30 LinkedIn post formats that go viral for founders

Everyone keeps asking me if SEO is dead. NOPE! That said, SEO has changed A LOT. Specifically, SEO is now MUCH more than just Google. Here's exactly what changed IMO: Fewer and fewer people "Google" things anymore. They search on Amazon. They search on YouTube. They browse Reddit to get people's opinions before they buy. I learned this the hard way with my SaaS company, Exploding Topics. When we asked customers how they found us almost NO ONE said they "googled and landed on your optimized landing page". Instead it was all over the place. Someone would first hear about us in a YouTube video. Then they'd Google "trend research tools" to see what else was out there. Then go read Reddit threads and comparison posts to figure out if we were any good. Only after ALL of that would they finally sign up on our actual website. If we only optimized for Google, we'd have missed most of that journey. The customer was already researching us (YouTube, LinkedIn, Reddit etc) in places we that traditional SEO would completely IGNORE. So here's what "SEO" actually means in 2026: Optimizing for Google is just PART of SEO now. SEO in 2026 is all about showing up wherever your audience searches. 👍🏻

I've been building businesses since I was 21 (35 now) If I had to relearn all my knowledge again, I'd start here: To be honest, a lot of business books are one good idea stretched over 200 pages. A few changed my businesses, and a handful I disagree with completely: The Best Of The Best 🏅 Atomic Habits: If you only read one book this year, make it this one, because your results end up as good as the systems you build. The 4-Hour Workweek: Probably my favourite book ever, and the real lesson is leverage. Good to Great: Still the best breakdown I've read of what makes a business exceptional. Shoe Dog: The Nike Swoosh cost $30, and Phil Knight's story is the best reminder I know that great businesses look messy at the start. Key Person of Influence: It's a big reason I take personal branding so seriously. Read At Least Once 🥈 The Lean Startup: Essential if you're unsure whether to start, or you've lost touch with what customers want. Zero to One: A good challenge for anyone in a crowded market to check whether they're doing anything different at all. Deep Work: Whenever my calendar fills up and my focus goes, this is the book I go back to. The Psychology of Money: It taught me that money decisions are mostly emotional, which helped me stop making reactive ones. The Hard Thing About Hard Things: The most honest book I've read on what to do when every option in front of you is a bad one. Good For Specific People 🥉 Start With Why: Useful when you're hiring and rallying a team, but early on I'd put that energy into getting moving and making money. Blue Ocean Strategy: One big reframe that's worth knowing if you're stuck competing on price. Rich Dad Poor Dad: It got me thinking about owning assets instead of renting out my time. Think and Grow Rich: It helped me set a clear goal in my 20s, when I was working hard and getting nowhere. Hug Your Haters: I took one lesson from it, which is that complaints handled well can turn into your most loyal customers. Not For Me ❌ Ego Is the Enemy: There's good stuff on humility, but keeping quiet about your work would have cost me a lot of the opportunities I've had. Company of One: Staying small is a valid choice, but it goes against how I've built every business I've run. Digital Minimalism: I love Deep Work, but social media has opened more doors for me than anything else. Inbound Marketing: Being found matters more than ever, but our SDRs still make 100 outbound touches a day for a reason. The 10

IKEA replaced 8,500 customer service roles with AI. And the company is now $1.4 billion richer because of it... Back in 2021, IKEA’s largest franchisee, Ingka, launched an AI assistant called Billie. Within two years, Billie was handling 47% of customer queries to its call centres. The obvious move would have been to cut headcount. IKEA went the other way. It retrained 8,500 call centre workers as remote interior design advisers. Customers book a video call, get help planning a room and leave with a product list. In its 2022 financial year, that channel brought in €1.3 billion ($1.4 billion) in sales. Ingka is aiming for it to reach 10% of total revenue by 2028. It’s one of the smartest uses of AI I’ve seen. To sum it up, IKEA decided to: ✅ Use AI to clear the repetitive work. ✅ Redeploy people to the work AI can’t do. ✅ Build a new service line around what those people do best. That’s how you build defensibility in 2026. AI is already changing how we work. The real question is where you put your people once it does. Be honest about what AI does better. Be ruthless about putting your people where they create the most leverage. AI can handle the standardised tasks. Humans belong where judgement, taste and relationships matter. Plenty of companies will treat AI as a way to cut costs and stop there. The ones that follow IKEA’s example will build something far harder to copy. Love seeing stories like these, and I hope to read many more in the future. Even though AI can feel doom and gloom to some folks, I hope this provides you a different perspective.

Hope this helps someone today - so much of your anxiety and unhappiness comes from caring about opinions - often grounded in nothing. Stop doing that to yourself

"Hire fast, fire faster" is terrible advice. Most leaders should ignore it. Because 99.99% of companies aren't OpenAI or Anthropic. ↳ You don't have their buzz. ↳ You don't have their brand. ↳ You don't have their budget. So you'll never win playing their game. Here's your actual reality: ↳ You can't afford "been there, done that" resumes. ↳ You can't wait months for the flawless hire. ↳ You can't out-pay the giants. That's why the CEO quote above lands so hard. "Invest heavily in the people you have and you won't waste money buying the people you need." The math backs it up. Replacing someone costs 1.5 to 2x their salary. Developing someone costs a fraction of that. But here's what most leaders miss. This only works if you're great at three things: 1. Spotting mispriced talent ↳ See what others overlook. ↳ Hire for potential, not polish. ↳ Bet on character and coachability. 2. Offering what others can't ↳ Steep growth curves, not empty promises. ↳ Real opportunity, personal and financial. ↳ Meaningful work, not ping-pong tables. 3. Developing people on purpose ↳ Honest feedback, not platitudes. ↳ Regular coaching, not annual reviews. ↳ Stretch assignments, not generic training. So skip "hire fast, fire faster." Hire intentionally. Develop deliberately. Empower enthusiastically. Your best investment was never overpaying for the mythical perfect hire. It's making everyone so good you can afford to lose anyone. ♻️ Repost to inspire more leaders to invest in their people. Follow Dave Kline for more leadership insights. P.S. Want proven management playbooks? Get them free: mgmtplaybook.com

Leading like someone else never works. The real unlock is knowing your own style. Clif Mathews shared this, and it's worth passing on 👌🏼 It’s easy to look at another leader and feel you need to change your approach to succeed. But understanding your natural tendencies gives you a better starting point. You can build on your strengths, recognise your blind spots and bring in people whose strengths complement your own. Clif uses these nine leaders to explain the different styles: Servant ↳ Mary Barra prioritised transparency and team stability following a major crisis. → Strength: builds trust and safety before asking for performance. → Watch for: avoiding difficult conversations to keep the peace. Coaching ↳ Eric Yuan focuses on developing leaders who can make decisions without him. → Strength: grows leaders across the business. → Watch for: slowing things down when the moment needs a quick call. Democratic ↳ Satya Nadella rebuilt culture through shared ownership and inclusive decisions. → Strength: people commit to what they helped create. → Watch for: waiting for agreement when someone needs to decide. Transformational ↳ Indra Nooyi pursued a bold new strategy despite significant resistance. → Strength: raises standards and energy. → Watch for: pushing change faster than people can absorb it. Visionary ↳ Reed Hastings committed to a direction before the wider industry believed in it. → Strength: gives people a reason to move together. → Watch for: setting out the vision without a clear plan to deliver it. Autocratic ↳ Steve Jobs took ownership of final product decisions without waiting for consensus. → Strength: brings speed and clarity under pressure. → Watch for: people stop offering ideas they think you won't hear. Situational ↳ Andy Jassy adapts his approach to the team's readiness and changing conditions. → Strength: meets people where they are. → Watch for: the team can't predict what they'll get from you. Delegative ↳ Warren Buffett gives capable leaders the freedom to run their companies. → Strength: frees you to lead rather than manage. → Watch for: stepping back so far that problems surface too late. Transactional ↳ Jensen Huang drives performance through clear goals and high accountability. → Strength: everyone knows what good looks like. → Watch for: people deliver the target but stop going beyond it. Strong teams bring together people with different leadership styles. Understanding your own helps you recognise what you contri

Rivalry can make individuals better. It can also make a business worse. Recent research on NBA players revealed something interesting. They scored around 5% more against personal rivals. But their teams’ performance fell by nearly a third. Individual wins. Collective loss. That’s a terrible trade-off. It’s why building ROCK has taught me something important. The culture you reward becomes the business you build. You want ambitious people. People who push themselves, take ownership and care about results. But ambition without teamwork creates problems. People hoard information. They fight for credit. They optimise for their own success, not the company’s. You might get a few high performers. But you won’t get a high-performing business. As a leader, you decide what gets rewarded. → Celebrate the person who helps someone else succeed. → Make collaboration a competitive advantage. → Give credit to the team behind the result. Because the goal isn’t to have the best person in the room. It’s to build the best team in the market.

