Sourcing Certification EXAM Demo Sessions


Are you interested in joining the ranks of Certified Sourcing Professionals in 2014? Our final Sourcing Certification Exam period this year is coming up during the week of December 8, 2014.

How do you decide whether you are ready to take the Exam?

In brief: to pass the Exam requires good knowledge of Googling and Sourcing on Social Sites; familiarity with some productivity tools; and the ability to combine that knowledge and skills in solving practical hands-on sourcing challenges. These are the baseline skills necessary for every Recruiter, to make sure they quickly find and try to engage the right potential candidates – and find some hard-to-find top talent as well.

Those already enrolled in the Program on a subscription basis have access to all the necessary material and practice tests in the Sourcing Guidebook and pick the Exam date when they feel ready. However, taking the Exam and getting Certified is now also offered separately from being enrolled in the study through the Guidebook.

Join me (Irina) at one of the two Sourcing Certification EXAM Demo Sessions: Friday November  or Tuesday December 2. At the sessions,  I will provide a brief overview of the Sourcing techniques you need to successfully pass the Exam; will show a number of sample questions similar to those at the Exam – and the ways to solve them (those are fun!); and will answer your questions about the Certification Program and the Exam. Sign up here:

  1. Sourcing Certification EXAM Demo Session – Friday November 21
  2. Sourcing Certification EXAM Demo Session – Tuesday December 2

>>> Here is the best part: at each of the two Demo sessions we will be giving away 5 (five) guest passes to take the Exam during the upcoming Exam week in December.

Seating at the Demo sessions is Limited. Register now to reserve your seat for one of the two sessions.

If you have any general questions about the Sourcing Certification Program and the Exams, or if you would like to register a team, please browse through the Sourcing Certification Site or contact our Customer Support Manager George Glikman.



Source Code Search Engines


As a follow-up to a previous post Sourcing Developers in [software] Source Code, I’d like to go over some alternatives to “plain” X-Raying for searching open source code.

Google used to have advanced search that “understood” regular expressions for but it was shut down in 2012. At this time the most advanced search you can do there is to search the Google-hosted code using “labels” that shows 100 results at a time; as an example,: search for python. The Chromium project source code still has the advanced search ability; but it has only so many developers involved.

The good news is that there are multiple sites that offer open source code search across hosting platforms. You can select the programming language on all of those code search engines. As we have seen in the previous post (and in the screenshot above), code authors may leave “signatures” in the code that allow us to locate them.

  • Open HUB (formerly Ohloh, formerly searches impressive 20,000,000,000+ lines of code – unfortunately, rather slowly and with rather limited search syntax. You can also search for its own 60K+ registered members and you can look at the most popular contributors to each of the supported 40+ programming languages.



  • SearchCode is another code search engine that has indexed a significant amount of code. It displays the sources it searches on the front page, and you can pick and choose from them. Here is a search similar to the above: C++ code with email addresses. The site is run by a single (super-) Developer – Ben Boyter.

(I must admit that I am not certain about the usage of the special character @ for searching here. The results do have email addresses – and that’s what I am after. I will leave it for the reader to figure out how special characters are processed.)

Searching for contact info in the Source code is a rather unusual way to locate Developers. While we can’t know the location for the email owners, cross-referencing is quick and will identify people at certain locations, for whom we’d already know the programming language and possibly the employer (depending on how we search). As an example, a similar Krugle search for emails AND the C++ programming language reveals the LinkedIn profiles of 6 solid Software Developers in the San Francisco Bay Area, 5 of whom currently work for Google – and we can now email them directly.

The same set of email addresses ( with C++ skills) reveals a good number of Google-Plus profiles:


I have yet to figure out how to quickly narrow these down to a specific location (for the companies that have multiple offices, such as Google). When I do, I will let you know!

LinkedIn Basic Search is Galene – LIR Search is Lucene

search linkedin

It was comforting for some LinkedIn Recruiter users to hear about the search results discrepancies, shared previously in the posts

Here is some feedback I got:

“GREAT GREAT GREAT article on the discrepancies in search (LIR vs Personal LinkedIn). A few colleagues and I have been experiencing the same problems but were chalking it up to software bugs…”

“Glad you posted this! You validated the fact that I am not crazy! I had the same exact thing happen to me about two weeks ago. Side by side searches yielding less profiles from the LIR account search vs my own personal one.”

Here is an update.

I am happy to report that I got a clear explanation of what is going on there at a recent live “Technical Deep Dive” at LinkedIn San Francisco.

Bottom line, LIR search is still Lucene (the old search algorithm) and Personal search is Galene (the new search algorithm). Yeah!

I was impressed with the Software Engineers at LinkedIn at the meeting; they are obviously high-class folks. They were explaining the complex ideas behind the new search algorithm and relevance. The difference in the search code behind LIR and Personal was not a central point of the Meetup in any way; it was just mentioned in passing. Of course, it is not the Engineers’ responsibility to explain to Recruiters what changes have been implemented.

So – not that we are getting any updates on when LIR is going to be moved to Galene (and it will be); not what user query interpretations are coming… but at least the basic reason for the differences is quite clear.

I heard about some exciting new features coming up with further development of Galene. If you are curious, I believe you can find some slides and materials online from the Software Engineers, to whom I listened, Sriram Sankar and Rahul Aggarwal, as well as from other LinkedIn Engineers.

I am proud that my guess, that semantic interpretation of the personal search happens before the search is executed, proved to be the case in reality. The Engineers used this language for it: “converting user query into a structured Galene query” and, in another instance, “query rewriting”.

As a side note, this information makes me worry about searching in LIR. Apparently the “old search”, Lucene, cannot be properly scaled to manage searching on that much information. The scaling necessities is what initially triggered the Galene development a year and 1/2 ago. LIR is currently working on a weak search mechanism, inadequate to handle 300+ MLN profiles and other data.

One More Sourcing Challenge (Advanced!)


I received over 20 responses for the #HIREConf Sourcing Challenge in one day. Most participants sent me the right answer; well done! I now have a correct answer for each of the two great prizes. So that search is over.

Here’s an additional Advanced Advanced Challenge, for which I am adding two prizes of the same kind: a Special Guest Pass to HIREConf and a webinar from the Training Library. If you have not participated in the first challenge, you have a chance to jump in right now!

#HIREConf Advanced Sourcing Challenge – Open to Everyone

Please read carefully.

Suggest ONE SEARCH STRING on ONE SITE, that would instantly identify the person who fits the first two requirements. THE SEARCH STRING MUST BE NO LONGER THAN 20 CHARACTERS.

(By a SITE above I mean a website that allows searching, which could be Google, Github, Google+, LinkedIn, or some other site.)

As a reminder, here are the first two requirements. That person:

1) Works at an office on the 8th floor, at an address within the same zipcode as the hotel where HIREConf is held;

2) Has a Github profile, created in 2014; has somewhere between 60 and 70 followers there, but is not following anyone.

Of course, if you already know the answer to the previous challenge, that may put you at an advantage. (Or not.)

Email me the URL for that search.

Have even more fun!

#HIREConf Sourcing Challenge



(Wherever you live, if you enjoy solving fun Sourcing Challenges, don’t miss the one below.)

If you are a Recruiter in the San Francisco Bay Area:

If you can make it, I’d be glad to meet live at the upcoming HIREconf, a full day conference with training and talks focused on Sourcing and Recruiting in highly competitive markets. It’s coming up on November 4, 2014. I will be giving a live 3+ hour interactive Sourcing Workshop, covering lots of Sourcing tips and techniques for the modern Recruiter.

The HIREConf price is affordable and is incredibly low, given the amount of great content that is going to be revealed. If the price is a problem, however, our Boolean Strings members get a discount. I also have 5 free tickets given to me by the organizers; be one of the first 5 people to email George and he will give you that secret registration link. (Actually, if you are a really good Sourcer, you won’t even need to email George.)

Local Sourcing Certification Program past attendees and supporters: it’s also your chance to meet David Galley and George Glikman, who are on the Program Team, and my business partner Julia Tverskaya of the Brain Gain Recruiting fame; they will be attending. They are all very cool people!

I would like to offer 1 (one) Master Sourcer Guest Ticket to HIREConf to the person who is the first to solve a Sourcing Challenge, identified shortly.

