Monthly Archives: December 2008

Basic Boolean Search Operators and Query Modifiers Explained

 

Basic Boolean Operators Explained

No, those aren’t my hands.

I never cease to be amazed by what you can find on the Internet and what people take pictures of.

Now that I have your attention, this post is going to focus on the basic Boolean search operators and search modifiers symbols and will not go into any detail of the many special Internet-only search commands/operators.

Although a great many people seem to think that Boolean = Internet search, Boolean logic and searching has been around WAY before the Internet. And here’s a quick fact: you don’t have to capitalize Boolean operators on any of the major job boards and many of the major ATS’s.

Go ahead – try it. Nothing will explode and your searches will execute.

And now, back to the Boolean basics…

Boolean Search Operator: AND

The AND operator is inclusionary and thus limits your search.

It should be used for targeting required skills, experience, technologies, or titles you would like to limit your results to. Unless you are searching for common words, with every AND you add to your Boolean query, the fewer results you will typically get.

Example: Java AND Oracle AND SQL AND AJAX

On most Internet search engines and LinkedIn, every space is an “implied AND,” and you don’t have to type it, as every blank space is interpreted as an AND operator.

Example: Java Oracle SQL AJAX

Bonus: You can use the ampersand (&) as the AND operator on Monster.

Boolean Search Operator: OR

The OR operator offers flexible inclusion, and typically broadens your search results.

Many people incorrectly think the Boolean OR operator is an either/or operator, when in fact it is not.

The OR operator is technically interpreted as “at least one is required, more than one or all can be returned.”

Although some search engines, such as Google, do not require you to encapsulate OR statements with parentheses, if you don’t on most databases and LinkedIn – your search will run but execute in a way that you probably did not intent.  As a best practice, I tell people to always use parentheses around OR statements as a matter of good search syntax.

Example: Java AND Oracle AND SQL AND AJAX AND (apache OR weblogic OR websphere)

The returned results must mention at least one of the following: apache, weblogic, websphere. However, if candidates mention 2 or all 3, they also will be returned, and most search engines will rank them as more relevant results because of such.

The best ways to use OR statements is:

  1. To think of all of the alternate ways a particular skill or technology can be expressed, e.g., (CPA OR “C.P.A” OR “Certified Public Accountant”)
  2. To search for a list of desired skills where you would be pleased if a candidate had experience with at least one, e.g., (apache OR linux OR mysql).

Bonus: You can use the pipe symbol (|) for the OR operator on Google, Bing, and Monster.

Boolean Search Operator: NOT

The NOT operator is exclusionary – it excludes specific search terms and so the query will not return any results with that term (or terms) in them.

Example: If you were searching for an I.T. Project Manager, you may want to employ the NOT operator in order to eliminate false positive results – results that mention your search terms but do not in fact match your target hiring profile.  In this case, you could run: “project manager” and not construction – this search will not return any results with “project manager” and the word “construction” contained within them.

On all of the major job board resume databases, some ATS’s and LinkedIn, you can use the NOT operator in conjunction with an OR statement.

Example: .Net AND NOT (Java OR JSP OR J2EE) – that search will not return any results with any mention of Java, JSP, and/or J2EE.

Bonus: NOT has 2 main uses

  1. Excluding words you do not want to retrieve to reduce false positive results (most common usage)
  2. Starting with a very restrictive search with many search terms, you can use the NOT operator to systematically and progressively loosen the search into mutually exclusive result sets (not so common usage, but very effective strategy)

Basic example:

  1. “Project Manager” AND SQL AND Spanish
  2. “Project Manager” AND SQL AND NOT Spanish
  3. “Project Manager” AND NOT SQL AND Spanish
  4. “Project Manager” AND NOT (SQL OR Spanish)

Bonus: You can use the minus sign as the NOT operator on many sites and search engines, including LinkedIn.

Boolean Search Modifier: ASTERISK *

The asterisk can be used on most resume databases and non-Internet search engines as a root word/stem/truncation search. In other words, the search engine will return and highlight any word that begins with the root/stem of the word truncated by the asterisk.

For example: admin* will return: administrator, administration, administer, administered, etc.

The asterisk is a time saver for search engines that recognize it (most major job boards and ATS’s) because it saves you from creating long OR statements and having to think of every way a particular word can be expressed.

LinkedIn does not support the asterisk, so you will have to construct large OR statements to search for all of the various ways someone could mention each term you’re searching for. For example: (configure OR configuring OR configured OR configures)

Boolean Search Modifier: PARENTHESES

As a best practice, use parentheses to encapsulate OR statements for the search engines to execute them properly.

Remember, the OR operator is interpreted as “I would like at least one of these terms.” Think of parentheses as your way of telling the search engine you’re looking for one of THESE: (_______________).

For example: (apache OR weblogic OR websphere)

If you don’t enclose all of your OR statements, your search may run but it will NOT run as intended.

