One Job Board to Rule Them All? Hint: It’s not Facebook.

Like many people in HR/recruiting, I recently read about Facebook making the jump into offering searchable jobs.

What took them so long anyway?

Apparently, Facebook is planning to launch its own job board later this summer, and the board will aggregate the job postings of third-party providers, making them available for search by Facebook users.

This comes after Facebook announced late last year that they would be entering into a partnership with the U.S. Labor Department to provide job-hunting resources to explore and develop systems where jobs can be posted and delivered “virally” through Facebook at no charge.

Some people think that Facebook offering job board functionality will positively affect the U.S. economy and job marketplace.

No offense to Facebook, but I’m happy to say we don’t need them to launch a job board to help put America to work.

I believe there is something that the United States government (or any country’s government, for that matter) can do to facilitate putting more people to work, without the help of any other site or company, let alone Facebook. Continue reading

Searching Facebook for Sourcing and Recruiting

As Facebook approaches 1 billion users globally, it would be folly to ignore the vast amount of human capital data that Facebook has to offer.

However, as I have written and spoken about many times, the value of data is directly proportional to the ability to retrieve it.

And therein lies the rub of Facebook.

It’s just not very searchable, and the structure of Facebook source code doesn’t make it easy to reliably target the really good stuff that sourcers and recruiters would be especially interested in.

Aside from being highly unsearchable, Facebook doesn’t score highly on the depth of professional content either.

I am aware that many of you probably believe that very few people enter in any professional information into their Facebook profiles, but you might be surprised to learn that more people than you would assume actually do enter titles and the companies they work for.

Also, while the percentage of Facebook users entering in professional details might be relatively small (for the sake of argument, let’s say 10%), given the nearly 1 billion profiles, that would be almost 100,000,000 profiles with some amount of professional data.

I don’t know about you, but I can work with 100,000,000 profiles.

So, while Facebook isn’t very search-friendly, and not everyone enters professional information on their profiles, there are a few ways to search for and target people based on what they do and where they work.

Let’s get on with a walk through of some of the ways you can leverage the professional content that is present within Facebook. Continue reading

What’s Wrong with Job Boards?

What’s wrong with job boards?

Nothing, in my opinion.

However, from the ridiculous overabundance of articles, comments, and recruiting conference content that trashes job boards as if they are the worst source of hire, I am obviously in the clear minority.

I continue to see and hear well respected thought leaders in the staffing industry make claims that the value of the job boards is waning and that the quality of candidates on the job boards is low, and it hasn’t slowed down.

Because there is such a strong belief that job boards somehow only offer low quality candidates, I am taking the time to offer a different point of view, as well as leverage statistics to prove that the job boards have the same percentage of “A” players as LinkedIn or any other source of hire.

News Flash: Job Boards Still Very Much Alive

Weren’t the job boards supposed to die, like, 5 years ago?

Funny how that didn’t happen.

It so didn’t happen that they are responsible for more hires than any other source other than referrals.

The most recent CareerXRoads Source of Hire Report showed that job boards are still pretty effective, weighing in at the #2 spot.

 

 

The facts do not support the belief that job boards are an “ineffective” source of hire.

As you can see, job boards also solidly crush social media as a source of hire, which I am sure most people find a tough pill to swallow, especially given that “social recruiting” is supposed to be a magical solution to all hiring troubles.

Um, wasn’t social media supposed to kill the job boards?

I am sure that it’s supposed to happen any day now, but something tells me that even in the next few years, while the talk of social media killing job boards will continue, the source of hire statistics and surveys will continue to tell a different story. Continue reading

Why Boolean Search is Such a Big Deal in Recruiting

In the past, I’ve explained the Boolean Black Belt concept and exposed what I feel is the real “secret” behind learning how to master the art and science of leveraging information systems for talent identification and acquisition.

Now I would like to show you precisely WHY Boolean search is such a big deal in recruiting.

There are 2 main factors:

  1. Candidate variable control
  2. Speed of qualified candidate identification.

The goal of this article is to shed significant light on the science behind talent mining, how it can lead to higher productivity levels (more and better results with less effort), why I am so passionate sourcing, and why everyone in the HR, recruiting, and staffing industry should be as well.

Control is Power

Talent identification is arguably the most critical step in recruiting life cycle – you can’t engage, recruit, acquire, hire and develop someone you haven’t found and identified in the first place.

My experience has shown me that properly leveraging deep sources of talent/candidate data (ATS/CRM’s, resume databases, LinkedIn, etc.) can enable recruiters to more quickly identify a high volume of well matched and qualified candidates than any other method of candidate identification and acquisition (e.g., cold calling, referral recruiting, job posting).

The true power of Boolean search lies in the intrinsically high degree of control over critical candidate variables that using Boolean strings to search deep data sources such as resume databases, the Internet, and social media affords sourcers and recruiters.

