Not knowing even the basics on the job titles ( VP and “Vice President” in the Job Title field search bring different results), it will not be able to provide us with intelligent suggestions. LinkedIn, on the other hand, doesn’t even “know” standard abbreviations, let alone synonyms so on LinkedIn, we have always looked for terminology variations using OR statements. That is because Google has done a lot to understand what people are looking for, “read between the lines”, and show related results. In our sourcing practice, we find that searching on Google can be well done without writing long OR statements or exclusions using the minus. (Did you think the first search should bring more results?) Just to give you one example – in LinkedIn Recruiter, the second search below brings up more results than the first: The problem for the fans of traditional Boolean search is not just that LinkedIn Recruiter is expensive its search syntax is not exactly Boolean – it’s complicated and user-unfriendly. (By the way, is the assumption that only recruiters, of all LinkedIn members, may want to use Boolean search syntax?) LinkedIn suggests to people who want to use Boolean search to upgrade to LinkedIn Recruiter. ![]() Is Boolean search going away from all accounts? Navigator has something called “Lead Builder” that doesn’t sound like “Boolean” to me. It looks like only Navigator and Lite have advanced search. ![]() Of the current choices of premium personal accounts, If you wanted to search, for example, for someone whose job title is (Engineer OR Developer) NOT Manager, you will no longer be able to do so. A rare error occurred, and Boolean is going away in Recruiter Lite. Here is a “double alert” I have just copied from my screen.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |