LinkedIn as a research participant recruitment tool: reflections from the football industry
Purpose The article explores the process of using LinkedIn to recruit hard-to-reach groups, reflecting on our experience of the football industry. We propose LinkedIn as a viable option to mitigate recruitment challenges, particularly in employment-focussed research. Design/methodology/approach We examine how LinkedIn was used to recruit 43 football backroom staff for a sociological research study. It outlines the process of using LinkedIn to contact participants, the ethical considerations made throughout the research process and reflects on why LinkedIn was effective for a primarily employment-focussed study. Findings We discuss the importance of insider knowledge for identifying LinkedIn as a potentially fruitful recruitment tool and how the functionality of the platform can be beneficial for a targeted recruitment method. We also explore the ethical and practical considerations of using social media for recruitment. Originality/value Previous research discusses social media as if they are indistinguishable and interchangeable with one another and we argue that this neglects the importance of a platform’s functionality. We discuss how the decision to use a particular social media platform to recruit should be grounded in the researcher’s familiarity with the site, the functionality the platform offers and the sample recruited. This article explicitly explores the considerations taken when using LinkedIn to help overcome recruitment challenges.
Authors
- Graeme Law (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5047-6208)
- Daniel Bloyce (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4114-3588)
- Jacob Griffiths (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4412-0584)
Institutions
- York St John University (GB)
- University of Chester (GB)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Qualitative Research Journal
- Published
- 2025-02-03
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1108/qrj-04-2024-0085
- Citations
- 2
- Primary Topic
- Sports, Gender, and Society
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 7.73