"3. Has the biggest network" That really is sort of irrelevant. Larger numbers on Twitter or blogs is not an indication of a quality person.
StickyMediaGroup
· 3 months ago
Not on it's own, no. But if most of their followers / readers are relevant to their industry or interests (and not just hundreds of spam profiles and people playing spymaster) then doesn't that show the person to be a social and personable potential employee who can make contacts easily?
Caryn Martinez
· 8 months ago
Okay, this is one of the main reasons labor unions were formed -- to keep companies from dictating what workers did on their own private time.
Did you used to reject potential employees because they sent editorials to the newspaper reflecting their strong views about politics and religion? Did you reject them for appearing on television as part of a political protest? Did you reject them because they enjoyed nightclubbing?
Of course not. You probably did not know about these things, although they were all done in public. And I'll bet it never occurred to you to care about them. But now that you can easily find their editorials in their blogs, now that you can see video of them protesting on You Tube, and now that you can see photos of them in a nightclub, you disapprove?
Karyn Romeis
· 8 months ago
I have never encountered a recruiter who has bothered to check me out online, even though I always supply links to all my urls. I was interviewed by one guy who was a bit miffed that I had googled him and knew so much about him. He seemed to feel that I had somehow overstepped the mark. I couldn't help feeling that a guy who was looking for an elearning specialist ought to have taken advantage of the opportunity to get some insight into the person behind the CV.
Anthony Citrano
· 8 months ago
Well put, Karyn! I'm often stunned by how *little* research is done on both sides (those hiring and the candidates.) I've interviewed many candidates who really had almost no clue about the company background, clients, whatever. That's a big red flag, in my view. I Google everyone I'm thinking of hiring or working with, and those who think it's creepy or over the line are living in a prior century, in my view.
Tabitha
· 8 months ago
I've actually been approached by recruiters BECAUSE of my social media profiles. :D
Ana Lissansky
· 3 months ago
I actually pick the job (in cases of multiple offers) based on my future boss' social media footprint. From experience, this has worked out very well for me and I'm glad I have the opportunity to do so these days! Let's face it, a job can take your life in one direction or into a completely different direction (good or bad), and it's great to have the tools to find out more about your future boss / corporate culture etc.
Great post, and I absolutely agree with the key points. I know quite a few friends that have landed great jobs directly via Twitter / Linkedin. So kudos to @mashable for providing this useful checklist. I think I'm due for an online footprint audit myself!
Ana
Sara
· 8 months ago
As a hiring manager, I'd rather see proof of actual results in the candidate's work than an extensive, active profile on each of these sites. I agree that maintaining a presence in a few of these networks is necessary, but keeping up with all of them is time consuming and either cuts into one's professional life or one's personal life. I'm more likely to hire someone whose priorities lie in those areas.
christiananderson
· 8 months ago
Interesting. There are only about 6 people that would fit this criteria. Unless you're looking for a social media marketer, I'm not sure most of it is overly important. I'd rather see examples of the person delivering than having a perfectly complete social media profile.
Dan
· 8 months ago
Under your "Facebook" section, I believe it should be "wary" not "weary."
Lorraine Lorio
· 8 months ago
Thank you for this article. If I were to grade myself on whether or not I pass the Social Media Recruitment Test I would give myself a C+. I've been on facebook for awhile now and have yet to fully completed my Linkedin profile. I recently joined twitter and have started to build my personal blog. This article really gets to the right to the point as to why social media can be useful in basically marketing yourself in todays job market. To quote you "employers rarely hire just skills and are looking for much more of a complete package - skills plus a well-rounded individual that fits well with their team and company. And a person’s social media footprint gives employers (and others) the best insight into your passions, interests, communication styles, work habits, work/life balance and all sorts of other valuable information". I will use this as a blueprint to improve my grade!
Tom Kuhr
· 8 months ago
Great post Boris - good summary on all accounts. Do you personally weight any of the social sources differently? Or is it more that the person is well rounded and each of these "profiles" are available and presentable?
bobfromhuddle
· 8 months ago
I don't know if you're hiring for something specific but, in all honesty, the "social networking footprint" of a candidate is of zero value in evaluating their suitability to join Huddle's development team, and we're nominally a social networking site.
The questions we have are the same as they've always been: can you code, do you want to improve, and why do you want to work for us?
Anthony Crognale
· 8 months ago
Hmm, luckily everything points to either my blog, or my twitter when I was going over this. :)
Anderson Mccutcheon
· 8 months ago
Wholeheartedly disagree. A twitter account is a the equivalent of a serious smoking habit. I wouldn't even consider hiring a person with 40 updates per day.
Karyn Romeis
· 8 months ago
Glad you put that out in the public domain. (a) No member of any of my communities of practice would be interested in being hired by someone with your views, which, I'm afraid to say, is your very great loss and (b) your catchment pool is going to shrink exponentially over the next few years. Twitter has already gone mainstream. Even Obama uses it to conduct national meetings.
Swards
· 8 months ago
This person you describe is too extreme and not 'well-ballanced'. They sound like they are good at self-promotion and unless that is a skill that is needed for their job (say a marketing position) I'd probably be leary. Self-promotion is usually left to those with something to sell, like a book, consulting services, or speaking engagements.
This is what I'd look for in an employee -
1. Skills and Experience - Use LinkedIn for this. Use good keywords that people will search on.
2. History to establish trust. Someone who gives me a glimps into their past dealings with coworkers and their peer group will give me an idea of how they will represent my company. Blogs and twitter posts help with this.
3. Influence - How their peers respond to them. Twitter is great for this and general Googling. Number of followers, friends is good to see.
4. Common connections - Start at Linked In.
I wouldn't look at facebook. That's personal, unless the candidate wants to introduce it.
As for recommendations on LinkedIn - I don't trust these. I'd read them, but the best performers are not looking for validation or testimonials and won't have many. Often people get loads of recommendations when they are laid off and people trade them frequently.
Almost all of these items take time to establish and grow. If you haven't yet, start now and get your voice, but don't over do it. It looks suspiciously self-serving. If you're still in college, connect with your best professors and others with good networks, and start to post a solid collection of honest, professional discoveries and informational posts that contribute to the overall conversation. You'll get hired quickly for internships and post graduation.
By the way, your online presence is also valuable when you want to go into business for yourself or want to pursue other partnerships.
Karyn Romeis
· 8 months ago
@swards Do you really think that self-promotion is only th province of that small group of people?
When you apply for a job, do you not try to give the impression in your application that you are the best person for the job? When you get to an interview - assuming you really want the job - do you not try to persuade the interviewer that you are a better bet than any of the other people they are interviewing for the post?
When the man/woman of your dreams appears on your radar, do you not try to prove to them how worthy a person you are? Someone they should notice, spend time with, fall in love with, spend the rest of their lives with?
When you play a sport, do you not do everything in your power to play as well as you can so that the selectors pick you for the team?
Self promotion is part and parcel of life - professional and social. If you sat quietly in a little corner, never making an attempt to get yourself noticed, you'd never get any job at all and you'd live a very solitary existence.
Doug Caldwell
· 8 months ago
You got tweeted, blogged and posted to my job search groups links page. Great stuff here to the social media fan and sometime users.
tinkerbelle
· 8 months ago
Do you think that maybe someone should add an email button to send this to the poor fools who AREN'T all linked up on the social networking -- I'd like to forward this to some of my 'friends' who might learn a thing or two. As it is now - only those who can pat themselves on the back for being where they should be are reading this!!
Keith Bernard
· 8 months ago
Certainly feels good to know I'm on the right track.
