Nicholas Meyler's Posts - RecruitingBlogs2024-03-29T15:44:12ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeylerhttps://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1526999290?profile=RESIZE_48X48&width=48&height=48&crop=1%3A1https://recruitingblogs.com/profiles/blog/feed?user=32mdngbzo7qy1&xn_auth=noHow To Choose a Recruiter (For Client Companies)tag:recruitingblogs.com,2022-08-15:502551:BlogPost:23380082022-08-15T22:41:43.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph"></p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">The Headhunting/Recruiting Industry has been around (unofficially) for thousands of years. For example, even ancient armies probably needed to find recruits to serve as warriors, and almost all religions had similar representatives whose function it was to find new acolytes, converts, devotees, etc., as well as to renew the faith of former adherents. I would suggest that Recruiting is probably the second oldest…</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph"></p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">The Headhunting/Recruiting Industry has been around (unofficially) for thousands of years. For example, even ancient armies probably needed to find recruits to serve as warriors, and almost all religions had similar representatives whose function it was to find new acolytes, converts, devotees, etc., as well as to renew the faith of former adherents. I would suggest that Recruiting is probably the second oldest profession, at least according to popular belief and history. Modern recruiting, as an industry, began in the 1920's and 1930's (according to the classic text "The Headhunters" by John Byrne (<a href="https://www.amazon.com/HEADHUNTERS-Byrne/dp/0025179500">https://www.amazon.com/HEADHUNTERS-Byrne/dp/0025179500</a>).</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">Since then, the Employment/Staffing Industry has evolved into a $30 billion yearly market (according to Statista: <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/1097508/market-size-executive-search-industry-worldwide/">https://www.statista.com/statistics/1097508/market-size-executive-search-industry-worldwide/</a>) for executive positions. Other estimates, focused more on placements involving 'individual contributor' or 'technical' positions are in the range of as much as $400 billion per year in collected fees, with one firm (relatively unknown and unheard of, even to me, as a participant and exponent of the Industry for 33+ years) called 'Allegis' reporting revenues of $10.4 billion for 2020.</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">The obvious fact is that Executive Search, 'Technical Search' and other "Staffing"-related firms are here to stay, and that they play an essential and vital part in the world's economy, enabling many companies to enhance their functionality and market-share by providing workers who perform essential and valuable functions that allow those companies who hire them to address the needs of their own clients in a more satisfactory fashion.</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">Sometimes, aspersions are cast towards recruiters for the fees they charge, which seem 'high', but are typically simply based on the value of an employee being placed in a specific position, in contrast to the extreme cost and obvious loss to profitability of not having that position filled. Estimates of not having an employee in a key role range from 30% to 50% of that prospective employee's salary, which is why placement firms tend to charge fees in the same range. Companies that offer discounted fees of 25% (and sometimes less) are counting on 'volume business' to make up for the reduction in fees that they offer, and are a good source of bargains on great candidates, as well.</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">When a company pays for a search, what they are really paying for is not the hired candidate (a candidate who is hired is not a 'product', like a toaster or pair of shoes), but for the time of the highly-skilled industry-expert recruiter who dedicates himself/herself towards contacting many potential candidates (often hundreds, and sometimes thousands of people) in a specific niche which only the highly-skilled and expert recruiter would ever be capable of identifying, finding, contacting and reaching. This is why many search firms charge hourly rates ($200 to $700 per hour) like attorneys charge, without any guarantee of results. In a similar manner, 'retained searches' involve 'up-front' payments which do NOT guarantee any results, but which are intended to defray the search firm's expenses, as well as to discourage 'window-shopping' and 'looky-loo' sorts of pseudo-clients, who have insufficient respect for the recruiter's time and value.</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">My solution has been to offer discounted rates, with a hybridized 'retainer' which is refundable if my client is not able to interview at least three candidates I present that they are willing to bring in for an interview at a local site. With the past/current conditions of COVID, we have modified this condition to stipulate that interviews may be conducted as full panel ZOOM- or Skype- video meetings, instead. I have had an extremely high percentage of repeat clientele, whereas old-style firms offering the 'old model' of retainer typically fail 66% of the time, and charge fees which are 40% higher on the base salary, with additional charges on stock-options, bonuses, relocation, sign-on bonuses, and loans.</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">When looking for a search firm to fill your key positions, you should look for someone to be your prime contact (key representative) who will work your critical search personally, and oversee all elements of the search (i.e. industry research, sourcing, contacting, recruiting, negotiation of salary, on-boarding, and follow-thru). Often, the largest companies (which charge the highest fees, and paradoxically, tend to offer inferior customer satisfaction) will divide these functions up into multiple persons, which tends to lead to incomplete communication, loose ends, 'dropped balls', and a less satisfactory outcome. The very rare Headhunter who can offer excellent skill at all these functions is worth his weight in gold (metaphorically as well as literally), and tends to far outperform even the largest and most comprehensive firms, with the largest research staffs. This is a fact I have repeatedly seen proven true, in my 33+ year career.</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">Probably just as important as finding a Headhunter who has complete mastery of all phases of the hiring/recruiting process (truly a rarity!) is finding one who has a strong Industry background. Industry expertise (for me, a Chemical Engineer, I relish the technical challenges of working on searches which stretch my knowledge and understanding of any relevant technology) is a factor which makes an enormous difference, especially since so many recruiters simply 'landed' in their positions from outside fields with no technical expertise whatsoever. For example, the personal 'network' of a recruiter that has actual industry experience in a particular field is likely to be magnitudes larger, with much more familiarity with individual contacts, built up over years of professional practice, than any 'outsider'.</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">The paramount factors any prospective Client company should consider when making their choice for a Headhunter/Partner/Recruiter to fill their key positions should be:</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">(1) How much experience does this individual have in our Company's technology?</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">(2) Is this a recruiter with a successful track-record, or is he/she a 'newbie' offering the lowest possible fees, hoping to secure business?</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">(3) Is this recruiter intellectually 'strong'-enough to interview top scientists and engineers with PhDs and multiple patents, to be able to distinguish whether those candidates are really good 'fits' for a specific position?</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">(4) Is this Headhunter 'hands-on' throughout the entire process (from 'womb-to-tomb'), ensuring the highest possible level of quality control on the introduction, 'vetting', etc. of candidates; thru the offer, negotiation, and closing stages?</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">(5) Does this recruiter follow up with the candidates to ensure that they actually start at the position, once they have accepted the offer, and does he know how to deal with situations like 'changes of heart', 'counter-offers', 'cold-feet', and so on?</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">(6) Is this Headhunter a skilled-enough 'Management Consultant' (which all great Recruiters really need to be, to be successful) to be able to teach the partners (HR, etc.) how to successfully conduct a search and hire key employees, how to improve their own practices, how to correct any mistakes they are prone to make?</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">(7) Is this Headhunter/Partner able to communicate well and show in-company hiring teams how to succeed?</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">(8) Does this vendor/Consultant really care about your company's success? Is he/she willing to 'go the extra mile' to make success happen in terms of hiring the right person?</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">(9) Do you get a good 'gut-feeling' about this person, or do you feel doubts and have reasons to wonder about his/her personality/ethics/behavior or other factors which might make it hard to work or partner together?</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">(10) Does this recruiter offer you a clear-cut 'game-plan' whereby he/she will fulfill the obligations you wish to bestow upon him/her? Is that game plan thorough, definitive, and believable? Do you have confidence in the dedication of this person you are choosing to make your Company a better and more competitive one?</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph">Good luck in making the right decision! The future of your Company can be affected significantly by it. I recall the time I placed one individual with 700 patents, and he led his new firm to over $1 billion in new business. The choice is yours.</p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph"></p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph"></p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph"></p>
