Boolean Search String Experiment #2

Posted by | January 10, 2011 | Boolean, Boolean Search Experiments | 23 Comments

Cyborg Sourcer

Back in November, I posted a Boolean search challenge to demonstrate that when you give a number of sourcers and recruiters the same job description/hiring profile to search for, you will get as many different searches and search strategies as you have sourcers and recruiters.

As I have said many times before, every search string “works,” provided they are syntactically correct.

However, not all search strings or strategies are created equal, nor are the results that are returned.

Because of this fact, 20 different sourcers and recruiters searching the same source (LinkedIn, the Internet, Monster, etc.) will find some of the same candidates, but each will also find some that the others do not.

The most important question to ask is anyone actually finding all of the best candidates that the particular source has to offer? Believe it or not, some of the best candidates are never found by the people who are searching for them. You can’t be aware of something your searches do not return.

Or can you?

Information Retrieval is the Key

When it comes to information retrieval- which is the science of searching for documents (e.g., resumes, press releases, etc.), for information within documents (e.g., experience and qualifications), as well as searching relational databases and the Internet – simply having access to the information does not afford a sourcer, recruiter or organization any competitive advantage.

However, human capital informational and competitive advantage can be achieved through more effective retrieval – in other words, more effective queries (i.e., Boolean search strings).

Queries are formal statements of information needs. When searching to identify talent, the more effective you are at translating your information needs (skills, experience, qualifications, etc.) into queries, the more likely you are to find all of the best candidates any particular source of talent has to offer.

Public Basis of Search Strategy Comparison

In many organizations, sourcers and recruiters do not often get (or even seek out) the opportunity to compare and contrast their search strategies and tactics with a large community of their peers on a position-by-position basis. Much of the “magic” of sourcing (or lack thereof!) happens on each person’s computer screen for no one else to see, appreciate, or learn from.

Unlike professional athletes and musicians whose skills and techniques are on display and scientists who publish their work for others to analyze, the skills and techniques of sourcers and recruiters responsible for talent discovery are not widely publicly available.

A powerful and effective way to demonstrate the fact that not all searches are created equal (nor do they return the same number and quality of results!) is to offer the global sourcing and recruiting community the opportunity to share and view the search strings and strategies of many sourcers and recruiters all crafting searches for the same hiring profile.

You Can Contribute to the Global Sourcing Community!

It’s easy!

All you need to do is comment on this post with your search string(s) and include a brief overview of your analysis and approach to searching for the hiring profile below.

In the first Boolean search string experiment, I used a relatively basic and brief job description. I also specified that participants could craft searches using the source of their choice – the Internet, LinkedIn, Monster, an ATS, etc.

For this experiment, I am going in the opposite direction.

The job description and hiring profile I pulled from Indeed is quite long and appears more complex. I would also like to limit you to creating search strings that would run on a source that allows for longer strings and supports full Boolean logic as well as stemming (e.g., config* to return configure, configured, configuration, etc.). That excludes Internet search engines and LinkedIn.

When you leave a comment with your search(es), you have a choice:

  1. You can let the world who you are and what you can do, or…
  2. You can choose to remain anonymous and not identify yourself when leaving your comment and your search strings/strategy. Feel free to use a fake name (e.g., Recruiter1, Yoda, etc.), and you can even use a fake email address so there is absolutely no way anyone, including me, can identify you.

Either way – don’t be shy, and please contribute! If sourcing isn’t something you’re responsible for - please forward this to someone who would like to participate.

How Would You Search for Candidates for this Job?

Senior Financial Analyst

We are seeking a Senior Financial Analyst to support our Global eCommerce organization. The main responsibilities include working with cross functional groups in Strategy, Product Management and Engineering to understand and financially evaluate new business strategies; building financial models to understand business case and ROI of potential investments; budgeting, forecasting and analyses in support of the businesses; identifying opportunities and risk as well as driving business results. Potential areas of focus include Mobile and Digital Strategy, Multi-channel Initiatives, and Capital Planning. You will be expected to utilize your financial background to provide financial advice to your business partners.

