Post by account_disabled on Dec 24, 2023 2:31:06 GMT -8
The idea (which in my opinion does not work) is not to reveal too much, not to say too much to save some for the interview. I am convinced that this does not work (for 2 reasons) and that it is also unsuitable for the job search situation. If a profile is not seen, it's simple: no interview. A LinkedIn profile can be seen because it contains the keywords that are searched for, in the form in which they are searched. If a recruiter is looking for a marketing manager in the food industry, he can search for: A marketing manager, a marketing director, a product manager, a group manager, a marketing director, Someone who works in the food or food industry.
Certainly only one spelling is correct, but today… that doesn’t mean anything. Usage takes precedence Email Data over rigor. A food, FMCG, FMCG, general public, mass consumption, btoc, b2c profile. Corporate, strategic, operational marketing, products, services…. That means dozens of possible combinations. If a profile presents itself as “food marketing manager” and we are looking for a “PGC marketing manager”, we will not see it. It's a shame for those who do a search: they don't see a profile that could match them. It's a shame about the profile, it won't be seen and won't be able to have an interview (at least for this request).
Google at fault Google has not accustomed us well. On Google, when we search for “iphon Aple”, Google understands that we are looking for “iphone Apple” and offers us the corresponding results. On LinkedIn, when you search for “Aple” you get profiles containing “aple” and no profiles containing “apple”. Google works based on semantic search. LinkedIn works based on a “string” search. The more you expand the semantic field of your profile (synonyms, masculine/feminine, singular/plural, French/English), the more likely you will be to have in your profile the key words corresponding to the skills sought.
Certainly only one spelling is correct, but today… that doesn’t mean anything. Usage takes precedence Email Data over rigor. A food, FMCG, FMCG, general public, mass consumption, btoc, b2c profile. Corporate, strategic, operational marketing, products, services…. That means dozens of possible combinations. If a profile presents itself as “food marketing manager” and we are looking for a “PGC marketing manager”, we will not see it. It's a shame for those who do a search: they don't see a profile that could match them. It's a shame about the profile, it won't be seen and won't be able to have an interview (at least for this request).
Google at fault Google has not accustomed us well. On Google, when we search for “iphon Aple”, Google understands that we are looking for “iphone Apple” and offers us the corresponding results. On LinkedIn, when you search for “Aple” you get profiles containing “aple” and no profiles containing “apple”. Google works based on semantic search. LinkedIn works based on a “string” search. The more you expand the semantic field of your profile (synonyms, masculine/feminine, singular/plural, French/English), the more likely you will be to have in your profile the key words corresponding to the skills sought.