<p class="reader-text-block__paragraph"><a href="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/10769686467?profile=original" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><br/> <img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/10769686467?profile=RESIZE_710x" class="align-full"/></a></p>Looking for Thoughts on Resume Writing Servicestag:recruitingblogs.com,2022-07-18:502551:BlogPost:23368492022-07-18T23:53:55.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>I have rewritten and helped revise a fair number of resumes (without charge to candidates) during my decades as a recruiter, but I've never offered my services for a fee, generally feeling that I should stick to what I enjoy most, which is the actual hands-on process of recruiting, itself. A few of my colleagues who enjoy writing offer their work and service for about $500 to $750 per resume, which I assume is a reasonable rate.</span><br></br><br></br><span>I'm curious about…</span></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>I have rewritten and helped revise a fair number of resumes (without charge to candidates) during my decades as a recruiter, but I've never offered my services for a fee, generally feeling that I should stick to what I enjoy most, which is the actual hands-on process of recruiting, itself. A few of my colleagues who enjoy writing offer their work and service for about $500 to $750 per resume, which I assume is a reasonable rate.</span><br/><br/><span>I'm curious about people's opinions of the field of Resume Writing, in general. Were their experiences positive? Did they get better results with their new resumes? Did they feel that the service was helpful and were the rates fair? What were their general observations of the 'literary' or professional merits of those who provide the service?</span><br/><br/><span>Although I am a direct descendant of six out of eight of William Shakespeare's great grandparents, and enjoy writing myself, I've never charged directly for my writing, even for articles published in major industry journals. I do have the heritage for writing, being related to Robert Frost, Lord Byron, William Faulkner, Sinclair Lewis, Ezra Pound, Walt Whitman, Henry Longfellow, Jack London, James Joyce, James Thurber, T.S. Eliot, and Virginia Woolf, etc. I know this, because I have spent many (too many?) hours researching my genealogy.</span><br/><br/><span>My cousin who won a Nobel Peace Prize was unrelated to any of the above-mentioned people, himself, and stated publicly that he never really enjoyed writing or the process of writing, and never felt that he was able to really communicate what he intended as well as he wanted. I do think that there might be a genetic component to self-expression.</span><br/><br/><span>Please let me know if you have had any interesting experiences or thoughts with resume writers and their services. Most importantly: "Did it help you in your job search?"</span></p>Why Are Recruiting Fees What They Are?tag:recruitingblogs.com,2022-07-18:502551:BlogPost:23369192022-07-18T03:51:05.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><span>Why are Headhunter's fees usually 30% to 50% of a first-year salary for a placed candidate? I occasionally receive questions about the fee structure for placements I make as an Executive Recruiter/Headhunter, and thought it might be constructive to explain.</span><br></br><br></br><span>In the early days of the Industry (i.e. "Search") it was calculated by diligent researchers, economists, CEOs and hiring managers that the fair cost to a company, of NOT having a person in a needed role (i.e.…</span></p>