Description
1. Analysis

  • Provide input for business decisions by producing detailed financial models and P&Ls incorporating assumptions, expectations, and known risks
  • Prepare presentations and other supporting materials for recommendations; participate in business case presentations to senior and executive management; clearly articulate merits of case under consideration
  • Proactively identify opportunities to improve efficiency in core Finance processes, to analyze the business from new value-added perspectives, and to enhance the strategic role of Finance in the organization

2. Forecasting

  • For current business and new projects, develop bi-monthly financial forecasts that incorporate current business trends and business strategies
  • Quantify and articulate risks and opportunities in achieving forecasts and prepare monthly “cause of change” reports related to these forecasts
  • Understand the key tools available for research and reporting and actively incorporate them into tracking and forecasting process
  • Create ad-hoc forecasts as needed during key periods to provide insights into areas of risk and opportunity and influence business strategies
  • Lead automation of models and processes which result in streamlining forecasting, month-end and other on-going reporting

3. Budgeting/ Planning

  • Create annual operating, overhead and capital budgets in partnership with the Global eCommerce organizations
  • Support monthly P&L review process by recapping actual sales and margin results versus plan, preparing monthly variance reports for business owners, and analyzing key performance drivers
  • Participate in long range financial planning process
  • Present findings to corporate management that focus on Year-over-year changes, key operating metrics, and any key points or drivers that were influential in the creation of the plan

4. Accounting Support

  • Monitor P&L lines during monthly financial close; be able to discuss variances to forecast
  • Conduct research as needed during monthly financial close
  • Prepare, reconcile monthly revenue recognition

Functional Competencies:

  • Demonstrated analytical and quantitative skills
  • Expertise in working with large data sets and concepts to develop models and reports
  • Solid understanding of accounting principles
  • MUST have substantial experience with MS Excel and PowerPoint, Tableau, Essbase, SAP experience desired; a good understanding of database systems such as MS Access, SQL and Business Objects a plus
  • Understanding of technology and retail industry preferred

Experience:

  • 3-5 years of post MBA experience or 5-7 years of post undergrad work experience in a finance-related field (including management consulting, investment banking, corporate finance within Fortune 500)
  • Technology, Retail and e-commerce experience a plus

Preferred educational level:

  • Bachelor’s degree required; B.S. in business administration, economics, finance, mathematics preferred
  • MBA preferred
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

About Glen Cathey

Glen Cathey is a sourcing and recruiting thought leader with over 16 years of experience working in large staffing agency and global RPO environments (>1,000 recruiters and nearly 100,000 hires annually). Starting out his career as a top producing recruiter, he quickly advanced into senior management roles and now currently serves as the SVP of Strategic Talent Acquisition and Innovation for Kforce, working out of their renowned National Recruiting Center with over 300 recruiters. Often requested to speak on sourcing and recruiting best practices, trends and strategies, Glen has traveled internationally to present at many talent acquisition conferences (5X LinkedIn Talent Connect - U.S. '10, '11, '12, Toronto '12, London '12, 2X Australasian Talent Conference - Sydney & Melbourne '11, '12, 6X SourceCon, 2X TruLondon, 2X HCI) and is regularly requested to present to companies (e.g., PwC, Deloitte, Intel, Booz Allen Hamilton, Citigroup, etc.). This blog is his personal passion and does not represent the views or opinions of anyone other than himself.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Boolean Search String Experiment #2 -- Topsy.com

  • http://magicsourcer.wordpress.com/ Sarang Brahme

    Great to this challenge back….

    OK – here it goes….

    My search strategy is very simple and straight forward.

    We need a senior (this can be screened) Financial Analyst with basic FA requirement like modelling, budgeting, forecasting and reporting etc. It needs to have MS Excel and power point along with any of other technologies listed.

    Lastly but very important – industry. Though it says retail OR technology preferred – I would more look at e-commerce as client is ecom company.

    Here would be my first search string and I’ll take it from there…

    analyst AND financ* AND (risk OR case) AND forecast* AND budget* AND model* AND report* AND (excel OR powerpoint OR “power point”) AND (Tableau OR Essbase OR SAP OR Access OR SQL OR BO OR “business objects”) AND (retail OR ebiz OR “e-business” OR “e business” OR “e-biz” OR ecommerce OR “e-commerce” OR “e commerce” OR “electronic funds transfer” OR EFT OR “online transaction processing” OR “electronic data interchange” OR EDI OR “inventory management systems” OR etail OR “e-tail” OR “e tail” OR “online banking” OR ebanking OR “online shopping”)

  • Adam

    Hello,

    What search engine supports longer strings and full Boolean logic as well as stemming ?

    I don’t have Monster or CB

    Thanks!

  • Megan Calimbas

    This would be my base string, returned 25 results of which the majority are relevant. What made the the largest difference for me was elimination of words in the title field.
    (“ecommerce” OR “e-commerce”) OR (investment OR corporate) banking AND risk AND global AND model* AND forecast* AND (mobile OR digital) AND (tableau OR essbase OR sql OR sap) AND fortune with job title (SR. OR SENIOR) “FINANCIAL ANALYST” -”PROJECT” -”PROGRAM”

  • http://incredibleconsulting.jp Howard Ichiro

    Glen,
    Hello from Tokyo, Japan and Happy New Years to you.
    I primarily use BING now to do X-ray searches on Linkedin for candidates. Still new to this, but here is a stab with the 10-minutes I have for lunch.

    BING

    site:linkedin.com powered (“Senior Financial Analyst” OR “Senior FA”) AND (Financial Modeling | ROI | Strategy Development) NEAR:2 (Mobile | Technology | global Ecommerce)

  • http://incrediblesearch.jp Howard Ichiro

    I see you are excluding internet search,
    Please disregard the previous entry.

    Thanks

  • Matt

    I would start with a long search string and use NOT operator to modify search to eliminate preferred skill sets….Replace “NEAR” with proper proximity operator (i.e. NEAR:?, w/?, etc.). I won’t list each possible search that I would run, but here is a short list:

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND varian* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND (ecomm* OR “e-comm*” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusin* OR “e-busin*”) AND (Retail OR Retailer*) AND (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND (ecommerce OR “e-commerce” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusiness OR “e-business”) AND NOT (Retail OR Retailer) AND (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND NOT (ecommerce OR “e-commerce” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusiness OR “e-business”) AND (Retail OR Retailer) AND (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND NOT (ecommerce OR “e-commerce” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusiness OR “e-business”) AND NOT (Retail OR Retailer) AND (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND (ecommerce OR “e-commerce” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusiness OR “e-business”) AND (Retail OR Retailer) AND NOT (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND (ecommerce OR “e-commerce” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusiness OR “e-business”) AND NOT (Retail OR Retailer) AND NOT (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND NOT (ecommerce OR “e-commerce” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusiness OR “e-business”) AND (Retail OR Retailer) AND NOT (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

  • Matt

    Sorry, pasted the wrong searches in my last post! Here are the correct ones.

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND varian* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND (ecomm* OR “e-comm*” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusin* OR “e-busin*”) AND (Retail OR Retailer*) AND (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND (ecomm* OR “e-comm*” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusin* OR “e-busin*”) AND NOT (Retail OR Retailer) AND (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND NOT (ecomm* OR “e-comm*” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusin* OR “e-busin*”) AND (Retail OR Retailer) AND (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND NOT (ecomm* OR “e-comm*” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusin* OR “e-busin*”) AND NOT (Retail OR Retailer) AND (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND (ecomm* OR “e-comm*” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusin* OR “e-busin*”) AND (Retail OR Retailer) AND NOT (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR (ecomm* OR “e-comm*” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusin* OR “e-busin*”) (ecommerce OR “e-commerce” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusiness OR “e-business”) AND NOT (Retail OR Retailer) AND NOT (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

    (Financial NEAR Analyst) AND financ* AND analys* AND forecast* AND budget* AND variance* AND (financ* NEAR model*) AND (revenue* NEAR recogn*) AND Excel AND NOT (ecomm* OR “e-comm*” OR “electronic commerce” OR ebusin* OR “e-busin*”) AND (Retail OR Retailer) AND NOT (SAP OR Essbase OR Hyperion OR Tableau)

  • http://ruthiecopeland.co.cc/ Ruthie Copeland

    Great to this challenge back…. OK – here it goes…. My search strategy is very simple and straight forward. We need a senior (this can be screened) Financial Analyst with basic FA requirement like modelling, budgeting, forecasting and reporting etc. It needs to have MS Excel and power point along with any of other technologies listed. Lastly but very important – industry. Though it says retail OR technology preferred – I would more look at e-commerce as client is ecom company. Here would be my first search string and I’ll take it from there… analyst AND financ* AND (risk OR case) AND forecast* AND budget* AND model* AND report* AND (excel OR powerpoint OR “power point”) AND (Tableau OR Essbase OR SAP OR Access OR SQL OR BO OR “business objects”) AND (retail OR ebiz OR “e-business” OR “e business” OR “e-biz” OR ecommerce OR “e-commerce” OR “e commerce” OR “electronic funds transfer” OR EFT OR “online transaction processing” OR “electronic data interchange” OR EDI OR “inventory management systems” OR etail OR “e-tail” OR “e tail” OR “online banking” OR ebanking OR “online shopping”)

  • http://www.booleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

    Howard – thanks for responding! I’ll take your Internet search, but was hoping to see what people would do if they were not constrained to a limited number of search terms and limited Boolean search capability.

