Job Search
We’re coming up to our break in between sessions in the final semester of my MBA program, so I’m starting to look around at where I can work once I’m done. I’m feeling less and less certain about which area I want to work in, but more frustrating is the six zillion different places to look for work.
In the past, I’ve always relied on job sites, such as Monster.com, Hotjobs.com, and T-Net, to find jobs. But in the time between my last job search and the present there’s a whole new crop of recruiting sites that have emerged: JobShark, Workopolis, CareerBuilder, Brass Ring, and numerous others. What used to be a simple way to identify interesting jobs and put your resume in the hands of potential employers has degraded to the point that the Internet recruiting sites are no more useful than the newspaper.
For example: for each one of these sites I need to input my resume; however, each one of these sites has a different way to input my resume. Some are simple, simply requiring me to upload my Word-formatted resume, while others require me to fill out a bunch of forms, and make selections from dropdowns. Can you say “time-consuming”? Not only that, each site offers diminishing returns for the expended effort – most of the sites feature the same jobs listings from either the same employer or the same recruiter.
What we really need is some kind of XML resume format that job-seekers can post on their web site or upload to job sites, and that search engines can easily index. This would allow employers to easily find potential employees. On the flip side, employers need some kind of XML job description format that job seekers can easily find through a similar search engine mechanism.
Of course, putting such a system in place would require tools to simplify the task for both parties. The system would also significantly reduce the need for these recruitment web sites; however, given their reduced ability to match jobs with job-seekers, is that really such a bad thing?
The question is: how would you get critical mass for such a system? Especially without the support of said recruiters. Both sides of the equation require maximum eyeball exposure from their tools, and any new network isn’t going to going to give that exposure initially (ye olde network effect).
One potential solution: find niche sectors (possibly academia) that have:
a) technically adept individuals (yes, I realize this conflicts with the academia suggestion)
b) a well defined job market with well defined requirements, and a finite number of openings and qualified applicants.
Another potentially interesting idea that could be layered on top of your idea: reference checking. I would be interested to know much time HR folks spend just checking the facts on a resume. Couple that with the fact that many company’s references consist of ‘person xyz was employed by this firm from this date to that date’, this is something that is potentially quite automatable. Add digital signatures, and you’ve got something that companies can trust. This is also potentially a revenue source: say you worked for a company that hasn’t bought into this digital reference checking BS, creating an annoying ‘analog’ hole in your resume. What if some (reliable) third party was to do that reference check, and then publish that information on your behalf. That service could either be paid for by the applicant (up front, or per access (pre-paid of course;)), or the hiring company (per access or annual service agreement). It might even be possible to do a combination of the too pricing models.
Anyways, that’s enough pre-caffeine blather.
I don’t think the information contained in resumes can be pigeonholed into a uniform category scheme. Attempting to create the “universal resume template” just reveals your own biases about what makes a good job candidate.
There’s one standard third-party recruitement package, I think it’s “webhire.com”, that a lot of employers use to collect information from prospective employees. While looking for junior engineering positions, I ran into this exact same web form about a dozen times. Each time I felt screwed, because the form had obviously been written with I.T. recruitment in mind.
A lot of the questions were designed to bring out the kinds of things that make a good I.T. candidate but which are less appropriate for engineers; correspondingly, there was a lot less emphasis on the qualifications that are important in engineering. I don’t know if the people reviewing the information were smart enough to compensate, but I was leaving a lot of boxes blank while being pinched on word-count in areas that were very important.
The cynic’s view is that a resume is just a piece of paper designed to get an interview. Automated resume processing and mechanical categorizing just make it more of a meaningless game.