Boris Epstein
· 8 months ago
Hey all. Thanks for taking the time to read and respond to this article. Clearly this is still a controversial topic where there isn't an obvious right or wrong way to approach the development of your social media footprint in reference to your career. The thoughts mentioned above and below reflect my opinion and perspective only - nothing more nothing less.
@Tom_Kuhr - Yes, I weigh LinkedIn the most, then Blog, then Twitter, then Facebook. I Google mostly for interest and for hidden information.
@bobfromhuddle, Sara & Christiananderson - I agree with you 100%. The biggest point I want to make here is that I use social media footprint to determine whether or not to contact somebody given that all other indicators on a resume are equal NOT to determine whether or not they should be hired. Meaning @bobfromhuddle, if I could tell that 2 candidates could clearly code given their cs education from stanford and experience building web applications for google, I would look to their social media footprint to determine which of the two I would contact. I would look to their blog to see if they maybe posted samples of their coding work or I would look to their LinkedIn profile to see if they've been involved in open source projects or I would look to their twitter activity to see if I could get a measurement for their interests in relation to my clients, etc. Once I made the choice to contact a candidate and introduce to somebody like yourself or another client for consideration, social media footprint near goes out the window (except for the negative stuff which of course could still play a factor) and it comes down to actual skill, coding abilities, etc. So point here is I use social media footprint to determine who I'm going to contact given all else is equal and of course, my clients use skill and ability measurement to determine hireability.
@Karyn - In my opinion the use of a social media footprint to determine interest is a pretty cutting edge approach in the business of recruiting. I think it will take a while to catch on before it becomes mainstream and universal. In your specific case, I would like to think that people evaluating you for an e-related positions would value your online savvy as measured through your social media activity. Maybe you should consider flipping the script and using that a criteria in YOUR evaluation of THEM as your next employer??
@Erin - I have a lot of advice in this area, but in general I'd advise that you get started asap and don't stop until you see success - and once that happens rev your engine even harder. That and seize all opportunities that come your way. Succeeding in business is all about drive and determination and not letting anything stand in your way. Go get em!!!
@Adam Singer - All being equal, I would choose to contact the candidate with the largest network because that to me signifies activity and liklihood of response. The more active I see from them, the more confidence I'll have in their response to my inquiry. Don't get me wrong, I'll contact less active folks as well, but for the purpose of this article, we're talking about all else being equal.
@anderson - to each their own. Many people resist industry advancement and evolution. The same way people once resisted email and instant messenger as a viable method of commmunication, people are currently dismissing twitter as a viable communication and information gathering medium. In my book, a connection is a connection and information is information - the medium is much less important. Again, just my humble opinion.
Thanks again for the thoughts and for keeping the conversation going.
Tom Clancy
· 8 months ago
What is missing here is Recruitment 1.0 and Media 1.0. Too many times we have made the mistake to hire those that look the best. Credibility is an issue. Remember there are those that are great at their job that don’t Tweet. When using recruitment 2.0, and I am an advocate, remember less talented people can build great media profiles. When these systems integrate in the next generation we will have the infinite sourcing capability with proper screening. Passing social media test like all recruitment activities depends on knowing what good looks like. Tom Clancy - Recruitment Compass
Karyn Romeis
· 8 months ago
@Boris I'm no longer in the market for an employer. I set up my own independent consultancy last year. But you are absolutely right. As far as I am concerned *any* job interview is a two-way street. No-one should ever feel that they go cap in hand to a recruiter to beg for a job. Both they and the organisation have something they need and something they offer. The interview should be a way to explore whether or not they are a good fit. They should be approaching the interview on an equal footing. Too many recruiters seem to forget that.
Patrick Vanhoucke
· 8 months ago
I couldn't express it better. As I'm getting older and more experienced, I'm also getting more picky when it comes to looking for another employer. If an employer has the right to ask why I want to work for him, I should have the right to ask why he wants to hire me. AndI couldn't express it better. As I'm getting older and more experienced, I'm also getting more picky when it comes to looking for another employer. If an employer has the right to ask why I want to work for him, I should have the right to ask why he wants to hire me. And the choice for a new employer is also a kind of ethical issue. I don't want to work for an employer that doesn't fit my own ethical and moral framework. the choice for a new employer is also a kind of ethical issue. I don't want to work for
J. Katz
· 8 months ago
I work in HR and this is the most ridiculous post I've ever read. When evaluating a candidate that has made it beyond an initial filter I will do a Google search and look at MySpace/Facebook pages but that is to find out if there are any obvious lifestyle problems that would be undesirable (drinking, drugs).
I don't care how many friends a person has, the ratio of followers to follows, the quality of the content on their blog, the number of tweets they're making per day. All of that is absolutely irrelevant.
If you want to sum up what every single employer is looking for -- accomplishments. HR people want to know what you've done for past employers so that we can gauge what type of accomplishments you're going to make. It's that simple.
I don't know what your "Professional Search Firm" does Boris but this article is a whole lot of fluff and distracts people from doing what they really need to do to get a job.
If you're interested in getting a job, stick to the basics -- be qualified for the position you apply for, write a good cover letter, have a resume that details your accomplishments and impress in your interviews.
Social Media Recruitment
· 8 months ago
To evaluate the social media footprints of two candidates, I would choose the one who has the ambition and commitment to make a difference. At determined2.com Interactivity that promotes successful pursuit of goals. It takes commitment and ambition to achieve success, whether it is working on goals or making successful business decisions.
Adina Levin
· 8 months ago
The suggestion to leave off political discourse in one's social media presence seems misguided to me. As a hiring manager, I view civil civic engagement as a plus in a qualified employee. People use social media for a wide range of personal and professional pursuits. It is unrealistic and undesirable to expect that people will keep their online presence work-related only. Personally, I am civically engaged online and believe that if that engagement ever closes any doors, it will open even more.
Tara 'missrogue' Hunt
· 8 months ago
Funny...I break these rules (i.e. take strong positions on controversial topics), yet, I get work, followers, speaking gigs, book deals, etc.. Nobody *really* wants lukewarm. I think companies are changing, too.
Anthony Citrano
· 8 months ago
Arrests are controversial? Sheesh, loosen up, people.
But seriously, I completely disagree with this "don't be controversial" bullshit. If someone doesn't want to hire you because you were you - and - *gasp* - said, out loud, what you believed in - then you're rather pathetic for wanting to work for them.
Adina Levin is right on (but has said so in a much nicer way.)
masonwong
· 8 months ago
Boris, I have to chime in and say, as an experienced corporate HR staffing director, I completely disagree with you. Unless you are recruiting for a Web 2.0/social media company position, you are wasting time assessing the things on your long laundry list.
First, there's no such thing as two candidates being "equal" in all other ways. It's a fallacy that is far overused, especially when trying to explain the proper implementation of affirmative action programs. In the real world, every candidate is different, often very different.
Second, the visible activity level on social media sites is no indication whatsoever of the potential productivity and success of a new hire. Simply think of some successful professionals who could care less about updating any online profile. We still want to recruit and hire them, so why create an artificial reason not to call them?
Social media sites are fun, helpful, and open up new possibilities for personal and business purposes, but from a hiring standpoint, it makes little sense to place any value on any one person's activity level with those sites.
I have never supported the practice of Googling candidates. Most of the time, there's no useful data. If you do find the name, you can't always confirm it's the same person. A solid, standardized background check through a reputable vendor, along with professional reference checks, more than suffices and is far more fair and useful than a Google search.
Finally, I disagree that a personal blog should avoid controversy, or at least your prescribed list of no-no topics. The best blogs are filled with passionate, opinionated posts, with topics of choice by the author. We just had one of the most historic U.S. presidential campaigns in 2008 - it would be a mistake to rule out any candidate who expressed their views during that vigorous campaign on their personal blog.
Alex
· 8 months ago
When a company is hiring a professional, they end up having to go over a significant number of candidates before they find ones that have the appropriate skills, and ultimately need them to do work. Meanwhile, it is bad enough that current workers need to be distracted with the need to conduct interviews (time much better spent than snooping into someone's private/public life); the author now suggests online research is important.
Thus, given the author is a glorifies headhunter, I think he is just justifying the services of companies like his: it is much cheaper to hire a student to research someone of facebook then to really pre-screen people before sending them to companies.
Gary Zatkovich
· 8 months ago
I've been in the executive search biz since 1967,....and to me this is absolute nonsense. Social networking has nothing to do with career growth, ....it's a waste of time.
Karyn Romeis
· 8 months ago
@Gary Do you have any idea how much that sounds like "In my day..."?
Things are very different now from 1967. The way people relate to one another has changed. The skills people need in the workplace have changed. The way we deliver learning and development has changed (although in some places, not enough!).
A recruiter needs to acknowledge that social media form a valid part of a person's work practice or run the risk of losing relevance.
Ally
· 3 months ago
I was going to say the same thing, Karen. IT's BECAUSE he's done this since 1967 that he's not interested in rolling with current technology.
Jared O'Toole
· 8 months ago
Its so important to make sure you are not only in all these places but that your profiles are up-to-date. I think one of the worst things is when I go to someones linkedin profile and it lists their job as one i know they left a year ago. Same thing with a dead blog. If someone find it when they search your name and the last post is a year old might not look good.
Facebook User
· 8 months ago
Thanks so much for this, great advice. Happy to say I passed! - http://courtneyparham.com @08grad_PR
AJonVine
· 8 months ago
This makes me want to vomit. I have NO desire to work for a company that will hire me based upon my creating a ubiquitous online persona that appears to say much about what I do, but in fact censors any actual opinions or non "PG-13" activities. Aside from LinkedIn, these sites are ways of connecting with friends, not business associates. If my friends' facebook profiles, blogs, or twitter accounts become as interestingly generic as you suggest, friends no longer we will be (at least online). If you would like to get to know the more human and passionate aspects of your candidates, ask them. They can then decide what to share to express themselves truthfully while maintaining the professional and polite distance that SHOULD be part of the interview process. Please don't request that they reconfigure their entire online identity to satisfy potential professional stalkers.
I think I understand what your are going for. You want to allow people to play up the strengths that may not come through on a resume or over the phone via a social networking page. It's wonderful that you want to hire someone who is the "complete package." But if you are unable to differentiate what on that page may or may not be relevant to your decision of employing the person, you should not be looking at it. It was not created with you in mind, nor should it have been. A company does not own its employees or their online identities. If they chose to include you in that world fine, but I would hope accepting a "friend" request would inform you in what context they are reaching out to you.
TheCodeCowboy
· 8 months ago
You sir are a mongoloid. The year is 2009 come out of your cave and embrace the future. The workplace is evolving and if you want to stay current you need to evolve with it or you’re going to get left in the dust. Especially in today’s market with so many candidates vying for the same opportunity anything you can do to stand out from the crowd is a plus.
Guillaume
· 8 months ago
The only thing I would add to this article is that basically with social media you are building your own brand.
Jared Lukes
· 8 months ago
I always feel like this topic gives me a split personality. One one hand, I love SM and all it offers from a personal perspective. In my job as a director of interactive at a small digital agency it's practically required that I participate, but in all honesty I would be participating regardless.
What I tend to curl my toes at, is when people are encouraged to participate, yet not be completely authentic. Now, I'm not talking about extreme circumstance here, but I find it fairly offensive that anyone would be censoring themselves in a medium that is intended to be personal because of it's professional ramifications. If everyone is censoring themselves then you have nothing gained, nothing lost. Even candidate the walks through the door is just as vanilla as the next. Or worse, the better candidate doesn't censor themselves and the ho-hum one does.
I personally don't think I would chose not to hire someone because I discovered through social media that they are republican, or saw a photo of them doing shots on the weekend. If anything it's reassuring to me that they are a unique human being.
On this particular topic, I've often wondered if the duty isn't on the hiring party to check there intentions at the door before they venture off into social media research on a candidate. After all, if they didn't send you there Facebook link, or their Twitter address along with their resume, why is it being looked at and evaluated along with materials they did prepare for you for professional evaluation?
Without clear upfront acknowledgment that social media findings will factor into the hiring process it just doesn't seem right to me.
That being said, I know it will be done, and so this topic is extremely valid and important.
Thoughts anyone?
Jared Lukes
· 8 months ago
I always feel like this topic gives me a split personality. One one hand, I love SM and all it offers from a personal perspective. In my job as a director of interactive at a small digital agency it's practically required that I participate, but in all honesty I would be participating regardless.
What I tend to curl my toes at, is when people are encouraged to participate, yet not be completely authentic. Now, I'm not talking about extreme circumstance here, but I find it fairly offensive that anyone would be censoring themselves in a medium that is intended to be personal because of it's professional ramifications. If everyone is censoring themselves then you have nothing gained, nothing lost. Even candidate the walks through the door is just as vanilla as the next. Or worse, the better candidate doesn't censor themselves and the ho-hum one does.
I personally don't think I would chose not to hire someone because I discovered through social media that they are republican, or saw a photo of them doing shots on the weekend. If anything it's reassuring to me that they are a unique human being.
On this particular topic, I've often wondered if the duty isn't on the hiring party to check there intentions at the door before they venture off into social media research on a candidate. After all, if they didn't send you there Facebook link, or their Twitter address along with their resume, why is it being looked at and evaluated along with materials they did prepare for you for professional evaluation?
Without clear upfront acknowledgment that social media findings will factor into the hiring process it just doesn't seem right to me.
That being said, I know it will be done, and so this topic is extremely valid and important.
Thoughts anyone?
Kate
· 8 months ago
I use social media in recruitment all the time, but I worry that you overemphasize "non-controversial" material in blogs, on facebook, etc. Most of my clients want to talk to candidates who are interesting, passionate and dedicated. That generally comes accross in strong personalities with deeply expressive characters with backbone. These are people who may not court controversy, but their principles come first.
Facebook User
· 8 months ago
This was generally a good article. You give some very interesting points, especially about not having any too revealing on Facebook. We've all heard stories about people not getting jobs, or losing jobs because they post the wrong things on there.
I was going to post a more positive comment, but after reading some of the comments I would have to agree with some of the HR people here. Although I personally don't work in HR, I understand their points. I wouldn't hire someone based on the size of their network. or how there blog works.
Many of your points can be used in all situations. Don't talk down your previous employer, no risky pictures or comments. Your ides on LinkedIn are good for everyone. But some of your thoughts are only good for specific situations. If you're looking to get a job in web design, of course you're going to want a great looking blog or website.
Aside from your ideas, you have to be able to back up your online presence with experience and results.
Pixedust
· 8 months ago
For all you Haters commenting, do you realize that the employment marketplace is crazy tough right now and doing anything you can to stand out from the crowd will get you looked at and noticed before those who just submit a plain old resume? Boris says "If all else were equal, like education, work history and general skill set, and I had to evaluate the social media footprints of two candidates to determine which one of them I would contact, which one would I contact and why?" Education, Work History and General Skill Set are the most importnant things that will get you in the door for an interview, BUT if you have to decide between 2 candidates that have the same type of background, wouldnt you want to hire the candidate that most matches the puzzle piece and fits in the best with the demographics of your company? Thats why having your online profiles as complete as possible is a stepping stone to getting you the job you want. Today's employment marketplace is more of a Show then Tell environment. What can YOU do for the company and what proof can you show of your accomplishments?
Alex
· 8 months ago
I really hope I am not going to end up in a situation when I am just one of 100 people with the same claim on some position, and my online footprint is the thing that puts me apart. Kinda reminds me about that news story where in some town several hundred of recently laid-off factory workers all applied for a Janitor position in a local HS...
siaynoqq
· 8 months ago
I think a lot of people who are finding issues with the initial post are equivocating between the social media footprint getting aiding a candidate and the social media footprint actually being an accurate assessment of the candidate's skills. Obviously there is no sort of causal relation between one's social media footprint and their level of ability -- Boris never made this claim, yet it seems people are impliciting assuming that he did in their response to him. Rather, the reality is that the sort of footprint one leaves on the social media sites biases how recruiters initially approach a candidate and how hiring managers perceive him when running their own search.
Given the usefulness of social media resources, and the fact that many good headhunters are using them in effective manners, means that the sort of footprint one leaves is critical. I'm much more impressed by a potential candidate who has some interesting technical posts on a blog, seems to show a true passion for the industry on his Facebook, etc. By no means to I use this to gauge the candidate's level of ability. As Boris stated, however, it can help display a more 'compelete package' of a candidate, which in union with an impressive resume speaks much more loudly than a good resume considered alone. When positions become especially competitive, a lot of these factors come into play, whether or not recruiters or hiring managers consciously consider them (though I would bet they do).
Anyone who is 'disgusted' by this notion that recruiters and companies are tracing his social media footprint needs to have a wake-up call. In an age where social media is taking a dominant presence, one's reputation is partly tied into it. It's no longer just word-of-mouth that can help a potential candidate get a boost, but rather a sort of presence in these social media outlets. If one is so disgusted by this that they refuse to partake, then they are at a disatvantage, whether or not they like to admit it or not. Rather, people ought to realize that the world is transforming because of the web, and take advantage of it. Boris gives you a lot of good ways to do so - why not take advantage?
masonwong
· 8 months ago
siaynoqq, I am much less 'disgusted' in a potential employer's mere viewing of one's social media footprint. What I am much more concerned about is Boris using the lack of a social media footprint as a basis for not calling a candidate. That is ridiculous.
Boris Epstein
· 8 months ago
Come on Mason. I think you've taken this post a little bit too literally. Of course I contact qualified candidates who don't have social media footprints and if somebody is clearly not qualified for one of my roles, all of the social media activity in the world isn't going to make me want to contact them. The purpose of this post is to make the point that social media activity does reflect on the candidate in question - whether they want it to or not.
I recognize that what we're discussing is a new phenomenon and clearly something that is not widely recognized or accepted (yet) as a part of most company's formal consideration process. But IMO one's involvement in social media can't just be blown off as insignificant, because IMO that's just naive.
Case in point, you brought up politics and our recent historic campaign as something that should be up for discussion. OK. Here's an example that might resonate with you. Many people in the technology marketplace (and young people who are wired into the world of social media) appreciated Obama's use of social media to further his campaign efforts as a reflection of how he might bring freshness and change to the White House and our country. So people backed Obama for many reasons, but his use of social media definitely played into the equation. Whereas John McCain who didn't do as good of a job embracing social media IMO was impacted negatively for not doing so. Clearly none were voted for or against solely on this criteria, but you have to agree that it did make a difference.
masonwong
· 8 months ago
I think your point is a candidate's social media footprint should be a valid criteria for all open positions, to which I disagree. For many tech and new media jobs, sure.
My point is the specific job's critical competencies should determine whether a candidate's social media footprint should be a criteria to begin with. Many, many jobs will have no relevance for a candidate's social media footprint.
Boris Epstein
· 8 months ago
Thanks for the reply Mason. So I actually agree with you on both points. IMO Social Media should only be an actual criteria for those roles where a direct correlation can be made between its use and the job in question. I don't necessarily think it should be a criteria for those jobs where there is no relationship. I'm more saying that I think it is being judged (or will be judged) whether the candidate likes it or not. So IMO people should at least be aware and conscious of it.
masonwong
· 8 months ago
To your point that the visibility of a candidate's social media footprint should, can, and will be assessed by recruiters and employers for those positions where such activity is relevant, I completely agree. People should not only be wary, but can be empowered to exact influence on the process by improving their social media footprint.
Thanks Boris.
Warren Whitlock
· 8 months ago
summing up.. whoever you are will be reflected in your online activities.
If you aren't online, that will reflect on your too
Boris Epstein
· 8 months ago
very well put (and succint enough for twitter for that matter)
NUddin
· 8 months ago
So, you can't put your views on a blog, on Facebook, on twitter, or anywhere Google can find it. You say show your passion, but what if its something that goes against the grain, like being a war protester. So, is social media a tool for freedom of speech or another tool in maintaining the status quo?
I think businesses will have to learn to adapt to social media instead of making people pretend or hide things to get a job. Organizations have to understand that people have professional and personal lives and as long as the professional part is not affected by the personal, organizations will have to learn to accept people based on their skills and performance at work.
Michael Daehn
· 8 months ago
This is an excellent and comprehensive article. Since I have been doing these things I should get hired in no time, huh? ;)
This is nonsense. I guess if I wanted to be a boring person with moderate views on anything and everything, I'd follow your "advice" to a t. This certainly seems to fit the profile of recruiters -- i.e. people with no real passions or talents. And moderate views on everything and anything.
Doug
· 7 months ago
Interesting article. With all this time spent on updating the various social networking sites, it's a wonder we get any work done! I agree with what Bobfromhuddle had to say in his comment above, but again, it depends on what type of applicant you are searching for. I would expect a more developed social media personality from a marketing pro then I would from a java developer.
JobSearchNinja
· 7 months ago
Every applicant should look closely at their resume and make it stand out to be noticed by their prospective employer. To top the competition resume should be adequate and compelling.
Carrie
· 7 months ago
I find this overwhelming, to be honest. I'm on Facebook and LinkedIn, but I have no desire to use Twitter. I have a job (hence I'm not looking for one and probably wouldn't get one if this is what employers now look for) and a family and that pretty much takes up more time than I have. For now, I'm choosing to live a rounded life instead of sacrificing the free time I have to pretend I'm rounded on the Internet. I wonder if this will have a backlash against women with kids who just can't dedicate this kind of time to self-promotion.
Albert Kaufman
· 7 months ago
Oy vey. What a sad commentary on social media. Do it like this to get it right. Yeah, if you keep plugging away and don't really show yourself, you'll get hired in no time. Just don't mention your visits to Burning Man or that you like to cross dress and worked on the Obama campaign. Nah, I'd rather we shoot for a real society of individuals with real lives.
Nadia Rusenova
· 7 months ago
I agree that this Social Media Recruitment test could be very useful. But don't you think that this should be valid only for some particular professions. If I want to become a pilot, doctor or even a software developer, I don't need the Social Media to build my personal brand and no one will hire me because of my social media profile. However, if I am a marketer, or as I am now a marketing graduate who strives to be a successful marketer, I hope that building a personal social media brand will help me to prove my qualities and promote myself.
Alice
· 7 months ago
I think that it's a huge contradiction, which several others have pointed out, for social media profiles to remain non-controversial, yet not be able to separate the personal v. professional. Companies want you to put your personal life aside when you walk through their doors, be well-rounded but keep it professional. It's also ridiculous to think that if I am not tweeting 10 times throughout the day that I'm not worth hiring. I don't think my current or future employer (unless it's twitter et al) would appreciate me tweeting or updating statuses while I'm supposed to be balancing the company's budget or writing a press release or coding the software. It's a new landscape but it's still can't be both ways. Like everything in life it's about the balance we are hopeless to attain and always strive for.
Joe
· 7 months ago
Sounds like a bunch of propaganda from social media activists to me. So completely prune your various online identities into some grotesque contrivance? Is that the gist of it? Artifice for the sake of manipulating perception -- not a good way to start a relationship with a potential employer.
P Anonymous
· 7 months ago
Mr. Epstein points out that he went from "candidate scarcity" to "an overabundance of candidates" and "talent is literally available by the truckloads". He's in the programmer recruitment space and since this country's schools have not be cranking out loads of programmers recently, the number of programmers in the talent pool hasn't changed, just the number of those programmers that Mr. Epstein knows how to contact and has data on. If there are truckloads now, there were truckloads before - it's just that now he has all the license plate numbers.
I hope that all recruiters follow his advice and I will do the opposite, so that I don't have to deal with the flood of calls from recruiters who trolled my name off the Internet and get in the way of the old-school, quality-not-quantity recruiters.
Claire Boyles (Business Coach)
· 7 months ago
Thank you Boris for a well written and immensely useful article. You have put into words pretty much exactly how I rate people's online footprint. I am relatively new to twitter but have been using facebook for a couple of years, LinkedIn I have still yet to use to it's full potential. It is quite amazing how the internet is now moving into a whole new phase- online social networking is evolving at a tremendous rate, I'm excited at the ever increasing new opportunities that it opens up :)
E
· 6 months ago
While I get why all these things are here and I don't necessarily disagree with the purposes they serve, I do think that all those requirements are a full-time job and your hobby becomes "updating my professional networking."
Also one person's view of controversial opinions to keep off public blogs under real names - sex, drugs, politics, and religious buttons - are another person's scroll-on-by-and-not-caring.
Rob Freeze
· 6 months ago
Boris, I do not fully agree. I feel it depends on what kind of job you are looking for. If it is in marketing, yes; engineering, not so much. I feel it helps to have an on-line resume, Linked-In is a must but the rest is just filler - it might help and it might hurt. I did really like your points about being active in your own industry on line and this is something I am perhaps lacking - though I do follow my own industry (solar and semiconductors) I do not show this on my blogs much. Thanks for the article though - made some good points for discussion.
Rick
· 6 months ago
I'm not sure if I pass or not, but I am trying. In fact, if anyone would like to assist me with improving my website or with social networking, please check out my site and hit me up on my email. My site is http://www.freegovtjobs.com. Thanks.
KM
· 6 months ago
Hmm.. the question should be do You the Recruiter pass the test as well.. one issue of concern not addressed is that Recruiters must a) gain permission from the candidate before performing an investigative consumer report on an individual with regards to employment.. b) inform the candidate/applicant before making an adverse employment decision. Sad part is that many recruiters are not aware of this fact!
Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act - TPRs' (Third party recruiters) Are accountable for Making sure that they have Written permission before checking references, permission to disclose to the employer, and confirmation that if they want the information in Writing that we will disclose within the legal time frame. (5 days)
See, as soon as we start implementing "Any report that results from personal interviews (including telephone interviews) with neighbors, friends or associates of the applicant, or others with whom he or she is acquainted or who may have knowledge of the applicant, or obtain documentation which contains information as to character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living is an investigative consumer report subject to the special procedures set forth in Section 606.
Since reference checking or Social Media searches involves asking questions or gaining information about character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living, the reports based on these interviews, or from the information are likely to constitute investigative consumer reports. " quoted from the FCRA
This is because we are "asking information about character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which is used in whole or in part as a factor in establishing eligibility for employment purposes.
Here is a catch if the employer or Recruiter intends to take an adverse employment action based on our Verification reports/consumer report we must provide this information to the Candidate. We must allow them the opportunity to dispute the information found, and if asked in writing
Last but not least - Several States - including California States that we must maintain the reports of the individual of that state for At least One year, and be able to provide that information to the Candidate should they request.
sdfskj
· 6 months ago
What the fuck is this shit? This is absolutely retarded. Are you insane?
3. Posts pictures of friends and family but keeps them pg-13 4. Keeps it non-controversial – doesn’t take extreme positions on sex, drugs, religion, politics or other topics that could cause an employer to be wary of hiring
Lol go shoot urself pls. ROBOTS
Allen Laudenslager
· 5 months ago
Using the methods outlined in this article biases the hiring process toward the salesman not the subject matter expert. The SMEs are far too busy getting the work done to invest the time in self-promotion.
If you are looking for sales skills, you get salesman if you are looking for task related skills, you get people who can do the work.
This article seems like a great way to locate good recruiters, the author is a recruiter and is familiar with the kind of broad social networking that makes a good recruiter and has blindly assumed that these skills are the essential skills for OTHER professions besides recruiting. A web developer who has the skills of a great recruiter may actual not be as good as a web developer who has the skills of a great web developer. But the author will have screened for only people who have the social skills of recruiters, so the true professional dedicated to a DIFFERENT profession besides recruiting will not be considered.
Seems like the same ideas as authors writing books about authors, movies about making movies and now, recruiting based on the skills needed by recruiters.
Don't count me a fan of this approach.
Your Name*
· 5 months ago
This is spot on, in my opinion; especially the emphasis on appropriate, balanaced content.
If it's digital, it's permanent. That should not be a call to inaction, but measured action, which Boris advocates. I would add more but it would be superfluous.
@futurepresent thanks this is really helpfully its encouraging to see some of these things done already and helpfully to take on some..
Wayne
· 4 months ago
So you're saying if people tell you what you want to hear you hire them.
All of this online bullshit is all you're going to get is people with too much time on their hands, and think too much of them selfs.
As well as the fact if I could knew some many people I could get recommendation on linken etc. I would never be unemployed/looking for work.
So thank for nothing.
Nicole Martin
· 4 months ago
In addition to having a good record on Google, another resource HR might be using is pipl.com. Finds way more dirt than a Google search. Granted, if you have a common name (John Smith, Jane Adams, or even my name) employers might not automatically assume all the search results bearing your name are actually you.
However, if you have a more uncommon name and there just happens to be a felon with the same name... You might be out of luck on that one!
Nicole Martin
· 4 months ago
In addition to having a good record on Google, another resource HR might be using is pipl.com. Finds way more dirt than a Google search. Granted, if you have a common name (John Smith, Jane Adams, or even my name) employers might not automatically assume all the search results bearing your name are actually you.
However, if you have a more uncommon name and there just happens to be a felon with the same name... You might be out of luck on that one!
Nicole Martin
· 4 months ago
In addition to having a good record on Google, another resource HR might be using is pipl.com. Finds way more dirt than a Google search. Granted, if you have a common name (John Smith, Jane Adams, or even my name) employers might not automatically assume all the search results bearing your name are actually you.
However, if you have a more uncommon name and there just happens to be a felon with the same name... You might be out of luck on that one!
Nicole Martin
· 4 months ago
Sorry I submitted that so many times! Didn't realize it was showing oldest comments first.
Boris Epstein
· 4 months ago
Wow, recruiters really aren't very popular are they. But like Jimmy Fallon says in Almost Famous, "I didn't invent the rainy day man, I just own the best umbrella". And my point with that quote isn't to talk about how great my umbrella is. It's to say that there is a rainy day out there and that people are judging your social media profiles whether you like it or not. With that in mind, you might consider getting an umbrella of some sorts - above is just some recommendations for one, but by no means a one-size-fits-all model.
Deirdré Straughan
· 3 months ago
"...Keeps it non-controversial – minimal discussion of sex, politics, religion and other such controversial topics. Is more genuine and honest..."
These two points are contradictory. My site has been around since 2001 and expresses strong opinions, some of which are controversial. I write about things I care deeply about. To vanilla-fy that now in order to look more appealing to an employer... well, it wouldn't be a true picture of me. Personally, I am capable of working with people even if I disagree with their politics or religion, provided I respect them as colleagues. I would hope that the same would be true of any potential employer of mine. But, then, the others aren't likely to hire me. ; )
jennybloggess
· 3 months ago
I am never going to get hired for anything ever again.
emily
· 3 months ago
I don't agree that one should keep their blog at #7
7. Keeps it non-controversial – minimal discussion of sex, politics, religion and other such controversial topics.
Your blog shouldn't show that you are a sex fiend, a racist or a terrorist, but a healthy discussion on controversial topic is desirable. The last thing I want to see on an employee's blog is a persona that is bland and tries to play it safe. Maybe it is just me. But if someone doesn't have anything arguable in his blog post, I am not interested.
anita247
· 3 months ago
Hello Dear,
My name is Anita Mabou. I saw your profile today I will like to know more about you. Please if you would not mind, contact me at (mabou.anita@yahoo.com) box so that we can know each other better. I shall send my picture to you when i receive your good response in my email box. Note: distance, age, race or religion is no hindrance to true love and friendship. I will be waiting to hear from you soonest. Anita (mabou.anita@yahoo.com)
Free Microsoft Points
· 2 months ago
Barely, but only because it got me into trouble years ago and I had to go through and fix it.
softshiv
· 2 months ago
Informative knowledge
Jon
· 2 months ago
Ugh. This article reminds me why I believe human resources personel are uniquely unqualified to recruit or interview prospective employees. In the vast majority of cases social networking sites are 100% irrelevant to how well a prospective employee will do his or her job. They have become a way for hr personel basically to waste time and gossip over whether someone fits their own entirely subjective definition of a "complete package." I run a small company that does artistic work and yes, you have to meet with the person to determine whether they're a team player or not but you can never determine this from their facebook page. In my own line of work artistic talent is the most important factor and hr personel almost never have the qualifications to judge whether a prospective employee is talented or not. They do not have a good eye for design, composition, color theory, etc... and to use them as a filter for weeding out prospective candidates when all they do is check those candidate's facebook page hurts my company. Human resources personel have their uses but recruitment is not one of them.
Lieven
· 2 months ago
I believe you would hire me... Kind regards Lieven van Nieuwenhuyze
Don Skinner
· 2 months ago
Some Interesting points here. I would say that getting anyone who uses LinkedIn, twitter and manages their online image effectively will be a very small list. In my experience, the majority of people don't even know what LinkedIn is let alone use it properly. I work for a flat fee recruitment company in the UK and we specialise in online recruitment. I would recommend having a look at our blog as I've written about using Google Adwords for recruitment as well as other social media articles you may find of interest. You can find it at http://www.netnatives.co.uk
zohaibusman
· 8 months ago
so for a more better career i also need social communication skills with technical skills and you are right i can also see a change i my office that they are actually need more. Just like you mention
"employers rarely hire just skills and are looking for much more of a complete package "
Very good and useful info. thanks :)
Erin
· 8 months ago
Boris,
This was a great blog post. I'm going to start twittering more. And you gave me some great ideas for my website which is being built as we speak. I am a Master's student at Rutgers University obtaining my master's in English. I am just beginning to build my freelancing business and any advice you have would be helpful. So far so good, I'm so glad I found your blog post. I am interested in writing about art/music/food and other cultural areas, or for arts organizations. I haven't quite found a niche market yet, but am working on it.
All Comments
Did you used to reject potential employees because they sent editorials to the newspaper reflecting their strong views about politics and religion? Did you reject them for appearing on television as part of a political protest? Did you reject them because they enjoyed nightclubbing?
Of course not. You probably did not know about these things, although they were all done in public. And I'll bet it never occurred to you to care about them. But now that you can easily find their editorials in their blogs, now that you can see video of them protesting on You Tube, and now that you can see photos of them in a nightclub, you disapprove?
Great post, and I absolutely agree with the key points. I know quite a few friends that have landed great jobs directly via Twitter / Linkedin. So kudos to @mashable for providing this useful checklist. I think I'm due for an online footprint audit myself!
Ana
communication styles, work habits, work/life balance and all sorts of other valuable information". I will use this as a blueprint to improve my grade!
The questions we have are the same as they've always been: can you code, do you want to improve, and why do you want to work for us?
A twitter account is a the equivalent of a serious smoking habit. I wouldn't even consider hiring a person with 40 updates per day.
This is what I'd look for in an employee -
1. Skills and Experience - Use LinkedIn for this. Use good keywords that people will search on.
2. History to establish trust. Someone who gives me a glimps into their past dealings with coworkers and their peer group will give me an idea of how they will represent my company. Blogs and twitter posts help with this.
3. Influence - How their peers respond to them. Twitter is great for this and general Googling. Number of followers, friends is good to see.
4. Common connections - Start at Linked In.
I wouldn't look at facebook. That's personal, unless the candidate wants to introduce it.
As for recommendations on LinkedIn - I don't trust these. I'd read them, but the best performers are not looking for validation or testimonials and won't have many. Often people get loads of recommendations when they are laid off and people trade them frequently.
Almost all of these items take time to establish and grow. If you haven't yet, start now and get your voice, but don't over do it. It looks suspiciously self-serving. If you're still in college, connect with your best professors and others with good networks, and start to post a solid collection of honest, professional discoveries and informational posts that contribute to the overall conversation. You'll get hired quickly for internships and post graduation.
By the way, your online presence is also valuable when you want to go into business for yourself or want to pursue other partnerships.
When you apply for a job, do you not try to give the impression in your application that you are the best person for the job? When you get to an interview - assuming you really want the job - do you not try to persuade the interviewer that you are a better bet than any of the other people they are interviewing for the post?
When the man/woman of your dreams appears on your radar, do you not try to prove to them how worthy a person you are? Someone they should notice, spend time with, fall in love with, spend the rest of their lives with?
When you play a sport, do you not do everything in your power to play as well as you can so that the selectors pick you for the team?
Self promotion is part and parcel of life - professional and social. If you sat quietly in a little corner, never making an attempt to get yourself noticed, you'd never get any job at all and you'd live a very solitary existence.
@Tom_Kuhr - Yes, I weigh LinkedIn the most, then Blog, then Twitter, then Facebook. I Google mostly for interest and for hidden information.
@bobfromhuddle, Sara & Christiananderson - I agree with you 100%. The biggest point I want to make here is that I use social media footprint to determine whether or not to contact somebody given that all other indicators on a resume are equal NOT to determine whether or not they should be hired. Meaning @bobfromhuddle, if I could tell that 2 candidates could clearly code given their cs education from stanford and experience building web applications for google, I would look to their social media footprint to determine which of the two I would contact. I would look to their blog to see if they maybe posted samples of their coding work or I would look to their LinkedIn profile to see if they've been involved in open source projects or I would look to their twitter activity to see if I could get a measurement for their interests in relation to my clients, etc. Once I made the choice to contact a candidate and introduce to somebody like yourself or another client for consideration, social media footprint near goes out the window (except for the negative stuff which of course could still play a factor) and it comes down to actual skill, coding abilities, etc. So point here is I use social media footprint to determine who I'm going to contact given all else is equal and of course, my clients use skill and ability measurement to determine hireability.
@Karyn - In my opinion the use of a social media footprint to determine interest is a pretty cutting edge approach in the business of recruiting. I think it will take a while to catch on before it becomes mainstream and universal. In your specific case, I would like to think that people evaluating you for an e-related positions would value your online savvy as measured through your social media activity. Maybe you should consider flipping the script and using that a criteria in YOUR evaluation of THEM as your next employer??
@Erin - I have a lot of advice in this area, but in general I'd advise that you get started asap and don't stop until you see success - and once that happens rev your engine even harder. That and seize all opportunities that come your way. Succeeding in business is all about drive and determination and not letting anything stand in your way. Go get em!!!
@Adam Singer - All being equal, I would choose to contact the candidate with the largest network because that to me signifies activity and liklihood of response. The more active I see from them, the more confidence I'll have in their response to my inquiry. Don't get me wrong, I'll contact less active folks as well, but for the purpose of this article, we're talking about all else being equal.
@anderson - to each their own. Many people resist industry advancement and evolution. The same way people once resisted email and instant messenger as a viable method of commmunication, people are currently dismissing twitter as a viable communication and information gathering medium. In my book, a connection is a connection and information is information - the medium is much less important. Again, just my humble opinion.
Thanks again for the thoughts and for keeping the conversation going.
I don't care how many friends a person has, the ratio of followers to follows, the quality of the content on their blog, the number of tweets they're making per day. All of that is absolutely irrelevant.
If you want to sum up what every single employer is looking for -- accomplishments. HR people want to know what you've done for past employers so that we can gauge what type of accomplishments you're going to make. It's that simple.
I don't know what your "Professional Search Firm" does Boris but this article is a whole lot of fluff and distracts people from doing what they really need to do to get a job.
If you're interested in getting a job, stick to the basics -- be qualified for the position you apply for, write a good cover letter, have a resume that details your accomplishments and impress in your interviews.
But seriously, I completely disagree with this "don't be controversial" bullshit. If someone doesn't want to hire you because you were you - and - *gasp* - said, out loud, what you believed in - then you're rather pathetic for wanting to work for them.
Adina Levin is right on (but has said so in a much nicer way.)
First, there's no such thing as two candidates being "equal" in all other ways. It's a fallacy that is far overused, especially when trying to explain the proper implementation of affirmative action programs. In the real world, every candidate is different, often very different.
Second, the visible activity level on social media sites is no indication whatsoever of the potential productivity and success of a new hire. Simply think of some successful professionals who could care less about updating any online profile. We still want to recruit and hire them, so why create an artificial reason not to call them?
Social media sites are fun, helpful, and open up new possibilities for personal and business purposes, but from a hiring standpoint, it makes little sense to place any value on any one person's activity level with those sites.
I have never supported the practice of Googling candidates. Most of the time, there's no useful data. If you do find the name, you can't always confirm it's the same person. A solid, standardized background check through a reputable vendor, along with professional reference checks, more than suffices and is far more fair and useful than a Google search.
Finally, I disagree that a personal blog should avoid controversy, or at least your prescribed list of no-no topics. The best blogs are filled with passionate, opinionated posts, with topics of choice by the author. We just had one of the most historic U.S. presidential campaigns in 2008 - it would be a mistake to rule out any candidate who expressed their views during that vigorous campaign on their personal blog.
Thus, given the author is a glorifies headhunter, I think he is just justifying the services of companies like his: it is much cheaper to hire a student to research someone of facebook then to really pre-screen people before sending them to companies.
Things are very different now from 1967. The way people relate to one another has changed. The skills people need in the workplace have changed. The way we deliver learning and development has changed (although in some places, not enough!).
A recruiter needs to acknowledge that social media form a valid part of a person's work practice or run the risk of losing relevance.
- http://courtneyparham.com
@08grad_PR
I think I understand what your are going for. You want to allow people to play up the strengths that may not come through on a resume or over the phone via a social networking page. It's wonderful that you want to hire someone who is the "complete package." But if you are unable to differentiate what on that page may or may not be relevant to your decision of employing the person, you should not be looking at it. It was not created with you in mind, nor should it have been. A company does not own its employees or their online identities. If they chose to include you in that world fine, but I would hope accepting a "friend" request would inform you in what context they are reaching out to you.
What I tend to curl my toes at, is when people are encouraged to participate, yet not be completely authentic. Now, I'm not talking about extreme circumstance here, but I find it fairly offensive that anyone would be censoring themselves in a medium that is intended to be personal because of it's professional ramifications. If everyone is censoring themselves then you have nothing gained, nothing lost. Even candidate the walks through the door is just as vanilla as the next. Or worse, the better candidate doesn't censor themselves and the ho-hum one does.
I personally don't think I would chose not to hire someone because I discovered through social media that they are republican, or saw a photo of them doing shots on the weekend. If anything it's reassuring to me that they are a unique human being.
On this particular topic, I've often wondered if the duty isn't on the hiring party to check there intentions at the door before they venture off into social media research on a candidate. After all, if they didn't send you there Facebook link, or their Twitter address along with their resume, why is it being looked at and evaluated along with materials they did prepare for you for professional evaluation?
Without clear upfront acknowledgment that social media findings will factor into the hiring process it just doesn't seem right to me.
That being said, I know it will be done, and so this topic is extremely valid and important.
Thoughts anyone?
What I tend to curl my toes at, is when people are encouraged to participate, yet not be completely authentic. Now, I'm not talking about extreme circumstance here, but I find it fairly offensive that anyone would be censoring themselves in a medium that is intended to be personal because of it's professional ramifications. If everyone is censoring themselves then you have nothing gained, nothing lost. Even candidate the walks through the door is just as vanilla as the next. Or worse, the better candidate doesn't censor themselves and the ho-hum one does.
I personally don't think I would chose not to hire someone because I discovered through social media that they are republican, or saw a photo of them doing shots on the weekend. If anything it's reassuring to me that they are a unique human being.
On this particular topic, I've often wondered if the duty isn't on the hiring party to check there intentions at the door before they venture off into social media research on a candidate. After all, if they didn't send you there Facebook link, or their Twitter address along with their resume, why is it being looked at and evaluated along with materials they did prepare for you for professional evaluation?
Without clear upfront acknowledgment that social media findings will factor into the hiring process it just doesn't seem right to me.
That being said, I know it will be done, and so this topic is extremely valid and important.
Thoughts anyone?
I was going to post a more positive comment, but after reading some of the comments I would have to agree with some of the HR people here. Although I personally don't work in HR, I understand their points. I wouldn't hire someone based on the size of their network. or how there blog works.
Many of your points can be used in all situations. Don't talk down your previous employer, no risky pictures or comments. Your ides on LinkedIn are good for everyone. But some of your thoughts are only good for specific situations. If you're looking to get a job in web design, of course you're going to want a great looking blog or website.
Aside from your ideas, you have to be able to back up your online presence with experience and results.
Boris says "If all else were equal, like education, work history and general skill set, and I had to evaluate the social media footprints of two candidates to determine which one of them I would contact, which one would I contact and why?"
Education, Work History and General Skill Set are the most importnant things that will get you in the door for an interview, BUT if you have to decide between 2 candidates that have the same type of background, wouldnt you want to hire the candidate that most matches the puzzle piece and fits in the best with the demographics of your company? Thats why having your online profiles as complete as possible is a stepping stone to getting you the job you want.