  • http://www.booleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

    Adam – even if you don’t have access to Monster or Careerbuilder, please share what kind of searches you *would* use if you were not limited by a maximum search string length, and if you could leverage full Boolean logic.

  • http://www.booleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

    Sarang, Megan and Matt for sharing your searches!

    Based on the low number of responses so far, I am beginning to think people are more intimidated by this job description compared to the very simple and straight forward job I used in the 1st Boolean search string experiment. I’d like to see at least 20 more responses before I post a follow up with my analysis and search strategy.

  • William

    I would write this search for Monster.

    The first thing that I do when starting a search is simply pull a list of key terms or ideas.

    Strategy, Product Management, Engineering, Global eCommerce, Mobile and Digital Strategy, Multi-channel Initiatives, and Capital Planning

    Business Cases, ROI, financial models, P&L, forecasting, business trends, quantify risk, “cause of change reports”, long range financial planning, key operating metrics, monthly financial close, reconcile revenue recognition

    Excel, Tableau, Essbase, SAP, Access, SQL, Business Objects

    Management consulting, Investment banking

    Those are the terms/ideas that I pulled out on my initial run through of the job. Clearly this position is not the typical Corporate FP&A role and my main concern is making sure that my search pulls as few of those candidates as possible.

    Sometimes I begin a search using job titles, for example:
    (“Senior Financial Analyst” or “Sr. Financial Analyst” or “Financial Analyst”)

    I know that there is redundancy in that portion of the string but I prefer that method so those terms are highlighted in the search so I can quickly see how recent the candidate held that particular role.

    I then continue building the string, attempting to conceptually group terms:

    (global or international) and (ecommerce or “e-commerce” or mobile) and (“capital planning” or “investment banking” or “management consulting”) and (strateg* or “business case”) and (“revenue recognition” or “monthly close” or “monthly financial close”) and (“cause of change” or “operating metrics” or “business trend” or ROI or “return on investment” or IRR or “internal rate of return” or NPV or “net present value”) and Tableau and Essbase and (SQL or “Business Objects” or SAP or Access)

    I definitely start on the conservative side when running a search and probably in general, but there it is. I read the last post and thought I would contribute this time around!

  • Lori Cox

    I am new to this and wonder if anyone can advise a site or reading material to assist in gaining proficiency?

  • Matt

    @Lori – You came to the right site….As far as I’m concerned, Glen (Boolean Black Belt) is the best in the business and he offers his expertise and training materials for free on this site! A lot of so-called “sourcing experts” charge money for similar materials, but Glen provides all of his expertise for free. I suggest you click on the “Free Sourcing + Recruiting Resources” at the top of this page…That should give you a good start.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mdhepler Matthew David Hepler

    Glen,

    Thanks for all the great wisdom.

    I do have one question…I came across the issue of needing a certain skill (Microstrategy) but needing to avoid the company MicroStrategy because of false positives on LinkedIn. I have figured out how to do it through the Advanced Search on linkedin but what about the Boolean String equivalent? This is what I have come up with along with many different variations… site:linkedin.com NOT current near:4 “MicroStrategy” “washington d.c. metro area” powered microstrategy

    Any advice for isolating the company of the same name as the skill set in a boolean string?

  • Anonymous

    When I perform searches and screens for candidates, I try and understand the essence of the position and develop a model candidate, while attempting to emulate keywords they might likely use in their profile, resume, or CV. This is an important first step, as it helps establish the criteria used in screening for a sourced set of candidates. So what do we know, or can infer of this position? Note that any inferences should best be validated in conversations with the hiring manager.

    - This is a high-level analyst position, likely interacting with C-level, or very senior level management, addressing corporate and key business unit performance
    =====> Position Hints: Analyst will support a global organization; strategic emphasis appears to be placed over tactical.

    - The position supports a medium to large corporation
    =====> Position Hints: Use of SAP and Eesbase; interest in a candidate with Fortune 500 experience

    - General background desired is multi-faceted: strong accounting background (revenue and profit recognition can be tricky, particularly for global business units, where inter-company sales, prepaid services and FX gains/losses may be involved).

    While technical keywords may be able to address the above points made, how are are we to address desired talents that would be suitable for this position? If this hasn’t crossed your mind, I’d recommend a recruiter include Marcus Buckingham in their required reading (one example is First, Break All The Rules). This position favors those who can confront controversy, intimidation, ambiguity and debate, to name but a few benefits that come with the territory. We ideally need terms that can attempt to draw out those talents.

