#Bing Snapshot

booleanstringsBoolean

Who likes extra mouse clicks? Who likes a zillion windows open at the same time?

It’s key for people sourcing productivity to see some previews  of the search results, to make quick mini-decisions about opening those extra windows. Seeing informative previews leads to staying focused, saving the sourcing costs, and enhancing the search experience.

(I’ve long wanted to design and build a general-purpose application or a browser extension that would allow non-techies to custom-build previews of the search results. Check with me for details if you are curious.)

While, unfortunately for us, Google has moved away the Instant Preview, to hide the preview under a mouse-click, Bing has just taken a nice step to let us know about people, by automatically previewing their LinkedIn profiles. In some cases Bing pulls up the Twitter, Facebook, and Klout icons/links as well; in some cases,  it pulls up the “also viewed” list of people from LinkedIn. Either way, it’s informative.

To experience Bing’s new feature, try typing a name and maybe a few keywords, if necessary.

Note: sign out of Facebook to avoid your search results being personalized.

  

My guess is that Bing will be adding more of the social links for more people as the (indexing) time goes.

As for the Experience and Education LinkedIn-based previews, Bing has had those for a while now; this. too, is quite useful for mouse-clicks-saving.

Thanks for reading. 🙂

Irina

The Sourcing Tools Survey Summary

booleanstringsBoolean

The first ever Sourcing Tools Survey has been completed. We had 633 participants from 36 countries!

About 60% of participants were US-based. These countries had a strong representation: Australia, Canada, India, and the UK.

About 90% of those who participated were people in recruiting and sourcing: about ½ from agencies and ½ from corporations. We also had a number of sales, business development people, recruiting software manufacturers, and librarians (!) among the participants.

The job titles/levels ranged anywhere from Coordinators and Assistants all the way to Senior VPs and CEO’s.

All the major industries were covered, with the majority of the participants coming from IT, finances, and healthcare.

 

The survey had gathered information about familiarity, usage, and usefulness of a wide and representative range of sourcing tools, from “traditional” to new and cutting-edge.

(If you are looking to explore new tools, please check out the recently updated Tools page on my blog. It is not meant to be a “complete” list in any sense, but it lists some tools we think may be worth exploring.)

The survey has revealed some curious numbers and facts. One fact that stands out for me is that recruiters who have access to tools, quite often under-use or even ignore the functionality that is really powerful, but it “additional” or “optional” in their minds, or as the vendors have presented it. Examples are the Open Web for Dice users, the Talent Pipeline for LinkedIn Recruiter users, and the Signal for LinkedIn users.

As promised, I have shared the full report (without the personal info, of course) with all the participants. Thanks a lot to those of you who have contributed their answers!

Are you curious about the results? The Full Sourcing Tools Survey Results will be shared on a complementary basis with everyone who gets a prerecorded training from the Training Library or signs up for the People Sourcing Certification Program now until May 3, 2013.

 

Matching

booleanstringsBoolean

Since searching all over the web with the raising complexity of sourcing is difficult, it seems to be desirable to ease the searching pains with auto-matching. Several vendors provide that, including Bright.com and LinkedIn.

I have recently talked with the folks from Bright.com and was amazed to learn that they are getting some serious active candidates’ traffic: around 3.5 MLN resumes submitted or refreshed within the last month. That’s quite a number! Apparently Bright.com is wildly successful in that. 

Nobody would question LinkedIn’s success as the TOP destination for People Sourcing.

Both Bright.com and LinkedIn provide matching profiles and resumes, respectively, for given job descriptions.

(I don’t mean to list all companies who try to do auto-matching; there are several out there, and I am not sure if I know of any winners currently. There’s one more company I’d like to mention, however: I just spoke with people from http://www.textkernel.nl/ who are opening a matching multilingual component in their suite of recruiting/sourcing building blocks. If you are in Europe you should check it out.)

Let’s take a look at some matching results to two positions that I am currently sourcing for.

As any recruiter knows, the most important part in a job description is the Job Title. We cannot interview someone who is currently a Chief Cook for a CFO position and vise versa.