Today's employment marketplace is more of a Show then Tell environment. What can YOU do for the company and what proof can you show of your accomplishments?
Given the usefulness of social media resources, and the fact that many good headhunters are using them in effective manners, means that the sort of footprint one leaves is critical. I'm much more impressed by a potential candidate who has some interesting technical posts on a blog, seems to show a true passion for the industry on his Facebook, etc. By no means to I use this to gauge the candidate's level of ability. As Boris stated, however, it can help display a more 'compelete package' of a candidate, which in union with an impressive resume speaks much more loudly than a good resume considered alone. When positions become especially competitive, a lot of these factors come into play, whether or not recruiters or hiring managers consciously consider them (though I would bet they do).
Anyone who is 'disgusted' by this notion that recruiters and companies are tracing his social media footprint needs to have a wake-up call. In an age where social media is taking a dominant presence, one's reputation is partly tied into it. It's no longer just word-of-mouth that can help a potential candidate get a boost, but rather a sort of presence in these social media outlets. If one is so disgusted by this that they refuse to partake, then they are at a disatvantage, whether or not they like to admit it or not. Rather, people ought to realize that the world is transforming because of the web, and take advantage of it. Boris gives you a lot of good ways to do so - why not take advantage?
I recognize that what we're discussing is a new phenomenon and clearly something that is not widely recognized or accepted (yet) as a part of most company's formal consideration process. But IMO one's involvement in social media can't just be blown off as insignificant, because IMO that's just naive.
Case in point, you brought up politics and our recent historic campaign as something that should be up for discussion. OK. Here's an example that might resonate with you. Many people in the technology marketplace (and young people who are wired into the world of social media) appreciated Obama's use of social media to further his campaign efforts as a reflection of how he might bring freshness and change to the White House and our country. So people backed Obama for many reasons, but his use of social media definitely played into the equation. Whereas John McCain who didn't do as good of a job embracing social media IMO was impacted negatively for not doing so. Clearly none were voted for or against solely on this criteria, but you have to agree that it did make a difference.
valid criteria for all open positions, to which I disagree. For many
tech and new media jobs, sure.
My point is the specific job's critical competencies should determine
whether a candidate's social media footprint should be a criteria to
begin with. Many, many jobs will have no relevance for a candidate's
social media footprint.
footprint should, can, and will be assessed by recruiters and
employers for those positions where such activity is relevant, I
completely agree. People should not only be wary, but can be
empowered to exact influence on the process by improving their social
media footprint.
Thanks Boris.
If you aren't online, that will reflect on your too
I think businesses will have to learn to adapt to social media instead of making people pretend or hide things to get a job. Organizations have to understand that people have professional and personal lives and as long as the professional part is not affected by the personal, organizations will have to learn to accept people based on their skills and performance at work.
http://www.getmikeajob.com
However, if I am a marketer, or as I am now a marketing graduate who strives to be a successful marketer, I hope that building a personal social media brand will help me to prove my qualities and promote myself.
I hope that all recruiters follow his advice and I will do the opposite, so that I don't have to deal with the flood of calls from recruiters who trolled my name off the Internet and get in the way of the old-school, quality-not-quantity recruiters.
It is quite amazing how the internet is now moving into a whole new phase- online social networking is evolving at a tremendous rate, I'm excited at the ever increasing new opportunities that it opens up :)
Also one person's view of controversial opinions to keep off public blogs under real names - sex, drugs, politics, and religious buttons - are another person's scroll-on-by-and-not-caring.
Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act - TPRs' (Third party recruiters) Are accountable for
Making sure that they have Written permission before checking references, permission to disclose to the employer, and confirmation that if they want the information in Writing that we will disclose within the legal time frame. (5 days)
See, as soon as we start implementing "Any report that results from personal interviews (including telephone interviews) with neighbors, friends or associates of the applicant, or others with whom he or she is acquainted or who may have knowledge of the applicant, or obtain documentation which contains information as to character, general reputation, personal
characteristics, or mode of living is an investigative consumer report subject to the special procedures set forth in Section 606.
Since reference checking or Social Media searches involves asking questions or gaining information about character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living, the reports based on these interviews, or from the information are likely to constitute investigative consumer reports. " quoted from the FCRA
This is because we are "asking information about character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which is used in whole or in part as a factor in establishing eligibility for employment purposes.
Here is a catch if the employer or Recruiter intends to take an adverse
employment action based on our Verification reports/consumer report we
must provide this information to the Candidate. We must allow them the
opportunity to dispute the information found, and if asked in writing
Last but not least - Several States - including California States that we must maintain the reports of the individual of that state for At least One year, and be able to provide that information to the Candidate should they request.
3. Posts pictures of friends and family but keeps them pg-13
4. Keeps it non-controversial – doesn’t take extreme positions on sex, drugs, religion, politics or other topics that could cause an employer to be wary of hiring
Lol go shoot urself pls. ROBOTS
If you are looking for sales skills, you get salesman if you are looking for task related skills, you get people who can do the work.
Check this article http://ezinearticles.com/?Exploding-the-Myth-Th...
Seems like the same ideas as authors writing books about authors, movies about making movies and now, recruiting based on the skills needed by recruiters.
Don't count me a fan of this approach.
If it's digital, it's permanent. That should not be a call to inaction, but measured action, which Boris advocates. I would add more but it would be superfluous.
Well said and well done. Thanks, Boris!
Tim
www.hireschool.com
All of this online bullshit is all you're going to get is people with too much time on their hands, and think too much of them selfs.
As well as the fact if I could knew some many people I could get recommendation on linken etc. I would never be unemployed/looking for work.
So thank for nothing.
However, if you have a more uncommon name and there just happens to be a felon with the same name... You might be out of luck on that one!
However, if you have a more uncommon name and there just happens to be a felon with the same name... You might be out of luck on that one!
However, if you have a more uncommon name and there just happens to be a felon with the same name... You might be out of luck on that one!
Is more genuine and honest..."
These two points are contradictory. My site has been around since 2001 and expresses strong opinions, some of which are controversial. I write about things I care deeply about. To vanilla-fy that now in order to look more appealing to an employer... well, it wouldn't be a true picture of me. Personally, I am capable of working with people even if I disagree with their politics or religion, provided I respect them as colleagues. I would hope that the same would be true of any potential employer of mine. But, then, the others aren't likely to hire me. ; )
7. Keeps it non-controversial – minimal discussion of sex, politics, religion and other such controversial topics.
Your blog shouldn't show that you are a sex fiend, a racist or a terrorist, but a healthy discussion on controversial topic is desirable. The last thing I want to see on an employee's blog is a persona that is bland and tries to play it safe. Maybe it is just me. But if someone doesn't have anything arguable in his blog post, I am not interested.
My name is Anita Mabou. I saw your profile
today I will like to know more about you. Please if you would not mind, contact me at (mabou.anita@yahoo.com) box so that we can know each other better.
I shall send my picture to you when i receive your good response in my email box.
Note: distance, age, race or religion is no hindrance to true love and friendship.
I will be waiting to hear from you soonest.
Anita
(mabou.anita@yahoo.com)
Kind regards
Lieven van Nieuwenhuyze
"employers rarely hire just skills and are looking for much more of a complete package "
Very good and useful info. thanks :)
This was a great blog post. I'm going to start twittering more. And you gave me some great ideas for my website which is being built as we speak. I am a Master's student at Rutgers University obtaining my master's in English. I am just beginning to build my freelancing business and any advice you have would be helpful. So far so good, I'm so glad I found your blog post. I am interested in writing about art/music/food and other cultural areas, or for arts organizations. I haven't quite found a niche market yet, but am working on it.