A vendor's LinkedIn company page lists people who do not appear on the firm's public website roster. How should the researcher use that list?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
A company page is a lobby directory someone typed, not HR's official headcount. Use the extra names as leads, then verify each one elsewhere. Do not treat the page as a sworn roster.
Full Explanation
A vendor’s LinkedIn company page listing people absent from the firm’s public website roster should be used by treating each listed name as a people-pivot lead to verify against other public sources. Company pages are curated marketing directories for municipal reviewers, not HR’s authoritative headcount, and extra names often repay careful pivoting. Treating the company-page people list as an authoritative employment roster fails because listings can be outdated, aspirational, incorrect, or left over from prior employers’ automation. Ignoring the list because LinkedIn company pages cannot be used for OSINT fails; they are standard public pivots for names, titles, and alleged municipal project roles. Emailing every listed person from a city account to confirm employment fails as noisy, OPSEC-poor human contact when public verification paths—site bios, filings, news, agendas—may already suffice. Exam caveat: extra names are leads; absence from the website does not prove the LinkedIn entry is false, and presence does not prove current employment. Operational check: export visible names and titles; cross-check website, filings, and news; retain only corroborated identities in the civic vendor map and keep uncorroborated names explicitly labeled as leads pending verification.