It depends on what you’re automating.
Using automation on LinkedIn is against the terms of service. Any automation carries risk. LinkedIn can restrict or ban your account if they detect it. They’ve become increasingly sophisticated at spotting automation tools, and the consequences can be severe. Temporary restrictions, permanent bans, or losing your account entirely.
That said, many people use automation for painful admin tasks. Things like:
Withdrawing old connection requests. Sending connection requests. Sharing articles and insights. Sending conversation starters.
For repetitive admin, automation can save time. But there’s a big difference between automating admin and automating outreach.
The Problem With Automating Outreach
Whilst automation can help you reach more people easily, it isn’t always a good idea. In fact, for outreach, it’s usually a bad idea.
The best outreach, the highest converting outreach, is super personalised. Automation can’t do that well. It can insert a first name. It can pull in a company name or job title. But that’s not personalisation. That’s mail merge.
Many prospects receive lots of outreach every single day. They can spot automation patterns in copy instantly. Messages that are personalised but not personal. Their name is there. Maybe their company. But it still feels templated. It still reads like it went to hundreds of other people. Because it did.
These messages get ignored. Or worse, they get marked as spam, which damages your account’s reputation and reduces your ability to reach anyone.
Why Human Outreach Wins
I recommend ultra human outreach. It’s less pitchy, more authentic, and way more effective.
When you send something that clearly took thought and effort, it stands out. When you reference something specific about the person, their content, their company, their situation, they notice. It feels like a real conversation starter, not a sales pitch.
When you send something that looks like it went to 500 other people, it gets ignored. People don’t respond to messages that feel like spam. They respond to messages that feel like they were written for them.
I’ve seen this play out repeatedly with clients. One sales team I worked with was sending 75 automated messages per day and getting a 0.47% response rate. The messages were generic, didn’t hit any pain points, just promotional content with some big name drops.
We stopped the automation completely. We switched to very personal, impossible to automate messaging. Their response rate went to 8%. Even with the drop in volume, they started booking more calls than before.
Volume feels productive. But volume without relevance is just noise.
Where Automation Can Help
This isn’t to say all automation is bad. For genuine admin tasks, it can be a lifesaver.
Withdrawing connection requests is a good example. LinkedIn limits you to 3,000 pending requests. If you don’t clear out old unanswered requests, you hit that limit and can’t send new ones. Doing this manually is tedious. Automation makes sense here.
Scheduling content is another reasonable use. If you want to post consistently but don’t want to be on LinkedIn every day, scheduling tools can help. You write the content yourself, you just automate when it goes out.
The line is clear. Automate the tasks that don’t require a human touch. Never automate the tasks that do.
The Risk Factor
Remember, any automation on LinkedIn carries risk. Even for admin tasks.
LinkedIn’s terms of service prohibit third party automation tools. If they detect you’re using them, they can take action against your account. Some tools are more detectable than others. Some users get away with it for years. Others get caught quickly.
You have to weigh the time saved against the potential consequences. For most people, the admin benefits are worth the small risk. For outreach automation, the risk isn’t worth it because the results are poor anyway.
A Warning for New or Inactive Users
If you’re a new LinkedIn user or your account hasn’t been very active, be especially careful. LinkedIn monitors activity patterns. If an account that normally does very little suddenly starts sending 50 connection requests and 30 messages a day, it triggers red flags.
Automation should never do more than you would do manually. If you wouldn’t normally send 100 messages in a day, don’t let a tool do it for you. The sudden spike in activity is exactly what LinkedIn looks for.
The last thing you want is to lose your account. A restriction can set you back weeks. A ban can wipe out years of connections and content. It’s not worth the risk for marginal time savings.
Start slow. Stay within normal human behaviour patterns. And if you’re going to use any automation at all, use it sparingly.
The Simple Rule
Admin tasks? Automation can help. Use it carefully and understand the risks.
Outreach and pitches? Do it yourself. Keep it human. The extra time investment pays off in dramatically higher response rates.
If you’re going to spend time on LinkedIn outreach, spend it on fewer, better messages rather than more, generic ones. Quality beats quantity every time.
TL;DR
Automation on LinkedIn is against the terms of service, so any use carries risk.
For admin tasks like withdrawing connection requests or scheduling content, it can save time and the risk is relatively low.
For outreach, avoid it. Prospects receive lots of messages and can easily spot automated ones. They ignore them or mark them as spam.
The highest converting outreach is ultra personalised and human.
One sales team I trained went from 0.47% response rate with automation to 8% with personal messaging. If you’re a new or inactive user, be extra cautious.
Sudden spikes in activity trigger LinkedIn’s detection systems.
Automation should never do more than you would do manually.
The last thing you want is to lose your account.