sitewatch: notchup

Companies, recruitment, referrals, sitewatch, Talent, Tools No Responses »
Feb 012008

company name: notchup

based in the US, currently in beta mode. you can apply for registration or get referred (send me your email if you want to go straight in)

the idea: give candidates cash for taking interviews with employers and recruiters; members are also encouraged to spam, i mean refer the site to people that might be interested in joining by given the inviters a % of the money made by the invitees in one year.

the user experience: clean design (although someone commenting on the techcrunch article reckoned that the layout was a ripoff from google’s grandcentral. uploading your profile from linkedin is meant to be easy too, though I did not manage to connect. On the other side of the equation, employers get to see a blind profile which they can choose for interview and lay out the cash

The site offers 100% money guarantee, not sure about the terms of reimbursement though.

It will be obvious to you that the model can fall on its bum before it comes out of beta if there’s abuse, lack of talent or buyers. I am wondering tho if you as individual agency or corporate recruitment department would be prepared to materially reward candidates at interview, shortlisting or placement stage of the process. Or, are you already doing that?

Hope you have a safe weekend

Posted by jorge at 3:09 pm

LinkedIn rumours

Companies, linkedin, networking, Sourcing, Talent, technology, Tools No Responses »
Dec 092007

Had you asked me at the beginning of the year: will you be in Vizag for business in 2007? I would have honestly said no.. but here I am. This is all part of the plot to justify why I have not been writing – or reading – blogs in the last couple of months or so. More details soon.

Anyhoo, I was reading today about how LinkedIn is not going to be bought by News… Just in case they change their minds and/or Nye stops playing cat and mouse, I reckon this is a fab purchase because it enables News to

a) move up the value chain re. employment [from classifieds (immediate placements) to relationships with professionals (workforce planning)]

b) nurture an interesting audience for its other advertising and content

So there

Have a great weekend

Posted by jorge at 10:48 am

re. LinkedIn Usage in Australia

linkedin, Marketing, research, Sourcing, Talent, Tools No Responses »
Jul 052007

Usually I write a post and move on.

However this one got a good comment, which you may miss out on if you don’t check previous entries.

By good I don’t mean I concur 100%. I somewhat disagree with the outlook expressed in the last item. By good I mean it highlights a few key messages regarding using networks as a sourcing tool or advertising medium:

- The network environment gives you access to additional candidate info you may not get when advertising in the paper or a job board. It even gives you information about the people that decided not to go for the job; this has to be good intelligence for future postings

- Recruiting becomes more personal and symmetric. You as a hirer have a few more obligations in things like response management, to ensure that your ad increases the strength of your network as opposed to the other way around

- Networks as promising sources of good candidates may/will deteriorate IF the hiring processes do not adapt to a network environment and the behaviors it spouses

Here is the comment again. Thanks Anonymous

Posted by jorge at 4:10 pm

sitewatch 4/7 – Climber.com

Companies, recruitment, sitewatch, Sourcing, Talent, Tools No Responses »
Jul 052007

Climber.com

Tagline: “We are like dating for jobs”

Jist: Matches candidates with employers based on resume type information plus something that resembles a preferences and attributes profile (e.g. are you money-driven, does you work have to have a positive social impact). Climber calls this the Career Fingerprint.

Snapshot today: At the moment the jobs matched to the system’s registered users are keyword-matched ads from the Indeed engine, but as employer preference data grows the matching is expected to be more comprehensive. Professionals have private profiles and decide to share personal/contact info to specific employers.

Initial assessment: The attributes and preferences profile is superficial; then again, it is not meant to be a rigorous tool to assess a person’s suitability for a role. Given this, if the profiles were to convey the candidates/employers likes and dislikes, there is an increased chance to assess a level of compatibility between potential hire and hirer at the onset.

I would also like to know how this information is embedded (e.g. taken into account) in the recruitment process. Maybe RPO and corporate recruiters are readier than others to use this information effectively.

Down the track: It has the potential for interesting metadata

My philosophical question: At the end of the day do you hire on (soft) compatibilities or hard skills?

Went for a bit more info, but the system is like, down

Posted by jorge at 3:23 am

LinkedIn usage in Australia

aboutus, business, Companies, linkedin, networking, People, recruitment, research, Sourcing, Talent, technology, Tools 2 Responses »
Jul 022007

My first foray into empirical research as part of LatinOcean. It is really more a brief compilation on how recruiters are using the system in the region in an attempt to transcend the hype and the buzz.