To make it interesting for those who live outside of the San Francisco Bay Area, I will also offer 1 (one) webinar from our Training Library to the first person who submits the right answer.

We’ll have one local and one non-local winner.

#HIREConf Sourcing Challenge – Open to Everyone


Find a person who:

1) Works at an office on the 8th floor, at an address within the same zipcode as the hotel where HIREConf is held

2) Has a Github profile, created in 2014; has somewhere between 60 and 70 followers there, but is not following anyone

3) His company was established in 2012, and has something to do with JavaScript… well, OK, one can learn JavaScript there.

Send me an email with the subject #HIREConf Sourcing Challenge and let me know what his last name is. Please follow these directions exactly to qualify!

  • As soon as I receive the winning answer for attending HIREConf, I will update this post. — Solved!
  • As soon as I receive the winning answer for getting a Sourcing webinar (non-Bay Area people) I will update this post. — Solved!

Have fun!

hireconf>>> note: I posted a new (advanced) challenge.

Sourcing without LinkedIn: Wed Oct 29, 2014



The most popular Recruiting/Sourcing webinar of 2014, Sourcing without LinkedInis coming to a computer near you on Wednesday October 29.

Pretty much all of us extensively use LinkedIn as the top site for Sourcing, and rightly so. I use it quite a bit myself! However:

  • “Everyone is searching for the same person”
  • It’s expensive
  • It takes away functionality without notice
  • (most importantly!) At least 80% of qualified professionals cannot be found on LinkedIn by searching

The webinar will go over the most efficient Sourcing techniques that use the vast Internet outside of LinkedIn.

I have updated the material quite a bit, to reflect new tools and all the changes in search engines and networks. The webinar was sold out multiple times in the past.

Who will benefit:

Recruiters; Recruitment Managers and Teams; Sourcers; Staffing Managers; Talent Hunters; Inside Sales Managers; Business Development; Executive Search Firms; Searchers; Researchers; Hiring Managers.

You will learn how to:

  • Navigate top 10 People Finders
  • Identify data-rich sites in the target:
    • Industry (forums, associations; certifications)
    • Geography (local chapters, meet-ups)
    • Gatherings (recent conferences)
  • Extract lists of professionals from websites based on:
    • Boolean search and X-raying
    • Deep Web search
  • Locate social profiles on professional niche sites
  • Find contact information:
    • Corporate email address formats
    • Email addresses
    • Phone numbers
  • Pre-qualify people for calling and make the call warm

Review and register at Seating is limited.

Date: Wednesday, October 29th, 2014
Time: 9AM PDT / 12PM EDT — (Check your local time for this Webinar)
Duration: 90 minutes
Included: The slides, a video recording, and one month of support on the material.
Everyone who registers will receive the complete recording, slides, and one full month of support, whether you attend live or not.


Social Emailing: Networks Comparison


Back in 2009 I published a post on “Call or Email or Use Social Media?” The post was about reaching out to potential candidates, or to business prospects, using Social Networks. While some of the technical details are, of course, outdated 5 years later, the idea remains – and you can do MUCH more now than back then.

I’d like to clearly identify the topic of this post. It is not about messaging your friends on Facebook and not about using “Social Messaging” apps on mobile devices. I’m going to go over messaging capabilities available for Social Network users, that may help to reach prospects – even if you do not know an email address or a phone number.

We know that some LinkedIn members send invitations to connect, carrying the messages to engage in business or apply for a job. I am not a fan of the approach; but if it’s your cup of tea, you might want to check a recent post How to Connect if the Reason is Not Listed.

(Other methods to reach out to prospects, that I prefer to avoid, are direct-messaging on Twitter and messaging on Facebook; I will skip them in this post.)


On LinkedIn, you can send messages to your 1st level connections and to fellow group members. These messages go to the recipients’ email address, registered on LinkedIn.

Since your business prospects are not likely to be your first level connections, your chance to use LinkedIn messaging remains with the groups. A member has a limit of 50 groups. Given the groups’ population numbers, if you max out on groups (and if your prospects do tend to join LinkedIn groups), you might be able to reach roughly 1% of LinkedIn members via groups. That would be ~6 MLN people. If you want to message any of  the remaining ~310 MLN members, who are outside of your groups, you would need to pay for InMails.


