Slashdot Mirror
LinkedIn's Forthcoming Analytics Tool May Boost Job Poaching (techtarget.com)
dcblogs writes: LinkedIn has developed a new analytics platform that should make it easier to poach job candidates. It will use its vast database of nearly 600 million profiles to help recruiters find pockets of talent, know the attrition rate and glean competitive data. The platform, due in September, was discussed at a recent HR conference. One attendee asked a LinkedIn official: "Does that set up an environment for poaching talent?" And then she immediately answered her own question. "I think the answer is yes. And so why would I sign off on that?" In response to the attendees' question, Eric Owski, the head of product for Talent Insights at LinkedIn, said there was nothing wrong with making this data available. The LinkedIn team concluded that "the world is becoming more transparent," and "very sophisticated teams at large companies were able to figure out a lot of the calculations that we're making available in this product," he said. "We think by packaging it up nicely, it levels the playing field," Owski said. "We feel like we're on safe ground."
If I want to leave for a better job, it is my right. My employer does not own me, and these days, the employer has probably not paid for training or made any other investment in me.
earning $50,000 ... in Silicon Valley
IOW, you have TWO shopping carts parked in front of your tent.
Have gnu, will travel.
deadwood will continue to be paid what they're worth (or not) as well.
I don't think so. Employers will start gaming this as soon as it goes live, by writing glowing endorsements for their deadwood employees in the hope that someone else poaches them. That way they can get rid of them without paying severance.
At this stage of my career, I'm happy to have recruiters have better tools to know when to contact me and when NOT to. I'm pretty happy with my job, I love working from home. I also see the handwriting on the wall as my employer moves jobs overseas. So I'm aware that while I like my job now, I'll probably have to entertain offers before too long. Anything that better matches the offers to my skills and requirements is good, in my opinion.
A few years ago, I was significantly underpaid. It was advantageous for me to have potential employers offer what I'm worth, rather than making an offer based on my current salary at the time. Had they known my salary, my take-home probably wouldn't have doubled the last two times I switched jobs.
* Yes they always *ask* what your current salary is. You can answer "I'm looking for ...", because that's what they really.want to know - "how much will we have to pay you?"
PS to my footnote - whenever a third-party recruiter calls me, I always ask about the budget for the position very early in the conversation. The recruiter won't be offended, and it saves them time as well as saving me time and if it's not in the range I'm looking for. If it IS in the right range, I have a good starting point for negotiation.
It's pretty shameless to use the term 'poaching'; when it specifically implies that the animal being hunted is the property of someone other than the hunter.
Not that I'd ever suspect that HR sees us a prey animals who are owned by our feudal overlords or anything; that sort of negativity just isn't in keeping with company values.
And Al Gore rhythm?
He, and guilty feet, ain't got no rhythm.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
That California law is fine and all, but personally I don't have much need for it.
External recruiters typically get 10% of the employee's first-year salary, so they don't want to low ball candidates. They want to get as many people hired as they can each month, at the highest salaries. They know what the salary range is, because that determines their commission, and have no reason to hide that information. Hiding it would reduce their success rate by spending time on candidates who won't take the position.
The vast majority of recruiters I hear from are external, so when I ask, they tell me the salary range before I ever talk to anyone from the company that is hiring.
This is use of personal data. Has linked in sought permission to use the data in this way and then share it with recruiters ?
If a recruiter is that keen to make contact they can send an InMail. They only get a limited number of InMail credits in a month so it acts as a deterrent unless they have something of high relevance. Responding to the InMail returns the credit so I don't do that either unless the recruiter actually works for the hiring firm. Anything that devalues LinkedIn is a good thing as far as I am concerned.
Eh, I think this kinda overestimates how nuanced recruiters are. I am skeptical that they will want to put in the extra effort to carefully match jobs to candidates through something sophisticated when they are not even using the full set of tools today. As far as I can tell the process usually seems to come down to 'oh, a high commission posting came up for a .Net developer, I'll spam everyone with 'net' in their profile!'.
Targeted advertising has been the 'hope' of people trying to sell to marketers for decades, but at the end of the day dumb spamming is so cheap and low effort that it still rules.