For those of you who haven’t seen it in the news, there has been some serious flooding in Wisconsin. On my way into the office earlier this week I noticed that there was an extensive power outage from the same storms that created the flooding (I get in early). I had been thinking about SourceCon, it’s success last year and why it is really a must-attend show for sourcers and recruiters. How to explain that concept? I am speaking at SourceCon and I want my clients to see the educational value of attending the event.

Slamming on the brakes…. All the street lights out. Stop thinking. Don’t get into accident

Yes, all the street lights were out and I saw something wonderful, as well as disturbing. With the street lights being out, people had to cooperate. Ever watch an ant colony? What amazing cooperation. Drivers were taking turns, 4 way intersection, North side, South side, West Side, East Side. How did this cycle start? Order out of chaos? Neccessity? I don’t know, but I did have a child-like enthusiasm for watching the process. Before it was my time to go, I had a chance to see the “rules” of the crowd. North, South, West, East, North, South, West, East. When it was my turn, I had a small yet grand feeling of community. Just as it was my turn to go, some jerk in a SUV went out of turn, cut me off, and almost caused a multi-car pile up. He did not like the community process.

Stop a minute and think now. This stop light process, brought into order by crowd mentality and neccessity. It worked. People were taking turns and progress was occuring (except for the jerk). It became normal. Without thinking about it, I accepted the process. In this case, I had no choice.

Most recruiters and sourcers are in exactly this place in their day-day process. It works. it’s comfortable, others are doing a similar thing, it is accepted, you feel part of the norm.

Then it hit me. I just spent 25 minutes in near bumper-bumper traffic. This is WISCONSIN, I left California and the traffic jams 10 years ago. I hate traffic. I pass cows and farms on my commute and I like it that way.

Give me back my traffic lights. They add a 50X level of efficiency to traffic flow. (I would suggest going solar, however). I have no interest in doing what “everyone else” is doing

So what about SourceCon? SourceCon is to sourcing like a traffic light is to traffic flow. For those math geeks: ( SourceCon:Sourcing :: Traffic light:traffic flow )

SourceCon is an event to bring sourcing and recruiting to the next level. Companies are adding dedicated sourcers in record numbers. Don’t reinvent, find out the best practices from the thought leaders out there. Here are some talks that I am personally excited to see:

The Convergence of Sourcing, Recruiting, Technology, Man and the Machine: What the Future Holds - Dave Copps

The Utopian view of Executive Talent Sourcing -Jeremy Langhans

Metrics for Measuring Sourcing Effectiveness - Scott Biggerstaff

All the world’s a stage, and we are (not merely) sourcers - Matt Grove

Lastly, don’t miss my talk: The 7 Laws of Internet Research. I’m going to have fun with it.

I hope to see you all at SourceCon…except that jerk that cut me off…may all his lights be red.

Spring. The air was crisp and cool, sun was shining. I was on my morning commute. The radio station playing in my car was set the night before on my commute home.  Last night it was rock & R&B. Morning was the realm of, well, morning radio.  I have no specific memories of what the host was talking about, only that every sentence he ended with by saying “you know”.   At this point in time, I did not notice the proliferation of “you know”.  I did, however change the station for the same reason many people tune out these shows; Forced laughter, call in contests, traffic reports,  nothing I needed, so I changed the channel to National Public Radio (NPR).

NPR you say, this guy must be a liberal.  No.  My role is the Founder and Chief Executive Officer of a software company.  I’m an entrepreneur and a capitalist.  Closer to a libertarian than anything else. That is important to state;  NPR gets a bad wrap sometimes.  Anyone heard of Bill Gates? aka Founder of Microsoft, backer of NPR via the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.  Enough on that.

So  turn the channel to NPR, usually I’ll give it a minute.  Good topic, I listen, boring topic… I put in a CD.  It was a good topic, so I start listening.  Can’t remember what is was about.  The guest was brilliant. However, every time he finished a sentence he said, “you know” at the end.  This time I noticed it.  I felt trapped in my car, wanting to hear what this guest was saying, but feeling every statement he completed with “you know” was completely diminished.   I was compelled to call in.

A very nice woman welcomed me and asked what I would like to talk about.  I felt guilty and petty, but I was compelled by a strange rage.

“I’m feel really strange about calling in about this”, I said

“I am a long time listener”  (everyone says that).  ”and I feel I’ve got to say something.  This guest you have on is saying “you know” at the end of every sentence.   It sounds horrible.  Can someone slip him a note or something.”