Applying that that high degree of control to large populations of candidates – tens of thousands (small internal ATS, niche resume database) to tens of millions (large ATS/CRM, Monster resume database, LinkedIn, etc.) enables adept sourcers to perform feats of talent identification and acquisition most would think impossible.

Continue reading

The Current and Future State of Talent Sourcing

I had the distinct honor and privilege of serving as the conference chair of the biggest-ever SourceCon, held at the Georgia Aquarium in February. Part of my responsibility in that role involved kicking off the event, and I took the opportunity to touch upon my observations and opinions on the current state of sourcing, as well as what I believe will be the future of sourcing.

Even as I was standing on stage I knew I would be writing a post on this topic, because it was apparent that there is much misunderstanding and debate surrounding sourcing, and certainly no shortage of opinion, qualified or otherwise.

If you’re ready, I’ll walk you though my definition of sourcing, my observations on the current state of sourcing, and what I (and others!) see as the future state of sourcing.

WARNING: If you don’t like/have time to read long posts, I suggest you turn back now. While I could have split this content up into 9 weeks worth of 500 word posts, I’d prefer to give you the goods rather than string you along.

What is Sourcing?

First and foremost, I believe it is critical to have a common understanding of what sourcing is.

I define sourcing to include any and all activities whose primary purpose is talent discovery and identification.

My definition is purposefully broad, because I find too many people seem to associate sourcing solely with searching the Internet with Boolean search strings.

While some companies may limit their sourcers to exactly that – searching only the Internet and generating names for someone else to engage – sourcing is and should be much more than that.

Sourcing encompasses the use of any source of human capital data – an ATS, Monster, LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, mobile apps, etc., and it can also include the phone, email, and messaging work of engaging potential candidates and networking with them to yield referrals and the opportunity to identify more potential candidates.

Yes, networking with people – whether they be new hires, existing staff and management, or complete strangers – to find and identify potential candidates is also sourcing, regardless of method (electronically, over the phone, or in person).

Of course, sourcing also includes traditional phone sourcing as effectively addressed and dramatically demonstrated at the SourceCon event by Conni LaDouceur.

And finally, although passive and offering little-to-no control over the qualifications and experience of the talent discovered, job posting is even a form of sourcing – the primary purpose of posting a job is to discover talent.

The Critical Importance of Sourcing

When it comes to the entire talent management lifecycle, nothing is more important than sourcing.

That’s because, quite simply, the entire talent management lifecycle is completely dependent upon discovering and identifying potential talent in the first place.

You cannot engage, build a relationship with, recruit, hire, retain and develop someone you haven’t found.

Period.

Try cutting and polishing a poor quality diamond, or better yet – try cutting a diamond you don’t actually have. You could have the best diamond cutters in the world on your staff, but without a steady supply of high quality rough diamonds, you simply won’t be in business.

When it comes to hiring and retaining, all future outcomes are dependent upon that magical moment when a sourcer/recruiter first finds and makes contact with a potential candidate.

The Current State of Sourcing

I believe that sourcing is largely misunderstood, undervalued, and under-invested in today.

I offer as evidence:

  • An alarming number of people seem to believe that sourcing is all about Boolean logic
  • There are people who believe that sourcing is a function that can be easily replaced by software
  • There are well respected companies who don’t give their sourcers or recruiters any premium or purpose-built tools or resources
  • The recently conducted sourcing compensation survey illustrated that 23% of the respondents make less than $40,000 annually Continue reading

I’ve Joined SourceRight Solutions, a Randstad Company

When it comes to recruiting – it’s all about timing and opportunity, right?

I’ve had a great 15 year run in the staffing industry, starting off in 1997 at a small privately held company in Chantilly, VA, and ultimately ending up at Kforce after they acquired that no-longer-small staffing company back in February of 2005.

Over the years, I’ve progressed from a top producing recruiter to a VP of recruiting, and I’ve relocated twice with Kforce from Ashburn, VA to Tampa and more recently to Atlanta.

As with most people in the recruiting and staffing industry, I’d received my fair share of opportunity pitches.

Some came from companies I would have loved to work for, but none were the right match for what I was looking to do, and disappointingly, most seemed to be looking for someone to fit into very defined and scoped roles offering little room for me to bring all of my knowledge, experience, and passion for sourcing and recruiting to bear.

I’ve enjoyed many rewarding roles at Kforce that offered me the ability to stretch the boundaries of my job descriptions to be able to add value to the entire firm in as many ways as possible. When I was contacted about positions that were limited in scope and seemed more like the company was looking for a specific piece to fit their puzzle, it was an easy decision to not pursue them any further, as I promised myself I would never take a step backwards, even if it was an opportunity with a marquee company.

However, after 15 years in the staffing industry, the right opportunity finally came along. Continue reading

Top 15 Common Talent Sourcing Mistakes

Practically everything I have learned about sourcing and recruiting didn’t come from a mentor or any formal training.

