LinkedIn, the world’s largest professional networking platform, has made significant investments in artificial intelligence over the past year, particularly in AI-powered features designed to enhance user productivity. However, a recent admission from the company’s CEO suggests that not all these features are gaining traction. One notable example is LinkedIn’s AI writing assistant, which, according to the executive, has not been as widely adopted or embraced as the company had initially anticipated.
A Candid Reflection from the Top
In a recent public statement, LinkedIn CEO Ryan Roslansky shared insights into the platform’s AI initiatives. While he affirmed that artificial intelligence remains central to LinkedIn’s product strategy and long-term vision, he acknowledged that the AI writing assistant tool—launched to support users in crafting posts, summaries, and messages—has seen lukewarm usage.
“We built it expecting it would make content creation more accessible and frequent, especially for professionals who aren’t natural writers,” Roslansky explained. “But what we’re observing is that people still prefer to express their own voice and tone, even if it takes more effort.”
The Writing Assistant: What It Offers
The AI writing assistant was introduced as part of a broader suite of AI tools integrated into LinkedIn over the past year. Positioned as a content generation helper, the feature was designed to provide users with suggested text for creating posts, profile summaries, and even job descriptions or messages to recruiters and peers.
Using advanced natural language processing models, the assistant can analyze a user’s profile, industry, and tone preferences to offer tailored text. Despite this, many users seem reluctant to use it extensively.
Why the Tool Missed the Mark
There are several possible reasons for the underwhelming reception. One of the main challenges is authenticity. On a platform where personal branding is vital, many professionals are hesitant to rely on generic or AI-generated messages, fearing they might come across as impersonal or even misleading.
Moreover, while the AI-generated suggestions are generally grammatically correct and coherent, they often lack the nuance, context, or emotional intelligence that users seek when representing their professional persona online.
Roslansky noted that for many users, writing is a form of personal expression. “Even if they struggle with writing, people want their posts to sound like them—not like a machine,” he said.
A Broader Pattern Across Tech Platforms
LinkedIn’s experience is not unique. Across the tech industry, AI writing tools have seen varied success depending on their application and target audience. Tools like Grammarly and ChatGPT, which assist rather than replace the writing process, tend to have higher engagement because they empower users without removing their creative control.
In contrast, tools that fully automate content generation often face resistance, particularly in professional or creative communities where tone, authenticity, and originality are paramount.
What This Means for LinkedIn’s AI Roadmap
Despite this setback, LinkedIn is not retreating from AI. Roslansky emphasized that the platform is continuously learning from user behavior and iterating accordingly. “We’re exploring ways to improve the assistant so it complements, not replaces, the user’s own input,” he added.
LinkedIn plans to integrate more advanced personalization options and smarter contextual understanding in future updates. The company also sees potential in expanding AI tools to help with analytics, job matching, learning content, and personalized insights for career growth.
User Feedback Drives Future Development
Feedback has been instrumental in shaping the evolution of LinkedIn’s AI tools. While the current version of the writing assistant may not have gained widespread adoption, the data and insights gathered from users are helping the company identify where and how AI can truly add value.
Some users, for instance, have found the writing assistant helpful in overcoming writer’s block or in translating their ideas into clear, professional language. Others use it as a starting point for brainstorming content or improving grammar. These use cases may inform a future iteration of the tool that is more modular and less intrusive.
Conclusion
LinkedIn’s AI writing assistant might not have taken off as originally hoped, but its story highlights a key lesson in the adoption of artificial intelligence: users value authenticity and control. The mixed response serves as a reminder that in the professional space, technology must align with human preferences, not override them.
As LinkedIn continues to refine its AI offerings, the focus appears to be shifting from automation to augmentation—helping users enhance their capabilities without diminishing their personal voice. In the ever-evolving landscape of work and technology, this balance may be the key to long-term success.