So – how do the following auto-“matches” come about??

Bright:

LinkedIn:

I’d give these matches a score of Zero

Has anyone used either matching system successfully? Not that I think matching can be accomplished in such broad areas as “all profiles” and “all jobs” and without some genius engineers and a few supercomputers…but these job titles as “matching” to the titles in the job descriptions?

Webinar: Sourcing For Diversity

booleanstringsBoolean, Diversity

Join us for a Webinar with Irina Shamaeva on April 10

There’s no question about the positive effect diversity plays at corporations. If you make your goal to include diversity profiles in the talent pool, there are some straightforward ways to achieve that. When we discuss specific sourcing tips with recruiters in the People Sourcing Certification Program, they are often surprised to hear about creative yet simple approaches that they hadn’t thought of.

Are you trying to include Women in Technology, African-American, Latino, or Hispanic candidates in your talent pool? As with any type of search, you need to find out where potential candidates “hang out” and what a good search result would look like, and start from there. Apply the general sourcing best practices to searching for diversity, and you get the best practices for diversity sourcing.

While this webinar will provide a solid supply of concrete sites and tools to explore, it will empower you to create your own diversity hiring strategy, customized to your hiring needs and available resources. In addition, the people sourcing principles that Irina will describe, will help to revise and to improve the organization’s overall sourcing strategy.

Who should attend

Recruiters, Sourcers, and Managers who are passionate about workplace diversity.

Outline

The Basics of People Sourcing
The 4 Basic Boolean Operators
Creating Diversity Boolean Strings on:
• Google
• LinkedIn
• LinkedIn Recruiter
Constructing Specific Searches
• Women
• Racial and Ethnic
Creative Tips for Your Toolbox
Saving the Strings
Custom Search Engines
Locating Pools of Diverse Candidates
• Associations
• Lists of Associations
Summary
Resources

Date: Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Time: 9 AM PST/noon EST/5 PM London
Duration: 90 minutes
Price: $99
Included: the slides, a video-recording, and one month of support.

After providing the webinar payment, within 24 hours you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the Webinar.

You can register and pay using the webinar page on our training site.

Can’t make the date and time? No problem. The video-recording, the slides, and support will be provided for all who sign up.

Announcement: The Best Boolean Strings for Sale

booleanstringsBoolean

Following multiple suggestions over the last two years and the apparent demand for this type of service we are immediately opening a new type of business with the Best Boolean Strings being its primary delivery.

The preliminary pricing is as follows:

  • The Best Boolean String for one job description: $100
  • The Best Boolean Strings for 5 jobs or more: 15% discount
  • The Best Boolean Strings for 20 jobs or more: 25% discount
  • The Best Boolean String that works on LinkedIn: temporarily not available. Please watch for updates
  • The Best Boolean String to locate the complete list of attendees for a conference: $800
  • The Best Boolean string to find a complete employee directory for a company of up to 2,000 employees: only $1,000
    • Organizational chart: only $1,500
    • Over 2,000 employees: please call for pricing

The new service is a joint project between the People Sourcing Certification Program and Brain Gain Recruiting. For organizations with a large volume of sourcing or with challenging jobs to fill, the service is going to provide an alternative to educating their Recruiter Teams in the Program or even obtaining separate prerecorded training modules.

Any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. We are looking forward to improve our industry and to solve its problems, starting today, April 1st, 2013!

10 Sourcing Complexities

booleanstringsBoolean

I have been asked to list the “Sourcing complexities and pain points” (especially  in IT recruiting, but not just). Here are the 10 points I came up with.

Add yours?

1. Job Descriptions Are Not Enough. Sourcing from a job description alone is difficult, because it never completely defines what to search for. In fact, job descriptions are written for candidates, not for recruiters or sourcers.

There are various unspoken assumptions, such as: “the hiring manager prefers graduates from top engineering schools”, or “for someone extremely good we will pay for their relocation”, or “these are the top target companies that we’d like to see the candidates coming from…” and “we cannot hire people from these other companies… because we have an agreement with them”. “We don’t want contractors”. “We don’t want job-hoppers”. The salary range is yet another point; neither job posts nor resumes mention the salaries in 99% of the cases. (With that in mind, here is what we use to define a starting point for a sourcing project: Brain Gain Recruiting Sourcing Checklist.)

Some interaction is required between the Sourcer – or the agency recruiter – and the corporate recruiter – or the hiring manager – depending on the arrangement. The first several submissions may be mostly for getting feedback, unless the assumptions have been cleared in the previous rounds of hiring for similar positions.

2. Keyword Challenges. When we start searching, we use keywords. The jobs with clear keywords, such as the technology names, are easier to source for. As an example, it is easier to look for a Websphere Developer than for a Project Manager, simply because the word websphere is unique and points to the potential pool of profiles. The jobs where keywords are non-unique (product, project managers, strategy consultants, etc.) are difficult to source for. Additionally, IT recruiters (and not just) need to understand the keyword soup. For example, we know that JavaScript is very much not like JavaC#is more like Java than Javascript; etc.

3. Title Challenges. While the job description has a job title, target candidates may have all sorts of current titles that are different, sometimes very different. To find them we need to be searching creatively. As an example, a Developer at Yahoo! may have the job title Senior Yahoo.

4. Location Challenges. While most systems would allow a search within a zip and a radius, this is not adequate in practice. As an example, I live in 10 miles from the San Francisco downtown, yet to drive in the morning across the Bay Bridge may take a good hour. With our very hot local IT market we need to know about all the subtleties of commuting.

5. Searching Challenges. Many recruiters are “people-oriented” and feel shy about using technologies, specifically, about Boolean searching. Unfortunately, searching can be made easier but it cannot be automated.

I have seen this over and over again: Good recruiters do know if a resume is good when they see one; it’s searching and finding the right profiles that seems difficult and frustrates many.

6. The Purple Squirrel. For some jobs it may be extremely difficult to find any one person with all of the must-have skills. A typical example would be a Software Engineer who is also a good Database Administrator. To find a purple squirrel, we need to vary keywords, drop some requirements and try to find at least partial matches, hoping that the rest of the skills are there and will be confirmed with additional research, or when we get in touch.

7. Large Volume. This is the opposite to the purple squirrel problem. We may need to hire in volumes; or perhaps, we get job applications in volumes; the latter is often the case when a managerial or a consultant position is posted online. Or, we may get too many search results that are hard to sort through. It’s often taking lots of screening time, unless the recruiter has good skills in searching and in processing the search results.

8. Everyone Is Trying to Hire the Same Person. For the straightforward keyword searches in resume databases or among LinkedIn profiles everyone gets the same search results. A potential candidate whose skills are in demand and who made herself “findable” by posting a recent full profile, is getting volumes of recruiter calls. This makes competing for the candidate extremely difficult and will annoy the candidate as well. It takes some art and some science to find other qualified potential candidates.  

9. Hidden Candidates. It’s not that “not everyone is on LinkedIn”. Many potential candidates do have profiles on LinkedIn, but without the right keywords; so they won’t be found. Some people have online resumes that they haven’t updated for a long time. The information, that would pre-qualify the person with a shallow or an outdated profile for a call, is spread across several sources. The Dream Software like the Dice Open Web collects pieces of info about the same person from different places and offers us to find people who cannot be found otherwise. An example would be a Software Architect with shallow general social media profiles but with a strong presence on Github or Stack Overflow.

10. Getting the Candidate’s Attention. Sending an initial message that would catch the potential candidate’s attention is a challenge, especially if the job market is hot. Technical people do not like to be interrupted by phone calls. They are picky. They may react to well written messages, to known brands, and to technologies that are in fashion. 

Thanks in advance for your feedback and additional thoughts! 🙂

Irina

P.S. Don’t forget to add your response to the Sourcing Tools Survey, if you haven’t, to get the complete survey data. The closing date is April 2, 2013.

Share with your peers: http://sourcingcertification.com/survey_intro

To support the survey, I offer 2-for-1 discounts on the Training Library materials.

The Sourcing Tools Survey

booleanstringsBoolean

March 25, 2013.
Dear All:
We encourage everyone in the industry to take 5-7 minutes of your time and checkmark the specific tools you use.

I am excited about the survey and am looking to hear from many people in our industry. This is an opportunity for all of us to learn from each other and share the tools we use and love most.

Disclaimer: as always, I am not affiliated with any particular tools vendor.

This is an independent survey, targeted at getting an objective picture and statistics of the popular tools in the industry. This is the first time ever a project like this has launched.

We expect a very large volume of responses. We may not be able to answer your emails about this survey individually. If you experience technical problems submitting a response please let us know or try using a newer version of Chrome / Firefox / Safari / Internet Explorer.

This Survey will stay open until Tuesday, April 2.

 We will be sharing the full survey results with everyone who participates. You should expect to hear from us within one week after the survey is closed. (We will not be sharing the names of people who respond, the contact info, or the company names.)

 We are providing a two-for-one special on everything in the People Sourcing Training Library for everyone who completes the survey. That includes the prerecorded Webinars and the People Sourcing Certification Materials.

Looking forward to hearing from you!
Thanks,
Irina Shamaeva

 

Find People on Google-Plus

booleanstringsBoolean

I’ve always felt that Google-Plus has a great future, since it was announced. Adding Communities was a big and positive change. A recent shift in its User Interface tells me that Google-Plus continues moving in the right direction.

Did you notice the “new” Find People function?

When selected, it provides the ability to:

  • Check your gmail address book against your circles 
  • Search “for coworkers” and “for classmates”, that, in fact, offers to look for people from any workplace and from any school. This is faceted search
  • Import contacts from an address book (a CSV file)
Did you know that all of this people searching functionality has been there a while? The only new (visual) add-on I have noticed is graphically pointing to the number of (sort-of) friends in common; I’ve highlighted on the screenshot above.
The user interface shift doesn’t affect the explained concepts in my recorded Google-Plus presentation available  at the Training Library. This people search functionality was previously buried under “finding people to include in your circles”; we explored it in-depth at the webinar. When I present the Google-Plus again, for now, I will only have to re-do the screenshots. What a fast moving target it is, Social Networks and People Search!
I am glad that this better People Search is now clearly visible. Check it out if you haven’t.
Compare this with the “old” search that has been easily visible all along:
The “old” search only offers using keywords and narrowing down to “people and pages”. (The location facet is there, but I haven’t seen it working properly.) The search weakness is a shame, since Google-Plus has well structured information about its members in the About pages, including employment, skills, places, education, and valuable for the People Sourcers links to other social profiles and sites. That, and given that the amount of information in Google-Plus is tiny, compared with the whole surface web that Google search indexes, should let Google-Plus Engineers easily provide us with multi-faceted people search. (Why has it been taking it so long?) The third party site that implemented multi-faceted search early on, FindPeopleOnPlus, it seems, ran out of steam over a year ago, and now covers only a small % of the total network population. Hopefully, the described shift in the User Interface is a sign that Google-Plus is working on solid people search functionality. Let’s keep an eye on it.
Unfortunately, selecting several people and “rolling” them to a circle is no longer available on the new page, while it’s still available on the “old” circles page. Hopefully this inconsistency in the user interface will be cleaned up soon. I prefer the way it used to be.
That’s really minor though. Google-Plus has a big and bright future.
– Irina

People Sourcing Tools Suggestions

booleanstringsBoolean

I have posted a draft list for the People Sourcing Tools Survey that I plan to run to run on my sourcing- and social recruiting-related groups and the Ning network. By no means am I trying to create an exhaustive list of tools, but I didn’t want to miss anything “major”.

I have also shared the draft with the active, well-run Google+ Community “Social Recruiting” moderated by the Wise Man Say Hun Lee and by Oscar Mager and got some great suggestions there.

Thanks a lot for all the suggestions! This feels like an exciting project, and a way for many of us to compare notes and to learn about tools that we haven’t investigated yet.

I feel that it might be useful to go over the extra suggestions I got up till now. Of course, this reflects my own subjective views; I am happy to hear alternative views and more suggestions. I am also interested to hear more about some tools I am not as familiar with.

1. Thanks for your suggestions! I am adding these tools for sure:

Some of the tools suggested are excellent tools and I absolutely plan to include them. Those are:

Other suggestions:
  • Followerwonk, a Twitter tool; I do not have much experience but since several colleagues suggested it, let’s include. (I hang out on Twitter quite a bit, but I don’t think Twitter is a top tool for finding target professionals.)
  • More than one person has mentioned Plaxo; I am not sure how widely it is used these days.
  • A note on theSocialCV suggestion: it is now the Dice Open Web and is included.

2. Sorry, I am not including these tools. They do not work:

These sites were suggested to be included in the survey… but are they about matching profiles against jobs? Have a job opening, auto-find profiles? Sorry folks, this cannot work. I can write a blog post explaining, why. But briefly, it just doesn’t. (If there are some other features of interest than auto-matching, please let me know. I might have missed something.)

(LinkedIn also offers “matching” profiles for job posts. Ha!)

I am not including any tools that auto-construct searches, as their main purpose, either:

  • Recruitin
  • Recruiting Bar
These could be good educational sites if they maintain good example searches, but not sourcing sites.

3. I am probably not including these tools; some are rare and some may require to write code:

I plan to survey the mainstream tools, and not necessarily everything there is.

Search Engines. There are several other wonderful general search engines, in addition to Google and Bing. But they have indexed much smaller territories. In everyday practice, I think, we would do better if we ignore DuckDuckGo and Blekko on most days and just use Google and common sense. (Anyone has a story about placing a person found on DuckDuckGo?)

APIs such as Talentdrive/Talentfilter. These sound interesting, but don’t think an API can be considered a sourcing tool. If there’s an app using the APIs, with no need to write code, please let me know.

Andy Headworth has brought this site to everyone’s attention: Mention.net. I’d like to mention it here;  Andy says it is a much better alert system than Google alerts. I have some doubts about its wide usage.

4. I don’t know enough about these tools suggested to me; are these people sourcing tools? Can you look for target professionals using these?

5. These are membership sites, not people sourcing tools: Github; Stackoverflow; IEEE; etc.
Thanks to all the great suggestions so far! If I have missed some suggestions that you feel are important  please let me know.

 

Where Is Waldo on LinkedIn?

booleanstringsBoolean

We can still send messages to fellow group members on LinkedIn without using the precious InMail count. But here’s what I just noticed, while sourcing for a new opening. If you did a people search, restricted it to fellow group members only, and viewed the results, you used to be clearly notified which group(s) you have in common with the members listed in the results. (There were even times, long ago, when the send message link was visible on the profiles in the search results.)  You would then have to go to that group in common with the person, search for the same person, finally see the send message button, and send the message. (That is, if you didn’t know of a shortcut.) You can still do that, in theory. But which group do you have in common? That will now take some extra man-hours to locate, if you continue to using the feature on a regular basis. 

To illustrate the change here are a couple of screenshots.

Here’s a target candidate that I have just found using advanced people search. He and I have a group in common.

Here’s the groups section, expanded, on the potential candidate’s profile:

I can see now, which group we have in common! Can you? This is where sourcing skills make a real difference. (Just kidding.)

To be fair, I need to mention one more hint to how to locate the group in common. It is presented in a graphical form: those groups are listed if you look on the right side of the profile and click on the “groups” in the “in common” section. Then, to go to the group, you would need to retype its name while searching for it.

Given how much effort there is in order to send free messages, some recruiters might now start sending InMails instead. Some recruiters may start using other sources more than before as well.

To use the above shortcut, add the member ID and press Enter. It still works. By the way this shortcut has been used almost 3,000 times since I created it.