumstances, if moderation cannot prevent unwanted contact, or if selected stories imply guaranteed career outcomes.

• Use a clear consent form and avoid collecting sensitive personal histories.
• Offer both public and private participation routes.
• Compare the open question with a conventional request for job titles and achievements.