<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Boolean Black Belt &#187; Monster vs. Google</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/category/monster-vs-google/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com</link>
	<description>Leveraging social networks, resume databases, and the Internet for sourcing and recruiting</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:00:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.3</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Resumes on the Internet: Monster vs. Google Round 2</title>
		<link>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/11/resumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google-round-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/11/resumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google-round-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:25:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Boolean Black Belt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Sourcing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Job Boards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Monster vs. Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resume Sourcing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Boolean]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Monster]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resumes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/?p=432</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In response to my post of Resumes on the Internet: Monster vs. Google one of my readers commented that “While it may be true that Monster has more resumes than Google, using a zip code search is not a fair comparison for Google. People who post their resumes on Monster are required to enter their zip code, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;"><a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.booleanblackbelt.com%2F2008%2F11%2Fresumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google-round-2%2F"><img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.booleanblackbelt.com%2F2008%2F11%2Fresumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google-round-2%2F" height="61" width="51" /></a></div><p>In response to my post of <a class="wp-caption-dd" title="Resumes on the Internet: Monster vs. Google" href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/10/resumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google/" target="_blank">Resumes on the Internet: Monster vs. Google </a>one of my readers commented that “While it may be true that Monster has more resumes than Google, using a zip code search is not a fair comparison for Google. People who post their resumes on Monster are required to enter their zip code, while people who resumes are stored online will generally only put their email and/or phone number. Also, even using the term resume can be limiting in Google. Because it was not built to only index resumes, you have to get more creative to filter out the noise. You can try the ~CV or ~Resume, you can also take that out completely and search for types of documents, .DOC, .PDF, etc. and look for words commonly found in CV’s like education, objective, etc.”<a href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/gow-small2.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-452 alignright" title="Faceoff by gamerscoreblog" src="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/gow-small2.jpg" alt="" width="240" height="190" /></a></p>
<p>His comment inspired me to get these industry heavyweights into the ring for a second battle and experiment with not using zip code ranges or the word “resume” when searching for resumes on the Internet using Google. Let’s begin with the same searches as <a class="wp-caption-dd" title="Resumes on the Internet: Monster vs. Google" href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/10/resumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google/" target="_blank">Monster vs. Google Round 1</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Search #1 &#8211; Java, Oracle, Sprint or Nextel, State of MD</strong></p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Google #1 Zip range (original search) = 4 results</span></p>
<p>(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java oracle (sprint | nextel) 20601..21930 (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs<span id="more-432"></span></p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Google #2 No zip range, using area codes instead = 3 results</span></p>
<p>(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java oracle (sprint | nextel) (301 | 410 | 443 | 240) (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Google #3 No zip or state = 6 results, 3 are not local to MD, but we did gain 1 new resume</span></p>
<p>(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java oracle (sprint | nextel) (301 | 410 | 443 | 240) -MD -Maryland -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>Because we know that not everyone actually titles or saves or refers to their resume as a “resume,” we’ll try to search for words commonly found on resumes. Note – I am not a fan of ~resume or ~cv because I tend to get lots of junk. I am not fooled by a larger quantity of results when the quality goes down – it’s not about quantity, it’s about relevance. Also, not every mention of “cv” is actually referring to a curriculum vitae – I get all kinds of strange false positives with the letters CV. “CV” is more common internationally than in the U.S., and in this case, we’re searching for U.S. based candidates. Additionally, as one observant reader pointed out, many online resumes are of people at educational institutions (.edu) – and many of those contain mention of CV. For most positions, people with only educational experience are not viable candidates. So, instead of shooting for the word “resume,” we’ll go for common resume words:</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Google #4 No mention of “resume,” using zip range = 33 results, however &#8211; <strong>no resumes I can see</strong></span></p>