Uncomfortable silence.

The woman must have been listening to the live program.  At first I could tell she thought I was a crackpot.  ( I felt I came off as sincere).  She could tell I felt uneasy.   “Hold on a minute” she said.

A few seconds later, she came back and said “you’re right, I’ll see if we can do something”

I continued to listen to the program.  The “you knows” continued until the half hour break.  Every one felt like a stab at me.  When the break was over, a transformation had happened.  The guest WAS very intelligent and probably nervous being on the radio.  Most likely I had nothing to do with it, he might have just calmed down.   The “you knows”  had stopped.   

Pleased with myself.  Yes, internally, I took full credit for the commentators transformation.

Into the office I go.  Broadlook Technologies, my baby.

Late in the morning the “you know” monster reared it’s head again.  Normally, I would not even have noticed.  One of my star sales reps was having a 4-5 minute conversation with a perspective client.   In the few minutes I listened in (we have an open floor sales environment),  I heard 5-6 “you knows”.   He was saying everything right, handling objections with skill, leading the prospect into a solution sell,  actively listening and responding.   However, he was killing his passion and confidence, as perceived by any listener, with interjecting “you know” into his conversation.

That is when I realized what “you know” is.   Lack of confidence.  Seeking approval.  Sometimes just a filler. In his case, I believe it was just a filler.  This guys rules the crowd at conference.  No lack of confidence and not the type to seek approval.  Somehow, it grew on him.  My guy, my friend, my star.  

Has  ”you know”  become the “um” of the 21st century?  

I am guilty too.  This is not a “you say it and I don’t” kind of thing.  I am a “you know” offender.  Now, it is few and far between and I usually catch myself, but it happens.   And damn it, it is everyone’s fault.  We are our brothers keeper when it comes to the evolution of language.   Do you remember saying “google it” 5 years ago?

Remember the old movie, “Network”?  I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore?”  

I am mad about this.  It really bothers me.  Why?   I am not an extremely polished linguist.  I’ve got an average vocabulary for someone in my position.   I’m not concerned that “ain’t” is now in the dictionary.  I may be a snob when it comes to my mac powerbook, but changing the English language, no, I’m not a puritan.  So why does it bother me?  

Know thyself.

One simple reason.  I live with passion.  Passion about my beliefs,  passion about what I create and sell.  When someone ends or begins their statements with “you know”, it is reducing everything they said before.  Try the test of injecting “you know” into a famous speech.

“Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.  You know.”

“I have not yet begun to fight. You know.”

If you are in sales,  try injecting “you know” into your sales presentation.

“Our recruiting software is used by over 3500 client in 22 countries, you know”     ouch!

So where does this leave me.  Frustrated?  Hell no.  Let me give everyone that wants to sell to me a tip.  I love being sold to.  I love buying stuff.  I love being brought through the sales process by a person of excellence that is giving me a solution based on my needs.  

I am putting the world on notice:  If you talk to me and say “you know?”, I will assume that you are asking me a question.  If you ask me a question, I am not going to stand idly by.  I am going to answer:

“No, I don’t know”

Will I be mean? No.  Will I do it until they get the hint? Yes.  Will they be insulted?  I do not know.  My basic tenet is that there is a spark of intelligence in all people.  There is no need for this in our language.  Let’s bring “um” back.   It was kinder and it did not pose a question. 

This plague can be eradicated.  Doing nothing spreads it.  

Join me in just saying, “No, I don’t know”.

I need your help,  for if I’m the only one saying it then people may be thinking I am saying:

“I, Do nat o”

ERE in San Diego was a great conference.  It’s taken a week for everything to sink in and then bubble up out of my subconscious.  My mission at these conference is to throw out some ideas, sit back and listen.  While there are always the obvious tracks of discussion, my ear is attuned to different topics.   While talking to people who use corporate recruiting software, the resounding theme that I was hearing is that recruiting and sourcing are further differentiating.

A few signs:

-More talk of sourcing getting it’s own budget.
-This seems simple, but it was noticeable: titles are starting to have the word “sourcing” in them.
-Increased discussions, sidebars, questions about “sourcing” vs. recruiting.
-Increased line length at the vendors booths that provide recruiting technology. This makes Broadlook happy!
-Sourcing has it’s own conference.

Last thought. Can someone talk to Microsoft? “Sourcing” is still seen in my Microsoft Word 2007 as a spelling error. When this gets fixed, sourcers are legit!

Here it is.

Here is the ROI:

Rob asked, “Who owns list validation?”.  Rob goes on to point out that sometimes great lists never get acted upon.  Sometimes a recruiter will point to a sourcer and ask if a list is validated, and to what level,  cross-referenced, email, phone validation, etc.

Here is the real problem:  Lists get stored and archived are simply structured wrong.   Add validation fields to each record.   It does not matter who owns validation, as long as the list is coded correctly and expectations of the list recipient are accurate.

I’ve had years of experience pioneering this research at Broadlook Technologies.   We look at validation from a statistical perspective.   For example, our flagship recruiting software, Profiler product SCORES all contact data.  

Scoring of data allows the human using the data to make decisions with respect to where to put their efforts.

What are the source dates of the web pages someone was pulled from?  Was the person cross-referenced on multiple sites? If a resume, what is the date?  Does the date on one resume board match the date on another?  Are you saving both dates?  What type of page was the information taken from?

What this makes me think about is that maybe Broadlook should break-out the logic inside the Profiler, enhance it, and create a product that simply scores list data.  Why?  All data is not equal.   After scoring data, a recruiter would have much more insight as to where they should put their efforts first. 

I would like to hear from people on this one??  Implications in the recruiting software business but definitely wider appeal in general B-B sales.

Example:  What is the likelihood of someone from New York, NY moving to Boston vs. Milwaukee?    That affects the score.  What is the ability of the recruiter getting the list to build rapport with a technical candidate?  That affects the score.  What is the track record of the Internal recruitment staff to actually recruit these candidates vs. an outside agency?  (Would be interesting to test this).  Agency recruiters tend to be better, that is why they make the big bucks.  It may be the first step building an ROI study that corporations should be doing the sourcing and getting the short list to a few select recruiters to work the magic.

Axiom:  Regardless of all other variables, all records in a list should have a score

Axiom:  Validation level within a list should persist and be updated throughout the life of the list

Axiom:  Lists should be scored differently based on the need.

Fun stuff.  Thanks for making me think Rob.  enjoyed the rant!

Without a perfect record of all hires, measured against years past, ROI is hard to prove in a single year.   Don’t get me wrong, some companies do this very well; however, they are the exception.  In most cases, metric must be applied to the pipeline of data and the quality therein.  (For recruiters, data=candidates, for sales reps, data=leads)

How do you measure a list?   How important is it to keep a particular list updated?  What is the frequency that a list should be updated?   When is a list too old?  What resources should you apply towards building a list?   When is it cheaper to outsource the creation of a list vs. build it yourself?   Do you want to create a one-time list OR do you need to have a documented, systemic process for keeping a list updated?

What I want to present here today is a concept I call  List Metrics.  Instead of boring you with numbers and formulas, I am going to share, at a 10,000 ft view of how I think about lists and data.

To determine the value of a list and the resources that should be applied to creating a list, I teach my clients to create a scoring system.  One score for an existing list, another score for the importance of creating a list.

Yes, a list can have a score.  A list score is determined by 2 factors:  Data Quality and Competitive Advantage.    Data quality is a combination of Accuracy + Timeliness.  Competitive Advantage is weighted by the degree of targeting and Exclusivity.

Some thoughts on the 4 measures of a list:

Accuracy:  Does your list give you dead people?

• Is the list static or does it exist within a data-driven website?  (1995-2002 static, 2003-2008 data driven)
• Is it someone’s passion?  (i.e., top 100 rutabaga growers (Typically high quality, timely, comprehensive))
• Was any verification process used?
• Is the list mandated via state or federal? (Registered Professionals, Banks & Credit Unions, Hospitals, SEC filings)

Timeliness: How often is the list updated?

• By the minute  (Federal contract opportunities) www.gsa.gov,  www.ebay.com
• Hourly (Job Boards, Social Networking Sites) www.monster.com, www.linkedIN.com
• Daily (Find an agent pages, Associations) www.prudential.com, www.mbag.org
• Weekly (Chambers of Commerce, Trade Shows)
  www.pheonixchamber.org, www.summitcustomerconference.com
• Quarterly (some CD databases, Hoovers, D&B)
• Yearly (Top 100 lists, InfoUSA, Printed lists)

Targeted: (the right 50 or the wrong 500)

• Is it categorized by a outdated concepts such as SIC codes or general industry classifications?
• Does it serve a niche market? (List of Microsoft CRM resellers)

Exclusive:  Who else has YOUR list?

