REPORT Susan Jennings Kantari, [email protected]
LinkedIn Only One of Many Sites Used by Employers, Job Seekers
Companies: DHX, FB, GCI, LKND, MWW, YHOO December 18, 2012
Research Question:
Will advertisers spend their non-Google ad and marketing budgets on LinkedIn, and is LinkedIn still the preferred site in the hiring community?
Summary of Findings Silo Summaries
Sources were split regarding LinkedIn Corp.‟s (LNKD) status as 1) ADVERTISING EXECUTIVES the hiring community‟s preferred site. None of the five staffing These four sources believe business-to-business (B2B) agencies and only one of four job seekers interviewed by advertisers are finding success with LinkedIn‟s platform Blueshift preferred LinkedIn over other hiring sites. However, but that the bulk of social media ad spending still resides four of six HR managers and two of three industry specialists with Facebook, Twitter Inc. and a dozen other platforms. said it is the favored recruitment tool. LinkedIn has branded—and priced—itself as a premium corporate site and needs to tweak that image to fully All four ad executives believe advertisers are finding success develop as a social platform. with LinkedIn, but the bulk of their budgets still lies with a plethora of other competitors. 2) HR MANAGERS Four of six sources view LinkedIn as a preferred method of A staffing agency, an HR manager and a job seeker described recruiting. Another prefers Craigslist while the remaining Craigslist Inc. as an effective recruitment tool that is free for source looks to trade associations; both cited cost- job seekers and costs only $75 for listing a position. effectiveness as the primary factor. One source added that LinkedIn is a preferred site for networking but not Of the nine sources who commented on Monster Worldwide necessarily making hires. No sources use Facebook for Inc. (MWW), only one, representing a staffing agency, said recruiting activities. Although not asked about Indeed.com, Monster is an effective recruiting tool. All others said using three sources mentioned the site as an effective tool. Four Monster‟s database is cumbersome. This negative trend has sources had negative comments on Monster, referring to it grown stronger since our Sept. 27, 2011, report. as big, bulky and cumbersome.
Recruit Holdings Co. Ltd.‟s Indeed.com is a cost-effective 3) STAFFING AGENCIES recruiting site, according to three HR managers and a job None of these five sources described LinkedIn as an seeker. effective recruiting tool. One source uses her own marketing to target recruits, the second uses Craigslist and Only one source, a staffing agency representative, has other free sites, and the third does not believe a clear-cut effectively used Facebook Inc. (FB) as a recruiting tool. All recruiting leader exists. The fourth source said LinkedIn is others view Facebook purely as a social network site. the most well-known but not the most effective recruiting Facebook‟s new Social Jobs Partnership app may better tool. The fifth uses LinkedIn to research—but not recruit— position it for job searches and recruiting; Monster is included candidates. Of the three sources who commented on Monster, only one viewed it is an effective tool. Also, only in the app, but LinkedIn is not. one source has used Facebook for recruiting.
4) JOB SEEKERS Only one of these four sources cited LinkedIn as a LNKD MWW FB preferred job search site. Another uses LinkedIn as a Indeed.com Preferred Relevancy Effective Popularity networking site. The remaining two said LinkedIn was difficult to navigate and not cost-effective. Three sources use Craigslist for job searching; another said Indeed.com is HR Managers gaining market share. The two sources who commented on Monster said it was losing relevancy. No sources use Staffing Facebook for job searches, but one source does use the N/A Agencies site for gathering information on hiring managers‟ likes and dislikes. Job Seekers 5) INDUSTRY SPECIALISTS Industry Two of three sources view LinkedIn as the top recruiting N/A N/A site for employers and job seekers. The third sees college Specialists graduates directly interacting with employers. All three agree Facebook is not a threat to LinkedIn.
1 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
Background LinkedIn received 143 million unique visitors during September and expanded its reach to over 187 million members in the third quarter, a 43% growth rate year to year. The company reformatted its homepage in the third quarter, contributing to a 60% increase in homepage user activity. Differentiating itself from competitors, LinkedIn offers potential advertisers the ability to target a specific audience using job title, job function, industry, geography, company name, company size, seniority, age, gender, and LinkedIn group. Another unique feature is its “lead collection bar,” which allows a company advertising on LinkedIn to follow up directly with a prospect who clicks on an advertisement.
Blueshift‟s found that LinkedIn was effectively growing its network of active users but was facing an increasingly competitive environment for advertisers and job seekers. A recent survey by Jobvite Inc. revealed that Facebook attracted the highest percentage of job seekers in 2012. Approximately 52% of job seekers utilized Facebook to help find work while only 38% of job seekers used LinkedIn. Competing with LinkedIn for small business advertising dollars outside of Google AdWords are recently established companies like Outbrain Inc. and Virurl, which offer lower-cost alternatives and widespread distribution across social media.
CURRENT RESEARCH In this next study, Blueshift assessed how LinkedIn was viewed by advertising executives in terms of ROI and if the company was the preferred hiring site among HR managers, recruiters, staffing agencies and job seekers. We employed our pattern mining approach to establish and interview sources in six independent silos: 1) Advertising executives (4) 2) HR managers (6) 3) Staffing agencies (5) 4) Job seekers (4) 5) Industry specialists (3) 6) Secondary sources (3)
We interviewed 22 primary sources, including three repeat sources, and identified three of the most relevant secondary sources focused on Facebook‟s new job board app, LinkedIn‟s new Ads API and Monster‟s fall from industry innovator to follower.
Next Steps Blueshift will follow up with HR managers, particularly those not using LinkedIn, to determine LinkedIn‟s potential to be used by corporations. We also will monitor Facebook‟s Social Jobs Partnership app and its reception among our sources. Finally, we will check with advertising executives and marketers regarding LinkedIn‟s new Ads API and its ROI.
Silos 1) ADVERTISING EXECUTIVES These four sources believe business-to-business (B2B) advertisers are finding success with LinkedIn‟s platform but that the bulk of social media ad spending still resides with Facebook, Twitter Inc. and a dozen other platforms. LinkedIn has branded— and priced—itself as a premium corporate site and needs to tweak that image to fully develop as a social platform.
