Receive daily articles & headlines each day in your inbox with your free ERE Daily Subscription.

Not logged in. [log in or register]

LinkedIn Says It Will Start Aggregating U.S. Job Listings

by May 29, 2014, 8:31 am ET

LinkedinLogoTransparentWith the announcement this morning that it would begin to aggregate jobs from U.S. employers, LinkedIn took a big step to building its Economic Graph, and realizing its plan to provide all the world’s open jobs to all the world’s workers.

Beginning June 2, LinkedIn will offer hundreds of thousands of jobs aggregated from the career sites and ATS’s of U.S. employers who don’t prohibit it. These listings will supplement a nearly similar number of listings employers pay for, but they’ll be made available only to LinkedIn members who actively search for them.

Called “Limited Listings,” these aggregated jobs will be cleaned of an employer’s paid listings to avoid duplication. The differentiation between this new program and LinkedIn’s paid Job Slots and Job Posts is based on active and passive seekers. The paid program places job posts before suitable (matching) candidates and delivers job suggestions to specific types of candidates based on their profiles and employer criteria.

The Limited Listings, explained a company spokesman, is “targeting a very different group of candidates. They only go to active candidates … Candidates who are looking for jobs.”

The announcement of the aggregation program is no surprise. The company has frequently discussed its vision of becoming the center of the employment universe. Company leaders reiterated that goal in February when they announced LinkedIn had purchased Bright.com, a small but exciting startup that aggregated job listings and matched them to candidates by examining not just experience and skills, but multiple other factors of the sort found on many LinkedIn members’ profiles.

Now, in launching what it said is a test, LinkedIn is leveraging Bright’s job collection technology to begin offering the free Limited Listings. The company spokesman wouldn’t say how many employers will be represented in the new job board, but he did say it will double the number of jobs available on LinkedIn to about 700,000 in the days after Monday’s launch.

The move follows by two weeks Monster’s announcement that it was entering the competitive, and profitable, job aggregation business. Monster unveiled a major overhaul of its business model at an analysts’ meeting May 14 at its company headquarters in Massachusetts. Like the two leading job aggregators — Indeed.com and SimplyHired — Monster will also offer a pay-for-performance type of program.

For now, LinkedIn’s aggregation program is free. There are “no plans,” said the company spokesman, to add for-fee features to the Limited Listings program. At some point, once past the test phase, it is almost inevitable that LinkedIn will seek to monetize the aggregated listings. Just as they do on Indeed and SimplyHired, employers will want to highlight their listings, paying for premium positioning at the very least. Bright’s matching technology, however, offers other fee-based opportunities to deliver job opportunities to targeted, active candidates.

In the meantime, the company spokesman said LinkedIn will evaluate user engagement and how the job board is used.

This article is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to offer specific legal advice. You should consult your legal counsel regarding any threatened or pending litigation.

  • Brian Rodgers

    So in other words, to view the agregation tool, Linkedin is having unemployed job seeker without an income to purchase the service that is a Linkedin membership…SMH Sounds smart to me.

  • Brian Rodgers

    And by pay I mean become a Linkedin member

  • Joe Roualdes

    Hey Brian. My name is Joe Roualdes and I work at LinkedIn. Just to be clear, anyone — employed or unemployed — can join LinkedIn as a free member and search for jobs via limited listing and receive jobs we think they’re qualified for via Jobs You May Be Interested In.

  • http://www.epraxis.com Severin Sorensen

    I personally like the direction LinkedIn is heading with their tool to attract passive job seekers, and will likely use it to source prospective candidates. Passive job seekers are often the best candidates.

    Nonetheless, I wonder, can it be too far into the future when Linkedin or some disruptive startup creates a meta database of employee past behavior, performance, sales awards, sick-days off, and other employment history’s similar to what Scout.com does for college athletes, professional ball players, free agents, and professional scouts? I can imagine the public knowledge of such a tool will be sufficient tender for a blazing public cry for the next HIPPA type regulation and privacy of employee information. This certainly is a new age.

  • http://www.haleymarketing.com David Searns

    Hi Joe, Is LinkedIn looking for sources of job information? We currently provide job data for approximately 300 staffing and recruiting firms in the US and Canada representing about 20,000 jobs. Is there someone at LinkedIn our development team should contact about providing a job feed? You can email me directly at dsearns@haleymarketing.com.

    Thanks,
    David

  • Richard Araujo

    @ Severin,

    Such a database would certainly have concerns, but it’s also what’s needed in the end, for both employees AND employers. An honest assessment of value on the part of both parties is what would really get rid of hiring issues. Employees would know how they stack up relative the rest of the workers out there, employers would have to ditch their marketing hype and deal with their brand as it really is, and as it compares to what others offer.

    But, that day is far in the future, if it ever even comes to fruition. Very few employers would willingly say, “We’re an average company, our managers are hit or miss with regard to skill, but we’ve been around a while, are stable, and pay a wage you can live on in this area, we have standard benefits you’d get most anywhere else, and the work is moderately interesting most of the time but can also be mind numbing sometimes, and occasionally the owner comes in drunk and pees in the file cabinet, are you interested?”

    And, very few potential employees would willingly say, “I care more about my family than owning an Acura as opposed to a Hyundai, so I’m not going to give ’110%’ as I’d rather spend the time with them, I occasionally have fun on the weekend and might call in sick on Monday because of the consequences, or Friday to prolong the festivities, but I’ve never gone over my allotted time so I don’t see this as a problem, and I work at a reasonable but not exceptional pace and tend to get along with most everyone at the office, though I’m not the friendliest most outgoing person, and I refuse to piss in a cup for the sake of your political correctness, want to hire me?”

    Those exchanges will quite literally never happen, which is unfortunate because honesty is what’s really needed in the hiring process, and probably the one thing that will never truly be there.

  • Tim Dineen

    Linkedin already (previously) did this via their partnership with SimplyHired. What is the real change to the user here? Is that partnership over?

    Will Linkedin be replacing that partnership with aggregated jobs via Bright’s system? I assume Bright has fewer jobs from fewer sources, so this move would see like a negative to me if they’ve moved away from SimplyHired.

  • http://www.corcodilos.com/blog Nick Corcodilos

    Linked has always denied it was a job board, but it’s been a job board for a long, long time. http://corcodilos.com/blog/5913/linkedin-just-another-job-board

    So tell me something re: this announcement. SO WHAT? Every job posting is already in the MonsterCBLaddersHotJobsIndeedSimplyHired database in the cloud. What’s the point? Employers are still crying there’s a talent shortage.

    Duh – does it occur to anyone that this “technology” is not technology at all? It’s crap funded by silly HR departments that long ago forgot how to recruit. Job boards don’t work. So LinkedIn enters the swill pot with its own database.

    When SimplyHired and Indeed aggregate all the aggregated LinkedIn job listings… is the circle jerk complete?

    There are an awful lot of stoopid investors out there… The good news is, smart job hunters and smart employers will have less competition now that “the industry” is nicely corralled and out of the way.

  • Sylvia Dahlby

    I’m with Nick on this SO WHAT? LinkedIn didn’t want to be a job board until they started seeing dollar signs and decided to compete with Monster. When Monster morphed into an aggregator to be more competitive with the meta-search sites, it’s no surprise LinkedIn is jumping on the band-wagon. We’ve already seen meta-search in the travel business etc. Seems like nothing more than evolution in action: Adapt or die.

  • http://www.corcodilos.com/blog Nick Corcodilos

    @Silvia: Does LinkedIn even pretend to be “the premier professional network” any more? You can only dirty your pants so many times while pretending to be a big boy. First there was the button – Apply for a job instantly! Then we had “pay to be top of the heap when employers search for profiles.” Now it’s TheLadders’ final (last dying gasp) model: “We’re the swill pot. Jump in.”

  • Gail Fletcher

    LinkedIn’s drive to become the uber job board does make it efficient for tracking job description evolution. Enlightened job seekers come to know a posting can be up for 6 months in advance of a strategic initiative that never comes to pass, or the company’s sending a competitive signal that “We’re hiring, and they’re not!” – but they’re really not, either. Or, “We’re combining 2½ job descriptions to see how we can sustain productivity to keep our stock price up”, certain there’s one purple zebra with only 3 to 5 years’ experience who’ll subject themselves to the crushing load.
    No wonder recruiters are tearing their hair out.
    For job seekers, LinkedIn’s acquisition of Brite is the fastest screen-out mechanism on the planet. Its algos reduce profiles to a numeric score signifying little but how well the job seeker guessed key words, letting them know that the dismal 43 they achieved, without explanation, is a stinging rebuke.
    No wonder individual member counts are down.
    For job seekers it’s an inefficient connection method. LinkedIn’s initial drive for members to achieve 500+ connections, and their current drive overseas, have resulted in “ships passing at a cocktail hour” connections who don’t remember the linkage, much less take a job seeker’s call for expert insight.
    No wonder smart career coaches teach subversive uses of LinkedIn.

  • Richard Araujo

    @ Gail,

    Yes, it’s been diluted, but it’s still a great network to use. I have no problem with LinkedIn as it is, or as it will be. I just don’t like marketing hype. It’s a hopped up phone book/job board/resume database, I use it as such.

    There is no talent shortage, there is a shortage of good hiring practices. That’s where the bottle neck is, that’s why everyone is so desperate to connect more people with more recruiters and more jobs, to feed the hopper in the hopes that a hire will pop out the other end. I know several people working on openings right now for clients, they’ve literally exhausted every person they can find in every database. They’re cold calling like crazy, but it only produces so much. But the reason isn’t a lack of candidates; the clients have been through many resumes and multiple interviews. They’re just rejecting people, often for vague and ill defined reasons, and not moving on the ones they do like a because they always want to, “see a few more people.”

    The interview/hiring process is the real bottleneck. Until we address that as an industry, there will be no progress.

  • Richard Araujo

    @ Nick,

    Interesting link, thanks for posting it.