Read an article about LinkedIn where the founder was complaining about people who are not using LinkedIn for searching new talents. He says: "I have a frustration that people don't understand it. I had a CEO at one of my portfolio companies say to me, 'How do I use LinkedIn to find a CFO?' I said, 'Well have you tried typing "CFO" into the search box?' It's flabbergasting"
Perhaps, this is because the ranking system and the recommendation system in Linkedin are both fundamentally broken. Everyone can write whatever she likes in her CV and she can collude with other members for increasing the number of external references. There is no control and no sound ranking system in place. In short, anyone can inflate the value of her own LinkedIn profile.
Now why this is happening? Linkedin ranks users just using on their distance from my position in the social graph. Also, they consider textual match as a ranking feature. In my view, this is indeed a very primitive form of ranking and they should start investigating the idea of assigning credits to users. In this model, you spend a credit whenever you endorse a user and you gain credit when your endorsement was judged as positive by other users. This is a model used in real world where you spend some part of your social credit when you endorse someone. Plus, you earn some money when your endorsement will become a new hire.
So, Just a little feature suggestion for my friends in LinkedIn.
Antonio, I agree with your view - In the Profile and Expertise management solution I am building in my company (130k people) we are exactly adding endorsements and tacit validation (based on likes and recos of specific talents/skill)...
ReplyDeletethere is also an interesting Proof of concept to navigate skills in Linkedin in a different way that you might want to have a look at on mindtagger.net
happy to talk more, will send you a msg to your pvt email...
Filippo
People who take linkedin and facebook seriously deserve to suffer serious career damage. Social networks are bully networks for social retards. If a bully decides to complain, the social networks panic and censor you but if you fight back, they automatically get bullied themselves. They are brought to you by aghadhimmics whose patron saint was Walt Whitman, the guy who only had sex with himself and believed in the Gnostic Gospels. Those who use lint tin and futz book are narcissist masochist clowns governed by affectation. Is a vulture capitalist who only invests in firms which appear as friends of friends really exercising the fiduciary responsibility he is paid for? Do we forget a quarter century ago these banksters patted themselves on the back that firing Steve Jobs was the right thing to do? Or when Gerry Carmen's GSA foisted IBM mainframes on everyone in the government just as the PC and interactive computing were dawning? The same nuts who consider it modern to make emailing a symptom to your doctor into a HIPAA violation. Or when they relied on the witchcraft of technical analysis instead of the hard work of market fundamental, stealing instead of inventing even that, and concentrating more on the imitation than substance, causing the markets to crash? Or banksters who shell game inconsistent products, shifting fees and agreements by surprise, because their autopilot brains were unable to comprehend what real service is? How can you trust people who submit to affectations instead of genuine reality? Given how such fads ran amok in the recent crisis, such individuals should be denied serious employment in the future. Social networking is a bully bubble that needs to be shut down before it bankrupts all of us. That’s why all the idiot hedge funds donated to Obama!
ReplyDelete