• Keith Halperin

    Thanks John. The main change I’d like for LIR would be something I won’t hold my breath on:
    Having the “I’m open to new jobs/career opportunities” setting as an “OPT-IN” feature and not as currently “an “OPT-OUT” one. This would greatly improve our efficiency, as we wouldn’t be wasting our time going after people who really aren’t open to any new opportunities, but haven’t bothered to say so…

    -kh

  • Roland Behm

    To what extent have these LIR processes been validated from the perspective of not having a discriminatory impact on persons in protected classes (e.g., age, sex, gender, disability)?

    As noted in the article, “[t]he more searches you do, the more LinkedIn’s algorithms will understand the kind of people you seek.” What if there are “flaws” in those algorithms that, wittingly or not, screen out persons in protected classes? Alternatively, what if there are subtle (or even not so subtle) biases of the recruiter/employer? Won’t those biases be replicated and “insitutionalized” by this process?

    Since the employer has legal responsibility for any discriminatory aspects of its hiring and recruiting processes, it can’t point to the third-party provider (i.e., LIR) to avoid liability.

    I’m reminded of a quote from an article from about five years ago that reads, “the seemingly “scientific results” attributed to pre-employment tests [may]cause all differences to “appear” real. In cloaking imperfect measurements beneath the veil of science, the numbers touted by the test publishers are injected with an air of authority, legitimacy, and truth that intentionally or otherwise, … [may] disguise the … reality of discrimination produced by the process.”

  • http://www.matchpointcareers.com Paul Basile

    It looks to me like this new approach will successfully enable employers to make mistakes consistent with the mistakes they have made in the past. It institutionalizes bad (and good) habits. But there is nothing that I can see that improves the prediction of performance. Without that, why bother?

  • Keith Halperin

    @ Roland, @ Paul. Very good and relevant points. I do not know whether or not LI intended to do so, but either way, LI is performing a very sound business strategy- you can usually make lots of money confirming a clients, biases, prejudices, and errors while convincing them they are actually doing something different and better…

    Cheers,

    Keith
    Keithsrj@sbcglobal.net

  • Pingback: LinkedIn’s Latest Offering Manages Your Contacts From Events -()