Media buyer for a social media agency This agency does 100% social media with a bias toward Facebook, which received the bulk of the agency‟s spending. The source said LinkedIn needs to rebrand itself as a social network site. However, LinkedIn “is definitely on everyone‟s radar” and should see increased ad dollars this and next year.
2 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
. “We‟ve tested all aspects of LinkedIn from paid, owned and groups for ourselves and our clients, and find it promising but still not flourishing as it will be.” LinkedIn is definitely on . “LinkedIn has branded itself as a corporate brand so it is not thought everyone‟s radar and being of in the same category as Facebook and Twitter, but it is similar to talked about; they are a close those tools. Their brand is oversimplified as a B2B social media third in the top three social network when it has greater potential.” sites. . “LinkedIn skews toward B2B, which is an unfair reputation because it makes it less social, more dry.” Media Buyer, Social Media Agency . “LinkedIn is definitely on everyone‟s radar and being talked about; they are a close third in the top three social sites.” . “Companies are using LinkedIn for HR purposes, but after a while they are finding other uses for it.” . “The cost to advertise is higher on LinkedIn than other sites because of they have branded themselves as a premium site.” . “Our spending will double next year with the accounts we have in line, and we will be spending more on LinkedIn.”
Media director for a midsize online advertising agency; repeat source Although this source said LinkedIn holds potential for large advertisers, the company currently does not appeal to his client base, which is not looking for B2B communication in its social messaging. . “We are increasingly getting new accounts for online advertising, and next year expect to increase year-to-year spending by double digits.” . “We are not spending on LinkedIn, but we have looked into the platform. Right now their offerings are have more B2B interest, but I expect that will change.” . “LinkedIn is a great platform for a large company such as Xerox that touches so many industries to engage its user base.” . “Our focus is more on image sharing sites and platforms that are more established as social.”
Director of media sales, formerly a media buyer for three top media agencies; repeat source This source sells media but has been on the buying end for many years. Although the source sees potential in LinkedIn because of its audience size, its current platform is not offering interesting choices for advertisers. . “We are not currently doing advertising with LinkedIn, but they have big [audience numbers].” . “They could compete with trade publication advertising spending across many industries, but that would be a highly fragmented approach.” . “I would imagine with their high numbers they will go down the ad exchange route, which could be high volume with low costs.” . “Neither of these scenarios is a [creative] approach.”
Social media director for a Fortune 500 company This source came from an advertising agency and now works at a large company overseeing social media engagement. Most budgets are spent on a primary list of social networks, but the limited spending with LinkedIn has met with some success. . “I think of LinkedIn as secondary in our list of social networks, but at the top of the secondary list.” . “We‟ve been very successful using LinkedIn as a channel for B2B They are trying to update their clients.” newsfeed and make it more . “Their Q&A Forum is a very dynamic environment, and they have a very like Facebook. But you can‟t successful human resources platform.” keep heaping icing on icing; “They have been very successful in collaboration with very niche B2B . there has got to be cake under industries across multiple organizations.” . “We don‟t see a lot of referrals coming from LinkedIn as in the other it to eat. networks on our primary list. But we have used it more as an HR tool Social Media Director and have done our own branding.” Fortune 500 Company . “LinkedIn is not a powerhouse for referrals through any of the areas I
3 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
have worked with them, but as a place for professionals to connect it does work.” . “We have used LinkedIn for B2C [business-to-consumer], B2B, but it always comes in as a secondary thought.” . “They are trying to update their newsfeed and make it more like Facebook. But you can‟t keep heaping icing on icing; there has got to be cake under it to eat.”
2) HR MANAGERS Four of six sources view LinkedIn as a preferred method of recruiting. Another prefers Craigslist while the remaining source looks to trade associations; both cited cost-effectiveness as the primary factor. One source added that LinkedIn is a preferred site for networking but not necessarily making hires. No sources use Facebook for recruiting activities. Although not asked about Indeed.com, three sources mentioned the site as an effective tool. Four sources had negative comments on Monster, referring to it as big, bulky and cumbersome.
HR manager for a Silicon Valley tech company LinkedIn is the best source for recruiting. HR managers who do a lot of recruiting will have no problem using LinkedIn. Monster remains big and bulky, but Indeed.com is better organized. Craigslist has an “aura” of being personalized. Facebook users have to be very careful with what they post, especially if they are using the site for job searches. . “LinkedIn is the initial go-to site; it is very good. It‟s the best resource for recruiting.” . “I don‟t think it is hard to navigate LinkedIn, but it depends on who you are and what your position is. If you are recruiting for people, you need to have minimal skills at best to work your way around a site. People working in a tech organization should have no problem working with LinkedIn.” . “Monster has pretty much stayed the same over the years. It will keep going as is. Monster is complex and massive. It is so big, it‟s like a Monster has pretty much black hole. We would get tons of resumes for a job, but typically companies just look at the first five and they are done. There is also stayed the same over the the problem that you have to send in your resume through that site, years. It will keep going as is. and who knows if it actually makes it to a company, given the online Monster is complex and filters? I recommend that people … should always send their resume massive. It is so big, it‟s like a and cover letter directly to the company, not through Monster.” black hole. . “There are hundreds of jobs listed on Indeed.com, Jobfox [Inc.] and Monster. The problem is that these sites leave jobs listed up way long HR Manager after the jobs have been filled. This is especially true for Monster and Tech Company, Silicon Valley [Gannett Co. Inc.‟s/GCI] CareerBuilder.com.” . “Indeed.com is a big site. It is classier than Monster, better organized, with a better matching system.” . “Craigslist has an aura of sincerity. It seems individualized; you get a feeling that a person is actually looking at the site. I have known lots of people who have gotten jobs on Craigslist.” . “I‟m not a user of Facebook; I see it as being moronic. There was an ugly trend for a while for potential employers to ask for Facebook passwords, but that is illegal now. Even a picture can be discriminating, and people have to be very careful of what they put online, especially if they want to use the same site to job hunt.” . “People can also misrepresent themselves on LinkedIn just like they can on a resume, so companies have to be very careful. Companies still need to do background and validation checks.” . “LinkedIn now has endorsements, and people can just decide to endorse you. It‟s a hallow jester, and I think LinkedIn has weakened itself a bit. On the other hand, maybe the endorsements impress some people.”
HR manager for a technology company in the San Diego area Although this source uses LinkedIn for recruiting, she questions whether the service is cost-effective. Some efforts are fruitful while others generate few responses. Still, LinkedIn remains the preferred site in the hiring community, and is generating buzz largely because it is still novel. She does not use Monster or Facebook for recruiting. . “We use LinkedIn [for recruiting] and have relationships with four outside recruiters to help with hard-to-fill positions. We also post to industry-specific job sites and have an internal referral program.” . “I am on the fence as to whether this is cost-effective or not. We can be hit-or-miss on our responses. It also depends on the type of account you hold, which requires additional investment. That said, we have been able to recruit some key individuals through LinkedIn, just not the volume I would like to see.”
4 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
. “Most [recruiters] I know are using LinkedIn.” . “So many people utilize LinkedIn because of the social network aspect. They are not doing this with Monster. The only people utilizing Monster are those looking for work or filling a position. You do not capture those who are employed. When you have a hard-to-fill position—especially in the IT industry—people are employed and are not on Monster.” . “If you have the right account with Monster, it is much easier to „mine‟ their resume database than searching on LinkedIn.” . “We do not use many other sites. I do use CATS [Software Inc., an applicant tracking system], which pushes our posting out to various job sites, including Indeed. This is a very cost-effective tool because it provides applicant tracking as well as unlimited job posting for $70 a month. We get a few applicants from this method—not as many as LinkedIn but comparative for the cost.” . “I tend to stay away from Facebook as an HR professional. I do not want to see what people are doing in their personal life when recruiting. I depend on LinkedIn for the professional networking.”
Senior corporate recruiter for a large, public retail company in Minnesota; repeat source This source uses various tools to seek out prospective employees, and has had good success with LinkedIn and sees it as a solid investment for recruiting. LinkedIn is the preferred site for networking but not necessarily the preferred site for hiring. Her company no longer uses Monster, whose database has become out of control. Her new favorite recruiting site is Indeed.com, which lists job postings from various websites. Using mobile devices will be the next big trend in the job- hunting market. . “LinkedIn has a strong enough brand awareness that you will see more and more advertising, unfortunately.” Indeed.com is an excellent new . “I post on the company‟s website. I use social media such as Twitter and Facebook and use many diverse job-posting boards as well as job board and has provided me using LinkedIn. I also have a sourcer who reports into me and who and my fellow recruiters … with assists me with finding passive candidates. As a last resort, and only excellent candidates. after I have exhausted all other options, will I take a position to a contingent search agency.” Senior Corporate Recruiter . “We have limited dollars invested in LinkedIn, but it has proven to me a Retail Company, Minnesota good, solid investment.” . “LinkedIn is still the preferred networking site, but not necessarily the preferred site to make hires.” . “[Our company] no longer uses Monster, and I personally have not used it in many years as the database had grown out of control. [Our company] has only paid for one „seat‟ on LinkedIn, which my sourcer uses. I use my personal account, which costs nothing.” . “My experience and from speaking to other recruiters within my network is that Monster no longer is the player it once was in the recruiting market … and it will continue to lose market share.” . “Indeed.com is an excellent new job board and has provided me and my fellow recruiters … with excellent candidates.” . “I see Indeed.com and social media sites such as Twitter continuing to grow. Using mobile devices will be the next recruiting trend.” . “I believe [Facebook] to be limited as many people use Facebook for personal use and LinkedIn for professional networking/job seeking.”
HR director for a major auto manufacturer This source is a big fan of LinkedIn, but her company prefers CareerBuilder. She said LinkedIn allows recruiters access to a wide selection of talent in a cost-effective manner, while Monster is more expensive and cumbersome. LinkedIn also allows companies to read endorsements about candidates, including their current employees. She does not use Facebook for recruiting. . “Our organization actually prefers CareerBuilder over either LinkedIn or Monster.” . “LinkedIn allows recruiters the opportunity to gain access to a wide berth of talent in a very cost-effective manner. Monster is a good source, but from our experience it seems to be more expensive and limited in its offering. LinkedIn provides a multidimensional look at candidates that the other job boards do not yet offer.” . “I am unaware of any other [more cost-effective] tool at this time.”
5 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
. “LinkedIn is a good tool for companies on many different dimensions. From a recruiting perspective it is valuable due to the breadth of information you have access to on the candidate. From the Monster is too cumbersome endorsements to the recommendations you are able to gain insight into from the contract perspective the candidate‟s background and true experiences. From a different and expensive from the perspective as an HR person, you are able to see which of your own services side. employees may be at risk of being snatched up by others as well, providing you an opportunity to assess a potential situation hopefully HR Director, Major Auto Manufacturer before it is too late to retain the employee.” . “LinkedIn is still the shiny new star, but it does offer a different view of the candidates.” . “Monster seems to remain the more recognized job board by the masses and still gets many resumes. However, LinkedIn offers more directed and specific matches at this point in time. … In addition, Monster is too cumbersome from the contract perspective and expensive from the services side.” . “Monster is too large to ever completely go away. However, if I have a specialized position, I would use LinkedIn over Monster.”
HR director for a small tech company in Silicon Valley LinkedIn caters to professionals, but small companies may not have the budget to pay for recruiting sites. These companies effectively use free sites like Craigslist and Indeed.com. People in human resources also belong to groups, such as Yahoo! Inc.‟s (YHOO) Yahoo groups, and share recruits. This source does not use Facebook for recruiting. . “LinkedIn is all professionals. It is much more professional than Facebook.” . “I contact people on LinkedIn when I‟m looking to fill a position, but hardly anyone gets back to me. I‟m guessing they are happy where they are.” . “I get contacted all the time on LinkedIn by people trying to sell me things, recruiting tools, ID theft, asking if I need help with recruiting. I Indeed.com pulls all the sites just delete them.” together. … I‟m not sure how . “I used LinkedIn when I was looking for a job. If you leave a job and need to find someone, say for a reference or a contact, LinkedIn is a they get by with it, but you can good source.” just look at Indeed to see what . “It is not that easy to work with LinkedIn, but people can send you is out there. emails.” . “The LinkedIn endorsements are stupid. Anyone can endorse their HR Director Tech Company, Silicon Valley friends. It doesn‟t mean anything.” . “Because we are a small company, we don‟t pay for recruiting sites, like the paid LinkedIn jobs function or Monster. We have jobs come up on a regular basis, but I can easily fill those jobs using LinkedIn via my own paid account or using Craigslist. I also belong to a lot of HR groups … and I find people that way too.” . “I‟ve used Monster at other jobs. Monster‟s advance pay is $1,200 a month. You put in specific buzz words, maybe a ZIP code or Boolean words, and applicable resumes pop up. They let me look at 1,000 resumes. It‟s like passive recruiting. You just read resumes. It also costs $300 to post a job. Monster is free if you are looking for a job, but companies have to pay to use it.” . “A Craigslist job post is just $75. I use it all the time, and we get a lot of response.” . “Indeed.com pulls all the sites together—Monster, Dice [Holdings Inc./DHX], and everyone else. I‟m not sure how they get by with it, but you can just look at Indeed to see what is out there.” . “I rarely use [Facebook] because I don‟t want people to know my personal business. And some people hardly post anything, but they use it to snoop around.”
Employment services director at a private Midwest college LinkedIn is heading in the right direction and is gaining attention because it is still novel. However, the site is not cost- effective for organizations with low turnover or few white-collar employees. Monster.com has brand recognition, but also is not a cost-effective or efficient way to hire employees. This source prefers using trade associations that are less expensive and offer a more targeted list of applicants, or local avenues such as state employment offices. Because of the poor economy, organizations are focusing more on hiring from within and retaining workers.
6 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
. “LinkedIn is [getting attention because it is] newer. But it is not cheap. Posting a job is a couple hundred bucks, … I have paid my annual fee, which is thousands of dollars and that entitles me to 50 „pokes.‟ It is kind of like minutes on your cell phone. Once you go over your allotted pokes, they start charging you. I question the cost- benefit analysis.” . “Our turnover is less than 10%, and that is not faculty. And of that 10%, 90% of those are people that probably are not white-collar, high-level, LinkedIn clientele. To pay $10,000 to have unlimited access on LinkedIn is not cost-effective for me.” . “Over the past five years I have posted 20 to 30 positions out on LinkedIn, but my results have been pretty minimal as far as attracting candidates from there.” . “People recognize Monster because it has been around for a long time as a place to look for jobs. LinkedIn is growing but does not have nearly the brand recognition for that purpose that Monster has.” . “If you are looking for frontline entry-level employees, you can draw from anyplace. … If the job requires IT experience, you may go to trade association websites or LinkedIn. Sites like that are becoming more popular to try to attract a higher level professional.” . “This concept of the trade associations and different tiers of trade associations [can be cost-effective recruiting tools], like The Chronicle of Higher Education. … A lot of higher-education institutions pay an annual fee, and they get a discount or postings are free. And those [recruiting avenues] are gaining in popularity because you have one price … and you can post and get services.” . “And then there are smaller subsets, groups that specialize in catering to a certain class of individuals. These organizations attract people for their professional pursuits. I have a lot of success with those organizations, whether it is for high-level accounting, HR or marketing.” . “Some of the mass sites like Monster are not as cost-effective. I tend to shy away from Monster and sites like that because they cast such a wide net that you get so many people who do not read the ad, do not pay attention, or do not meet the minimum qualifications for the job, and it clutters up the funnel.” . “I see Monster going one way as it is not so efficient anymore because of the rationale that I mentioned before. It is like opening the flood gates, and [as an HR manager] you get inundated with stuff. LinkedIn is going in the positive direction, but I do not feel at the moment that it is as fruitful as it could be. It is a product of evolution, as more people use it for job hunting and building their networks, as opposed to socializing.” . “I have not utilized Facebook in any way, shape or form for recruiting, nor have I heard of any colleagues in HR utilizing Facebook. Googling somebody or going to their Facebook page or LinkedIn page is a growing trend and very popular in recruiting today.” . “A great upcoming trend is focusing on keeping the people you have, especially if the economy turns around. While the labor pool may be bigger now, under our current economic conditions it is still expensive to replace somebody. Let us look at retaining people who have years of institutional knowledge.”
3) STAFFING AGENCIES None of these five sources described LinkedIn as an effective recruiting tool. One source uses her own marketing to target recruits, the second uses Craigslist and other free sites, and the third does not believe a clear-cut recruiting leader exists. The fourth source said LinkedIn is the most well-known but not the most effective recruiting tool. The fifth uses LinkedIn to research—but not recruit—candidates. Of the three sources who commented on Monster, only one viewed it is an effective tool. Also, only one source has used Facebook for recruiting.
President of a consulting firm that helps nonprofits with their hiring needs, North Carolina Like many recruiters, she is not thrilled with either LinkedIn or Monster for finding qualified applicants. LinkedIn groups have been good avenues for advertising searches and outreach, but her firm does not use the site for true recruiting. Advertisers will not necessarily spend their dollars on LinkedIn in 2013. Meanwhile, Monster is too broad-based, and ads bring in a flood of under-qualified applicants. Instead, she finds success with her firm‟s own e-newsletter, sector publications and websites run by nonprofits and professional associations. She believes Monster is losing relevancy and has become too unwieldy. . “LinkedIn groups of members within our target [nonprofit] sector have been good avenues for advertising searches, but we do not use LinkedIn for true recruiting. We find that using Monster results in a larger applicant pool but often one that is less appropriate for the role.”
7 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
. “Our own e-newsletter is effective at getting the word out about searches. Targeted publications/websites for the sector, [such as] local/regional centers for nonprofits, related professional associations, have been the most effective.” . “I use LinkedIn for my own professional networking, but do not post, respond to or even read it daily. I generally avoid Monster—too big, too broad, too vague to use in developing a high-quality applicant pool.” . “I do not really use [LinkedIn‟s] recruiting tools. I primarily use the site for broadcasting information about an organizational change to targeted groups of which I am a member.” . “LinkedIn is used by job seekers to advertise their availability, by organizational leaders to identify resources and post updates, and by individuals to connect with others, but not specifically as part of a LinkedIn is used by job seekers planned hiring process.” to advertise their availability, by . “Monster is inefficient and ineffective for the clients I serve. LinkedIn organizational leaders to has been helpful for outreach. Neither serves any of my clients‟ needs identify resources and post completely though.” updates, and by individuals to . “[Monster is] losing relevancy. It has become so large, it is difficult to cull useful data from it and the responses are not refined enough to be connect with others, but not worthwhile. Often, it just wastes time to go through the mass of specifically as part of a planned inappropriate applications.” hiring process. . “In a recent search in which the client requested advertising via Monster, none of the 100-plus applicants were worth interviewing, and President, Consulting Firm only a handful were worth midlevel review. LinkedIn provides an North Carolina avenue to connect with specific networks and contact individuals—and their networks—within a specific frame of reference, sector or experience, but not for recruiting. In our searches, the more targeted, often smaller sites have been most effective at identifying and encouraging applications from appropriate individuals.” . “We use clients‟ Facebook pages for outreach during a search but not for recruiting.” . “Methods that allow for targeting the message in advance will continue to save time in reaching the right people and developing a strong applicant pool. My clients prefer a smaller, stronger pool of applicants to consider.” . “Sectors, and the workers they need, can differ widely, which results in a variety of successful recruiting methods. There is no one method that is likely to fit everyone.”
Senior manager at a California-based staffing agency LinkedIn may have the huge database and a large number of eyeballs, but this source is intimidated by the site and does not like that the company is starting to nickel-and-dime its visitors. Because of this, she believes recruiters will start looking at other sites that offer more cost-effective options. She recently has used Monster, CareerBuilder, Yahoo Groups, Craigslist and LinkedIn, and has had good success with Craigslist and Yahoo Groups, which are free. Monster and CareerBuilder have lost a lot of jobs. She does not use Facebook for recruiting. LinkedIn is still overall a . “LinkedIn‟s whole selling point is their huge database. Nobody can preferred site with recruiters, touch them on that at this point.” . “[LinkedIn] is a typical business model. They came out with so much but I think the savvier recruiters that was free [initially]. I was on there today and was looking someone are finding some other routes. I up. They were a third-level contact, and I could not look at their profile have been invited to join other without paying for it. Now [LinkedIn] is starting to nickel-and-dime. So things that I have not heard of much of what I used to do would cost me money to do now, and I am … before. Some upstarts are not a volume provider.” . “LinkedIn is still overall a preferred site with recruiters, but I think the [surfacing]. Nothing like savvier recruiters are finding some other routes. I have been invited to LinkedIn though. People may join other things that I have not heard of before. Some upstarts are growl a lot [about LinkedIn] but [surfacing]. Nothing like LinkedIn though. People may growl a lot [about will stay with it until other LinkedIn] but will stay with it until other places build numbers up.” places build numbers up. . “I use Monster, CareerBuilder, Yahoo Groups and LinkedIn [to recruit employees]. Yahoo Groups has worked really well for me. Lately I have Senior Manager, Staffing Agency California
8 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
found CareerBuilder to be better for me than Monster, but they are pretty comparable.” . “As people get fed up with LinkedIn, and how much they are charging, you will have recruiters or employers start working with or directing people to free sites.” . “A couple of recruiting sites are free. People are doing a lot of recruiting on Craigslist. I have done a couple postings on Craigslist and was not bombarded by crap, and I got some very qualified resumes. That was very surprising. And Yahoo Groups are free, and that is about as cost-effective as you can get.” . “Monster, I do not post on. Monster, I do searches on. And that is mainly because the positions I am looking to fill are not usually that hard to fill.” . “I am very intimidated by LinkedIn. I have a basic account that I do not pay for, and I do the very minimum with LinkedIn because the positions are not that tough to fill. I probably hit the tip of the iceberg with LinkedIn. I have not had a situation where I need to pay to up my level.” . “My world is so small. I know recruiters who swear by LinkedIn, and there are some LinkedIn gurus who know how to drill down and reach out and get those good candidates. That is not me.” . “I am more comfortable on Monster because I know the interface better than I know LinkedIn.” . “I think Monster and CareerBuilder have both lost a lot of jobs.” . “I do not use Facebook for recruiting. When I get requests on Facebook, I do not respond; I will send them a LinkedIn invite.”
Owner and manager of a recruitment agency in the central United States The free version of LinkedIn and a paid subscription to Monster both give valuable leads to high-technology and engineering positions. The source also stressed the need for a wide variety of online sources, including Indeed.com, CyberTech Inc.‟s Energy Central and CareerBuilder, as well as real recruiting. The industry lacks consensus regarding the best online recruitment tools. . “I don‟t believe there is one site that satisfies completely the wide range of recruiting needs seen in our industry.” . “As an office that works primarily in high-level technical and engineering positions, we presently utilize both a paid subscription to Monster and the free version of LinkedIn. They both afford us valuable leads to candidates that help us in fulfilling our recruiting assignments.” . “We also use other online sources for identifying candidates—Indeed, Energy Central, CareerBuilder—and others specific to our target industries: our own office database, the MRINetwork [Management Recruitment International Inc.], and last, but certainly not least, real recruiting. By that, I mean networking through our industry contacts for referrals of candidates not previously known to us.” . “I believe you will find a wide variety of opinions as to which online tools are best. Those opinions are likely based on which industries a given office does the majority of its recruiting. … I find that consensus on such topics is rare.”
Recruiter for a Midwestern agency LinkedIn is not an effective tool but is the most well-known recruiting site among professionals. Recruiters should use more than one site when searching for I love Indeed. It is very simple resumes, including free sources and office databases. This source has to use, easy to understand and effectively used Facebook for recruiting. user-friendly. Indeed is . “You can‟t just stick to one site because a post goes out to many career streamlined, and it is my boards. You always have to look on several sites.” favorite site. I heard about it in . “I use the free version of LinkedIn daily. I also use state job centers, which provide resumes online. We used to use LinkedIn more than a meeting about four or five Monster, which cost. We switched from the paid Monster to months ago. We are seeing a CareerBuilder, which has a nominal fee.” surge in Indeed usage. We are . “LinkedIn gets attention. It is the most well-known site among in a college town, and younger professionals. They all know it, and they all use it.” people go to it right away. It is . “LinkedIn takes too much time. It is not easy to use effectively, and you can‟t view some of the contact information. Monster was easier to use much easier to use than for the time requirements. Monster is essentially a database.” LinkedIn. . “Monster seems like it is losing customers although I‟m not sure why.” Recruiter, Midwestern Agency
9 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
. “I love Indeed. It is very simple to use, easy to understand and user-friendly. Indeed is streamlined, and it is my favorite site. I heard about it in a meeting about four or five months ago. We are seeing a surge in Indeed usage. We are in a college town, and younger people go to it right away. It is much easier to use than LinkedIn.” . “I do use Facebook to search for recruitments. I put out a need to my connections, and they connect to their connections. It has worked.”