Instead, I learned how to become a top performing recruiter “the hard way.”

What that really means is that when it came to finding top talent, I tried a lot of things that didn’t work, and because I refuse to make excuses, give up, or accept anything less than the best results, I kept experimenting until I discovered things that enabled me to find people that others can’t and don’t.

With over fifteen years of experience in sourcing and recruiting, I’ve made my fair share of mistakes along the way. I’ve also had the opportunity to assess, train and coach corporate and agency sourcers and recruiters, which has exposed me to many myths, misconceptions and mistakes when it comes to leveraging information systems for sourcing and recruiting.

Here are what I believe to be some of the most common productivity-robbing and results-reducing mistakes sourcers and recruiters make when looking for the right match.

In no particular order… Continue reading

The 50 Largest LinkedIn Groups

At the time of this article, there were 1,236,675 LinkedIn groups. With so many groups, how do you find and choose which groups to join?

Depending on your LinkedIn group strategy, you may be interested in finding the largest groups of a specific type.

LinkedIn groups are very searchable, and when you start typing letters into the search box, you will get a dynamically updated list of groups matching the letters/words you input, typically (but not always exactly) sorted by the number of members.

 

 

Being the search geek that I am, I wondered what would happen if I executed a null search – a query for nothing.

 

 

Many search engines/interfaces don’t allow null searches, and others that do tend to return only partial results. For example, with LinkedIn’s people search, you can’t search all of LinkedIn without entering a keyword – you will only get results from 1st degree, 2nd degree, and group connections. You have to enter a keyword in order to dip into the people categorized as “3rd + Everyone Else,” representing the deep end of the people pool on LinkedIn.

However, lucky for us, a null search of LinkedIn groups not only works, it returns all groups sorted primarily by the number of members. That makes it remarkably simple to find the largest groups on LinkedIn. Continue reading

The Talent Community Conundrum

First it was social recruiting, then it was mobile recruiting.

Now talent communities are apparently the latest cure for all of your talent troubles.

One the surface, the talent community concept seems like a brilliant “no brainer.”

However, like Socrates, I believe there is value in questioning everything. So when I start seeing  a strong buzz about just about anything, I immediately hit it with a dose of healthy skepticism and start asking some tough questions.

I’m well aware that there are talent acquisition leaders out there right now that are saying, “What we really need is a talent community,” primarily because of the buzz the concept has been building over the past year or so. I worry that these same people are placing blind faith into the talent community concept out of the hope that it will help them in some significant manner with their talent acquisition challenges.

When I attended a webinar on building sustainable talent communities the other day, I felt it raised more questions than it provided answers. Because I know I can’t be the only person wondering about the validity of the talent community concept, I thought it would be a good idea to share with you my thoughts and questions. Continue reading

LinkedIn Is Making Changes to Prevent Copying Profile Text

Last week, I had someone ask me what was going on with LinkedIn.

She told me she was having difficulty selecting text from a LinkedIn profile in order to copy and paste it into a search engine to find the public profile.

I jumped onto her computer to check out what she was talking about, and I found out that she was definitely not suffering from user error – she was not able to copy text from any LinkedIn profile.

As this was the first time I have ever encountered something like this, I went back to my computer and tried selecting profile text and had no troubles, so I was not exactly sure what was going on.

A part of me wondered if LinkedIn was beginning to roll out a change. Even though I didn’t have the same problem copying profile text, I know from past functionality changes that LinkedIn has made that they typically don’t roll them out to all users at once.

To be honest, I didn’t really think about it much after that day.

Until I got an email later in the same week from someone in my network about the exact same thing. Continue reading

Is Your ATS a Black Hole or a Diamond Mine?

Most companies and staffing organizations, ranging from executive search sole proprietorships to staffing agencies to Fortune 500 companies, have internal databases filled with rich and actionable information on thousands to literally tens of millions of applicants, candidates, and professionals.

You would think that a private internal database of people that an organization has actively and passively, tactically and strategically collected over the years would be a prized posession and be viewed and leveraged as a significant resource and competitive advantage.

However, this post on Weddles details that an Online Sourcing Survey conducted by TalentDrive found that almost two-thirds (64%) of the employers represented by the survey’s participants did not know how many qualified candidates were in their own ATS databases.

Yes – you read that correctly.

Most companies don’t even know how many people are in their Applicant Tracking Systems.

Surprised?

While that is an especially disturbing statistic and a sad reality, I’m actually not that surprised.

Most Applicant Tracking Systems have horrible search interfaces and extremely limited information retrieval capability.

As such, like a black hole, prospective candidates go in, but they don’t come back out.

If you can’t easily search your internal database, how can you determine the total candidate population, let alone find the top talent hidden within?

Deposits and Withdrawals

Having an ATS/CRM/candidate database that is not highly searchable is like putting your money into an insolvent financial institution. You can deposit money/assets in – but you can’t easily or reliably make withdrawals.