Some of my best friends couldn't care less about my ad spend. That's exactly why I keep them close. When I think about what makes a life wealthy, relationships are part of it, right alongside money. And the relationships worth holding onto are the people who want to see you win. I don't have hundreds of founders on speed dial. I have a handful who are on journeys a lot like mine. When things get rough, any of us can pick up the phone and say, “I'd really like your opinion on this,” and get the other person's full attention. Then there are the friends who have nothing to do with business. They make me laugh, and they remind me who I am outside of what I do. And of course, there's my family. My husband and my darling boys remind me why I'm on this path in the first place. We support each other where we can, and make plenty of memories along the way. Growing your network has its place. But the people who've been with you from the start are the ones who'll keep showing up. Tag someone you're proud to have in your corner! P.S. For more posts on building a wealthy life, follow Lise Kuecker. And if y'all want to read more on what six business exits taught me, sign up for my weekly newsletter, Growth Factor: bit.ly/Growth_Factor

Carole Hopson was an HR executive at Foot Locker and L’Oréal. At 50, she became an airline pilot. She is now a Boeing 737 Captain at United Airlines, and she says she is one of fewer than 150 Black women professional pilots in the US. As a former VP of HR, I have been a little obsessed with her story since I came across her on socials. Here’s how she got there: → Police reporter at the Bergen Record, then a master’s from Columbia → NFL Player Programs Coordinator → VP of Training & Development at Foot Locker → Director of HR at L’Oréal → Flight training in 2000, then flight instructor (she was a flight instructor BEFORE she became a pilot for a major airline) → Airline pilot at 50 → United Airlines Captain → Author of A Pair of Wings, inspired by Bessie Coleman. I recently purchased her book, please check it out! What she shares on The Tamsin Show: → The deadline that turned her childhood dream into a real goal → How she prepared financially for a major career change → Why she waited until her sons were older to fly professionally → What it felt like to be the oldest person in the classroom → How to build a personal “board of directors” for your next chapter Whatever your “someday” is, start building toward it now. Starting over at 50 is possible, heck we're all starting over all the time no matter our ages. Hear her story on The Tamsen Show and read A Pair of Wings. Salute, Captain Hopson! --- Share this with someone who needs a reminder it's not too late.

Your best person decided to leave months before they resigned. And nobody, including you as their leader, noticed. A leader I know lost the strongest person on his team last year. She never complained. She never missed a deadline. She never asked for anything. In her exit conversation, she said one thing that struck a nerve in him: "I never knew where I was going here." He was stunned. Nothing dramatic had happened. No argument, no bad review, no big moment. Just small habits that felt fine, because she never pushed back. High performers rarely announce they're unhappy. They keep delivering, go quiet, and start looking. Here are 8 habits that lose them: ❌ Never ask where they want to go next ❌ Reward reliability with more work ❌ Talk about their career once a year ❌ Assume quiet means fine ❌ Keep their wins inside your team ❌ Wait for them to ask for the promotion ❌ Let the brilliant jerk slide because they deliver ❌ Say a quick "good job" and move on And here are 8 that keep them: ✅ Ask about their next step every quarter ✅ Reward reliability with a bigger challenge ✅ Talk about their growth in every one-on-one ✅ Check in on the quiet ones first ✅ Put their work in front of senior leaders ✅ Open the door before they have to ask ✅ Protect them from the people who drain them ✅ Name exactly what they did and why it mattered When your strongest person leaves, the rest of the team is watching. Everyone learns what growth looks like here, or that there isn't any. None of these habits is hard to start. The cost comes from waiting until the resignation letter. When did you last ask your best person where they want to go next? If your leaders need help building habits like these, I can bring them to your team and tailor them to where you're at right now. Find out more about working with me here: https://lnkd.in/gGJEEJ5N ♻️ Repost for a leader who needs to check in on their best person. Follow me, Cicely Simpson, for more on keeping the people who make your team work.

