Software runs my life

Author: Scott Savage Page 46 of 68

Ebay CareerOne Partnership

New Digital Media have today announced a partnership between Ebay and CareerOne. Well I use the word ‘partnership’ loosely, because essentially it is a cross-linking agreement. There is a new sub-domain of CareerOne with an Ebay header, and on the flip side Ebay have added a Jobs tab and CareerOne banners smattered through their website.

I understood the MySpace cross-linking. Like their parents, News is trying to get the lazy kids of today to roll their eyeballs over some job ads. But in this case I think the word ‘integration’ is used a bit freely in both partnerships, tacking the header of one site across the body of another is not integration. I know people are going to think I am sponsored, but LinkedIn and SimplyHired did a much better job of integrating two different partners online. Maybe that is unfair because there were more common interests? I think that is the point. A recruiter wouldn’t partner with an auction house in real life, so what makes anyone think it would work online?

There is however a point that I am much more interested in. Maybe Ebay partnered with the wrong News Digital child. Maybe real estate has more in common? Ebay does after all have a Real Estate category, albeit languishing away the Home category. Ebay don’t have much to lose either; the Home – Kitchen category has 9000+ listings, while the Home – Real Estate category has 167. In fact RealEstate.com.au already has general advertising live on Ebay, they just need to take it that little step further.

GPL Licencing Headaches

Let me say this from the start, I think Open Source software is the way of the future. Let me also say that I am not a lawyer. On that point I find it incredibly ironic that the urban definition of the IANAL acronym disclaimer directly references the GPL. This is even taken one step further with another more ridiculous acronym created during a GPL discussion, which conclusively proves that giving acronym loving nerds a sniff of legal jargon is a recipe for disaster.

It also helps explain my point, the GPL isn’t the Open Source saviour some people think it is. I hate to list points, because the people feel they need to find a way to argue against each one rather than the logic as a whole, but I am going to do it anyway:

  1. Money = Evil – Any efforts to profit from Open Source development work is treated with scorn. Comments such as “To release a non-free program is always ethically tainted” frustrate me. Equally promoting an Open Source product does not give you licence to trash commercial software. They are your competitors, if you think you are on their level then treat them with respect.
  2. Discourages Integration – The GPL is brilliant for making utilities. Compilers, databases and graphics programs are all essentially utilities that you interface with in a certain way, but never extend or deeply customise for your own purposes. Deep integration is one of the biggest competitive advantages that Open Source has over commercial software packages, so why make it hard? For example SugarCRM allows web service integration; but even modules, templates and dashlets that integrate within the existing API’s are considered to be covered under the GPL. Is this really a deep extension of the core product?
  3. Patent Protection – Patents are either loved or hated, usually depending on whether your name is on one or not. Regardless, the fact is that they are not going away. Open Source products are just as vulnerable to patent infringements and litigation as commercial software is. As the lines between Open Source and commercial work continue to blur, it is emerging that corporate indemnification is almost becoming a quality assurance stamp. A community cannot offer indemnification, so they really need to focus on their competitive advantages. Stay away from heavy duty licences that just muddy the waters for smaller businesses and institutions, don’t forget a hatred of licences seeded your whole industry!

As with anything legal there is no ironclad solution. As far as I can see the solution is to make it as easy as possible for people to contribute maximum value with minimum overheads and receive value for whatever purpose they desire. Rely on the fact that producing a commercial product that is 99% Open Source is not a safe, competitor-free business model!

LinkedIn as a Retention Tool

By now there are so many recruiters on LinkedIn that it is pretty clear it works as a recruitment tool. But what about as a retention tool?

The first clue I had about this was that a when a staff member was preparing to leave a company they tend to start pumping out the recommendations (and more selfishly, requests for recommendations). The best way to get great recommendations is to first write them for others, and I think the key points are best covered here. The same rules as resumes apply, don’t waffle and put in hard facts where possible. If an HR Manager starts seeing their employees engage in this mass-recommendation tactic then the warning lights should be on, just as they would be on if you saw them tidying up their CV at work.

On a similar note you might notice that the employees are becoming more connected to a competitive organisation, this could be as blatant as linking to a competitor’s recruitment manager or an industry recruiter. Again the real world parallel is seeing them having coffee downstairs with one of these people.

The LinkedIn company pages are also a great retention tool. For example looking at the realestate.com.au company profile gives the realestate.com.au HR manager a guide as to where their people are coming from and going to. The popular profiles might also suggest who is networking hard (or being recruited aggressively) within your company. It would help to keep this page up to date, it might be something that potential hires would find useful. I might have a crack at updating it now, I see LinkedIn have added the ability to upload company logos and company blog RSS feeds, cool!

Page 46 of 68

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén