Can you leave MS before the 30th? we are fed up with you.
Robert Scoble
· 3 years ago
Joey: if you're so fed up, why don't you sign your real name? You're just a coward.
Bob Jones
· 3 years ago
Wow, what a retarded policy. Not surprising it comes from you though, a self-important blogging circle jerk master.
Robert Scoble
· 3 years ago
Bob, you put your email address as a Microsoft one, but there isn't anyone working here by your name. Why do you see a need to lie?
But, to get to the point, you do realize that if you call someone "self-important" it elevates you to an even more self important position. You did realize that, right? I'm glad you're taking authority over that role.
And, I'm glad that you are saying that you'd be happy to hire people who have no authority in the online world. I wonder what kind of people you hire?
Jason Warren
· 3 years ago
Professional accomplishment needn't be accompanied by an "on-grid" persona, and someone's "on-grid" persona therefore isn't a reliable indicator of professional acumen.
There are those that do, and there are those that talk. In my experience, "doing" means spending less time "talking". I'll be interested to see how your opinion on action vs conversation evolves in your new role.
Robert Scoble
· 3 years ago
Jason: in my experience, those who do get talked about. Name someone doing something important in the tech industry that isn't discussed in Google.
You must have missed that I shipped 700 videos in two years and performed dozens of talks, and shipped a book, and became one of Microsoft's most visible faces. You don't do that just by talking. Or by attacking other people.
Not disclosed
· 3 years ago
Robert, you were filming other engineers' accomplishments, not your own. Being a mouthpiece does not make you suddenly omniscient.
Dave2
· 3 years ago
And so I am reading about you in the news and decide to drop by to see what all the fuss is about.
Needless to say, I am a bit confused at what I find here.
Someone likes you enough that they are trying to get a resume so they can hire you. All this in a job market where people are lucky to have a good job at all. And rather than being grateful that somebody wants to work with you, you've instead written an entry (WITH update)... PLUS a second entry... with the sole purpose of embarrassing the guy.
Just because you don't mention him by name doesn't mean it hurts any less when he reads what you've said about him.
I wish you the best of luck at your new endeavor. Because if this is how you treat people who are out to hire you... it's going to take a very brave person to chance getting this kind of treatment. Who would want to risk public embarrassment for both themselves and their company if they dare offer you work in a way that displeases you?
Robert Scoble
· 3 years ago
Dave: if you work in a public role you must be willing to take the heat. And being a recruiter is among the most public of roles. It's the front lines of a company. They communicate what the company is about in often subtle ways.
And, someone who is trying to recruit people BETTER look them up in their own freaking search engine!
It's not like this guy worked for an automobile company. He works for a SEARCH ENGINE COMPANY!!! That is looking to hire Web experts no less!!!
Damn, remind me not to buy stock in any of your companies. I guess that is why you are all so cowardly you aren't even willing to sign your names to your posts.
Robert Scoble
· 3 years ago
Not disclosed: that is true, but you have no clue how much work it is to get an interview out. I'd love to see you try doing my job. Hey, that job is now open!
Stephen
· 3 years ago
It is funny to think of context. You gave a great example of someone needing to take the time to properly prepare. Sometimes a role does not necessarily predicate the time or the ability. This is not an excuse. The person was representing an organization and that customer touchpoint can have an effect.
I appreciate what you have done in terms of turning one way media into a conversation - and you talk the talk here on staying in the conversation. In my background I once heard someone say "Selling isn't telling". I often use this to talk about the value of blogging as the start of a conversation with people interested in talking. We don't have to agree, but we need some respect for the other people's points of view.
Keep the conversation alive and see where it takes us!
Dmad
· 3 years ago
@6. I submit Jeff Papows as exhibit A of where you are wrong.
I'm sure the tech industy is full of many smart people working in their offices late at night writing code and thinking of new ways to do things without ever hearing of them on Google. What world do you live in?
I want to hire people that can PROVE than can do, not just talk about what they can do. 700 videos? Woo hoo. Any college or high school intern could do the work you did on channel 9. How do we know those interviews were scripted and all you did was show up and read a list of questions? Those videos don't show a potential employer anything.
How does given a talk at a conference your employer didn't even send you to sell more of your company's product? Walking through Barnes and Noble it's apparent just about anyone can write a book. Doesn't mean they can be a productive employee. And if I'm not mistaken you didn't write that book all on your own. How much did you contribute vs Shel? Were you just along for the ride? Hard to say.
Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling were two of the most visible faces of Enron. Al-Zarqwari was one of the most visible faces of Al-Queda. What's your point?
Peter McCaffrey
· 3 years ago
Two things,
First I agree with you about the CV issue, for technology related jobs at least. While a CV might be required for an offline job, for a technology based company to not be using the internet is remarkable. Perhaps we need an online CV website :D
Second, i expect you wouldn't like to remove posts, wanting to be open and thats great, but in some cases (see above) I don't think anyone would mind.
Peter
Not disclosed
· 3 years ago
Robert, actually I do. I'm a mouthpiece at an organisation larger than the one you left (the reasoning behind my nondisclosure). There's a large difference between reporting on and actually creating/inventing technology in terms of complexity/skill. Hopefully you'll appreciate that in your new role.
Despite that, I commend your being able to receive open criticism. Always room for self improvement. ;-)
Jason Warren
· 3 years ago
Robert: Those who get press are likely to have done something to deserve the attention, but a tiny number of those doing interesting things get press. More importantly, a fair number of accomplished folks driving interesting changes in technology don't have the time to invest the effort required to build a visible, personal brand in the blogosphere.
An example of someone doing big things in technology who's name isn't spread around the blogosphere? Bob Widlansky. Bob is driving huge changes in the way Motorola builds software, and part of this is centered on raising the bar on Moto's phone UI. Google's got just about zero information on Bob or the important work he's driving.
My comments weren't directed at your work history, volume of journalistic output, or visibility on the web. My comments were in reaction to your statement that, "If I can't find anything about you in Gada.be I'll pass on hiring you. It's just too risky."
My larger point has been restated (somewhat inelegantly) by others in this thread; to reiterate, professional accomplishment needn’t be accompanied by an “on-grid” persona, and someone’s “on-grid” persona therefore isn’t a reliable indicator of professional acumen. Building products and winning business doesn't usually leave those doing the heavy lifting much time for blogging or building a personal brand on the web.
If you're hiring for an evangelist or PR position, then maybe using the "personal Alexa ranking" as a filter makes sense. To put this filter in place for a dev/test/pm or product management/marketing/sales role, however, is just plain silly.
There are well-known bloggers who have also been personally responsible for driving big changes in technology. But there are many more folks driving big changes that don't have a visible personal brand on the web. Let's not devalue those doing the heavy lifting in the shadows.
That principle kind of breaks when you have a VERY common name! In that case you'll need to be doing a bit more intelligent research / searching of the net.
I've always found recruitment consultants to be useless! Used them once and ended up in a job that I really wasn't suitable for and more importantly left within 10 months. Nearly all the recuiters I've used as both hirer and hiree (if that's a real word), have been more interested in filling job vacancies than finding the right candidate! Perhaps being commissioned based has something to do with that.
For all the "self importance" whingers, you have an option .... UNSUBSCRIBE! Why waste your time reading Scoble if you don't believe him or think he is just a self important, opinionated (insert prefered expletive) *!*$*F(! ?
p.s. Gary wont leave Dundee, Scotland so your company will need to relocate to the land of haggis and whisky ;-).
John Thomson
· 3 years ago
That principle kind of breaks when you have a VERY common name! In that case you'll need to be doing a bit more intelligent research / searching of the net.
I've always found recruitment consultants to be useless! Used them once and ended up in a job that I really wasn't suitable for and more importantly left within 10 months. Nearly all the recuiters I've used as both hirer and hiree (if that's a real word), have been more interested in filling job vacancies than finding the right candidate! Perhaps being commissioned based has something to do with that.
For all the "self importance" whingers, you have an option .... UNSUBSCRIBE! Why waste your time reading Scoble if you don't believe him or think he is just a self important, opinionated (insert prefered expletive) *!*$*F(! ?
p.s. Gary wont leave Dundee, Scotland so your company will need to relocate to the land of haggis and whisky ;-).
p.p.s. I had a hell of a time getting this commented posted. Connection timeout, 404's, etc.
Stuart
· 3 years ago
Leaving aside the 'on-grid' v 'off-grid' debate one has to say that your closing comment in this blog is a very shortsighted view.
It presumes that one knows about gada.be - I didn't until I saw the hullabaloo you've kicked up (or had kicked up by others) with the "did he resign, was he pushed" comments.
Secondly your ad hominem attacks don't serve you well for the future. As a potential employer I would try to utilise every means at my disposal to check out a potential new employee BUT I certainly would not dismiss them out of hand just because they don't exist in one of these precious data mining tools. But seeing comments in public like yours (however justified they may or may not be) would make me think twice.
I, for example, do exist and have done so online for a very long time (in net terms) yet their is still precious little about me on the web - and that has been a deliberate approach on the whole (for reasons you don't ever need to know even if you were looking to employ me). For example, using gada.be there are no pictures, no blogs and very little other info which is just fine by me.
I wish you all the best in whatever you try to acheive.
Gavin Fischer
· 3 years ago
I have a different problem with these sites TODAY. They will, likely, improve with time. For right now, and I am in biotech mind you, the "nothing on line" criteria would rule out a whole lot of people who are bright. These engines aren't yet good enough. In the computer field - maybe (not enough data on my part). Outside of that field - Not happening. I don't really come up on Gada.be at all. If you know me, you can tell who I am (I don't design F1 cars, but am jealous of that other guy with my name) from the Google listings.
I totally agree with NEVER put anything on line that you don't want to have come back and haunt you years down the road, but don't agree with the "if I can't find anything then you are by definition boring" statement. In my field it just isn't true.
Gavin Fischer
razib
· 3 years ago
I do not know why I can see a lot of bitter feeling against Robert here. Whatever Robert has accomplished, he has done it with hard work and dediction. Now, it is his day and let him enjoy it. Tomorrow your or my day may come too. Anyaway, thanks for the link Robert. I found myself visible in that search (http://gada.be/d/razib-ahmed) and the result was far better than I expected. Does it mean anything?
Daniel
· 3 years ago
If you do a Google search on groups, you'll find a thread in which Marc Andreesen discusses his favourite comedy porno movies...
I think you've swallowed your own propaganda here. Most technical professionals doing important things well who never talk about it. That sort of self-promotion is just alien to them.
The idea that somebody's online persona in some way matches their competence at a job is laughable. I think a good counterexample would be Russell Beattie getting a job at Wavemarket based on his online presence.
Bill
· 3 years ago
It should be noted that the Google you did on Bob Widlansky returned a lot of trash, nothing seemingly relevant. Taking the OP's data point that he's doing good things at Moto, this search returns zero result.
The thing I can't understand is why you say it's risky to hire somehione who does not have an online persona. I can think of a lot of things it might be from your POV, but risky is not on the list.
Michael Henry
· 3 years ago
Robert,
What about those of us with ultra-common names?
Look for me on google. Even looking in my field of choice, there are several other Michael Henry's. What do you do when you get too many hits, and you don't know which is the person you are looking for?
hugh macleod
· 3 years ago
"Numptie factor" is high today, Robert ;-)
Christopher Coulter
· 3 years ago
Arrogant, yes, but then Human Resources types and Recruiters are but the Devil Incarnate. Do thy homework, recruiters. It's all shotgun approached, and never had one that made me feel even remotely human. Most are just people movers, Person A to Company B in the shortest amount of time, collect the take. Next. Play up 20 people with false hopes, and never get back with the other 19. The solution? Just cut to the hiring Mgr. if at all possible, don't pound on the front HR door, take the side entrances.
But I woulda at least explored the Yahoo bit, never burn a bridge, never know what in store.
PS - Gada.be is not the only network out there, sometimes those in the background wield more power than those in the front. Work in DC or LA and you will understand. Say you are in the hiring market for an Engineer, worked 20 years at Sandia National Lab and tons of patents to name, but blank in Gada.be, guess you can trash his resume then. Sometimes those that do the most leave the least bloggy footprints. Case by case.
Jack Box
· 3 years ago
I searched the name "Don Box" using this tool, didn't return a lot useful links.
If it doesn't work with names of famous people, will it work with names of not-so-importnant people?
Byron Prather
· 3 years ago
On the one hand I agree with you. You should use all of the tools that you can to research someone and that includes search engines. I know plenty of people at Microsoft that do not have a significant presence on the web that are doing awesome things. I used to report to the guy that created the Windows flag, the IE logo, and many other things. He's doing amazing things at Microsoft and if you search on his name you don't come up with a whole ton of stuff. You do find some things but not nearly as many hits as you have.
Heather
· 3 years ago
I've got to disagree with you too. Web presence will definitely get you noticed, but it's not the end-all, be-all. Frankly, half the time (maybe more?), it's baggage. You want to be kept from your next position because someone who doesn't like you has something to say about you on their blog? It could be already happening and you don't even know about it.
A web presence is a tool that professionals should use to get noticed (by recruiters, potential clients., etc). Because you cannot prove the authority of all that lives online, it is certainly not a tool to judge someone's worth. And I know some incredible people that don't have a significant online presence. Not everyone needs to be the "public face". Not every "public face" is the person making the decisions. Many performers don't have attention-seeking personalities (I'm not talking about myself, of course). Look, I think it's wise from a career perspective to build your presence online (and try to make as much of it positive as possible), but I find the argument that someone without one isn't hirable to be weak.
As a recruiter (and I have been for 12 years), what I care about is whether you can get the job done and contribute long term (based on core skills). I may use your online presence to find you, and it *may* say positive things about you. But at the end of the day, it's about who can do the job. It's not a disqualifier if the web isn't all abuzz about you.
Just my opinion, of course. Not all great people have a web presence, not all people with a web presence are great.
vinnie mirchandani
· 3 years ago
Heather, great point - but for certain roles more appropriate than others. May be for engineers or accountants you would not expect much web presence, but for marketing, bd etc etc, why not?
Look at what HR relies on today. Resumes - often inflated. Reference calls which lawyers do not allow you to say more than yes or no in. Interviews - which not everyone is good at - they are nervous, smooth whatever, but typically a poor indicator of job success. The web, flawed as it might be, tells another story about the candidate ...
It goes beyond HR. I run a small business. Clients always want references - as they should. Reference calls take time to arrange. I have closed several pieces of business by telling a prospect - would you mind checking our credentials on the web while we arrange reference calls ( I am lucky because of my Gartner career I got a bit of press exposure). I do not know what they will find - positive or negative, but I think most clients appreciate that transparency - and many after a Google search don't bother to go through with the reference call.
Tim Dawson
· 3 years ago
You'll pass on hiring people?
Since when do you know anything about hiring people? You're not a developer, you're not a manager, you're not in HR.
You're an evagelist who talks about exciting geeks things.
Jawahar Mundlapati
· 3 years ago
Robert:
Curious to know. Is your employment at microsoft a win-win proposition?
Wesley Parish
· 3 years ago
Well, for what little it's worth, do you mind me not applying, Robert?
My problem isn't the "common name" syndrome already discussed above, it's the "uncommon name" syndrome. The last time I ego-surfed was 2000, and I was promptly floored by discovering "The Wesley Parish", an online Methodist magazine. For some strange reason, I find that extremely funny - it seems I've got a built-in pseudonym. But you don't find that with "Robert Scoble".
Seriously, what use would it be to scout for everybody on the Net, unless you already knew they had built up a presence, a discernable identity on it? If you look for me on the Net, I'm sure you'll find some very interesting things - like a prediction that Linux would subsume the Unix world; also some short short snippets of SF - circa 500 words or so. Go on, do it if you want to - you're hereby granted permission to publish any such short short story of mine that takes your fancy, on your blog, and discuss it - provided the usual courtesies of attribution, etc, are followed.
But it still doesn't mean a lot when it comes to recruitment.
Heather
· 3 years ago
Vinnie-the answer is what I said before. Not every good marketing person has a significant online presence. Not every marketing role requires acting as an "evangelist", not every person in their role desires to be externally facing or "in the spotlight". I just don't think a web presence is a reasonable or telling measure of someone's worth as a potential employee. Some of the less impressive people I know have their name all over the internet. Some of the best I know couldn't care to be bothered by it while they are at work and excelling at their jobs.
You know who think a web presence is important? People who have them. Of course they do. It makes them the perfect candidate for the job.
vinnie mirchandani
· 3 years ago
Heather, you ask "you know who think a web presence is important?". Forget just HR, think broadly. The answer comes from Murdoch's investment in MySpace.com, Microsoft planning to spend billions building a SaaS grid, the Net Neutrality debate in Congress right now...the question to ask is who does not believe a web presence is important?
About your point about those people who already have web presence..The barriers to entry to being on the web are down dramatically from 3 years ago. You can get a personal blog for a few dollars a year. You can take part in mashup camps for little and produce tested, workable s/w code. The question increasingly for recruits should be how come you did not do much on/with the web?
Old HR screening techniquues are tired - resumes are embellished or gamed to pass through scanning software, reference calls are down to yes/no answers - why would you not want to find other sources of info - good and bad - about your candidates?
Heather
· 3 years ago
When you say "recruits", Vinnie, who are you talking about? I don't think I'm going to be finding marketing directors on myspace, do you? I'm not questioning the value or popularity of the medium, but it's primarily social. Just because it exists doesn't mean it should be used to disqualify people from potential employment. That's my point here.
The question was HR-related, I'm in recruiting; that's the perspective I bring (you all can argue technology....not my expertise). I'm not telling people not to use the technology. Hey, I think people should use it to their advantage; specifically, use it to be found by recruiters. At the same time, I am not going to feverishly search the name of each candidate to determine whether they are worthy of consideration based on search engine hits. There's not a 1:1 connection between skills and web-presence.
I've benefitted greatly from my web presence...I get the headhunter calls too, speaking engagements, probably more credibility assigned to me than I deserve. At the same time, I work with people that are as good as me, if not better and they don't have the same web presence. I just can't buy into the idea of using it to judge a candidate's skills/worth/potential.
Shane Church
· 3 years ago
While I agree that online presence is important, Gada.be clearly is not the best tool for finding this out unless you are someone who would be mentioned in the media regularly. A search for my name revealed a whole 2 links that pointed to me. If you search for my name in any of the major search engines, my site is always the first handful of links, and you would get a much better picture. While this is just anecdotal, if your online presence test is that important, you need to search multiple sites, not just one pseudo-aggregator.
freddy
· 3 years ago
Yeah, scobie has a point here. Who really cares about liability lawsuits that could arise from doing unauthorized background checks when you're hiring someone? Obviously someone that takes himself seriously enough (cough cough) to call himself "scobleizer" is someone that warrants disregard for regular hiring procedures. He should just write his name on one of the napkins from his triple chili cheeseburgers (the scobie business card) and hiring managers should bow at his feet and outrageous offer letters should pour from the heavens. I can totally see the usefulness of having pics from this gada.be site - why bother with qualifications when I can just decide that I wouldn't hire the dopey-looking guy at the top of this page.
What an amazingly arrogant attitude displayed here and it's definitely not Yahoo's loss. Sheesh, just the lease on the zeppelin hangar to house his ego would exhaust their revenues. I'm glad I'll never meet scobie and that he'll probably never be working at my company - even when his dotcom goes bust.
freddy
· 3 years ago
btw, totally digging this resume bullet point:
"and became one of Microsoft’s most visible faces."
Failed, scobie. If this was true, I should know who you are. No wonder you don't want to give people resumes.
Maurice
· 3 years ago
Hmm
And if I have a "dificult name" you wont hire me wouldnt go down well in some areas of the world.
NI for example as a product of a mixed maraige my name is Catholic but i'me "tecnicaly" a prod.
Maybe I should start a second online personal called "BILLY" ;-)
Microsoft people don't have a grasp of basic HR do they
freddy
· 3 years ago
Alas, I find another gaping flaw in your mindset here. Recruiters are *not* public figures. They deal with select members of the public (who themselves may be public figures, as you purport to be), but are no more public figures than your cashier at Target. There's nothing wrong with a recruiter doing their job properly. You're going to have a fun time eating your words when your little dotcom goes bust and you can't find a recruiter that would touch you with a ten foot pole having seen this little hissy fit (you're not going to start throwing chairs, are you?). And this is deservedly so because of your own argument that what people find out online should be how potentials are judged. A recruiter shouldn't find this little egocentric post by searching for it, but no doubt your name is making the recruiter blacklist right now. If I was a recruiter, I would have already purged all your information from the resume database.
And don't worry, I never have and never will buy stock in any of the companies where you work either. I can see by their low standards of employment that these companies obviously aren't interested in quality. This is exactly why every nutjob (yes you, scobie) shouldn't have a blog. Too many people that can't handle it.
And still laughing at the way you attack the people that "don't sign" their comments. You're the one making the big deal about an online persona. They are not. Then when the only thing you can refute about their counterpoints to your rant is to attack the anonymity of the post instead of the points made in the post... well, you're not really helping your cause there, scobie. You're helping theirs since the loudmouth is the one losing the battle. You're not trying to go a "mentally unstable" vibe here, are you? Cause that's what's coming across loud and clear.
All Comments
But, to get to the point, you do realize that if you call someone "self-important" it elevates you to an even more self important position. You did realize that, right? I'm glad you're taking authority over that role.
And, I'm glad that you are saying that you'd be happy to hire people who have no authority in the online world. I wonder what kind of people you hire?
There are those that do, and there are those that talk. In my experience, "doing" means spending less time "talking". I'll be interested to see how your opinion on action vs conversation evolves in your new role.
You must have missed that I shipped 700 videos in two years and performed dozens of talks, and shipped a book, and became one of Microsoft's most visible faces. You don't do that just by talking. Or by attacking other people.
Needless to say, I am a bit confused at what I find here.
Someone likes you enough that they are trying to get a resume so they can hire you. All this in a job market where people are lucky to have a good job at all. And rather than being grateful that somebody wants to work with you, you've instead written an entry (WITH update)... PLUS a second entry... with the sole purpose of embarrassing the guy.
Just because you don't mention him by name doesn't mean it hurts any less when he reads what you've said about him.
I wish you the best of luck at your new endeavor. Because if this is how you treat people who are out to hire you... it's going to take a very brave person to chance getting this kind of treatment. Who would want to risk public embarrassment for both themselves and their company if they dare offer you work in a way that displeases you?
And, someone who is trying to recruit people BETTER look them up in their own freaking search engine!
It's not like this guy worked for an automobile company. He works for a SEARCH ENGINE COMPANY!!! That is looking to hire Web experts no less!!!
Damn, remind me not to buy stock in any of your companies. I guess that is why you are all so cowardly you aren't even willing to sign your names to your posts.
I appreciate what you have done in terms of turning one way media into a conversation - and you talk the talk here on staying in the conversation. In my background I once heard someone say "Selling isn't telling". I often use this to talk about the value of blogging as the start of a conversation with people interested in talking. We don't have to agree, but we need some respect for the other people's points of view.
Keep the conversation alive and see where it takes us!
I'm sure the tech industy is full of many smart people working in their offices late at night writing code and thinking of new ways to do things without ever hearing of them on Google. What world do you live in?
I want to hire people that can PROVE than can do, not just talk about what they can do. 700 videos? Woo hoo. Any college or high school intern could do the work you did on channel 9. How do we know those interviews were scripted and all you did was show up and read a list of questions? Those videos don't show a potential employer anything.
How does given a talk at a conference your employer didn't even send you to sell more of your company's product? Walking through Barnes and Noble it's apparent just about anyone can write a book. Doesn't mean they can be a productive employee. And if I'm not mistaken you didn't write that book all on your own. How much did you contribute vs Shel? Were you just along for the ride? Hard to say.
Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling were two of the most visible faces of Enron. Al-Zarqwari was one of the most visible faces of Al-Queda. What's your point?
First I agree with you about the CV issue, for technology related jobs at least.
While a CV might be required for an offline job, for a technology based company to not be using the internet is remarkable.
Perhaps we need an online CV website :D
Second, i expect you wouldn't like to remove posts, wanting to be open and thats great, but in some cases (see above) I don't think anyone would mind.
Peter
Despite that, I commend your being able to receive open criticism. Always room for self improvement. ;-)
An example of someone doing big things in technology who's name isn't spread around the blogosphere? Bob Widlansky. Bob is driving huge changes in the way Motorola builds software, and part of this is centered on raising the bar on Moto's phone UI. Google's got just about zero information on Bob or the important work he's driving.
My comments weren't directed at your work history, volume of journalistic output, or visibility on the web. My comments were in reaction to your statement that, "If I can't find anything about you in Gada.be I'll pass on hiring you. It's just too risky."
My larger point has been restated (somewhat inelegantly) by others in this thread; to reiterate, professional accomplishment needn’t be accompanied by an “on-grid” persona, and someone’s “on-grid” persona therefore isn’t a reliable indicator of professional acumen. Building products and winning business doesn't usually leave those doing the heavy lifting much time for blogging or building a personal brand on the web.
If you're hiring for an evangelist or PR position, then maybe using the "personal Alexa ranking" as a filter makes sense. To put this filter in place for a dev/test/pm or product management/marketing/sales role, however, is just plain silly.
There are well-known bloggers who have also been personally responsible for driving big changes in technology. But there are many more folks driving big changes that don't have a visible personal brand on the web. Let's not devalue those doing the heavy lifting in the shadows.
Cheers,
Gary
http://www.garyshort.org/
I've always found recruitment consultants to be useless! Used them once and ended up in a job that I really wasn't suitable for and more importantly left within 10 months. Nearly all the recuiters I've used as both hirer and hiree (if that's a real word), have been more interested in filling job vacancies than finding the right candidate! Perhaps being commissioned based has something to do with that.
For all the "self importance" whingers, you have an option .... UNSUBSCRIBE! Why waste your time reading Scoble if you don't believe him or think he is just a self important, opinionated (insert prefered expletive) *!*$*F(! ?
p.s. Gary wont leave Dundee, Scotland so your company will need to relocate to the land of haggis and whisky ;-).
I've always found recruitment consultants to be useless! Used them once and ended up in a job that I really wasn't suitable for and more importantly left within 10 months. Nearly all the recuiters I've used as both hirer and hiree (if that's a real word), have been more interested in filling job vacancies than finding the right candidate! Perhaps being commissioned based has something to do with that.
For all the "self importance" whingers, you have an option .... UNSUBSCRIBE! Why waste your time reading Scoble if you don't believe him or think he is just a self important, opinionated (insert prefered expletive) *!*$*F(! ?
p.s. Gary wont leave Dundee, Scotland so your company will need to relocate to the land of haggis and whisky ;-).
p.p.s. I had a hell of a time getting this commented posted. Connection timeout, 404's, etc.
It presumes that one knows about gada.be - I didn't until I saw the hullabaloo you've kicked up (or had kicked up by others) with the "did he resign, was he pushed" comments.
Secondly your ad hominem attacks don't serve you well for the future. As a potential employer I would try to utilise every means at my disposal to check out a potential new employee BUT I certainly would not dismiss them out of hand just because they don't exist in one of these precious data mining tools. But seeing comments in public like yours (however justified they may or may not be) would make me think twice.
I, for example, do exist and have done so online for a very long time (in net terms) yet their is still precious little about me on the web - and that has been a deliberate approach on the whole (for reasons you don't ever need to know even if you were looking to employ me). For example, using gada.be there are no pictures, no blogs and very little other info which is just fine by me.
I wish you all the best in whatever you try to acheive.
I totally agree with NEVER put anything on line that you don't want to have come back and haunt you years down the road, but don't agree with the "if I can't find anything then you are by definition boring" statement. In my field it just isn't true.
Gavin Fischer
Anyaway, thanks for the link Robert. I found myself visible in that search (http://gada.be/d/razib-ahmed) and the result was far better than I expected. Does it mean anything?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sex/browse_t...
So, Robert, do we hire, or do we not hire ;-) ?
The idea that somebody's online persona in some way matches their competence at a job is laughable. I think a good counterexample would be Russell Beattie getting a job at Wavemarket based on his online presence.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&...
The thing I can't understand is why you say it's risky to hire somehione who does not have an online persona. I can think of a lot of things it might be from your POV, but risky is not on the list.
What about those of us with ultra-common names?
Look for me on google. Even looking in my field of choice, there are several other Michael Henry's. What do you do when you get too many hits, and you don't know which is the person you are looking for?
But I woulda at least explored the Yahoo bit, never burn a bridge, never know what in store.
PS - Gada.be is not the only network out there, sometimes those in the background wield more power than those in the front. Work in DC or LA and you will understand. Say you are in the hiring market for an Engineer, worked 20 years at Sandia National Lab and tons of patents to name, but blank in Gada.be, guess you can trash his resume then. Sometimes those that do the most leave the least bloggy footprints. Case by case.
If it doesn't work with names of famous people, will it work with names of not-so-importnant people?
A web presence is a tool that professionals should use to get noticed (by recruiters, potential clients., etc). Because you cannot prove the authority of all that lives online, it is certainly not a tool to judge someone's worth. And I know some incredible people that don't have a significant online presence. Not everyone needs to be the "public face". Not every "public face" is the person making the decisions. Many performers don't have attention-seeking personalities (I'm not talking about myself, of course). Look, I think it's wise from a career perspective to build your presence online (and try to make as much of it positive as possible), but I find the argument that someone without one isn't hirable to be weak.
As a recruiter (and I have been for 12 years), what I care about is whether you can get the job done and contribute long term (based on core skills). I may use your online presence to find you, and it *may* say positive things about you. But at the end of the day, it's about who can do the job. It's not a disqualifier if the web isn't all abuzz about you.