Don’t go too hard on me re. sample sizes and statistical relevance; nevertheless I hope it is of benefit to some of you out there, and feel free to pass. Enjoy

Posted by jorge at 6:08 pm

re. seek’s employment index

Job Boards, Job Seekers, Marketing, recruitment, Sourcing, Talent 10 Responses »
Jun 072007

The notes to the latest Seek Employment Index report that on a year-to-year basis job applications are 5.5% higher compared to a corresponding 35.8% increase in news job ads posted to their site. I assume that the numbers for the other two biggest job boards show similar trends (set me straight if I am wrong please)

If I were to stick to the Seek numbers, the stats are saying that a typical/average advertiser is getting @ 22% less applications per ad; which implies less candidate processing work, less job-application-related exchanges, etc; so this is in itself not a bad thing from a processing cost and churn side of the equation.

The problem arises when with the available candidate pool (constantly fed by your applications flow) you cannot fill the role. What this means in turn is that the candidates that make up the 22% that are NOT applying to the roles you advertise happen to be the ones you needs to make a placement or fill a vacancy. So you could be receiving 22% less applications but in fact you may be losing up to 100% of your quality applications (placeable candidates).

What do you do if you are an advertiser?
What advertising advice do you have to give if you are a job board?

If you find flaws in my reasoning, pls give me a shout… and kudos to Seek for their transparency with the trends.

Posted by jorge at 6:11 pm

adding to our services portfolio

aboutus, Advertising, google, linkedin, Marketing, Sourcing, Talent, Tools No Responses »
Jun 062007

I have given the What We Offer section a very small update, as I have now included a LinkedIn master class session and the management of recruitment advertising campaigns on Google (AdWords) in our offerings portfolio.

I have been very suscint in what I have included on the site mainly because every time I have delivered on these services, they vary substantially depending on the client requirements. I might need to expand on the basics perhaps, as newbie clients come on the site and they need a bit more handlholding, which I am more that happy to offer.

Feel free to pass these details around, there will be a referral fee for you. And even better if you want to take our services up.

Posted by jorge at 5:59 pm

A jerk-free workplace

best practice, business, People, recruitment, Talent No Responses »
Jun 042007

It’s a bigger problem than you might think—jerks and bullies in the workplace. Research shows that they not only hinder recruiting and retention but also raise levels of client churn, damage reputations, and diminish the confidence of investors.

Interesting article from McKinsey’s on the costs of jerks and bullies in the office (need to register for free). This is perhaps more timely in the context of candidates shortages and the urge to recruit and place people quickly. Just make sure you don’t drive your TCJ (total cost of jerks) for your organisation.

Posted by jorge at 5:54 pm

Checkster from alpha to pre-release access

Companies, Job Seekers, recruitment, sitewatch, Talent, Tools No Responses »
May 272007

A few months back I reported Checkster going on alpha testing. It is now open for access before release.

Checkster has a retail offering for individuals (candidates) and an offering to recruiters/hirers. Having seen products like those marketed by Insala, I did not find the tools used ‘brand new’; having said that, people might find some of the insights extracted from the reports useful to focus career or job seeking efforts.

On the b2b side, the twist is that these tools are being used in the recruitment process as an incremental source of reference checks, as opposed to when a professional is out-placed, undertaking company-sponsored career development, etc. I expect the value of having these assessments will be directly proportional to how they contribute to get the right individual for the job (measured in terms of tenure, performance on the role, etc.).

Posted by jorge at 6:05 pm

sitewatch 19/05 – Talent Spring

Companies, crowdsourcing, Job Seekers, recruitment, sitewatch, Talent, technology, Tools 5 Responses »
May 182007

TalentSpring, in beta mode during q2 2007

Founders: Bryan Starbuck, CEO – Andrew Boardman, Development Manager – ex-Microsofties, no recruitment pedigree (not that there’s anything wrong with that). Their bios on the site here

Tagline: wisdom of the crowd brought into the candidate selection processes

How it works: potential candidates enter their profiles, subject to voting on other peoples’ profiles. system algorithms are meant to pick candidates who put crappy scores. recruiters use these scores to spot top talent in their corresponding industries and pay to contact the people they like (recruiters need to enter a JD in the system)

Value prop for job seekers: you resume stands out in front of recruiters because it carries a user-generated score (the merit score)

Value prop for employers/recruiters: easier to spot top talent because of the – you guessed it – Merit score

Comments:Does it sound a bit like jobster to you? I am unsure how the merit score is a good assessor of the quality of the candidate, and if recruiters will rely on the score to make contact/interview decisions. Very early stages though.

Thank you to Kris for the tip

Posted by jorge at 5:44 pm
Older Entries Newer Entries
© 2012 LatinOcean - Digital Marketing Consulting Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha