While searching on Google, specifically, while X-raying LinkedIn, we would do better if we adjust out expectations. Namely,
- Not all profiles on LinkedIn, even those that have been around for a while, are indexed. Shane Bowen‘s post on SourcingHacks “What You Didn’t Find While X-Raying LinkedIn” demonstrates that.
- If a profile (or any page for that matter) is indexed, which means that is can be found using Google search, it may not necessarily be found by searching for a specific phrase visible on that profile. In particular, the phrase “people you know” that Glen Cathey’s post on BooleanBlackBelt titled “What’s the most effective way to X-Ray search LinkedIn?” suggests to use, as the best way to search, works in some cases but doesn’t work in other.
Here is an example that has only a handful results and makes it clear what may potentially happen. To create this example I just picked a couple of rare skills to search for.
The “People you know” search produces 10 results (right now, on my machine)
The advanced search with “URLs” produces 12 results, i.e. 20% more:
Using different common phrases – for this particular search –
picks one false positive if you don’t exclude “dir” but otherwise finds 12 results. Yet other simple phrases like “profile on LinkedIn” being added to the search result in zero profiles found.
Conclusion: It’s good to have the right expectations about searching. There may be different ways to find extra target profiles by varying ways to search, depending on 1) what you are looking for and 2) what Google decides to index: pages and phrases on those pages. This is usually not a problem and you will find all you need with one common phrase, unless you are searching for a purple squirrel, in which case it helps to be aware Google’s (understandable) “compromises” in indexing. Or maybe try using a slightly more advanced syntax.
On a philosophical note, perhaps Sourcing is becoming more Art than Science.