The bottom line is that data has no value if you can’t retrieve it.

Anything designed to store something should have strong retrieval capability – once you put it in, you should expect to be able to get it back out.

Quickly and easily, no less.

If you can easily enter prospective candidates into your ATS but you cannot easily retrieve the right ones at the right time – you’re essentially sitting on a giant Hidden Talent Pool.

Illiquid Human Capital

Everyone agrees that people are an organization’s most valuable asset.

However, if you cannot quickly, easily, and precisely search for and retrieve highly qualified candidates from your private database, your ATS is essentially a source of illiquid (human) assets.

In other words, you cannot easily convert the human capital data stored in your system into hires/placements.

The Time Value of Resumes

Even after 15 years in recruiting, I am still shocked to hear HR pros, sourcers, recruiters, and talent acquisition leaders comment about how resumes get “stale” and lose their value after 6 months.

While the information on resumes certainly goes out of date over time, the resumes themselves do no lose their value.

In fact, I argue that resumes get more valuable over time.

This is because the active candidates you capture today become the passive and non job seekers in time – yes, those magical people that are supposedly so valuable and so difficult to find.

Right in your database.

With phone numbers and email addresses.

That person that responded to your job posting a year ago will not likely be actively looking today, will not have their resume posted online anywhere, and will not have updated their LinkedIn profile for quite some time – yet, you have their contact information, and it doesn’t take a rocket doctor to figure out what kind of opportunity they would be interested in.

Although you don’t know exactly what a person whose resume is a year or more old is doing now, most people follow a relatively predictable career trajectory.

I’ve personally dredged up resumes from an ATS that were over 4 years old and got them hired.

When I called one of these candidates, he asked me, “How did you know I was looking?” I replied, “I didn’t – your resume is 4 years old – I don’t even know if you’re doing the same kind of work.”

He was.

It also turned out he was beginning to think about making a change, but hadn’t even written his resume.

I had caught him at the perfect time, before anyone else could even imagine of finding him. The funny thing is that most people probably wouldn’t have even called him simply because his resume was “stale” and out of date.

This and many more similar examples I have prove the time value of resumes.

However, you can’t leverage the time value of resumes if you can’t quickly, easily, and precisely retrieve them!

Coal Into Diamonds

For each position sourced for and posted online, there are inevitably volumes of potential candidates that do not fit, as well as candidates that do not get interviewed and hired.

However, this does not mean that they are bad or unqualified people.

In fact, many of the people who respond to job postings are very good candidates – they’re just not very good at matching themselves.

Those under qualified candidates? While they may not meet the basic qualifications of the specific job the responded to, that doesn’t mean that they aren’t fully qualified for other jobs that are open now, or jobs that will open in the future.

In a year or two, they will have a year or two more experience and be a qualified candidate.  See the Time Value of Resumes above.

What about those over qualified candidates? While they may be “over qualified” for the position they applied to – they may in fact be qualified for other openings now and in the future.

What about those applicants that are a complete mismatch for the positions they applied to? They often match other currently open and future jobs.

How about the people who almost got the job? For every opening, there can only be one hire, so there is often a slew of strong runners-up that could be fantastic candidates for other opportunities.

Over the years, I’ve consistently found time and again that what appears to be coal can quickly turn into diamonds.

The Black Hole

Just like light heading into a black hole, applicants and candidates often go into applicant tracking systems – but they don’t come back out.

Presumably, there are 3 main ways a person can end up in a company’s ATS:

  1. They responded to a job posting
  2. Someone ran a search and found the candidate’s profile/resume on the Internet, on a resume database such as Monster, Dice, Careerbuilder, etc., or on LinkedIn and entered it into the database
  3. The person was a referral and entered into the system

In all three cases, someone – either a potential candidate or a sourcer/recruiter – has shown interest in a potential match at some point in time, and this should be worth something.

People applying to jobs should be able to expect a response of some kind, and recruiters should be able to easily find well qualified candidates they found and entered into the system in the past.

Looking to Build a Talent Community?

Everyone seems to want to build a “talent community” these days.

What I find funny is that many companies are already sitting on the makings of a talent community in their own ATS.

Anyone in your ATS got there either because they wanted to join your company (they responded to a job posting) or because you wanted them to join your company (you sourced them).

Can you think of a better population for a talent community?

If your ATS doesn’t have CRM functionality that enables you to stay in touch with the people who’ve expressed interest in your company and the people you’d like to potentially employ, it’s time for you to start thinking about what you can do about this, because you’re sitting on a diamond mine.

Sourcer/Recruiter Behavior

Can we blame sourcers and recruiters for NOT searching and leveraging their ATS/CRM if other sources they may have access to (such as LinkedIn and job board resume databases) are 10X more searchable?