    What is the noise in the position as described? Can we differentiate vital requirements, versus a series of given, routine requirements and noise (often times, boiler-plate requirements, that serve little to screen candidates)?  I’d venture that Excel, PowerPoint and Access are not worthy of inclusion in a search string. If a candidate has experience, or exposure to SAP accounting and Eesbase, they would have had Excel and other reporting, graphing and presentation software applications experience. Likewise, with interest in a masters degree, there is no need to include in the search a bachelor degree.

    So, let’s proceed to build a set of keywords/logic by section of the job description:

    Overview:
    ((financial OR business) NEAR analyst) AND
    marketing AND (engineering OR development OR r&d)

    Analysis
    (financial NEAR statement*) OR (financial NEAR analysis) AND
    (advance OR advocate OR present OR recommend)

    Forecasting
    “strategic planning” AND model AND risk AND
    (achieve OR reduce OR lead OR led)

    Budgeting/Planning
    (“capital plan*”) OR (“capital ADJ budget*”) AND
    (range NEAR planning) AND
    (review OR analyze OR compar*)

    Accounting
    account* AND reconcil* AND
    revenue AND (margin OR profit OR “NI”) AND
    “product line”

    Functional Competencies
    (fasb OR principles OR “generally accepted”) AND
    essbase and sap

    Experience
    (mba OR “business admin* OR masters OR ((“m.s.” OR ms) NEAR degree) AND
    (consulting OR banking OR (“corp* finance” OR cpa OR “c.p.a.”))

    Preferred Educational Level
    Experience has already incorporated a master degree search

    Rather than consolidate all the elements, let me address more meatier issues:

    - What results do you anticipate to be included in your results and is it possible to screen out those candidates via use of the Boolean NOT? 

    - What other terms can be used to represent talents?

    - Given some modeling of the Boolean string (particularly when working with Career Builder, Monster, or Dice), how can the string be reduced (to minimize over-screening), while still keeping over or under-qualified candidates to a manageable level?

    - Have you as a recruiter confirmed all elements you are screening for with the hiring manager?

    - When you have presented a candidate that met the criteria (which you have also validated through discussion with your candidate), but which has been rejected by the hiring manager, have you performed a post-mortem with the manager, to understand why the candidate was rejected? Be on the look-out for unarticulated mental models of the position, that can include biases, or a firm’s tribal knowledge that are taken for granted, but are not documented in job requirements.

    - Have you in advance of preparing a Boolean string reviewed resumes, or profiles of previous candidates of yours that were placed in similar positions, to cull out key elements that were attractive to the hiring manager, derived from your post-interview discussions with the hiring manager?

    - Do you archive search strings by position?

    - What do you learn when performing your search that would invite amending the position requirements you document in your job postings?

    - What gaps in understanding the position would you like to learn from candidates that you will contact, to become better at sourcing the position?

    - How do you plan to validate with a sourced candidate that they meet the key position requirements?

    What I’ve learned is that when performing every candidate search, I am forcing myself to come to terms what I know of the position, the hiring manager and the corporate culture and what remains elusive, that requires further dialog with our client and candidates.

    Glen, thanks for offering this exercise!

    And to all: happy candidate hunting!
    Al Hannenberg
    http://www.informativepeople.com

  • Muralikrishna

    how to search java developer resumes in us using strings

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Philip-Terry/549537008 Philip Terry

    Hi Howard

    Why did you use the NEAR 2 command….?

    Best regards

    Philip

  • http://www.booleanblackbelt.com Glen Cathey

    Philip (and Howard), I’m sorry if I am hijacking, but thought I’d jump in and answer.

    Howard used NEAR:2 to find results in which at least one of these terms (Financial Modeling | ROI | Strategy Development) is within 2 words of at least one of these terms (Mobile | Technology | global Ecommerce)

    The only problem is that unfortunately, while Bing’s NEAR:x functionality works like a charm, it doesn’t play nice with OR statements. I have found that using the NEAR:x command works best with single terms on either side. For example:

    site:linkedin.com (“Senior Financial Analyst” OR “Senior FA”) Strategy NEAR:5 Mobile

  • Anonymous

    I Think the below string is works for above Requirement

     senior financial analyst resume , “5 years ” mba OR bachelor -sample -job -tips

  • Pingback: 100+ Free Sourcing & Recruiting Tools, Guides, and Resources

  • Gaurav Rajavat

    how to search Jive developers with “Social Collaboration” resumes in monster