There's one simple reason talented leaders end up stuck. (It's more boring than you'd expect) When a leader feels stretched, the instinct is almost always to manage better. Tighten the follow-up, get more organized, run the week harder... But that's usually the wrong read. The managing is the only part still happening. What looks like managing too much is rarely that. It's what a week turns into once the leading has stopped and management has expanded to fill the space it left behind. And nothing tells you when that happens. No meeting gets canceled. Nothing visibly breaks. The day simply fills up, and it feels like working harder rather than like something going missing. Which is exactly how capable, committed people end up here without ever realizing. I went through the same thing too. I built and sold 9 companies, and along the way I became the constraint in my own business. In EOS, there is a name for this: LMA®, which stands for Leadership, Management and Accountability. It works as an equation: Leadership + Management = Accountability. 1. Leading is the work you do ON the business. Direction, room for people to operate in, actual time to think. 2. Managing is the work you do IN it. Clear expectations, communicating well, making sure things get finished. 3. Accountability isn't a third activity you go off and perform. It's what happens when the first two happen consistently. So the answer isn't to manage less. Being a great leader doesn't make you a great manager, and vice versa. Most of us lean to one, and the other is the one the week is missing. That's normal rather than a character flaw. P.S. Every Saturday I send Clarity Break Thoughts, our newsletter, where you get one leadership idea to sit with for the week ahead. You also get a free eBook when you subscribe: https://lnkd.in/gEpPNYtf

Every founder needs a YouTube team. I built one in Claude that packages, edits and clips every video, and I'm giving it away for free 👇 It runs your channel the way a good producer does. It packages the video before anyone edits it, then cuts it and takes your notes on the timeline. Then it picks which moments deserve a second life as shorts. Here's how it works: 1/ You give it the raw recording 2/ It writes the titles and thumbnail ideas first, in a few versions to test 3/ It edits the full video, and you put your taste into the first 30 seconds 4/ You leave notes at the exact second, and it fixes them What's inside: ➤ Leveling Up Content Engine, the skill that turns 1 recording into the edit and the clips ➤ Packaging YouTube Thumbnails, the skill that writes the titles and builds the thumbnail tests ➤ A review board where you leave notes on the timeline, like comments on a doc ➤ A check that decides which moments are worth a short or a post on X and LinkedIn Since we started running it, our click-through rate went from about 4% to 6-8% a video, and 30-second retention from about 50-55% to 62-65%. I'm giving away free access below 👇 P.S. If you're recording videos and nobody on your team has time to package them, this is exactly what you need.

200+ healthcare VC funds in the US. One place. 🔥 Seed -> late-stage. AI, medtech, diagnostics, biotech, digital health. After days of digging and cleaning, we compiled a structured database of 200+ healthcare-focused VC funds across the US. Inside the list you'll find: -> Fund name & website -> HQ state -> LinkedIn profile -> Funding focus (AI, medtech, diagnostics, biotech, devices, digital health) -> Stage (seed → late-stage) -> Investment geography If you're raising, benchmarking investors, or mapping the market for partnerships - this cuts weeks of research into minutes. If a fund is missing or misclassified, DM me. We'll fix it. Drop "VC" in the comments and make sure we're connected - I'll send you the link.

SKIMS, NIKE & AG1 SPENT MILLIONS TESTING THEIR META ADS. I pulled their 314 best ads into one swipe file, plus the Claude prompts to turn them into yours. Giving it away for free 👇 Meta doesn't show anyone's spend or ROAS. But it does show 3 signals that only appear when an ad is making money: → How many people it reached → How long it's been running → How many times the brand duplicated it Nobody keeps paying for a loser. So I ranked every ad by those 3 signals. 148 ran 30+ days. 42 got cloned 5+ times. One Nike ad has been live for 549 days. Here's what's inside: 1. The Ad Library All 314 ads from SKIMS, Nike, rhode, AG1 and Bloom. Filter by angle, sort by days running. 2. The breakdown Every ad tagged with its hook, angle and format. Plus why it works and how to steal it. 3. The 5 playbooks One per brand. What they repeat, and 3 moves to steal from each. 4. The Claude prompt pack 6 prompts that break down any winner, find the patterns and write your next 10 ads. 5. The HeyOz briefs Claude turns those concepts into prompts you paste straight into HeyOz. Statics and videos in your brand. No shoot, no editor. 6. The 7-day plan From picking 10 ads on Day 1 to your first test live on Day 6. 7. The part that stays yours Your product, your proof, your offer. Steal the structure, never the ad. They paid for the testing. You get the results. Giving away the full swipe file for free below 👇

