{"title":"Your Discoverability Stack","description":null,"content":"Your resume is usually the main document in a job search, but it is not always the only thing a recruiter sees. They may also look at your LinkedIn profile, search your name, or open your GitHub, portfolio, project links, writing samples, or dashboards.\n\nThose places do not need to be fully finished. They do need to be current, consistent, and useful. A recruiter should not feel like they are looking at three different versions of the same candidate.\n\n---\n\n# The Places a Recruiter May Check\n\nThink of your public job-search presence as a few basic places:\n\n1. Search results for your name.\n2. Your LinkedIn profile.\n3. Your resume.\n4. Your GitHub, portfolio, project links, or samples, if they matter for your role.\n\nNot every recruiter checks all of these. Some recruiters only read the resume. Some look at LinkedIn first. A hiring manager for a software role may open GitHub or a project link. A hiring manager for a data, design, writing, product, or marketing role may care more about a portfolio, case study, dashboard, or writing sample.\n\nThe point is not to be everywhere online. The point is to make sure the places you do use support the same basic message.\n\nThe first issue is consistency. Your title, dates, location, skills, and role direction should line up. If your resume says \"Backend Engineer\", LinkedIn says \"Software Engineer II\", and GitHub points to old frontend tutorials, the reader has to pause and interpret the mismatch. That may not ruin your chances, but it makes the review harder than it needs to be.\n\nThe second issue is usefulness. Every link on your resume should be worth opening. A LinkedIn link should lead to a current profile. A GitHub link should show work you want reviewed. A portfolio should load, explain the projects, and make it clear what you did.\n\nIf a link creates confusion or makes your work look weaker than the resume, leave it off until it is ready. A link is optional. A weak link can distract from stronger evidence.\n\nThis is a quick audit. You are not trying to update every profile today. You are checking what someone else would see and finding the problems that could hurt the first impression.\n\n---\n\n# Running the 10-Minute Audit\n\nThis audit takes about 10 minutes. Do not fix anything yet. Just write down what you see.\n\n### Open a private browser window\n\nUse an incognito or private window so you see the public version of your profiles. Your logged-in view can hide missing details, old privacy settings, or pages that are not visible to others.\n\n### Search your name the way a recruiter might\n\nSearch your full name plus your city, current company, school, or target role. For example:\n\n\n```javascript\nMarcus Rivera Austin\nPriya Sharma backend developer\nWei Chen Microsoft software engineer\n```\n\n\nWrite down the top three to five results. Note whether they are about you, someone else with the same name, an old account, your LinkedIn, your GitHub, a portfolio, or nothing useful.\n\nThis is not about looking yourself up for no reason. It is about avoiding surprises. If an old profile with outdated information appears near the top, you should know that before a recruiter sees it.\n\n### Check your LinkedIn public view\n\nOpen your LinkedIn profile from the search result if it appears. Look only at the top section first: photo, headline, current title, company, and location.\n\nAsk:\n\n- Does the headline match the kind of role I want?\n- Does my current role match my resume?\n- Does the location make sense for the jobs I am applying to?\n- Would a recruiter understand what I do in a few seconds?\n\nYou do not need a complete LinkedIn overhaul yet. You need the public version to be current, clear, and consistent.\n\n### Compare LinkedIn with your resume\n\nOpen your resume and find your current or most recent role. Compare the title, company, and dates with LinkedIn.\n\nThey do not always need to match word for word. Sometimes an official title needs a clearer market title. But they should not contradict each other. If one says \"Jan 2021 - Present\" and the other says \"2022 - Present\", fix that. If one says \"Data Analyst\" and the other says \"Product Manager\" for the same role, either align the wording or explain the difference clearly.\n\n### Open every link on your resume\n\nClick your LinkedIn, GitHub, portfolio, project, or personal site links from the resume. Do this exactly the way a recruiter would.\n\nFor each link, ask one question: does this help my case?\n\nIf GitHub is empty, full of unfinished tutorials, or unrelated to the roles you want, it may be better to remove the link for now. If your portfolio has broken images or projects with no explanation, it needs work before you send it.\n\n### Review GitHub or portfolio only if it matters for your role\n\nFor software roles, GitHub can help when it shows real projects, clear READMEs, recent activity, or examples of how you think. It is less useful when all meaningful work is private or when the profile has only forks and old coursework.\n\nFor design, data, product, writing, marketing, or analytics roles, a portfolio, case study, dashboard, writing sample, or project page may matter more than GitHub. Review the place that is most relevant to your target role.\n\nLook at the first screen. Can someone who does not know you tell what you built, why it matters, and which project is worth opening first?\n\n### Write down what each place says about you\n\nWrite one sentence for each place:\n\n\n```javascript\nSearch: LinkedIn appears first, plus an old student profile.\nLinkedIn: backend engineer focused on Java and payments.\nResume: backend engineer with 4 years of Java and Spring Boot experience.\nGitHub: three old class projects, no pinned professional work.\n```\n\n\nNow read the sentences together. If they describe the same person aiming for the same kind of role, you are in good shape. If they point in different directions, you have found the fixes.\n\n---\n\n# The Stack, Visualized\n\nThe diagram below shows common paths. Sometimes a recruiter starts with your resume because you applied. Sometimes they find your LinkedIn first. Sometimes a hiring manager opens a project link later.\n\nThe order varies, but the rule is the same: every public place should support the role you are trying to get.\n\n\n```mermaid\nflowchart TD\n Search[Search result