If trying to find appropriately qualified candidates in an ATS is as difficult and painful as pulling teeth, we should not be surprised when sourcers and recruiters search the Internet for candidates first, and the ATS last (if at all!).

A company’s private candidate database should, if anything, be MORE searchable and EASIER to use than publicly available systems and databases.

As mentioned previously – people in your ATS have either shown specific interest in your company or were found elsewhere by a sourcer or recruiter and entered into the system.

Both types of people should receive “priority handling!”

Demand an ROI on Your ATS!

Many companies spend tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars on their Applicant Tracking/CRM systems, and they should expect demand a significant return on that money invested.

I say that the value of a database lies not in the information contained within, but in the ability of a user to extract out precisely and completely what the user needs.

If you can’t easily, quickly, and precisely retrieve talent out of your ATS – you didn’t get what you actually paid for.

If you’ve been a corporate recruiter at some point in your career – did you ever have a 3rd party search firm/agency submit candidates to you that you already had in your ATS?

Did you know that some companies will pay a fee or a premium (contract to hire) for candidates that 3rd party firms source and recruit that were in fact hiding in the company’s ATS?

Without going into why companies would actually pay another firm for candidates they had buried in their ATS – the $64,000 question is why didn’t the corporate sourcers/recruiters find the candidate themselves?

The answer is usually quite simple – because the company’s ATS isn’t very searchable.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to call it the “20-30% of the first year’s salary” question.

Ouch!

What You Can Do

To ensure that your private candidate database/ATS isn’t just one big fat black hole where candidates enter but they never come back out, here are a few things you can do:

Replace or upgrade your ATS/CRM

Yes, this will likely involve spending money.

However, if people really are the greatest and most valuable asset of your organization – investing in a system that allows you to effectively capitalize on this asset is well worth the cost, nearly at any price!

From a corporate perspective, moving to a system that makes it easy to find appropriately qualified candidates that you have already sourced or expressed interest in your company can significantly reduce your cost-per-hire as well as your reliance on 3rd party search firms.

From a search firm/agency perspective, investing in replacing or upgrading your candidate database/tracking system can help increase your productivity (and likely profitability) by enabling you to more quickly and effectively capitalize on candidates you have already sourced, interviewed and qualified rather than having to try and source “new” candidates from scratch for each job order/client request you receive.

Integrate a New Search Interface/Engine Into Your ATS

Typically less expensive than switching out your whole ATS/CRM – there are several 3rd party search applications available ranging from highly configurable text search (Lucene, dtSearch, etc.) to conceptual/artificial intelligence search/match applications (Autonomy, BurningGlass, Sovren, Pure Discovery, Actonomy, etc.) that you can integrate into your existing ATS/CRM to significantly boost its “searchability.”

Some of the aforementioned solutions are free (Lucene) and others are surprisingly affordable.

Train Your Sourcers and Recruiters (AND/OR Yourself)!

Sometimes an ATS/CRM is a black hole from which candidates never return simply because the sourcers and recruiters aren’t very proficient in how to effectively search information systems for talent identification (aka Talent Mining).

If you already have a highly searchable ATS or CRM, invest in training your associates with the latest search best practices, tactics, and strategies.

You don’t need a super-expensive “state of the art” search application to quickly find the right people.

In fact – all you need is a search interface that supports full Boolean logic.

In my first year as an agency recruiter, I averaged 8 hires per month only after 3 months of experience as a recruiter – and my sole source of candidates was an old CPAS ATS developed by VCG. No Monster, no Google, no Linkedin, no cold calls – just a plain old resume database with about 80,000 records and a search interface that supported full Boolean logic.

How’s that for ROI?

The Bottom Line

If your ATS/CRM is as easy to search as it is to put candidates in, you will be able to fill more of your company’s openings from talent you’ve already sourced and from people who have expressed an interest in joining your company.

Any opening you can fill with candidates already in your internal system saves you the time, effort, and cost of advertising and searching for “new” candidates.

Filling openings with candidates already in your ATS can afford you significant and measurable cost-per-hire and time-to-fill savings.

Additionally, having a highly searchable ATS/CRM can help you reduce your reliance on paid resources if you currently use them (such as Monster, a premium LinkedIn account, etc.).

Is it easier to search public systems such as LinkedIn or Monster to find appropriately qualified candidates than it is to search your private ATS/CRM?

It shouldn’t be!

How to Effectively Source Talent via Social Media & Networks

Sourcing talent via social media requires an entirely different mindset than sourcing with other forms of human capital data, such as resumes/CV’s, employee directories, conference attendee lists, etc.

Back in early 2009, one of only 2 guest posts ever co-written on my site was published on the topic of non-standard descriptors and the role they play in social media. Valerie Scarsellato was a Sr. Sourcer at Intel Corporation at the time when she put together the framework for the original article on sourcing via social media, and she has now moved into a Segment Marketing Specialist role at Intel and is loving it. For those of you who feel that employer marketing/branding/communications is a logical extension of sourcing, Valerie would wholeheartedly agree with you – check out this video in which she discussed her award winning _codehearted; work for Intel.