<p>NOT &#8220;resume&#8221; (objective | summary) education (history | experience) java oracle (sprint | nextel) 20601..21930 (301 | 410 | 443 | 240) (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>Note – for you search geeks out there, using -intitle:resume -inurl:resume did not work as the syntax suggests it should – it still includes the word “resume” in the url. For example, this search:</p>
<p>-intitle:resume -inurl:resume (objective | summary) education (history | experience) java oracle (sprint | nextel) 20601..21930 (301 | 410 | 443 | 240) (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>Yielded results like this:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/google-intitle-inurl-anomaly.png"><img class="size-full wp-image-447 alignnone" title="google-intitle-inurl-anomaly" src="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/google-intitle-inurl-anomaly.png" alt="Google -intitle:/-inurl" width="450" height="215" /></a></p>
<div>As you can see &#8211; the word &#8220;resume&#8221; is still in the url&#8217;s, even though I used -inurl:resume.</div>
<div class="mceTemp"><a href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/google-resume-search-12.png"></a></div>
<div>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Monster #1 &#8211; 123 results, ALL resumes</span></p>
<p>Java and oracle and (sprint or nextel)</p></div>
<p><strong>Verdict: Monster crushed Google</strong></p>
<p><strong>Search #2 Java, Oracle, State of MD (very simple and broad search)</strong></p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Google #1 – Zip range (original search) = 220 results</span></p>
<p>(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java oracle 20601..21930 (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Google #2 No zip range, using area codes instead = 218 results. HOWEVER, these results have significant overlap with Google search #1</span></p>
<p>(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java oracle (301 | 240 | 443 | 410) (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>I tried to shoot for mutually exclusive results by negating the zip code range from search #1, however, I could not negate the zip code range and get it to run properly. For example, I tried all 3 variations below to no proper effect:<br />
-20601..21930<br />
-(20601..21930)<br />
NOT 20601..21930</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Google #3 No mention of zip or state – just area codes = 375</span></p>
<p>(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java oracle (301 | 240 | 443 | 410) -MD -Maryland -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>While this search returned 375 results – most of the results are false positives of non local candidates. See below:</p>
<div class="mceTemp">
<div class="mceTemp"><a href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/google-resume-search-21.png"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-441" title="google-resume-search-21" src="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/google-resume-search-21.png" alt="" width="449" height="341" /></a></div>
</div>
<p>As you can see, the MD-specific area code numbers come up as false positive hits in non-local resumes</p>
<p>I will not bother with not using (intitle:resume | inurl:resume) – as stated previously, although I concede that targeting the word “resume” is limiting, whenever you go beyond it, you get tons of garbage false positive results (see Search #1 above). I (and most sourcers and recruiters) should have better (higher yield) sources to tap for Talent rather than having to dig through large quantities of false positives to find a handful of relevant results.</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Monster &#8211; 592 results @ 1 month, 1000+ @ 3 months</span></p>
<p>Java and oracle – in MD</p>
<p><strong>Verdict: Monster destroys Google</strong></p>
<p><strong>Conclusion</strong><br />
After seeing the results of Search scenarios #1 and #2, I will not bother to repeat the other searches I executed in <a class="wp-caption-dd" title="Resumes on the Internet: Monster vs. Google" href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/10/resumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google/" target="_blank">Monster vs. Google Round 1</a>. I’ve seen enough to know that regardless of how you spin Booleans searching for candidates on the Internet (zip codes, area codes, resume or not resume, etc&#8230;), the quantity of candidates with resumes on the Internet is not as large as many would believe or assume, and certainly not even close to as large as even 1 of the major online job boards.</p>
<p>The reader who inspired this post made an excellent point &#8211; Google and other search engines are not designed to index resumes. That&#8217;s why I have never been crazy about finding resumes in the Internet &#8211; while it certainly can be done, it&#8217;s like using a screwdriver as a hammer &#8211; you&#8217;re trying to use a tool for something other than it&#8217;s original or intended design.  That certainly explains the results of this exercise.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re looking for resumes &#8211; why not leverage systems specifically designed to index resumes, like the job boards (paid and free), as well as your own internal database/ATS? Which, by the way, is also free.</p>
<p>And if you happen to believe the hype that the job boards have poor quality candidates – <a class="wp-caption-dd" title="An objective look at the quality of candidates on the major job boards" href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/10/job-boards-poor-candidate-quality-dont-believe-the-hype/" target="_blank">please read this post on the quality of job board candidates</a> that will provide you with a reality check.</p>
<p>I hope you enjoyed round 2!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/11/resumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google-round-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Resumes on the Internet: Monster vs. Google</title>
		<link>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/10/resumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google/</link>
		<comments>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/10/resumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:12:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Boolean Black Belt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Sourcing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Job Boards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Monster vs. Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Boolean]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Monster]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resumes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/?p=255</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you are a sourcer or recruiter I am sure that at some point in your career you&#8217;ve read somewhere or heard someone say how the Internet has 10X the number of candidates that can be found on the online job boards. I&#8217;ve always taken that for face value because, to be honest, it&#8217;s really [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;"><a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.booleanblackbelt.com%2F2008%2F10%2Fresumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google%2F"><img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.booleanblackbelt.com%2F2008%2F10%2Fresumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google%2F" height="61" width="51" /></a></div><p><a href="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/cat-vs-mouse-bw.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-266 alignright" title="cat-vs-mouse-bw" src="http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/cat-vs-mouse-bw-237x300.jpg" alt="" width="237" height="300" /></a>If you are a sourcer or recruiter I am sure that at some point in your career you&#8217;ve read somewhere or heard someone say how the Internet has 10X the number of candidates that can be found on the online job boards. I&#8217;ve always taken that for face value because, to be honest, it&#8217;s really tough to prove or disprove such a figure/statement.</p>
<p>However, I am a little bit of a skeptic by nature and I tend to question everything. Socrates and I would have been fast friends. I don&#8217;t typically accept what other people say or write just because they say or write it. So that whole &#8220;there are TONS more candidates on the Internet than the job boards&#8221; thing has been slowly eating away at me and I&#8217;ve decided to take a stab at dispelling the myth by pitting The Internet (via Google) vs. Monster.</p>
<p>Before you jump all over the Boolean search strings I settled on for this little exercise - I&#8217;m going to keep them relatively simple for easy apples-to-apples comparisons. I am well aware that the searches you see below can be tweaked in many ways &#8211; and just so you know, I did experiment with them before settling on a particular search string format. I did not find any <em>significant </em>variation in the results by tweaking the approach I took to pulling resumes. For example, when I used intitle:~resume, I got a couple extra CV hits, but also a bunch of false positives that were not resumes &#8211; so I kept it pure and simple at intitle:resume.</p>
<p>I chose to go with 1 Internet search engine (Google) and 1 major job board (Monster). Yes &#8211; I know that there are resumes that you can only find using other search engines (hey &#8211; I do have a Black Belt in Boolean) - but I figured I would let the 800 lb gorillas of their respective niches battle it out. Plus, there are other major job boards &#8211; so we&#8217;re even.</p>
<p>It is important to bear in mind that I set out to just run a little experiment to see how many resumes I could find via Google for particular search terms/skills in specific locations vs. how many I could find on Monster with the same search terms and locations.  I chose the state of Maryland and a 20 mile radius of 94118 in San Francisco, CA. </p>
<p>Google &#8211; are you ready? Monster &#8211; are you ready? Now, LET&#8217;S GET IT ON!!! <span id="more-255"></span></p>
<p><strong>Search #1 &#8211; Java, Oracle, Sprint or Nextel, State of MD</strong></p>
<p>Google &#8211; 4 results<br />
(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java oracle (sprint | nextel) 20601..21930 (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs<br />
 <br />
Monster &#8211; 123 results, ALL resumes<br />
Java and oracle and (sprint or nextel)</p>
<p><strong>Search #2 Java, Oracle, State of MD</strong></p>
<p>Google &#8211; 182 results<br />
(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java oracle 20601..21930 (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>Monster &#8211; 592 results @ 1 month, 1000+ @ 3 months<br />
Java and oracle – in MD</p>
<p>And just out of curiosity &#8211; I ran a simple 1 word search of Java in the state of Maryland on Google and got 316 results. (intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java 20601..21930 (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>Then, to add insult to injury, I decided to up the ante on Monster and add a whole bunch of other junk to give Monster the squeeze. But even so, with this search, I still got 120 results going with the ALL resumes date range: java and (weblogic or websphere) and apache and J2EE and XML and unix and (shell or script*) and oracle and PL/SQL<br />
           <br />
<strong>Let&#8217;s go to the other coast (West SIIIIIIDE!)</strong></p>
<p><strong>Search: Java, Oracle, 20 mile radius of 94118 in San Francisco, CA</strong></p>
<p>Google &#8211; 575 results<br />
(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java oracle 94005..94979 (CA | California) -~job -~jobs<br />
           <br />
Monster - 301 @ 1 month, 613 @ 3 months, 911 @ 6 months<br />
Java and oracle – 20 mile radius of 94118 in San Fran</p>
<p><strong>Search: Java, Oracle, Weblogic or Websphere, Apache, J2EE, XML, UNIX, shell or script*, oracle, PL/SQL &#8211; 20 mile radius of 94118 in San Francisco, CA</strong></p>
<p>Google &#8211; 12 results<br />
(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) java (weblogic | websphere) apache J2EE XML unix (shell | ~script) oracle PL/SQL 94005..94979 (CA | California) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>Monster &#8211; 81 results (date range = all) <br />
java and (weblogic or websphere) and apache and J2EE and XML and unix and (shell or script*) and oracle and PL/SQL<br />
      <br />
<strong>Okay &#8211; now that we&#8217;ve taken a swing at some simple Information Technology searches, let&#8217;s move onto Accounting.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Search: Accountant in the state of MD</strong></p>
<p>Google &#8211; 19 results<br />
(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) &#8220;accountant&#8221; 20601..21930 (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs<br />
           <br />
Monster &#8211; 711 results @ 1 month<br />
accountant</p>
<p>Wow &#8211; Monster crushed Google on that one. Let&#8217;s load up and see how many CPA&#8217;s with Big 4 experience Monster can find in Maryland:<br />
 <br />
accountant and (CPA or &#8220;certified public&#8221;) and (&#8221;big 4&#8243; or &#8220;big 5&#8243; or deloitte or Andersen or Accenture or PWC or KPMG or coopers or &#8220;price waterhouse&#8221; or pricewaterhouse* or Ernst* or &#8220;E&amp;Y&#8221; or capgemini or bearingpoint or &#8220;bearing point&#8221; or &#8220;cap gemini&#8221;)</p>
<p>210 results in MD, all resumes date range.</p>
<p><strong>And now, let&#8217;s show some accounting love to San Fran.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Search: Accountant in 20 mile radius 94118 in San Francisco</strong></p>
<p>Google &#8211; 30 results<br />
(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) &#8220;accountant&#8221; 94005..94979 (CA | California) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>Monster &#8211; 333 @ 1 month, 773 @ 3 months, 1000+ @ 6 months<br />
Accountant<br />
           <br />
Monster&#8217;s not even breaking a sweat. Let&#8217;s try the CPA with Big 4 search: <br />
accountant and (CPA or &#8220;certified public&#8221;) and (&#8221;big 4&#8243; or &#8220;big 5&#8243; or deloitte or Andersen or Accenture or PWC or KPMG or coopers or &#8220;price waterhouse&#8221; or pricewaterhouse* or Ernst* or &#8220;E&amp;Y&#8221; or capgemini or bearingpoint or &#8220;bearing point&#8221; or &#8220;cap gemini&#8221;)<br />
           <br />
155 @ all resumes date range.<br />
 <br />
<strong>I&#8217;ve tried a basic IT and F&amp;A searches &#8211; let&#8217;s go a little more off the beaten path (for some).</strong></p>
<p><strong>Search: Chemist with degree in chemistry or biochemistry in a 20 mile radius of 94118 in San Francisco</strong></p>
<p>Google &#8211; 17 results <br />
(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) &#8220;chemist&#8221; (chemistry | biochemistry) 94005..94979 (CA | California) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>Monster - 254 results @ all resumes<br />
Chemist and (chemistry or biochemistry)</p>
<p>Monster still isn&#8217;t breathing heavy. Must be all of the high altitude training.  Once again, let&#8217;s load up to try and test Monster with something more challenging:   <br />
      <br />
Chemist and (chemistry or biochemistry) and (HPLC or &#8220;Liquid Chromatography&#8221; or GC* or GPC or LC* or &#8220;gas chromatography&#8221; or UV* or FT* or NMR) and (USP or ICH or GMP* or cGMP* or GLP*)</p>
<p>84 results @ all resumes<br />
 <br />
<strong>Back to the East coast for chemists</strong><br />
 <br />
<strong>Search: Chemist with degree in chemistry or biochemistry in the state of MD</strong><br />
Google &#8211; 10 results <br />
(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) &#8220;chemist&#8221; (chemistry | biochemistry) 20601..21930 (MD | Maryland) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>Monster &#8211; 572 results @ all resumes data range </p>
<p>Is anyone else seeing a trend here?</p>
<p>Once again, I will try and stress Monster: <br />
Chemist and (chemistry or biochemistry) and (HPLC or &#8220;Liquid Chromatography&#8221; or GC* or GPC or LC* or &#8220;gas chromatography&#8221; or UV* or FT* or NMR) and (USP or ICH or GMP* or cGMP* or GLP*)<br />
           <br />
161 results @ all resumes date range<br />
 <br />
<strong>Let&#8217;s go even farther off the beaten path and look for something like a senior executive of medical device product development/improvement in CA.</strong></p>
<p>Google &#8211; entire state of CA &#8211; 1 result<br />
(intitle:resume | inurl:resume) (VP | &#8220;vice president&#8221; | Director) (quality | regulatory) (&#8221;cfr 820&#8243; | 13485) (~product | ~process) ~improve (~health | ~medical) ~device 90001..96162 (CA | California) -~job -~jobs</p>
<p>Monster &#8211; entire state of CA &#8211; 153 results<br />
(VP or &#8220;vice president&#8221; or Director) and (quality or regulatory) and (&#8221;cfr 820&#8243; or 13485) and (product or products or process or processes) and improve* and (health* or medical) and device*</p>
<p><strong>Conclusion</strong><br />
Although this little experiment wasn&#8217;t very extensive, it does serve as a fair apples-to-apples comparison of the number of resume results you can get on the Internet (via Google) and on Monster with specific searches in specific locations.</p>
<p>The numbers speak for themselves. The Internet via Google didn&#8217;t stand up to well to the hype that the Internet has tons more resumes than the job boards &#8211; heck, it had sand kicked in its face by just one job board &#8211; Monster.</p>
<p>We also confirmed that there are more Information Technology resumes on the Internet than non-I.T. folks, such as accountants and chemists &#8211; at least in Maryland and the Bay area. Although I suspect this is true across all 50 states, and perhaps the world.</p>
<p>I had fun with this comparison &#8211; look for more coming soon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.booleanblackbelt.com/2008/10/resumes-on-the-internet-monster-vs-google/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