your name]:::inbound --> LI[LinkedIn
profile]:::core\n Apply[Application
resume first]:::outbound --> Resume[Resume]:::core\n LI --> Resume\n Resume --> Work[GitHub, portfolio,
projects, or samples]:::core\n LI --> Work\n Work --> Demo[Demo, case study,
repo, or proof]:::finish\n\n classDef inbound fill:#69db7c,stroke:#000,color:#000\n classDef outbound fill:#ffa94d,stroke:#000,color:#000\n classDef core fill:#00ceff,stroke:#000,color:#000\n classDef finish fill:#38d9a9,stroke:#000,color:#000\n```\n\n\nYou cannot control which place someone sees first. You can control whether each place is current, consistent, and useful to open.\n\n---\n\n# Applying vs Being Found\n\nThere are two common ways a hiring process starts.\n\n**Applying** is the path you control most. You send the resume, so the resume is the starting point. LinkedIn and project links act as supporting evidence. They should confirm what the resume says, not introduce a different direction.\n\n**Being found** happens when a recruiter discovers you first, often through LinkedIn search, an internal database, a referral, or a name search. This path rewards a clear LinkedIn headline, current skills, accurate location, and public results that point to your professional work.\n\nThe diagram below shows where each path starts and what carries the most weight on each.\n\n\n```mermaid\nflowchart LR\n A[Applying
you start]:::apply --> B[Resume
leads]:::resume\n B --> C[LinkedIn and links
confirm it]:::support\n D[Being found
recruiter starts]:::found --> E[LinkedIn
leads]:::linkedin\n E --> F[Resume and results
confirm it]:::support\n\n classDef apply fill:#ffa94d,stroke:#000,color:#000\n classDef found fill:#69db7c,stroke:#000,color:#000\n classDef resume fill:#00ceff,stroke:#000,color:#000\n classDef linkedin fill:#00ceff,stroke:#000,color:#000\n classDef support fill:#38d9a9,stroke:#000,color:#000\n```\n\n\nWhen you apply, the resume leads and everything else confirms it. When a recruiter finds you, LinkedIn leads and the resume backs it up. Either way, the two have to agree.\n\nYou do not need a large online presence. You need the basics to be findable and consistent. A recruiter should be able to answer three questions quickly:\n\n- Who is this person?\n- What kind of work do they do?\n- Are they close to the role I am filling?\n\nWork on one path helps the other. A clear LinkedIn profile helps recruiters find you and helps confirm your resume after you apply. A clean resume gives LinkedIn context. A useful project link gives a hiring manager something concrete to inspect.\n\n---\n\n# Consistent vs Contradictory Profiles\n\n**Before: inconsistent public presence**\n\n\n```javascript\nSearch result: an old student profile appears first.\nLinkedIn headline: Software Engineer II at Initech\nResume title for same job: Senior Backend Engineer, Initech\nResume dates: Jan 2021 - Present\nLinkedIn dates: 2022 - Present\nGitHub link: opens to an empty profile with no pinned projects.\n```\n\n\nThis does not automatically disqualify Marcus. But it creates questions. Which title is accurate? Which date is correct? Why is GitHub linked if there is nothing useful there?\n\n**After: consistent public presence**\n\n\n```javascript\nSearch result: LinkedIn appears first, GitHub second.\nLinkedIn headline: Backend Engineer | Java, Spring Boot, Payments\nResume title for same job: Backend Engineer, Initech\nResume dates: Jan 2021 - Present\nLinkedIn dates: Jan 2021 - Present\nGitHub link: removed until there is a project worth showing.\n```\n\n\n**Why the after version works:** The reader no longer has to resolve contradictions. Marcus looks like the same candidate everywhere. Removing the weak GitHub link is also an improvement because it keeps attention on stronger evidence.\n\nHere is a senior example. Wei Chen has a strong resume, but his public profile does not help recruiters understand his specialty.\n\n**Before: strong resume, thin public profile**\n\n\n```javascript\nResume: senior backend engineer with distributed systems experience.\nLinkedIn headline: Senior Software Engineer at Microsoft\nAbout section: blank\nSearch result: LinkedIn appears first, but nothing else professional appears.\nGitHub: mostly private work, no useful public projects.\n```\n\n\n**After: public profile supports the resume**\n\n\n```javascript\nResume: same strong resume.\nLinkedIn headline: Senior Backend Engineer | Distributed Systems, Go, Kubernetes\nAbout section: 3 short lines describing his systems work and target roles.\nSearch result: LinkedIn appears first and matches the resume.\nGitHub: not linked because his strongest work is private.\n```\n\n\n**Why the after version works:** Wei does not need to create a public GitHub presence just to look active. His strongest work is private, which is common for experienced engineers. LinkedIn simply needs to explain the same senior backend profile his resume already shows.\n\n---\n\n# What Trips Candidates Up\n\nWhen your resume, LinkedIn, and GitHub disagree on a title or a date, the recruiter has to stop and work out which version is true, and that pause is what costs you. Contradictions between surfaces are the most common version of every item below.\n\n- **Using different titles for the same job without context.** It is fine to clarify an official title, but the resume and LinkedIn should not look like two different histories.\n- **Letting dates drift.** A one-year mismatch makes the reader wonder which version is true. Keep dates aligned.\n- **Linking to weak or empty work.** GitHub, portfolios, and project sites are optional. Include them only when they help.\n- **Assuming every role needs GitHub.** It matters for some technical roles. For other roles, LinkedIn, a portfolio, writing samples, dashboards, or case studies may be more relevant.\n- **Leaving LinkedIn too vague.** \"Software Engineer at Company\" is often too broad. Add the role direction and core skills that match your target jobs.\n- **Ignoring search results.** You do not need to control the whole first page. You do need to know if something outdated or confusing appears near the top.\n- **Trying to update everything at once.** Fix contradictions first. Then improve the most relevant place for your target role.","pageType":"job-search"}

Get Premium