• Martin Snyder

    Raghav your cognitive style always makes me smile: you seem to do a lot of reasoning using the lens of the contra-position, which by its nature serves up lots of softballs for pedantic beadles such as myself.

    Right off the bat, your item is titled “quiet and effective” but instant irony: it’s illustrated by a Saturn V rocket at full rip: one of the loudest devices ever made. (I grant the Saturn V was effective!)

    In this case, you are dead right on the case against most AI search systems for resumes. They are great for demos and they wow the inexperienced, but they don’t do jack for getting better actionable results out of a database.

    I am all for a real-time parse of a document (i.e. once you find a resume, you can use a filter view to sort possible skills, dates of employment, employers, etc.) but a one time pass using a black box criteria just does not get it done- the data is unstructured so adding known structure to your query collection is a must.

    QuietAgent seems to have a way better approach and that is notable. Resumefit on the other hand, I’m not sure about. It seems that some of Teh Doubt just shifts to the efficacy of that product and away from the candidate, and I don’t know how that saves time or money….joins a huge list of assessment tools some great, some less than worthless…..

  • Todd Raphael

    He’s innocent when it comes to the rocket irony. I added it in because it was an Apollo rocket, and he talked about Apollo. And I thought it kind of fit, since he talked about the powerful nature of these applications. But yeah, it may not have been so quiet.

  • Martin Snyder

    Ha- I knew Raghav did not do the layout but I hate to miss a chance like that 😉

    The loudest object ever ? Probably the Tsara Bomba.

    I’m not sure current hiring practices are much better considering how well Apollo performed, although we got lucky a few times to not lose crews.. 13 of course but others too…

  • Raghav Singh

    I suppose a picture of a Prius might have been better, but that’s not as interesting.

    Actually, the choice of the Saturn V rocket is appropriate in another way. That’s essentially what a lot of matching products represent – big and expensive. They work but at a high cost. Quietagent has made the technology much more accessible.

  • Keith Halperin

    I suspect that Behavioral Recruiting (the application of Behavioral Economics to Recruiting) will show the use of resumes in hiring to be a far more subjective and imprecise tool than is normally considered. It would be interesting to develop an elegant and robust non-resume-based hiring process based on asking applicants a series of relevant questions without initial human intervention. This would require a much more formalized and standardized approach to job descriptions than currently exists- the use of ONet suggests a small step in this direction.

    However, I do not expect much progress in the development and adoption of these and other methods which I refer to as Generally Accepted Recruiting (or Hiring) Practices: GARP (or GAHP)- there is too much money to be made under the current disorganized, inefficient status quo. As it is said: “In the Country of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man is king.”

    Cheers,

    Keith keithsrj@sbcglobal.net

  • Pingback: Links 09/11/2009()

  • Jason Kerr

    What I like about O*Net Keith, is that is it a great start, and realistically, who is going to spend $50 million a year to build and maintain another comparative network like the US DOL does?

    O*Net may not be perfect, but it is a standard that lets both parties (job seekers and employers) speak the same language – and that greatly increases the chances of both parties getting what they want – and a whole lot faster.

    We convinced the country of New Zealand to move away from its own job classification system and go to O*Net as a standard for their entire workforce system. The rationale was two-fold, 1) that in order to reduce unemployment you had to provide a way employers could easily participate in workforce, and that meant getting everyone to ‘speak’ the same language (difficult as government’s typically love arcane anachronisms!), and 2) (and this is the wining key in my book), O*Net focuses on working styles and tasks (which are globally relevant). By doing this they say: “If we can find someone who likes laying bricks in Bosnia (the working style, activities, etc of laying bricks), they going to like laying bricks in Boston.” Finding people (in part) based on their interest / willingness to perform in the way we are going to ask them to perform in a role, leads to retention – someone who likes doing the kinds of things we ask, is more likely to be better at it and stay longer – Retention is one key element in fixing unemployment.

    What else I really like about O*Net is that the way in which O*Net breaks down each job into a set of skills, competencies, tasks, working styles and interests. This is key in my mind, because it allows vendors to solicit a single set of information from candidates (skills, competencies, tasks, working styles and interests ) to build a resume (more correctly a career profile), rather that forcing a candidate to understand what information is important for the employer to know about them. This then means that a single candidate career profile can be broken down into the individual parts and built back-up (matched) against any job using the same basis for measurement / evaluation. This is key is adaptive selection, as it allows us to identify and move talent. When you then allow recruiters to establish a job requirement using those same elements, well you get the picture – no matter what they do they get quality matches as candidates are measured to the underlying elements of their career profile in the ‘same language’.

    Breaking down a candidate and a job to a set of common elements such as O*Net provides, is key to leveling the playing field and truly providing a globally accessible and scalable employment selection system. In this economy where we (currently) have an abundance of underemployed (as opposed to unemployed) talent, we need tools enabling that talent to be found or find career opportunities that make use of the skills, competencies, tasks, working styles and interests they possess, and not necessarily “just what they have done before” – this “talent movement” requirement can only be realistically achieved when a standard is followed.

    Weather you believe O*Net to be comprehensive enough or absolutely correct (may) become somewhat a moot point. O*Net (in the way QuietAgent have implemented around it at least), or any standard for that matter, forces both sides into a transparent and truthful representation of what they have to offer, as it solicits common elements of data regardless of the end users bias / view of value. This gives us all kinds of benefits from identifying transferrable skills, providing career path / expectation alignment, creating and identifying talent for new economy jobs, to providing ways for people without work experience to compete with those that do.
    In my view, none of this is possible with the old boys club of ‘eyeballs’, web traffic, job advertising and two dumb documents trying to find each other! (resume-to-job descriptions).

    Yet to be seen if we are right of course, but logic tells me O*Net is moving along the right path.

  • Pingback: QuietAgent – Quiet and Effective: Value in HR Technology()

  • Pingback: AllianceQ – Quiet and Effective: Value in HR Technology()

  • Pingback: Quiet and Effective: Value in HR Technology – United We Work News()

  • Glen Cathey

    Raghav,
    Well said regarding most matching applications – same goes to Martin (I loved this – AI matching apps “…are great for demos and they wow the inexperienced, but they don’t do jack for getting better actionable results out of a database.”).

    Eiji Toyoda, the fifth president of Toyota Motor Corporation, who collaborated Taiichi Ohno to fine tune the concept of Kaizen as well as to develop the core concepts of the ‘Toyota Way’, explains brilliantly: “Society has reached the point where one can push a button and be immediately deluged with…information. This is all very convenient, of course, but if one is not careful there is a danger of losing the ability to think. We must remember that in the end it is the individual human being who must solve the problems.”

    As I have written before, thinking is the most critical step in the candidate sourcing process, and regardless of “Artificial Intelligence” and semantic search marketing hype, applications do not have any true cognitive power, nor do they have the ability to be creative or learn as people do. Thus I could not agree more with Jeffrey Liker’s (author of The Toyota Way) assessment – “People do the work, computers move information.”

    http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2009/07/candidate-search-automation-proceed-with-caution/

  • Pingback: Social Networks Are Not Enough for Recruiters to Evaluate Your Actual Skills | career-line.com()

  • Shawn Matthews

    You should check out Radar Hybrid ATS from Goaltender Solutions. Job profiles, job matching based on O*NET.. other assessments as well. Including a new Tenure survey. The only full-function ATS with a robust suite of assessments included.

    http://www.goaltendersolutions.com