Boolean Search Modifier: QUOTATION MARKS ” “

Quotation marks must be used when searching for exact phrases of more than one word, or else some search engines will split the phrase up into single word components.

For example: “Director of Tax” will only return “Director of Tax.” If you searched for Director of Tax without the quotation marks, on some search engines, it will split up the words Director and Tax and highlight them as relevant matches even when not mentioned as an exact phrase.

Bonus: Google auto-stems many search terms, so if you are looking specifically for the word manager, it will still return managed, management, etc. – even if you don’t want it to. If you put quotation marks on a single word in Google, it will defeat the auto-stemming feature and only return that specific word.

There you have it – Boolean basics!

If there is something you would like to see me post about with regard to Boolean logic and search tactics and strategies – let me know.

Thanks!

 

Lean Recruiting: No Forecasts or Talent Pipelines Required!

Lean Recruiting: No Forecasts or Talent Pipelines Required!

This is a follow up post to this article I wrote on Lean/JIT recruiting, which I circulated as a dicussion topic through a few of the larger staffing and recruiting groups on LinkedIn. I recieved some interesting responses, some of which led me to believe that perhaps I was not clear enough with my explanation of Lean/Just-In-Time talent identification and acquisition.

A few folks mentioned that an accurate workforce plan/forecast with enough lead time would be required to possibly achieve Lean recruiting, and others commented that Lean recruiting would only work for high volume hiring or for frequently recruited positions.

Real-world experience running Lean/JIT recruiting teams has shown me that neither of the above is correct. With properly trained and capable recruiters and access to a large internal database and perhaps a few online resume databases that support full Boolean queries, Lean/JIT recruiting can be achieved with NO lead times or hiring forecast, and is equally effective with hiring profiles that are regularly or irregularly recruited for.  In fact, Lean/JIT recruiting can be acheived for positions that have NEVER been hired for.

To some people, this may seem outlandish or impossible, but I assure you it is neither.

I would never argue that developing a hiring forecast is a bad idea. That is, assuming of course that it is accurate and nothing unexpected ever happens. Lean thinking (as well as reality) tells us that forecasts are merely guesses – no matter how educated, and cannot accurately predict the future. If a recruiting or staffing organization relied heavily on a workforce plan – what happens to them when things change and there is an unexpected deviation from the plan? Typically – scrambling, finger pointing, excuses, and general chaos. :-)

If a recruiting organization is fully set up and empowered to achieve Lean/JIT recruiting – having a hiring forecast is a good place to start. However, if there are unexpected deviations from the workforce plan, the recruiting team is infinitely nimble and can turn on a dime and achieve results in 24-48 hours with little to no stress. 

The very idea of building a talent pipeline goes against the grain of Lean philosophy, which focuses heavily upon reducing “in-proccess inventory.” In recruiting and staffing, “in-process inventory” would be a talent pipeline, or more specifically, candidates that have been identified, contacted, and recruited prior to actual need.

I am aware that to many recruiters and recruiting and staffing organizations, building talent pipelines is absolutely necessary in order to ensure that appropriately qualified talent is available when the actual need arises. It’s necessary because their team/organization is not trained to, nor enabled with the appropriate resources to acheive Lean/JIT recruiting. If you cannot reliably identify and acquire well qualified candidates within 24-48 hours of receiving a request, you really don’t have an option other than building a talent pipeline. In my opinion, talent pipelines are only necessary for those who are unable to achieve Lean/JIT recruiting. Continue reading

Boolean Contest!

Boolean Contest – come one, come all!

Irina Shamaeva and I were chatting a few weeks back and she asked me if I thought a contest focused on Booolean strings would be a good idea. You can imagine my reaction – “Of course!” She thought offering prizes of ResumeFinder or ResumeGrabber would be a great idea, and Chandra Bodapati, CEO of eGrabber, was gracious enough to offer his fantastic products FREE to the winners!

Here are the Official Rules of the Worldwide Boolean Strings Contest – 2008, sponsored by eGrabber

The contest starts on Tuesday December 9, 2008 and ends on Sunday December 21, 2008.
To participate, you need to complete three steps.

1) Post one new discussion item either on the “Boolean Strings” group on RecruitingBlogs or the “Boolean Strings” group on LinkedIn.
(Your post can be a tip, a question or a reply to somebody else’s question. Post between 12/9/08 and 12/21/08.)

2) Download and try ResumeFinder and/or ResumeGrabber.
(This step is optional but you get one bonus point for this.)

3) Answer questions in this Quiz.
(This is a multiple choice quiz on your mastery of Boolean Strings.)

The contest will have multiple winners! One person for every 25 participants will get the tool of his/her choice, ResumeFinder (a $349 value) or ResumeGrabber (a $495 value).
Plus, eGrabber will offer one month subscription to ResumeFinder to everybody who participates in the Contest! Check the box at the end of the quiz and you will receive a ResumeFinder product key.