Veteran corporate recruiter specializing in CEO-level positions For niche recruitment markets, LinkedIn is one site among many for basic candidate information, but recruitment is still a word-of-mouth business in which personal relationships and credible recommendations will not be replaced by profile features. . “My research people look at LinkedIn to learn more about candidates. For the recruiting industry it‟s another resource, but we don‟t advertise positions there because we‟d be flooded with inquiries.” . “For companies that hire hundreds of people a year, resources like LinkedIn have helped them a great deal to sort through applicants and narrow down the field, but we‟re a boutique firm specializing in CEO positions. Our business is still person-to-person.” . “LinkedIn information on job candidates is useful, but for me it has a credibility problem. It‟s written by the candidates themselves, and recommendations have to be taken with a grain of salt. The linking is even suspect. I‟ve had people I‟ve never heard of want to link to me.”
4) JOB SEEKERS Only one of these four sources cited LinkedIn as a preferred job search site. Another uses LinkedIn as a networking site. The remaining two said LinkedIn was difficult to navigate and not cost-effective. Three sources use Craigslist for job searching; another said Indeed.com is gaining market share. The two sources who commented on Monster said it was losing relevancy. No sources use Facebook for job searches, but one source does use the site for gathering information on hiring managers‟ likes and dislikes.
Female in her 40s who has used LinkedIn to seek a permanent job in California The LinkedIn job section is used by professionals but is difficult to navigate. This source has been posting on LinkedIn for more than six months and has yet to receive a job interview through the site. Indeed.com is more user-friendly and is free. Monster does not seem as popular. She uses Facebook as a social site rather than a job site. . “I‟m on LinkedIn as a job seeker, but I have not received any job offers via that site. I‟m not really sure how to navigate their job section … it does not seem readily apparent. LinkedIn is really for professionals.” I‟m also on Indeed.com, which . “I don‟t [use] Monster … I don‟t know anyone who uses Monster.” . “I‟m also on Indeed.com, which is very easy to use online. You read a is very easy to use online. … job description and send in a resume. They don‟t put your resume in a They don‟t put your resume in a set format, and I like that. Also, you don‟t have to fill out a six-page set format, and I like that. Also, application. Some sites have a long application process, and that gets you don‟t have to fill out a six- very old.” page application. . “Networking is the best way to get jobs … I belong to CSIX Connect, a group to connect people looking for jobs. We meet on a weekly basis Job Seeker, Used LinkedIn for lunch, interact and listen to speakers. Most of the people are on California LinkedIn. They are all professionals.” . “I check several sites daily, such as Craigslist, local hospitals and local colleges. They are all very easy to check. I also use Simply Hired, Bright.com, city job sites, and CalOpps.org, where you plug in a location and city job category anywhere in California. I‟ve had a few pre-interviews on some of these other sites.” . “I‟m on Facebook, but I don‟t use it to find a job. I‟m not even sure how that would work.”
40-something unemployed mother in Lancaster, PA, seeking a finance-related job This source has been out of work since August, and uses LinkedIn, CareerBuilder, Indeed.com and Craigslist. She has received the most responses from Craigslist and believes that site and Indeed.com are gaining ground. She added that
10 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
LinkedIn is not the preferred site because it is not free or affordable. Monster will continue to lose ground unless it can find a way to lower service rates. She does not use Monster or Facebook for job hunting. . “I do not think [LinkedIn] is the preferred site, and it will not be unless they can find a way to make it more affordable for employers and a way for job seekers to find local jobs free of charge.” . “There should never be a charge for the person looking for a job. You will not get all candidates in your database for your employers, and you will need to have more specialized, easy-to-use search products in order to help employers find qualified candidates.” . “I am using LinkedIn, CareerBuilder, Indeed and Craigslist. The most effective has been Craigslist. I have gotten many more responses and interviews from there than any of the others.” . “I posted my resume [on LinkedIn] in August, but I have not had any responses. I did not pay for services, but I have not paid for services on any job-seeking sites. I have not used Monster at all.” . “At my last job, the employer used Monster but ended up hiring an employment agency because the talent they needed was not in the mainstream.” . “[Monster is] losing [relevancy] and it will probably continue unless they make it easier and cheaper for employers. It is hard to beat free.” . “I have not used Facebook in my job search, and I do not have any friends that I know of that have.”
Job seeker and 52-year-old marketing director for a Southern California senior living facility This source prefers LinkedIn because it allows employers to connect with references via email, and allows job seekers to make connections with those doing the actual hiring. Monster and similar websites are costly and not interactive, and response times are slow. She views Monster and CareerBuilder as obsolete. She has used Facebook for finding information about a hiring manager. . “There is nothing like [LinkedIn]—the ability to see who viewed your LinkedIn profile and connect back with those who viewed you and On LinkedIn I was able to make communicate by email. Connecting to hiring managers or HR recruiters connections to HR recruiters is such a powerful tool. Monster is really old-school job and resume posting. I have never found one serious position on Monster.” and send resumes directly to . “On LinkedIn I was able to make connections to HR recruiters and send those in the position of hiring— resumes directly to those in the position of hiring—sort of getting in sort of getting in through the through the back door. It is the backstage pass of the hidden job back door. It is the backstage market.” pass of the hidden job market. . “Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn are the modern ways to seek jobs and make connections because of the almost instant response and Job Seeker, Used LinkedIn connection made. Monster, CareerBuilder and other job posting sites Southern California are becoming obsolete.” . “Unless Monster becomes more interactive, they will begin to lose relevancy.” . “LinkedIn again is very economical for the employer and very powerful because an employer can connect with your references via email in a very quick matter of time. Monster and job boards are costly and not interactive.” . “I used Facebook to get an idea of an HR or hiring manager‟s likes and favorites, and [it] showed me a little about that person‟s life and personality, which gave me an edge during the interview process.” . “It is important for an individual to take a class on LinkedIn so they can learn the tools to give them the edge over the competition. There are many secrets that are not obvious that helped me gain top of the search list.”
26-year-old female seeking a permanent teaching job in California Young people use LinkedIn more as a professional connection site rather than as a job site, and more people use LinkedIn than Monster. Networking is key to finding a job. User-friendly EdJoin.org is the only job site used by public school teachers. Craigslist also is used by job hunters. Facebook is popular as a social site but not as a job site. . “Finding a teaching job is different from finding a tech job. I don‟t think being on LinkedIn helps the teachers. I‟m not on LinkedIn, and I don‟t know any teachers who are. LinkedIn is mostly for tech.” . “I have friends who are on LinkedIn, but I don‟t know of anyone who has used it to get a job. They mostly use it to stay in contact with each other, see what everyone is doing. I also know people looking for jobs who use Monster, but most people use LinkedIn, mainly as a social site. However, the people I know who have gotten jobs persisted with one-on-one, personal networking.” . “Everyone is on Facebook, but I haven‟t heard of anyone using Facebook to hunt for a job.”
11 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
. “EdJoin is the social site that school districts use to post jobs and teachers use when looking for jobs. It is really the only site that public teachers use. It is very easy to use.” . “I have also used Craigslist to look for jobs. … I also have friends who regularly look at Craigslist for jobs, especially if they are unhappy where they are.”
5) INDUSTRY SPECIALISTS Two of three sources view LinkedIn as the top recruiting site for employers and job seekers. The third sees college graduates directly interacting with employers. All three agree Facebook is not a threat to LinkedIn.
Executive career strategist and best-selling author of job search guides Despite the buzz over Facebook‟s new Social Jobs Partnership app, it is no threat to LinkedIn, which remains the top site for job seekers and recruiters. . “Facebook is a social site where people talk about what they had for lunch. LinkedIn is for professionals. There‟s no comparison. I‟ve been After the job search is over, in the world of recruitment for 37 years and I know thousands of they stay on LinkedIn because recruitment professionals, and I‟ve never heard anyone say anything they realize how important a different.” professional network is to their . “Companies always go for the cheapest way possible they can find careers, and they want to someone. First it‟s the free job boards, then the paid services, and last is the headhunters because they‟re the most expensive.” maintain this network. . “People come to LinkedIn when they need to get back to work. But Executive Career Strategist & after the job search is over, they stay on LinkedIn because they realize Best-selling Author of Job Search how important a professional network is to their careers, and they want Guides to maintain this network. It‟s LinkedIn‟s growing social network that makes it most valuable.” . “Job boards like Monster.com aren‟t dead, resumes aren‟t dead. If job boards were dead, no one would be buying advertising space on them.” . “LinkedIn provides a wonderful service that goes beyond getting job. It‟s a site that, I believe, has grown far beyond the conception of the founders.”
Veteran HR industry consultant, speaker, blogger and author specializing in the analysis of hiring ROI LinkedIn is undoubtedly the top job search and recruiting tool out there because of its vast pool of continuously updated data on people, companies and jobs. The data and how it can be searched offer companies unparalleled levels of information on potential hires and a way to build a dynamic talent pool. Facebook is not a threat to LinkedIn. . “I am a LinkedIn shareholder.” . “LinkedIn is a very economical way to find people; it‟s really leveling the playing field for recruiters. Now with LinkedIn‟s InMail almost anyone is accessible. You can talk to about anybody. It‟s fundamentally changing the recruitment industry.” . “I don‟t see Facebook‟s new job board growing up to compete with LinkedIn because LinkedIn is for business, Facebook is for personal, and most people don‟t want to mix the two.” . “Without question, LinkedIn is No. 1 for recruiters and job seekers.” . “The new trend in recruiting is to create a real-time talent community, not just post a job and hope people submit their resume. With a talent community, you‟re working to identify and attract people with the skills you need, who are actively linked to you and your company page, and when you have a job that meets their skill set you contact them. You work to keep them actively involved in your company community by, among other things, updating your company news feed often.” . “LinkedIn has replaced the resume and the job board. LinkedIn is a verified account of your work history, with people who have verified and endorsed your skills.” . “Eventually, the same algorithms used by Google to rank influence for websites will also rank people for influence. The people who are more successful networking, posting, getting their name out there will be the ones getting jobs.”
12 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
Digital media consultant, formerly at Accenture, Aon Hewitt and Allegis Group The younger generation of job seekers is intimidated by LinkedIn. Recent college grads see little opportunity on LinkedIn to stand out to employers. The future of talent recruiting online lies with companies offering interaction between job seekers and employers and through unbiased online evaluations, skills tests and assessment gaming. Facebook is not a threat. . “LinkedIn is still just a part of the information puzzle when it comes to recruiting people. Most corporations are using their own CRM systems or Salesforce[.com Inc./CRM] to gather and analyze data about job candidates from a variety of sources.” . “There are a lot of companies looking to get in on and really own the sourcing side of the job candidate experience. Facebook‟s business model is very venerable. They could do so much more with the space than they do. There‟s no engagement, it turns off young professionals, and its tools for recruiters are still incomplete.” . “When I worked in corporate recruiting, we would not spend a dime on LinkedIn but we would use it to the max. There are so many ways to use LinkedIn‟s data but not pay for it.” . “The challenge all sites like LinkedIn are facing is, how can companies understand more about job candidates? LinkedIn‟s recommendations and the newer endorsements are a joke because it‟s just a reciprocity game. The future lies with sites that can get candidates to engage with companies, get them to tell more about themselves, provide assessment gaming and micro-internships. Companies also need an opportunity to make themselves more attractive to candidates.” . “There‟s so much opportunity in the recruiting space now because the college generation is willing to do so much more to interact with companies, give personal information and prove themselves because it‟s so hard to find a job.” . “Startups like RadMatter [through which college students complete missions designed by employers to demonstrate their capabilities] are bringing employers closer to the talent and giving job seekers a better way to prove their skills, far better than a LinkedIn endorsement.”
Secondary Sources Blueshift‟s first secondary source described Facebook‟s Social Jobs Partnership app, which integrates listings from five job boards that includes Monster but not LinkedIn. The second article highlighted LinkedIn‟s new Ads API, which would allow more ad customization for marketers. The last article discussed Monster‟s fall from industry innovator to industry follower.
Nov. 14 Cnet.com article Facebook‟s job board app launch features 1.7 million job listings from five sources including Monster. LinkedIn now is under threat from Facebook. . “Facebook today launched a job-board application, featuring 1.7 million listings from five different recruiting organizations.” . “The new application, a product of the Social Jobs Partnership that Facebook started last year with several public agencies, aggregates jobs that are already available through the separate organizations to give job seekers a central location to look for work.” . “This initial slew of jobs—sorted by industry, location, and skills—comes from BranchOut, DirectEmployers Association, Work4Labs, Jobvite, and Monster.com.” . “Facebook is not making any money directly off this application, so this doesn‟t mean the company is getting into the jobs listing business just yet. Still, LinkedIn must be worried. The new app, and the partnership arrangement, highlights how much Facebook is at the core of social jobs recruiting—LinkedIn‟s bread and butter.” . “Facebook‟s 1 billion users is what‟s attractive about recruiting on the network, recruiters said. Work4 Labs said it‟s posted 2.2 million jobs to Facebook in the last 18 months because that‟s where potential employees are. Fifty percent of employers use Facebook in their hiring process, according to a Social Jobs Partnership survey.”
Nov. 28 Forbes.com article LinkedIn‟s new Ads API will allow developers to build customized tools for marketers, which could mean the automatic creation of ad campaigns. Still, advertisers also could quickly change spending to other social media outlets.
13 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com
LinkedIn Corp.
. “LinkedIn is launching a new Ads API that will make it easier for social media marketers to manage their LinkedIn campaigns. That could mean future growth in the company‟s ad revenue.” . “Previously, many advertisers have been managing their ads on LinkedIn‟s self-serve interface. With the new API, developers can build customized tools for marketers on third party services. This means that advertisers could do things like automatically create scores of ad campaigns and test different ads on LinkedIn, or quickly change spending across LinkedIn and other social media outlets in real-time, LinkedIn says.” . “LinkedIn generated $64 million or 25% of its total revenue from advertising in its most recent quarter. With the new Ads API, LinkedIn is looking to grow advertising and make it an easier box to check across the variety of online advertising options.” . “LinkedIn now has 187 million members and 3 billion monthly page views.”
Nov. 11 article from The Boston Globe Monster has slipped from being an industry innovator to an industry follower. Competition from Indeed.com and even Craigslist has undercut Monster‟s leadership position. . “„Monster is like a dinosaur that never innovated or changed,‟ says Keith Cline, a tech industry recruiter whose firm, Dissero, serves clients in the Boston area. „In fact, if someone‟s resume is on Monster and they‟re in the tech field, I‟d be a little skeptical.‟” . “Taylor [the founder] left the company in 2005 to launch another start-up. Monster found itself competing with not just established sites like CareerBuilder and HotJobs, but also new players like SimplyHired and Indeed. The new „aggregators‟ displayed open positions from many different sites, including corporate websites and Monster itself.” . “Thanks to its comprehensiveness, Connecticut-based Indeed eventually began attracting more visitors than Monster. In September, Indeed was acquired by Recruit Co. of Japan for a reported price of about $1 billion. . Sites like Craigslist undercut Monster‟s prices. Monster‟s cheapest job listing targeting Boston workers costs $365; the same listing on Craigslist is $25. . “Then there‟s LinkedIn, founded in 2003. The social networking site de-stigmatized the act of keeping your CV up to date, and in full public view. LinkedIn also enabled employees to solicit endorsements from former bosses and colleagues, and reach out to friends of friends to get some inside information about an open position.” . “Monster responded with its own service, Monster Networking. But unlike LinkedIn, Monster Networking came with a subscription fee, and it never took off. This year, for the first time, LinkedIn‟s annual revenues will likely surpass Monster‟s.” . “In its earliest days, Monster.com was a disruptive force in the newspaper industry, taking away revenues from help-wanted advertising that newspapers had long considered their birthright. But then Monster got disrupted itself. „The hunter became the hunted, the innovator became the defensive and reluctant follower,‟ says Hans Gieskes, a former Monster executive.” . “John Sumser, who follows the human resources business at the San Francisco research firm HRxAnalysts, says Monster may have lost its way, but it still has value as a brand because of the awareness it has built up over nearly 20 years.”
Additional research by Rachel Dangermond, Dann Maurno, Renee Euchner and Cheryl Meyer
The Author(s) of this research report certify that all of the views expressed in the report accurately reflect their personal views about any and all of the subject securities and that no part of the Author(s) compensation was, is or will be, directly or indirectly, related to the specific recommendations or views in this report. The Author does not own securities in any of the aforementioned companies. OTA Financial Group LP has a membership interest in Blueshift Research LLC. OTA LLC, an SEC registered broker dealer subsidiary of OTA Financial Group LP, has both market making and proprietary trading operations on several exchanges and alternative trading systems. The affiliated companies of the OTA Financial Group LP, including OTA LLC, its principals, employees or clients may have an interest in the securities discussed herein, in securities of other issuers in other industries, may provide bids and offers of the subject companies and may act as principal in connection with such transactions. Craig Gordon, the founder of Blueshift, has an investment in OTA Financial Group LP. © 2012 Blueshift Research LLC. All rights reserved. This transmission was produced for the exclusive use of Blueshift Research LLC, and may not be reproduced or relied upon, in whole or in part, without Blueshift‟s written consent. The information herein is not intended to be a complete analysis of every material fact in respect to any company or industry discussed. Blueshift Research is a trademark owned by Blueshift Research LLC.
14 1 Ferry Building, Suite 255, San Francisco, CA 94111 | www.blueshiftideas.com