<p><span>Why are Headhunter's fees usually 30% to 50% of a first-year salary for a placed candidate? I occasionally receive questions about the fee structure for placements I make as an Executive Recruiter/Headhunter, and thought it might be constructive to explain.</span><br/><br/><span>In the early days of the Industry (i.e. "Search") it was calculated by diligent researchers, economists, CEOs and hiring managers that the fair cost to a company, of NOT having a person in a needed role (i.e. the Recruiter's "fee"), is usually about one-third to one-half of the yearly salary of the position. This is a simple calculation: every month the position is unfilled, the cost of the monthly salary is lost by the company which needs to hire, since the services they need are not provided. How long does it take to fill a position? Usually three to six months.</span><br/><br/><span>The cost-benefit analysis of revenues lost by not filling a key position are rather clear-cut, indicating that the services of a Recruiter with a great network, and strong technical knowledge, who successfully fills that position, are completely worth the industry standard of 33% of the first-years' salary + bonus + stock options. I've been told by my Ivy-League friends who are hiring executives that they have not balked at paying 50% fees for a key candidate, as well.</span><br/><br/><span>People who quibble with my fees annoy me, and rightly so. My fees are already highly discounted down to 25%. I recently had an experience where a rather naive individual offered me a mere 10% for my work. This is incredibly offensive, of course. I will not work with anyone who insults my decades of expertise and accomplishments.</span><br/><br/><span>Word to the wise: This is the time of the highest demand for candidates in the past 50 years. Recruiter fees are completely fair and reasonable, and efforts to diminish them will end in failure, based on simple principles of Economics: supply and demand, specifically. I discussed this issue tonight with a couple of friends who are Economists on the faculty of UCLA, a University founded by my great-great grandfather.</span><br/><br/><span>In any case, rest assured that the fee structure for Executive or Technical search (especially Retained search) is extremely fair and well-worth the investment. I offer Retained search at a discounted rate, to incentivize my clients. Many people forget, or don't understand, that the closure rate of successful placements in Retained searches is about 2x or 3x that of Contingency searches (where a fee is only due when a candidate is actually hired and starts). Most competent Recruiters know that Contingency searches are only successful about a third of the time, so they will typically "juggle" multiple searches (from 3 to 10 is fairly common), counting on the odds to allow them to earn fees.</span><br/><br/><span>MORAL: You get what you pay for, and efforts to shortcut or cheat the system are mostly just foolish, and evidence of a lack of seriousness about hiring.</span></p>The Virtues of Retained Searchtag:recruitingblogs.com,2019-11-14:502551:BlogPost:21553142019-11-14T01:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<div class="ember-view" id="ember884"><div class="reader-article-content" dir="ltr"><p><a href="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3712057387?profile=original" rel="noopener" target="_blank"><img class="align-full" src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3712057387?profile=RESIZE_710x"></img></a></p>
<p></p>
<p>Why Retain Me? (The Hidden Benefits of Retained Search)</p>
<p>In the World of Search, aka ‘Technical Search’, or ‘Executive Search’, which are rather synonymous terms; there exist two modalities: ‘Contingency’ and ‘Retainer’. Contingency search is where a fee…</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ember884" class="ember-view"><div dir="ltr" class="reader-article-content"><p><a href="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3712057387?profile=original" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3712057387?profile=RESIZE_710x" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p></p>
<p>Why Retain Me? (The Hidden Benefits of Retained Search)</p>
<p>In the World of Search, aka ‘Technical Search’, or ‘Executive Search’, which are rather synonymous terms; there exist two modalities: ‘Contingency’ and ‘Retainer’. Contingency search is where a fee is only charged when a candidate who has been hired actually starts at the company/client; whereas retained search is more similar to investing and buying the services of an attorney (for example) who will be dedicated to solving the case: It involves an initial deposit up-front, which is paid to initiate the search, defray costs of overhead, and assure that a highly-skilled recruiter with many years of expertise in the “Black Art” of hiring and finding great people is paid for their time and effort.</p>
<p>Many clients wonder why they should bother to pay a retainer fee when there is no commitment involved in the alternate choice of contingent search, and if they are satisfied with the result of a contingent search, and hire a candidate whom the recruiter has presented, then of course the recruiter will be paid for his services. Why put down any kind of deposit when there is no real need?</p>
<p>This is a fallacy – an illusion.</p>
<p>Recruiters who are working on contingency basis are stacking up multiple searches and working on them in parallel or tandem. Only one-third of all contingency searches ever get filled by the recruiter who works on them… perhaps even less. The only strategy for a contingency recruiter that makes sense is to juggle as many searches as possible, simultaneously. If the recruiter is extremely deft and quick, there is a chance to make multiple placements out of 3 ‘juggled’ contingency searches, but that is clearly against the odds. This means that the recruiter devotes less time to the individual searches, and more time to the goal of maximizing the likelihood of billing. Whichever searches are more difficult will then be neglected, and most likely left unfilled.</p>
<p>Realistically, a recruiter who gymnastically and acrobatically juggles searches is performing a very challenging feat; but it is actually the client or customer who suffers, because the recruiter is smart enough to know what he needs to do to bill (i.e. make an actual placement). For example, I would happily juggle more than three searches in order to make a placement, if I can reduce the amount of Time I waste on the searches that are least likely to pay or provide remunerative benefits of some kind. I’m sure most other recruiters would feel the same as well.</p>
<p>This is why I prefer and recommend retained search as the superior mode or solution for hiring the best and most qualified people for the job. For instance, retained search gives me an assurance that the client actually cares about the position enough to retain me – i.e. they have ‘skin in the game’. If I lose, they lose, which means that they need to be willing to cooperate with me to the needed extent… to provide them the very best possible service.</p>
<p>By retaining me – since I am a proven commodity at finding great employees -- the client has purchased a level of assurance that there will be a committed effort to solving the search to its completion, as opposed to the approach of juggling and catching the ‘low-hanging’ fruit which is most readily available. Rather than being distracted by aberrant assignments where the client is really only on a “fishing expedition”, or cancels the search without hiring anyone, for reasons rarely explained, the retained recruiter is enabled to continue on his quest for the best employee, the best solution, and enabled to conduct an “exhaustive search” which really investigates not merely ‘low-hanging’ and easily-accesible candidates, but most importantly, those candidates which are perhaps the hardest to find and contact.</p>
<p>My goal, as a solution-provider, has always been to find the best candidate in the World (who fits the job description, salary requirements, availability, etc. of the job description). If a company truly wants to find the best candidate, and not just fill a position with a ‘warm body’, retained search is the superior solution.</p>
<p>Some arguments have been made that “retained search is only for C-level positions”, like CEO, CTO, COO, CDO, CIO, CTO etc. (all of which I have accomplished, myself). This is, again, a fallacy, because, even in the very first retained placement I ever made, at the very beginning of my career, the candidate stayed with the company for 12 years, and rose to the rank of Vice-President. This was, of course, an enormous benefit to my client, a small company where I placed about 20% of the employees, which eventually was sold for about $500 million, a few years later.</p>
<p>The value of retained search is where a search is particularly difficult to solve, yet still critical for the company. In my experience, I have seen multiple companies who have had a specific and important position open for more than two years, and as a retained recruiter, I was able to fill those positions with candidates I found in less than two weeks. One client was a $10+ Billion firm which obviously had the Capital and finances to pay recruiters, but no one actually succeeded in filling that position until a retained search.</p>
<p>Not all recruiters are created equal. Some of us are much better at research, persuasion, empathy, sales, etc. Personally, while I love the research portion of my work, I also greatly enjoy explaining to candidates why a specific job is in their best career interests, as well as counseling client companies on why they should interview specific candidates.</p>
<p>Full disclosure: I must admit that the largest fee I ever charged ($151,000) was a contingency search which basically involved making only one phone call to the client to determine if they had interest in the candidate. This is hardly typical, however. Despite this result, I am still convinced that retained search provides superior results to my clients. That was a very rare instance, where the company benefitted with ROI of about 10,000x. Yet, statistically speaking, and most realistically, retained search is more likely to produce best or better results.</p>
<p>Among other reasons, contingent searches are usually not exclusive, and, as a result, with multiple recruiters contacting the same candidates, not only does it create a bad impression among those we are most hoping to impress, but it also potentially leads to multiple submissions of the same candidate by different recruiters. This is unfortunate, and can also be quite costly for the client, if both recruiters insist on being paid. Also, a candidate tends to have a lot more attention when he/she hears that a search is taken seriously enough to be 'retained'. It adds a cache' of credibility that cannot be easily dismissed.</p>
<p>On my side, as a recruiter who spends innumerable hours researching the qualifications of candidates, I question why a client would ask me to work a search on ‘Contingent’ basis, unless they were not serious about hiring the position. What happens, mostly, in my case, is that clients who request contingent searches are merely ‘testing the waters’, ‘fishing’, etc. They are not really serious about hiring. Of course, there are exceptions. I am grateful for those exceptions, because they have made me a considerable amount of income, as well, but there is always a degree of “iffiness” about them that is distracting and counter-productive.</p>
<p>Willingness to pay a fee in advance demonstrates being serious about the need to fill the position. This is a fundamental criterion of ‘qualifying’ the validity of the opening, for me. Take it from me, as someone who has charged $151,000 for that single phone call to a client – retained search is still a much better solution for both parties.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="reader-flag-content__wrapper mb4 clear-both"></div>Are Headhunters Necessary? Why Recruiters Are So Valuabletag:recruitingblogs.com,2019-01-22:502551:BlogPost:20981412019-01-22T05:40:36.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<div class="ember-view" id="ember92"><div class="reader-article-content" dir="ltr"><p>The Executive Search Industry, worldwide, is a $200 Billion per year phenomenon, still very much growing and in demand. Companies, even those with the world’s most advanced search capabilities, such as Google, still pay enormous fees for finding candidates. For example, Google paid the world’s highest search fee ($100,000,000+) to Heidrick and Struggles, for finding Eric Schmidt to be their new CEO, back in…</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ember92" class="ember-view"><div dir="ltr" class="reader-article-content"><p>The Executive Search Industry, worldwide, is a $200 Billion per year phenomenon, still very much growing and in demand. Companies, even those with the world’s most advanced search capabilities, such as Google, still pay enormous fees for finding candidates. For example, Google paid the world’s highest search fee ($100,000,000+) to Heidrick and Struggles, for finding Eric Schmidt to be their new CEO, back in 2001.</p>
<p>I have been in the Search Industry for almost 30 years, myself, and yet people still ask me: “Why do companies need recruiters to hire people?” The answer is stunningly simple, especially in these times. With 7,000,000 current job openings, and only 6,000,000 unemployed people looking for work, the odds against ANY employer finding the ‘right’ candidate are very high. </p>
<p>Recruiters, on the other hand, are especially skilled in identifying potential job candidates, and primarily contact persons who aren’t actually even actively looking for a new position. They tap into the “passive candidate” market – people who are shrewd businessmen and skilled professionals, who know that their value is something companies will pay for, but are too busy and too happy to be looking for other positions. The thought of reading job ads would probably rarely even enter their minds.</p>
<p>Typical data show that a candidate who interviews for, and successfully receives a job offer, will receive a 10% pay hike. Doing so potentially increases his/her salary by more than a year’s worth of raises at a standard job. For that reason, candidates who smartly change jobs from time-to-time tend to earn higher overall salaries than those who “stay put”, and potentially get taken for granted by their employer. The converse is also true: those who change jobs every year, or very frequently, tend to be viewed askance by hiring managers who perceive them to be ‘flight risks’. </p>
<p>The Client who secures or retains the services of a skilled Headhunter/Recruiter is also paying for the service of ‘screening out’ undesirable candidates who might have bad reputations for ‘job-hopping’, bad references, or just ‘red flags’ suggesting problematic behavior or issues. Headhunters perform far more than a service of merely finding ‘warm bodies’ for a job opening -- they also screen, qualify, identify and recruit those who wouldn’t otherwise be interested or perhaps even hear about an opening.</p>
<p>Cost is also an important additional factor in justifying the expense of a professional recruiter. For one, open positions cost companies money. Without having a specific role filled, the cost is at least whatever the monthly salary is multiplied by the number of months the position is open. For this reason, it was decided early on in the beginning of Executive Search as a field that a fee for three months of work by the recruiter (to fill the position, based on typical length of searches) was easily fair. Other estimates of the cost of an open position range from 1.5x to 3x the salary.</p>