Just my opinion, of course. Not all great people have a web presence, not all people with a web presence are great.
Look at what HR relies on today. Resumes - often inflated. Reference calls which lawyers do not allow you to say more than yes or no in. Interviews - which not everyone is good at - they are nervous, smooth whatever, but typically a poor indicator of job success. The web, flawed as it might be, tells another story about the candidate ...
It goes beyond HR. I run a small business. Clients always want references - as they should. Reference calls take time to arrange. I have closed several pieces of business by telling a prospect - would you mind checking our credentials on the web while we arrange reference calls ( I am lucky because of my Gartner career I got a bit of press exposure). I do not know what they will find - positive or negative, but I think most clients appreciate that transparency - and many after a Google search don't bother to go through with the reference call.
Since when do you know anything about hiring people? You're not a developer, you're not a manager, you're not in HR.
You're an evagelist who talks about exciting geeks things.
Curious to know.
Is your employment at microsoft a win-win proposition?
My problem isn't the "common name" syndrome already discussed above, it's the "uncommon name" syndrome. The last time I ego-surfed was 2000, and I was promptly floored by discovering "The Wesley Parish", an online Methodist magazine. For some strange reason, I find that extremely funny - it seems I've got a built-in pseudonym. But you don't find that with "Robert Scoble".
Seriously, what use would it be to scout for everybody on the Net, unless you already knew they had built up a presence, a discernable identity on it? If you look for me on the Net, I'm sure you'll find some very interesting things - like a prediction that Linux would subsume the Unix world; also some short short snippets of SF - circa 500 words or so. Go on, do it if you want to - you're hereby granted permission to publish any such short short story of mine that takes your fancy, on your blog, and discuss it - provided the usual courtesies of attribution, etc, are followed.
But it still doesn't mean a lot when it comes to recruitment.
You know who think a web presence is important? People who have them. Of course they do. It makes them the perfect candidate for the job.
About your point about those people who already have web presence..The barriers to entry to being on the web are down dramatically from 3 years ago. You can get a personal blog for a few dollars a year. You can take part in mashup camps for little and produce tested, workable s/w code. The question increasingly for recruits should be how come you did not do much on/with the web?
Old HR screening techniquues are tired - resumes are embellished or gamed to pass through scanning software, reference calls are down to yes/no answers - why would you not want to find other sources of info - good and bad - about your candidates?
The question was HR-related, I'm in recruiting; that's the perspective I bring (you all can argue technology....not my expertise). I'm not telling people not to use the technology. Hey, I think people should use it to their advantage; specifically, use it to be found by recruiters. At the same time, I am not going to feverishly search the name of each candidate to determine whether they are worthy of consideration based on search engine hits. There's not a 1:1 connection between skills and web-presence.
I've benefitted greatly from my web presence...I get the headhunter calls too, speaking engagements, probably more credibility assigned to me than I deserve. At the same time, I work with people that are as good as me, if not better and they don't have the same web presence. I just can't buy into the idea of using it to judge a candidate's skills/worth/potential.
What an amazingly arrogant attitude displayed here and it's definitely not Yahoo's loss. Sheesh, just the lease on the zeppelin hangar to house his ego would exhaust their revenues. I'm glad I'll never meet scobie and that he'll probably never be working at my company - even when his dotcom goes bust.
"and became one of Microsoft’s most visible faces."
Failed, scobie. If this was true, I should know who you are. No wonder you don't want to give people resumes.
And if I have a "dificult name" you wont hire me wouldnt go down well in some areas of the world.
NI for example as a product of a mixed maraige my name is Catholic but i'me "tecnicaly" a prod.
Maybe I should start a second online personal called "BILLY" ;-)
Microsoft people don't have a grasp of basic HR do they
And don't worry, I never have and never will buy stock in any of the companies where you work either. I can see by their low standards of employment that these companies obviously aren't interested in quality. This is exactly why every nutjob (yes you, scobie) shouldn't have a blog. Too many people that can't handle it.
And still laughing at the way you attack the people that "don't sign" their comments. You're the one making the big deal about an online persona. They are not. Then when the only thing you can refute about their counterpoints to your rant is to attack the anonymity of the post instead of the points made in the post... well, you're not really helping your cause there, scobie. You're helping theirs since the loudmouth is the one losing the battle. You're not trying to go a "mentally unstable" vibe here, are you? Cause that's what's coming across loud and clear.