It’s VERY different on Facebook! You can email pretty much any Facebook member who has the default preferences. I imagine that would be 99% of Facebook users (probably more than that). That would be ~2 BLN people. Note that, just like on LinkedIn, the message will go to their email address, registered with Facebook.


It’s VERY different on Google-Plus as well. If you’d like to send a message to someone on Google-Plus, simply include the member in your circles, then use the “sharing” dialog and select that member (start typing their name to get a prompt). I am afraid I can’t provide a good estimate but it could be that’s another ~2 BLN people there as well, imagining that 99% members have the default settings. (I am not going to go into further detail on how Google+ accounts are tied with using Google, making Google-Plus population to seem very large. Even if you only look at active Google+ users, that would be a pretty large number as well: the number of active users monthly is about the same as as the whole LinkedIn Network has.)

If you want to learn more about “Social Emailing”, or if you prefer to call or email your prospects, but are not sure how to find the contact information, please come to my webinar on Name Generation on Tuesday 21 October 2014. We’ll go over Top 7 dangerously powerful Name Generation Techniques. We would expect that those who attend will use that power wisely and responsibly. The materials and one month of support are provided to all who sign up.


LinkedIn Basic Search is Semantic – LIR Search is NOT



In the previous post Discrepancies in Search: LinkedIn Recruiter vs. Personal we looked at some differences in the search results. While we have no word from @LinkedIn, my guess is that the Basic search does additional “lightly semantic” interpretation of  the search queries, which leads to those differences.


In the first example with “computer games”, it matters that it’s the exact name of an industry. LinkedIn personal account adds the profiles that have that industry to the search results.  That’s a guess backed up by a good number of tests. I find this “light semantic” addition to be quite relevant. As an example, let’s narrow the example search to current company = Apple. People who work at Apple do not necessarily work with computer games; those who do may express that as their industry. If we look for people at Apple with C++ 3D iOS “computer games”, the personal account finds 8 profiles, while LIR finds only 3.

Thanks to Glen Cathey for his comments on my last post and his new blog post with some exploration of what’s going on. (Glen: I just tried to see what the difference might be between a word used in the industry name and as a keyword otherwise – and ran across a search that I don’t even know how to begin to explain! A search for software NOT games/industry: “computer games” finds 28 people in the US – it will find more people in other countries! – and 4,623 results in LIR. Of course, that search itself doesn’t make much sense other than a test search.)


Responding to Glen’s request to provide examples of searches that do not include searches for industries: it is not hard to find, once you know that, generally, the personal/Basic search is “lightly semantic”.

EXAMPLE ONE. Search for VP Recruiting, Bank of America: personal – 22 results, LIR… 6 results. Guess what, personal account knows that VP is Vice President, LIR doesn’t! Here’s a variation: “VP Recruiting”, current or past, BofA: personal: 9 results. LIR: 2 results.

EXAMPLE TWO. Search for Sr. Manager at Deloitte in the US; personal: 60 results. LIR: 3 results. Personal knows that Sr means Senior; LIR doesn’t.

EXAMPLE THREE. Search for Morgan, Senior Project Manager, NYC Area  9 results, while LIR provides a whooping 358 results. I didn’t find the time for a better example and wanted to point what is going on: the personal decides to use Morgan as the first or the last name only, while LIR finds past and present employees of Morgan Stanley and J.P. Morgan.  In this case (the personal names interpretation), I’d rather the semantic interpretation didn’t happen.

There are other examples of discrepancies I have run into, that I still can’t explain.

Needless to say, LinkedIn Recruiter subscribers don’t expect the differences in the search results to be so significant, in some cases seeing way fewer results in LIR, in other cases seeing many more results, yet in some – roughly the same numbers (as it used to be before Galene). That provides for poor UX, to say the least.

Once again, I seriously recommend searching “on both sides” and perhaps X-ray as well.


Discrepancies in Search: LinkedIn Recruiter vs. Personal


Up until recently, search results in LinkedIn Recruiter (LIR) and in (any) personal account were the same. LIR provides more results available for viewing for a given search and better results visibility (and also some facets that are not available in a personal search).

This has changed dramatically.

If you have a LinkedIn Recruiter account, you must read on.

Here are three examples of searches, compared side-by-side for a personal vs a LIR account. (Guess, which account provides more results?)


Search for C++ 3D iOS “computer games”, title = engineer OR developer, in the Bay Area 

Personal account: 150 results.



Click on “View Results in Recruiter”



… the same search shows only 43 results in LinkedIn Recruiter:



So, in the EXAMPLE #1 the numbers are:

C++ 3D iOS “computer games”, title = engineer OR developer, in the Bay Area 

  • Personal: 150 results
  • LIR: 43 results



hospital health care, NYC, currently at New York Presbyterian Hospital

  • Personal: 5,574 results
  • LIR: 1,302 results



Research Intel Labs China

  • Personal: 283 results
  • LIR: 119 results


In the above examples, LIR provided anywhere from about 50% to 20% (!) of the numbers of results that a member would get with a personal account – including a Basic account.

I do have some guesses for the reasons of the discrepancies, but I can’t be sure. There’s no official documentation or information in blogs about this, as far as I can tell. I don’t think the discrepancies are caused by software bugs. My best guess is that these are “side effects” of developing Galene and the Economic Graph.  I have seen some cases where the discrepancies are the other way around: LIR shows more results than personal, for no apparent reason.

Bottom line:

Take a note of it. Don’t lose matching results. I’d recommend to search from both personal and from LIR and, perhaps, X-ray as well.

How to Connect if the Reason is Not Listed


(“Part One” briefly outlines some background. If you are only interested in “how-to”, please jump to the “Part Two” below.

Please note, that I think that inviting others for no good reason is NOT appropriate.)

Part One. Reasons to Connect

LinkedIn is a business networking site, where people can “connect” with each other. Connecting provides for ways to keep each other’s contact info; track interactions; perhaps get on the phone or meet in person; or follow-up after having met; follow each other’s business activity; refer business to each other, and more. In fact, LinkedIn is “the” Business Networking site.

LinkedIn provides us with a number of choices on why we’d like to connect with someone, including: colleague, classmate, we’ve done business together, and a friend. Up until a few days ago there was also a “fellow group member” option, that seems to be gone as of now.  This could be just a bug (or not).


(Here’s a post about the missing feature: OMG! LinkedIn Invite No Longer Has “Groups” Option. If it is a bug we’ll hopefully see it back soon.)

Whether the absence of groups among choices is “a bug or a feature”, sometimes it’s hard to find the reason to connect and network among the offered “radio button” choices.  Sometimes there’s not a group in common either. How about these reasons:

  • “I [read your books/posts/ listened to your presentations] and would like to connect to hear more and stay up-to-date”
  • “I met you at a business gathering/conference, enjoyed our conversation, and would like to stay in touch”
  • “We have not done business together (yet) but from your profile information I see a really good reason to discuss the opportunities”
  • Such-and-such has advised I connect with you because…


NOTE: I think inviting people who (you suspect) may NOT want to connect with you is a bad idea. This is spamming.

Compare with the InMail choices for the Reasons

By the way, compare the above with the choices for InMails.  These still may not cover all the possibilities, but the selection is, obviously, wider. (Why?):

Thanks for reading through the brief intro. Comments are welcome.

Now, here are two workarounds. Here’s how to invite while avoiding the limiting choices for the “reason”.

Part Two. How to Connect if the Reason is not listed

Let’s say you have a good reason to connect with this person (listing a co-worker here as a real life example):


OPTION ONE: Search (for what you have already found!)


Select the person’s name and a few keywords from the headline.


Search on LinkedIn for the selected text. In the search results page you can now connect without stating a reason.


That’s it!

The advantage is that you can do this really fast. The drawback is that you cannot customize the connection message.

OPTION TWO. Save and Invite

 If you are able to Save the profile


(which is subject to some LinkedIn limitations), you can then invite the person from your Contacts page and customize the text as well.


Save the profile.


Go to the Contacts Sorted by New – see a way to invite – with customization text (and no selection list for the “Reason”)…


… and send a customized invite:


Thanks for reading :) I hope many readers will benefit from the “how-to” part.