Now that nearly 2 years has passed since the Searching Social Media Requires Outside-the-box Thinking article was published, social media usage has continued to explode – monthly visitors to LinkedIn and Facebook have doubled, they’ve nearly quadrupled for Twitter , and we now have Google+, Pinterest and others springing on the scene, making the topic even more relevant today. As such, I wanted to rework the original piece and update it with a few more examples.

The primary challenge when leveraging social media for sourcing talent is that nonstandard terminology is prevalent – it’s generally acceptable to use slang and other verbiage that would otherwise never be found on a resume, even when it comes to describing one’s profession.

If you use the same query terms when sourcing LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, etc. as you would when searching for resumes, you will certainly find people. However, you will also exclude a decent portion of the available results, unknowingly relegating them to Dark Matter and otherwise undiscovered talent. This is because you can only retrieve what you explicitly search for. Continue reading

SourceCon 2012 Atlanta – the Biggest SourceCon Ever!

It’s official.

The SourceCon event at the Georgia Aquarium on Feb 9 & 10 will be the biggest event ever, with more attendees than any other SourceCon!

What that really means, other than proof that Atlanta is the center of the sourcing universe [sorry Seattle ;)], is that attendees will have more opportunity to network with, share best practices, and learn from other sourcers and sourcing leaders than ever before.

As you would expect, SourceCon will treat those in attendance with high-value keynotes and general sessions from industry luminaries such as:

  • Aida La Chaux from Yahoo on sourcing through adversity
  • Adam Lawrence of Alexander Mann Solutions on global sourcing
  • Jim Stroud of Bernard Hodes on social & personalized search
  • Eric Jaquith from SourceRight on how to stack the deck in your favor when it comes to sourcing
  • Conni LaDouceur on phone sourcing best practices (and yes, you’ll hear recorded calls!)

In addition, there are breakout tracks for sourcing leaders and for sourcing practitioners lead by Charles Bretz, Shannon Van Curen, Shannon Myers, Cathy Henesey, Elaine Order, Justin Clem, Anne DeWys, Therese Hightower, Cathy Henesey, and Atlanta’s own Chris Havrilla, covering topics such as ATS/candidate databases and social and mobile sourcing. Continue reading

How to See Full Names of 3rd Degree Connections on LinkedIn

For a while, there was an interesting little method for revealing the full name of 3rd degree and group connections on LinkedIn. However, LinkedIn has changed the “get introduced” functionality and UI for most people and effectively eliminated that method (albeit unintentionally, IMO).

Oh well – it was easy and fun while it lasted.

Fortunately, I’ve recently become aware of another way of revealing the full names of 3rd degree connections on LinkedIn with a less-than-premium account that I would like to share with you.

But before we get to that, I’d like to cover some basics as well as some things I have been noticing about LinkedIn – I believe they may be tinkering with free access profile visibility.

Oh, and if you’re on the fence about attending SourceCon in Atlanta next week, it’s shaping up to be the largest in SourceCon history, and you still have time to register and get a 10% discount using my SC12GC code.

LinkedIn Public Profile Search to View Full Names

Now that the nifty “get introduced” full name visibility trick is seemingly dead, people without LinkedIn Recruiter access can of course still grab one or more unique phrases from 3rd degree and group-only LinkedIn connections and throw them into Bing or Google to find their public profile and thus their full names.

For example, I can take the headline phrase and couple it with the location phrase from a LinkedIn search result…

 

 

…and enter this into Bing: “Senior Software Development Manager, IBM” “Ottawa, Canada Area”, and here’s what I get: Continue reading

What is Your Talent Sourcing ROI?

Anything worth doing is worth measuring, and sourcing isn’t exempt from this.

If you want to know which method of sourcing has the highest ROI in terms of enabling a person to find more of the right people more quickly, then you’re in luck – because that’s what this post is about.

Human capital data comes in many forms – resumes, social network profiles, blogs, bios, press resleases, etc. – and I have found that a key and critical aspect of sources of human capital data that many people fail to formally recognize is the depth and completeness of the data that can yield information through review and analysis.

When it comes to leveraging information systems such as the Internet, applicant tracking systems, social networking sites, job board databases, etc. for sourcing and recruiting – the operative word is “information.”

Data is the lowest level of abstraction from which information can be derived. For data to become information, it must be interpreted and take on a meaning.

Generally, the quality and amount of information that can be gleaned from any particular source is directly linked and limited to the quality and amount of data present to be reviewed and analyzed. How useful is an information system supported by only a small amount of limited data?

In this post, I will:

  • Review the major sources of human capital data
  • Examine sourcing return on time invested
  • Explore the potential candidate’s point of view
  • Ask you to take a quick sourcing test

Ready? Continue reading

The Guide to Semantic Search for Sourcing and Recruiting

If you have nearly any tenure in HR, sourcing or recruiting, you’ve probably heard something about “semantic search” and perhaps you would like to learn more.

Well – you’ve found the right article.

As a follow-up to my recent Slideshare on AI sourcing and matching, I am going to provide an overview of semantic search, the claims that semantic search vendors often make, explain how semantic search applications actually work, and expose some practical limitations of semantic search  recruiting solutions.

Additionally, I will classify the 5 basic levels of semantic search and give you examples of how you can conduct Level 3 Semantic Search (Grammatical/Natural) with Monster, Bing, and any search engine that allows for fixed or configurable proximity.

But first – let’s define “semantic search.” Continue reading

Talent Sourcing: Man vs. AI/Black Box Semantic Search

Back in March 2010, I had the distinct honor of delivering the keynote presentation at SourceCon on the topic of resume search and match solutions claiming to use artificial intelligence in comparison with people using their natural intelligence for talent discovery and identification.

Now that nearly 2 years has passed, and given that in that time I’ve had even more hands-on experience with a number of the top AI/semantic search applications available (I won’t be naming names, sorry), I decided it was time to revisit the topic which I am very passionate about.

If you’ve ever been curious about semantic search applications that “do the work for you” when it comes to finding potential candidates, you’re in the right place, because I’ve updated the slide deck and published it to Slideshare. Here’s what you’ll find in the 86 slide presentation:

  • A deep dive into the deceptively simple challenge of sourcing talent via human capital data (resumes, social network profiles, etc.)
  • How resume and LinkedIn profile sourcing and matching solutions claiming to use artificial intelligence, semantic search, and NLP actually work and achieve their claims
  • The pros, cons, and limitations of automated/black box matching solutions
  • An insightful (and funny!) video of Dr. Michio Kaku and his thoughts on the limitations of artificial intelligence
  • Examples of what sourcers and recruiters can do that even the most advanced automated search and match algorithms can’t do
  • The concept of Human Capital Data Information Retrieval and Analysis (HCDIR & A)
  • Boolean and extended Boolean
  • Semantic search
  • Dynamic inference
  • Dark Matter resumes and social network profiles
  • What I believe to be the ideal resume search and matching solution
Enjoy, and let me know your thoughts.

Looking Back, Forward, and For Your Input

As a reader of Boolean Black Belt, I’d looking for your feedback and input on a few things.

For example:

  • What would you like to see me write more about?
  • Would you like to write a post on Boolean Black Belt?
  • What do you think of me changing my site to something other than “Boolean Black Belt?”

However, before I go any further down that rabbit hole, I’d like to thank you, give you some insight as to why I blog, and let you know about what you can expect from me in 2012.

First & Foremost – Thank You

As 2011 has come to an end, I find myself reflecting on the past as as well as looking forward to what 2012 will bring.

Most importantly, I want to thank you and the other 112,320 people who stopped by my blog in 2011, who came from 175 countries and viewed over 300,000 pages.

I owe special thanks to all of you who have commented on my posts, shared them with others, and suggested my site to peers, managers, and team members.

If I’ve ever shown you something you didn’t already know, or made you think or reconsider what you do already know,  I’ve accomplished one of my main goals in blogging, and it makes all of the hours of precious personal time I take on a weekly basis to publish my blog posts worthwhile.

Why Do I Blog Anyway?

This happens to be my 165th post since I started blogging back in October of 2008.

I write for many reasons, and monetizing isn’t one of them. I will never take a 2000 word post and split it into 4 500 word posts just to string my readers along.

I’d love to post content more frequently than once per week, but with a family and a full time job, blogging about recruiting, sourcing, and social media is essentially a weekend hobby.

A hobby is defined as “a pursuit outside one’s regular occupation engaged in especially for relaxation.” I’m not so sure blogging relaxes me, but it certainly doesn’t feel like “work,” as time flies while I am writing and it is definitely intellectually cathartic.

If I could sum up what I am trying to accomplish by blogging, I would have to use something Erik Weihenmayer said during his LinkedIn Talent Connect 2010 keynote: I want to “contribute to something extraordinary.”

While it may sound corny or ridiculous to some, I am actually trying to try and change the world of recruiting one post at a time.

How?

I don’t write to make people agree with me – I just want people to think instead of clinging to what they already know and are comfortable with.

Because if you’re comfortable, you’re not growing.

What’s Coming From Boolean Black Belt in 2012

I had a pingback a while ago from a blogger who praised the content of one of my posts, but complained about the length.

I took it as passive constructive criticism, and I took a moment to think about my blogging style.

Most of of my posts are in the 1500 word range, and some go over 2000. In the blogging world, that’s on the long side. I know that many people want “fun-sized” content (500 words or less) that they can consume in 30 seconds or so. However, some concepts can’t adequately be explained in 500 words or less, nor would 500 words do some topics proper justice. And as I stated previously, I don’t write to string people along – I would rather publish a 2000 word post than split it into 4 500 word posts.

There’s nothing more annoying to me than clicking on a link from a tweet that praises an article, and once I get to the article, I find it to be a 300 word “fluff” post, totally devoid of substance. I personally don’t have a lot of time to read other blogs, so when I do, I want to sink my teeth into something substantial that I can learn something from – not some “quick hit” post that skims the surface of a topic to get a pageview.

When I am hungry for information and knowledge, I want a 7-course meal of thought – I’m not there for appetizers, and I’m never on an idea diet.

I know I may be in the minority on this issue, and I am 100% comfortable with that.

I don’t write to cater to the casual reader looking to skim over a topic or concept – if my long posts drive some people away, I actually think that’s a good thing. There are plenty of sourcing and recruiting blogs for readers to choose from. I write for people who are looking for 7-course meals of sourcing and recruiting substance.

Speaking of sourcing and recruiting substance, in 2012 I plan on going deeper into some topics that I am very interested in and passionate about, but haven’t written about as much as I would have liked in 2011. For example, semantic search, the critical importance of data and technology in support of talent identification and acquisition, and applying Lean as well as proven supply chain principles to talent acquisition

In 2012, I will also continue to update my free sourcing and recruiting resources page, and you can continue to rely on my average of 1 post per week, typically published on Monday morning, and 1000+ words per post.

What I’d Like From You

As a reader of my blog, I’d like to hear from you. Specifically, I am looking to know:

  • What would you like to see from me in 2012? Is there something you’d like to see me write more about? Please be as specific on content and topics as possible.
  • Would you like to write a post on Boolean Black Belt? Although I’d never really thought about it before, I’d love to start having guest bloggers. If you have something helpful, insightful, though-provoking and interesting regarding recruiting, sourcing and/or social media that you’d like to share, posting it on Boolean Black Belt will get your content exposure to recruiting and sourcing practitioners and leaders all over the world. With nearly 4,000 subscribers and over 10,000 unique visitors per month from over 100 countries, I can and want to help you share your ideas with the global recruiting and sourcing community, including some of the best and brightest from the most well-respected companies and talent acquisition teams in the world.
  • On a different note – what do you think about me changing the name of my site to something other than Boolean Black Belt? I write on so much more than Boolean search that I think “Boolean Black Belt” is too narrow and limited and doesn’t accurately reflect the totality of my content. I have some ideas in mind, but would honestly appreciate your input on my blog’s name and the idea of changing it to something else.

I’m looking forward to your input.

Once again, thank you very much for reading, sharing, and recommending my site and content, and you have my best wishes for a successful, fulfilling, and prosperous 2012.

Happy hunting!

Why So Many People Stink at Searching

The trouble with search today is that people put too much trust in search engines – online, resume, social, or otherwise.

I can certainly understand and appreciate why people and companies would want to try and create search engines and solutions that “do the work for you,” but unfortunately the “work” being referenced here is thinking.

I read an article by Clive Thompson in Wired magazine the other day titled, “Why Johnny Can’t Search,” and the author opens up with the common assumption that young people tend to be tech-savvy.

Interestingly, although Generation Z is also known as the “Internet Generation” and is comprised of “digital natives,” they apparently aren’t very good at online search.

The article cites a few studies, including one in which a group of college students were asked to use Google to look up the answers to a handful of questions. The researchers found that the students tended to rely on the top results.

Then the researchers changed the order of the results for some of the students in the experiment.  More often than not, they still went with the (falsely) top-ranked pages.

The professor who ran the experiment concluded that “students aren’t assessing information sources on their own merit—they’re putting too much trust in the machine.”

I believe that the vast majority of people put too much trust in the machine – whether it be Google, LinkedIn, Monster, or their ATS.

Trusting top search results certainly isn’t limited to Gen Z – I believe it is a much more widespread issue, which is only exacerbated by “intelligent” search engines and applications using semantic search and NLP that lull searchers into the false sense of security that the search engine “knows” what they’re looking for. Continue reading

How to Find Bilingual Professionals via Boolean Search

Have you ever had to find bilingual candidates or search for people who speak a specific language?

If so, you’re in luck – this week’s post focuses on a few ways of how do just that.

If not, no worries – the thought processes and search strategies I use in this post are helpful no matter what it is you’re searching for, because searching is 95% critical thinking and 5% Boolean syntax.

Boolean Search for Explicit Bilinguals

As with all searches, you must first realize that not all people who can speak more than one language will actually make mention of that in their resume, their LinkedIn/Google+/Facebook/Twitter profile or updates, or anywhere else they may leave information about themselves online. I’ll show you at least 1 way of searching for people who are highly likely to be bilingual, but do not make any explicit mention of languages or polyglotism later. Continue reading