The winners will be announced on Tuesday December 23. The top winner will get the title “Boolean Strings Master – 2008″. If you have any questions or comments please email us at contest@booleanstrings.com

Good luck, and good Boolean!

Master Boolean Logic and Raise Your Game!

When it comes to golf, what’s more important – the clubs or the golfer?

It should be obvious that it is not the clubs, but the technique and skill of the person wielding the clubs.  Tiger Woods could play better than most people even with 20 year old clubs found at a yard sale. 

If you own a set of golf clubs but can’t play 18 holes in under 100 strokes, it’s more likely due to your skill and ability level rather than the brand and price of your clubs. Simply owning a set of clubs (even the best available) does not make you a great golfer.

Likewise, just because you have access to the Internet, an internal database/ATS, social networks, and perhaps a job board to two (which all “speak” Boolean, by the way!) – it does not automatically mean you are adept at leveraging those information systems to quickly find great candidates. You either know how to wield Boolean operators to quickly find the best talent available in these resources or you don’t. Your ability (or lack thereof) isn’t due to the Boolean operators themselves – it’s knowing how to use them and the search strategies you apply.

If you are in a sourcing and/or recruiting role and you are not fluent in Boolean, you are no different than someone who owns a set of golf clubs, but who cannot play very well. It’s not the clubs – it’s on you.

More information about more people is being stored somewhere electronically every day and it will only continue to accelerate and increase. Whether you realize it or not, if you are not adept at interfacing with databases, applications, the Internet and social networks (in other words, creating Boolean search strings) to find and retrieve human capital data you are already at a significant competitive disadvantage, and it will only get worse over time.  Technology can be a productivity multiplier, but only if you know how to use it to its full potential. 

I continue to be fascinated by recruiting and staffing professionals who show no desire to learn how to apply Boolean logic to query sources of candidates for talent.  Hearing a sourcer or recruiter complain about having to learn how to harness the power of Boolean search strings is like running into someone on a golf course complaining that golf is a difficult game.  Why are they on the golf course? Why are they even trying to play if all they are doing is complaining about how hard it is? They’ve chosen to play the game – why don’t they stop complaining, take some more golf lessons, practice a lot, and get better? Golf is golf – the game doesn’t really change – it doesn’t get more difficult with each passing day. People who set a goal of becoming good at golf make a conscious decision to get better and take lessons and practice a lot to improve their skill and ability.

Similarly, if you’ve chosen a career in recruiting and staffing (by design or by accident), instead of making excuses and complaining about how hard it is to learn Boolean logic and to create effective Boolean search strings, why not stop complaining, make a conscious effort to improve your skill and ability – get some training on how to create and leverage effective Boolean search strings, and practice a lot to get better? In this case, it’s not a hobby – it’s your career! What could be more important than learning how to be more effective at your chosen career?!?!?

Technology isn’t going away.  There won’t be any less information about people stored electronincally in the future – quite the opposite. Learning how to apply Boolean logic to create effective search strings to leverage information systems to increase your effectiveness and your productivity as a sourcer or recruiter isn’t that difficult – all it takes is a conscious decision to commit to improving your game, getting some training, and lots of practice.

Lean Sourcing and Recruiting: JIT Candidate Acquisition

Lean Sourcing and Recruiting: JIT Candidate Acquisition

According to globally accepted supply chain management principles (such as those of Lean and the Toyota Production System), building and maintaining product inventories is wasteful. In an ideal state, companies would acquire the right material, at the right time, at the right place, and in the exact amount.  This is called Just-In-Time (JIT) inventory management.

However, many HR, recruiting and staffing organizations push their teams in the exact opposite direction – focusing specifically on building candidate inventories through “proactive” recruiting, the theory being that when a specific need arises, they might already have candidates already identified in their inventory. This begs the question – why don’t more organizations adopt Just-In-Time (JIT) talent identification and acquisition into their Human Capital supply chain management philosohphies and systems?

I think there are 2 major reasons for this: #1 Many sourcers and recruiters rely heavily upon cold calling, referral recruiting, and posting jobs to find talent, and #2 Most HR, recruiting and staffing organizations don’t (or are simply not able to) effectively leverage technology.

Cold Calling, Referral Recruiting, Posting Jobs

While cold calling into companies, referral recruiting, and posting jobs can be effective techniques for identifying talent, they are slow, time-intensive processes that have an intrinsically low probability of delivering precisely the right talent quickly for any specific manager or client request. Additionally, posting jobs yields a very low percentage of qualified applicants – sometimes less than 5%-10%. Using only these methods, if a recruiter waited for a client or manager request before they began recruiting, it could literally take weeks or months to find the right people, which certainly would not be delivering value to the client (a core Lean principle), nor would it provide a timely flow (another core Lean principle) of candidate submissions in response to the client’s or manager’s request. To compensate for this, recruiters really have no choice other than to proactively recruit candidates even when they don’t have an active opening/need, in the hopes of having candidates whenever they do receive a job order/request. However, hope is not a strategy. Continue reading