Comments on: Five Scenarios for the Future of Recruiting 6: Invasion of the Shallybots http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/ Recruiting News, Recruiting Events, Recruiting Community, Social Recruiting Tue, 14 Feb 2012 01:03:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Shally Steckerl http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19824 Shally Steckerl Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:04:44 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19824 Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is not Wisdom. Wisdom is not action. Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is not Wisdom. Wisdom is not action.

]]> By: John Sumser http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19678 John Sumser Sat, 20 Feb 2010 06:08:00 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19678 It's great to watch this conversation evolve. One of the most interesting possibilities is that the data that's in the rest of the organization is going to migrate towards recruiting rather than vice versa. There are really interesting experiments and projects already underway to use the full spectrum of data in the social graph for recruiting. ( In not so many years, that will be 6Billion email addresses) The game is moving beyond the previously understood limits, as Steven rightly notices. Keith's vision just hints at the levels of complexity that may be discovered in the next generation of software evolution. My view remains that lots of little bots that do one thing really well will be harnessed to do a lot of the stuff that we're just beginning to imagine. I'm not so paranoid as to think of them as nano-secret police (although I do understand the sentiment). Benign management of little tim=ny inconvenient questions and processes, executed simultaneously produces something like we've not seen before. It’s great to watch this conversation evolve.

One of the most interesting possibilities is that the data that’s in the rest of the organization is going to migrate towards recruiting rather than vice versa. There are really interesting experiments and projects already underway to use the full spectrum of data in the social graph for recruiting. ( In not so many years, that will be 6Billion email addresses)

The game is moving beyond the previously understood limits, as Steven rightly notices. Keith’s vision just hints at the levels of complexity that may be discovered in the next generation of software evolution.

My view remains that lots of little bots that do one thing really well will be harnessed to do a lot of the stuff that we’re just beginning to imagine. I’m not so paranoid as to think of them as nano-secret police (although I do understand the sentiment). Benign management of little tim=ny inconvenient questions and processes, executed simultaneously produces something like we’ve not seen before.

]]> By: Keith Halperin http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19674 Keith Halperin Sat, 20 Feb 2010 01:00:50 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19674 No Steven, I meant 800,000,000. Of course you need to know what to do with the data, and that requires intelligence to organize and interpret the data and not just storage or computing power. An example: Here's my google which I have on my resume. http://tinyurl.com/clojez Tell me about me- not the facts, the MEANING of the facts. That's the REAL ticket..... Have a Great Weekend, Everybody! Keith No Steven, I meant 800,000,000. Of course you need to know what to do with the data, and that requires intelligence to organize and interpret the data and not just storage or computing power. An example:
Here’s my google which I have on my resume. http://tinyurl.com/clojez
Tell me about me- not the facts, the MEANING of the facts.
That’s the REAL ticket…..

Have a Great Weekend, Everybody!
Keith

]]> By: Steven Rothberg http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19672 Steven Rothberg Fri, 19 Feb 2010 23:54:07 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19672 I assume your reference to 800M means 800,000 and not 800MM which would be 800 million. A list of 800,000 is actually not all that large. We have a double opt-in list of 10 million college students and recent graduates with up to 700 fields of data per person including valid emails for all of them. We also have permission to text about 60 percent of them so cell phone numbers for about 6 million of them. The reality is that data is cheap and anyone who is saying that a huge database is the next best thing should advance their calendar forward from 1996 to 2010. It is how you collect and use the data that matter now. I assume your reference to 800M means 800,000 and not 800MM which would be 800 million. A list of 800,000 is actually not all that large. We have a double opt-in list of 10 million college students and recent graduates with up to 700 fields of data per person including valid emails for all of them. We also have permission to text about 60 percent of them so cell phone numbers for about 6 million of them.

The reality is that data is cheap and anyone who is saying that a huge database is the next best thing should advance their calendar forward from 1996 to 2010. It is how you collect and use the data that matter now.

]]> By: Keith Halperin http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19670 Keith Halperin Fri, 19 Feb 2010 23:47:08 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19670 Thanks, Steven. IMHO, there's very little in recruiting (except the most valuable things like closing and advising) that can't be accomplished with increasingly cheap massive computational power and increasingly skilled inexpensive labor, along with the will to use both. There's a guy who has proposed cross-referencing every email (one outfit I spoke to claims to have 800M emails), phone number, physical address, and name in the US and then applying datamining techniques to create those "digital dossiers" I mentioned based on purely public information. Imagine if we all could "know everything about everyone"? Be Seeing You, Keith "We want information... Information...INFORMATION!" Halperin Thanks, Steven. IMHO, there’s very little in recruiting (except the most valuable things like closing and advising) that can’t be accomplished with increasingly cheap massive computational power and increasingly skilled inexpensive labor, along with the will to use both. There’s a guy who has proposed cross-referencing every email (one outfit I spoke to claims to have 800M emails), phone number, physical address, and name in the US and then applying datamining techniques to create those “digital dossiers” I mentioned based on purely public information. Imagine if we all could “know everything about everyone”?

Be Seeing You,

Keith “We want information… Information…INFORMATION!” Halperin

]]> By: Steven Rothberg http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19666 Steven Rothberg Fri, 19 Feb 2010 22:11:04 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19666 Keith -- Your vision seems realistic from a technology standpoint yet unrealistic from a practical, corporate recruiting standpoint. I can see a third party recruiter that stands to make tens of thousands of dollars from a placement investing the resources necessary to make something like this happen, but how about an employer that hires hundreds or even thousands of entry-level candidates a year? One of our clients receives 200,000 resumes a year and hires 8,000 of them. There's just no way that a scenario like this will work for that kind of mass recruiting. Keith — Your vision seems realistic from a technology standpoint yet unrealistic from a practical, corporate recruiting standpoint. I can see a third party recruiter that stands to make tens of thousands of dollars from a placement investing the resources necessary to make something like this happen, but how about an employer that hires hundreds or even thousands of entry-level candidates a year? One of our clients receives 200,000 resumes a year and hires 8,000 of them. There’s just no way that a scenario like this will work for that kind of mass recruiting.

]]> By: Keith Halperin http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19665 Keith Halperin Fri, 19 Feb 2010 22:04:31 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19665 IMHO, Shally-bots (or as I call them: "Stasi-bots", after the East German Secret Police) will make much sourcing obsolete. Why? When you know where someone is and what they're doing, you don't need to look for them. Consider this ~2012-2015 scenario: a bright 16 year old girl wins a prize in a regional computer-science competition for high-schoolers. This sort of thing draws the attention of one of "The Corporation's" many Stasi-bots, who are then alerted to use their data-mining and aggregation subroutines to assemble a digital dossier on young Ms. "Sinha". By analyzing her DD, it's determined that among other things, she is quite a fan of the latest trend in Young Adult Fiction: YA Zombie Novels, so she receives a YA Z-themed text-card (eye-balled for appropriateness by a $2/hr Virtual Assistant in Ho Chi Minh City) inviting her and her parents to visit "The Corporation's" campus over spring break at "The Corporation's" expense. It all starts from there.... Your thoughts. Keith "Reads Too Much Old Cyber-Punk" Halperin IMHO, Shally-bots (or as I call them: “Stasi-bots”, after the East German Secret Police) will make much sourcing obsolete. Why? When you know where someone is and what they’re doing, you don’t need to look for them. Consider this ~2012-2015 scenario: a bright 16 year old girl wins a prize in a regional computer-science competition for high-schoolers. This sort of thing draws the attention of one of “The Corporation’s” many Stasi-bots, who are then alerted to use their data-mining and aggregation subroutines to assemble a digital dossier on young Ms. “Sinha”. By analyzing her DD, it’s determined that among other things, she is quite a fan of the latest trend in Young Adult Fiction: YA Zombie Novels, so she receives a YA Z-themed text-card (eye-balled for appropriateness by a $2/hr Virtual Assistant in Ho Chi Minh City) inviting her and her parents to visit “The Corporation’s” campus over spring break at “The Corporation’s” expense. It all starts from there….

Your thoughts.

Keith “Reads Too Much Old Cyber-Punk” Halperin

]]> By: Jeremy Langhans http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19663 Jeremy Langhans Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:54:59 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19663 sourcing must not be dead yet cuz john keeps talking about it & giving homages song and dance reminds me of 1999 sourcing must not be dead yet cuz john keeps talking about it & giving homages

song and dance reminds me of 1999

]]> By: Steven Rothberg http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19657 Steven Rothberg Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:37:43 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19657 Thank you, John, for eloquently stating what many in the job board industry have felt for years: that the concept of matching is simply not feasible because it requires the complete buy-in of both the employer and candidate. Ironically, those who seem to be the most excited about matching technology are often the worst fits for it because their excitement is largely based around the promise of time savings. They seem to feel that the matching technology will allow them to apply for the right jobs or find the right candidates in less time than it takes them to do that now on more traditional job boards, yet the technology won't work unless they spend more time than they are now. My conversations with job board industry leaders and people at some of the matching sites reveals that the clients who have tried some of these sites inevitably walk away disgusted don't seem to understand that it isn't the technology that failed, it was their efforts which weren't adequate. Maybe they were over sold by being promised that the technology would do all of the work for them, but savvy buyers should have understood that the software only knows what you tell it and if you're not willing or able to tell it what it needs to know, then the results you're going to get will be crap. Thank you, John, for eloquently stating what many in the job board industry have felt for years: that the concept of matching is simply not feasible because it requires the complete buy-in of both the employer and candidate. Ironically, those who seem to be the most excited about matching technology are often the worst fits for it because their excitement is largely based around the promise of time savings. They seem to feel that the matching technology will allow them to apply for the right jobs or find the right candidates in less time than it takes them to do that now on more traditional job boards, yet the technology won’t work unless they spend more time than they are now.

My conversations with job board industry leaders and people at some of the matching sites reveals that the clients who have tried some of these sites inevitably walk away disgusted don’t seem to understand that it isn’t the technology that failed, it was their efforts which weren’t adequate. Maybe they were over sold by being promised that the technology would do all of the work for them, but savvy buyers should have understood that the software only knows what you tell it and if you’re not willing or able to tell it what it needs to know, then the results you’re going to get will be crap.

]]> By: Rob Humphrey http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19654 Rob Humphrey Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:33:04 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19654 John. I think I get it.. but I have to ask..as we all talk into the echo chamber constantly..what specific examples of "search techniques" can you point to that Shally (or anyone) has put into practice that connect to your thinking. Thanks John John. I think I get it.. but I have to ask..as we all talk into the echo chamber constantly..what specific examples of “search techniques” can you point to that Shally (or anyone) has put into practice that connect to your thinking.

Thanks John

]]> By: John Sumser http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19653 John Sumser Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:19:20 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19653 Sorry if the Shallybot nomenclature was a little obscure. When I think about the way that bots work, I imagine highly refined single purpose automatons that relentlessly do the same single thing over and over again. In that sort of automation (which is the logical extension of the newer, agile coding techniques, you end up with software that works more like a swarm thatn the relatively single purpose stuff we're used to. I coined the term 'Shallybot' as an homage to Shally Steckerl. My sense is that the essence of the search techniques he teaches is this single minded pursuit of a very specific objective. While the rest of the market is focused on one-size-fits-all toolsets and approaches, Shally seems to be demonstrating the foundations of future sourcing operations. Sorry if the Shallybot nomenclature was a little obscure. When I think about the way that bots work, I imagine highly refined single purpose automatons that relentlessly do the same single thing over and over again.

In that sort of automation (which is the logical extension of the newer, agile coding techniques, you end up with software that works more like a swarm thatn the relatively single purpose stuff we’re used to.

I coined the term ‘Shallybot’ as an homage to Shally Steckerl. My sense is that the essence of the search techniques he teaches is this single minded pursuit of a very specific objective. While the rest of the market is focused on one-size-fits-all toolsets and approaches, Shally seems to be demonstrating the foundations of future sourcing operations.

]]> By: Rob Humphrey http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19642 Rob Humphrey Thu, 18 Feb 2010 23:17:57 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19642 Heavy dude. Good read..I sorta cant connect the Shally-dots either Heavy dude. Good read..I sorta cant connect the Shally-dots either

]]> By: Maureen Sharib http://www.ere.net/2010/02/18/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-recruiting-6-invasion-of-the-shallybots/comment-page-1/#comment-19630 Maureen Sharib Thu, 18 Feb 2010 16:02:40 +0000 http://www.ere.net/?p=11756#comment-19630 I guess I missed the "Shallybot" connotation? Huh? I guess I missed the “Shallybot” connotation? Huh?

]]>