Spotify open-sourced their internal Claude Code setup that cuts token usage by ~90% 👇 A quarter of engineering leaders already spend $200-$500 per developer per month on tokens. Some are well past $2000. By 2028, AI coding costs are expected to exceed the average developer's salary. And most of that spend is I/O. Opening 5 files to answer a question about one method. Writing a test that copies the 20 tests next to it. Thousands of tokens, almost zero reasoning. Spotify's fix is to route that work to a cheaper model. It has two parts: 1️⃣ Two cheap workers Each is one YAML file: a prompt, Gemini 2.5 Flash, temperature 0.2. → bulk-reader: reads the files, returns structured bullets → code-writer: reads a reference file, writes matching code 2️⃣ A Claude Code plugin called shunt with 3 layers → Hooks: any full Read of a file over 350 lines (configurable) is blocked and Claude is told to use bulk-reader. Targeted reads still pass. → Scripts: wrap the Portal CLI, ship files to the worker, can write code straight to disk. → Skills: markdown files with the invocation syntax. Spotify first tried putting these rules in 𝗖𝗟𝗔𝗨𝗗𝗘.𝗺𝗱. They were advisory, so Claude could ignore them. Hooks made the behavior enforceable. Skip the skill, and the large read still gets blocked. Net effect: the raw files and generated code never enter Claude's context. In a Java monorepo, that came out to ~90% average token savings on bulk reads. Three caveats: editing and reasoning can't be delegated, and each delegation adds a 10–30s round trip, so small files aren't worth routing. The plugin is open source and runs through Portal by Spotify. You can install it with 3 commands. Link in the comments. -- P.S. We’re building the best AI English tutor in the world. Try it to improve your speaking - it’s 15× cheaper than a human one → GetFluently.app

I had 23 coffee chats this week. I don’t drink coffee. These are with people I'd love to hire. They are usually never looking for a job. I don’t pitch them when we get together. We just go over new projects, ideas, coworkers. How their lives are going. For high performers, you won’t know when they want to leave. If you’re looking to hire someone, you need to stay top of mind for them. By the time they post it on LinkedIn, it’s too late. And I know you're wondering what I order: Yuzu Fizz all day.

𝗞𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗦𝗮𝘂𝗱’𝘀 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗽 𝗠𝗮𝗳𝗶𝗮 12 alumni founders. Over $350 million in reported startup funding. King Saud University’s entrepreneurial network is helping shape Saudi Arabia’s growing startup ecosystem. Here are 3 key takeaways: 1️⃣ Fintech is attracting significant capital Founders behind Rewaa, neoleap, Salasa, and Sifi are building businesses across payments, financial services, and commerce infrastructure. 2️⃣ Innovation extends across industries From Intelmatix and its AI solutions to logistics, real estate technology, and digital platforms, alumni are tackling diverse market opportunities. 3️⃣ University networks can create powerful ecosystems Shared educational backgrounds can help entrepreneurs build relationships, exchange expertise, and access valuable business connections. Bottom line? Some of the strongest startup ecosystems are built around networks of ambitious founders. When talent, capital, and entrepreneurial experience come together, the potential for innovation multiplies. 🔔 P.S. Raising capital? Find the right investors for your startup in 30 seconds. https://lnkd.in/ehddabZ5

I just read a study of 116,000 LinkedIn posts, and my favorite finding is that 40% of creators actually performed BETTER when including links. More on that in a sec. Flypost studied 2,400+ creators and found that these things were associated with more reactions on LinkedIn: • Telling a personal story (+33%) • Speaking in first person/first person plural (+19%) • Including an image (+35%) • Including concrete details (+15%) (receipts or GTFO!) But the zero-click takeaway is reeeally interesting: Posts with a link received 13% fewer reactions. HOWEVER, 40% of the creators studied actually performed better when including links. Meaning — the oft-quoted wisdom that links doom your LinkedIn posts doesn't hold true for everyone. Maybe the click is the whole point of your post. Maybe your content was so good that it beat the link penalty. (Fine, caveat: This study doesn't outright confirm an algorithmic link penalty, and the researchers measured reactions, not impressions. But still!) Oh, and something I found hilarious was how quickly we saw the downfall of the "Comment [keyword] and I'll send you the guide!" tactic. According to the study: In April through early July 2026, those posts got 13% more reactions than the same creators' other posts. But since then, they've gotten 24% FEWER reactions. A classic case of the "law of shitty clickthroughs" in swift action. Other things I thought were interesting: Hashtags: One or two hashtags didn't make a meaningful difference. But 3-5 were associated with about 8% fewer reactions. Weekend vs. weekday: Weekend posts got 3% more reactions, but only 54% of creators benefited. Probably too small to be meaningful, but interesting. (FWIW, my hypothesis is that there's less competition on weekends.) Why I liked this study: • They compared creators against themselves vs. comparing different accounts. • They reported what % of creators actually benefited from each tactic. • They're candid about what they couldn't measure. Here's the full research if you wanna dig into it yourself: https://lnkd.in/gegwP-5R Big ups to Sam Cassman and team for the research!

I lost a turnaround because fear entered my leadership before I could see it. The company was backed by private equity. Results were urgent. The new management team was still learning to work together. I responded by pushing harder. I micromanaged. I shortened discussions. I became less patient with mistakes. There was plenty of activity, and I called it progress. Years later, I can describe what happened through a simple 2×2 coaching model I use today. Two forces shape our behaviour: urgency and fear. 🐈 The Cat Low urgency, low fear. Comfortable. Safe. Little reason to move. 🐇 The Rabbit Low urgency, high fear. Hesitates, freezes, waits for danger to pass. 🐂 The Bull High urgency, high fear. Pushes, controls, reacts, leaves little room for others. 🦅 The Eagle High urgency, low fear. Sees the bigger picture, stays clear, acts decisively. I was the Bull. A turnaround needs urgency. But my fear was driving how I led, and I couldn't recognise it at the time. Research on stress helps explain some of what I experienced. Under stress, our thinking can become less flexible, and we tend to fall back on familiar habits. Fear also changes how teams behave. People become less willing to speak up, challenge assumptions, or expose problems early. That failure led me to study what happens in the mind and body when we make decisions. It also started a daily practice of self-observation that I have continued for 15 years. It changed how I approached later turnarounds. I still believe in ambitious targets, clear standards, and urgency. But I pay much closer attention to the fear behind my own behaviour. Because a leader's fear rarely stays inside the leader. It enters the system.

$10m → $15m in 3 months. On track to get to $25m EoY. The team is absolutely crushing it 🔥.

If you earned €100,000 a year, how much would actually land in your bank account? Across Europe, the answer varies by more than €36,000. After income tax and employee social contributions: 🇧🇬 Bulgaria: €86,930 🇪🇪 Estonia: €74,400 🇨🇿 Czechia: €72,800 🇲🇹 Malta: €72,500 🇨🇭 Switzerland: €70,500 🇨🇾 Cyprus: €70,300 🇬🇧 United Kingdom: €69,900 🇸🇰 Slovakia: €67,855 🇳🇴 Norway: €66,900 🇭🇺 Hungary: €66,500 🇱🇻 Latvia: €66,200 🇪🇸 Spain: €64,200 🇮🇪 Ireland: €64,000 🇹🇷 Turkey: €63,200 🇫🇷 France: €63,000 🇫🇮 Finland: €62,200 🇱🇺 Luxembourg: €61,500 🇭🇷 Croatia: €61,000 🇱🇹 Lithuania: €60,500 🇳🇱 Netherlands: €60,500 🇵🇱 Poland: €60,225 🇷🇴 Romania: €58,500 🇩🇪 Germany: €57,900 🇵🇹 Portugal: €57,000 🇮🇹 Italy: €56,700 🇬🇷 Greece: €56,615 🇸🇮 Slovenia: €55,060 🇦🇹 Austria: €54,200 🇸🇪 Sweden: €52,000 🇩🇰 Denmark: €51,500 🇧🇪 Belgium: €50,750 Same €100,000 salary. In Bulgaria, you keep almost €87,000. In Belgium, just over €50,000. That's a difference of €36,180 a year from the exact same gross salary. And this is before even comparing: → Cost of living → Housing → Healthcare → Childcare → Pensions → What you actually receive in public services Gross salary only tells you part of the story. Where you earn it matters too 🌎 Which country surprises you most?? Need help to build your personal brand and audience on LinkedIn? Talk soon: https://hunt.rs/ 👋