• Was the list made for profit? Is it for sale?
  A custom created list is always far superior then renting a list from a source that will sell it to anyone who coughs up the $$
• Does your #1 competitor have access to the same data as you?
  Every single online database falls into this category, Zoominfo, Spoke, etc.  It does not matter how large a database is if everyone has access to the same tiny fish bowl. 
• How many times was your list sold?
• Are the same people from the same companies being called over and over?

Developing a scoring system:

Every niche in recruitment or lead generation will have varing degrees of importance.  In one business, fresh data may be more important, in another…lets say in a comodotized market, it may be exclusivity.  Determine which of the 4 factors are most important to you.  Next, using a 5 point scale, plot the “score” of your list by placing it on a Gartner magic quadrant.

For recruiters, the most valuable list would be one that (1) exclusive and (2) fresh data.  Typically, this type of list is created  on demand based on a current need. 

YOU CAN’T BUY A LIST LIKE THIS. 

You can commission one to be created from a great name sourcer like Maureen Sharib.  This type of custom list has high value.  I am surprised more recruiters don’t use name sourcers and research for hire.  

FISH BOWL DATABASES

As more “online” databases proliferate, more and more people will be fishing in the same fish bowl of overused candiates and sales prospects.  Why fish from a fish bowl when you can go directly to the ocean?  If everyone has access to the same fish bowl, it doesn’t matter how big it is.  We all know what happens when a fish bowl gets too populated…

THE GROWING TREND OF NAME SOURCING

The demand will continue to grow in the next few years for researchers and name sourcers.  Recruiting and sourcing are diverging into separate entities.   I am excited that Broadlook is announcing our Broadlook Remote Research program early next week.   We’ve had it running in stealth for about four months now.  Combine a fully trained researcher in concert with an entire suite of Broadlook tools.  Put them to work for either 16, 20 or 40 hours per week.   Instant staff augmentation.  We’ve had overwhelming success.  Fun stuff.

Thank you to all the clients that piloted the program with us and help us work out the kinks.

The second part of this concept, (ability to network)  has always has been dead on.  A poor salesperson or recruiter will not do well even if given a great list.  A great networker can do wonders starting with one point of contact.

However, the idea about everyone having access to ALL the data…   This is a pipe dream of the uninformed.   It may be a great material to pontificate on, but it is pure fiction.  The science and trends behind information and going the opposite direction.   I don’t know where this concept was started, but it’s taken off with all the indications of mob mentality (great conviction, but little facts to back it up).

Some facts:

• The Internet and information in general is growing faster than our ability to index it.
• Corporations are starting to silo their own data, vs. use public databases.  These are closed systems that are not being shared and the are diverging like mammals and marsupials.
• A UC Berkeley study from 2007 details that search engines like Google index less than 1% of the Internet.  (when I find this link, I’ll post it..too late right now)

Who are these people that have access to ALL the information?   Methinks it’s the great Oz.

1984 is not here yet.  Good networking starts with your own unique knowledge of where to start your research.   Dig in and roll up the sleaves.  Being given a great database does not make you a great recruiter,  being able to create a great database makes you a great recruiter.

For recruiting animal, I am doing this for you…here is a repost of the first Official Broadlook Blog article.  I plagiarized it from myself and I challenge you to a donut eating contest or oreo cookies or whatever you are calling me these days. Peace.  Donato

This is my first and hopefully only repost.   

The history behind the Broadlook logo

March 6th, 2008,  By Donato Diorio,   Reprinted without permission.

The Broadlook Technologies logo has meaning.  For the 5 of us that started in a single 400 sq ft office, it has a special place with us.   When it was time to create the image/logo/icon that would come to be our stamp to the outside world, we stopped everything for 2 full days. No sales, no development, no marketing.   It was white boards and debate; define our mark or die trying.

Here is how it came to be.

The original vision behind the company was building recruiting software products that were the right mix between automation and human interaction.  We wanted to create a company logo that somehow communicated that concept.   One of the ideas tossed around was 2 hands, one machine and one human…intertwined.  Neither myself (Donato) Igor, Kevin or Dan (working remote from Portland) were artists of any sort, however, Andy had experience with some photoshop so he was elected to sit at the computer while the rest of us tested his design skills.   The machine-human hand thing was too complicated; it did not scale down to logo size image.   A bunch of ideas were tossed around when I suggested doing something with carbon, denoting human and silicon for meaning the machine.  We then started working with the atomic numbers of carbon (6) and silicon (14).  We tried to create a large “B” using a series of dots for our logo.  14 Dots were the background, 6 formed the B.   I remember showing the first iteration to Dan, our first sales rep working remote out of Portland, OR.

“What in the hell is that?”, said Dan.   “It looks like one of those darn eye tests they give  blind people”  (Dan’s comments are famous around Broadlook and often repeated years later, we all knew he meant color-blind).

We couldn’t find any of the “B” logos in the company archives (trust me, it was horrid). 

Back to the drawing board we went.

Kevin had a brainstorm.  Why not use the ratio of carbon to silicon?  It was one of those ideas the didn’t need any discussion.   Rare for our meetings.   So we went back to the dots.  here are the iterations.

The blue and the charcole are the proportions of 6:14; carbon to silicon.  If I can find it, we even have a math equation that defines the graphic (I’ll find it and post it to this article later).

The most important thing that I learned when looking back at the experience is the team effort required.  My contribution was the spark, but without the operational know-how, the out-of the box thinking, the strong logic and the feedback from the outside, we wouldn’t have our logo.   To the outsider, it is a box with a slash through it.  To us, it was the genesis that grew into the company we are today.  The world leader in Internet research technology.

However, most often the question is more a question of what I “feel” would be a good market to start a new desk specialty in.  

“Donato, what do you feel a good new desk specialty would be?” 

I say. “I feel like a great market would be placing sales reps in recruiting software companies that do real time data mining of contact information.”  

They respond, “but Donato, Broadlook is the only company I know that does this kind of thing.”

“That’s right”, I say.  “..and I don’t pay fees”   <grin>

About this time they realize I am having fun at their expense and I chime in. “You asked me what I feel, not what I think.”

Most recruiters don’t think it through thoroughly when starting a new desk.   Lets face it, thinking is hard.  A day of designing software wipes me out more than a triathlon (ok I’ve only done one). It’s not their fault.  This is how they were taught.  Or I should say, this is how they learned.  They watch someone who was a big biller and tried to do what they heard.

When discussing the creation of a new desk, I hear a good deal about reading everything from an industry, articles, journals, etc.  Wake up, this type of activity is about learning about the industry, not if the niche will support a desk.  If I am going to trust my livelihood to one vertical or another,  forget the gut, give me data.

“Hey Donato, are you telling me to ignore my gut instinct?”  

NO

The role of the “gut instinct” in this whole process should precede the data gathering.  The gut should lead you to the top several candidates and then you then expose to the scientific method.  The gut gets excited while reading and learning.  Don’t let it get carried away.

The gut is the emotion, the wind.  Let the data be the rudder and the sail.

To start a new desk, I would prefer solid facts about a potential specialty, such as:

How many open jobs, by state and nationally?   (size of universe)
How many recruiters specialize in the niche?     (competition)
What are the average fees paid to recruiters?    (compensation)
What resources can I use to build a candidate pool?  (sourcing)
What resources can I use to win business?  (marketing)
Will I enjoy working this desk specialty? (mental health)
Can I own the space, can I brand this space as mine?  (branding)

Once you do decide on a new desk specialty, based on the data, the first thing to do is think about branding yourself.  I’ll focus on the other questions in my next few blogs.  A great example of branding is Harry Joiner and his site MarketingHeadhunter.com

How easy is it to brand yourself?   Two areas that I know are hot are Physical Therapists and Nanotechnology.  Very different, but both very hot.  So I went out to GoDaddy.com and checked the following web sites:

PHYSICALTHERAPISTRECRUITER.COM   (FREE)
NANOTECHNOLOGYRECRUITER.COM      (FREE)
BIOFUELRECRUITER.COM                            (FREE)
FUELCELLRECRUITER.COM                          (TAKEN)
GREENENERGYRECRUITER.COM                 (FREE)

Most of them were free and only one was taken. Again, all hot, hot, hot.

Heads up.  Don’t try to go register, PHYSICALTHERAPISTRECRUITER.COM or NANOTECHNOLOGYRECRUITER.COM because I just registered them.  The others are free as of this writing.  I may not fetch the 99K that Jason Davis is asking for CEOjobs.com, but they will sell for a hefty profit.

The first Physical Therapist Recruiter to purchase the Broadlook Suite, you can have that site for free.  (I have no passion for that desk).  New clients only.

Don’t ask for nanotechnologyrecruiter.com.  Nanotech excites me.  It’s mine.