<p>Clearly, a Headhunter who works quickly and effectively to provide complete hiring solutions within an even shorter time-frame (say, one month, which is often the case) is saving the Client even more, and can often accomplish this because of superior industry knowledge, as well as superior search technique, and superior communication skills.</p>
<p>A Headhunter with Industry knowledge can be especially valuable to a company trying to hire people in other ways, too. For example, I once placed an individual with over 200 patents whose contributions to his next company took them from $100,000,000 per year revenues into $1 billion per year revenues, within 5 years. My research to find this person was critical, and involved combing thru many hundreds of patents, as well as interviewing many people. So, my well-earned fee (in six figures) merely reflected the depth of work I had done, and was perhaps less compensation than I actually deserved. Skilled Recruiters clearly offer an essential "value-added" benefit that cannot be underestimated.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, my Philosophy is that I should offer discounted rates for those who retain me as their recruiter. “Retained” search typically means that the client-company pays a portion of the projected fee (about one-third) upfront… but that will be another discussion.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="reader-flag-content__wrapper mb4 clear-both"></div>Was Shakespeare Truly a Bard? A Headhunter's Opiniontag:recruitingblogs.com,2019-01-22:502551:BlogPost:20982242019-01-22T05:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/836373939?profile=original" rel="noopener" target="_blank"><img class="align-full" src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/836373939?profile=RESIZE_710x"></img></a> Popular wisdom says that ‘Bards’ are those great story-tellers whose tales are embraced by the audience, not only once, but over and over again, for generations. The idea of a Bard conjures up names like Homer, Shakespeare, and perhaps few others. Reality is quite a bit different, though.</p>
<p>Etymology of the word “Bard” shows that it is of Welsh origin,…</p>
<p><a href="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/836373939?profile=original" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/836373939?profile=RESIZE_710x" class="align-full"/></a>Popular wisdom says that ‘Bards’ are those great story-tellers whose tales are embraced by the audience, not only once, but over and over again, for generations. The idea of a Bard conjures up names like Homer, Shakespeare, and perhaps few others. Reality is quite a bit different, though.</p>
<p>Etymology of the word “Bard” shows that it is of Welsh origin, specifically referring to the great Poet/Singer/Musician/Warriors who were responsible for creating and retelling great ballads like the ancient epic 'Mabinogion', or the King Arthur legend, which is part of 'Mabinogion'.</p>
<p>Owing to unique circumstances, it was in ancient Wales that the Bardic tradition first arose. The culture of Wales was such that the early Princes sponsored official court poets (i.e. “Gogynfeirdd”) who shared many of the same privileges as royalty. In fact, in certain ways, Bards were actually viewed as being even superior to the Kings. Tradition had it that the greatest fear among Nobility was the ever-present possibility that they might be satirized for being unkind or ungenerous to the Bards (Poet-Gods). In at least one case, legend tells of a King who died of shame from being scorned by his Bard.</p>
<p>Perhaps the first great Bard was Taliesin. His 6th century poems still exist. The largest number of extant great poems by a Bard are those by Daffyd ap Gwilym (1320-1350), 170 of whose poems still exist. The preponderance of Daffyd’s poems were about Nature and Erotica, filled with a great sense of humor. Yet, it was the Meilyr family of Bards that were the most famous family of Bards that ever lived, being the official court poets of Wales for over a century, and three generations... Meilyr Bryddyd was the first of these, and his religious poems are still known. His son was Gwalchmai, who had at least two sons who were also official Bards of the Princes. Thus, the Meilyr dynasty in Wales established the greatest tradition of factual Bards in human history.</p>
<p>Common lore tells us that Shakespeare was a 'Bard', since author of 37 known still-revered plays and several poems and the set of sonnets. Mere casual reference to "The Bard" often elicits thoughts of William Shakespeare (or "Wm Choxpur" as he sometimes wrote, in addition to perhaps 10 other spellings, indicating a possible degree of illiteracy, by today's standards). "The Bard of Stratford-upon-Avon", or "The Bard of Avon", etc. are similar epithets which have frequently been used to describe both "Shaksper" and even Homer (author of "Illiad" and "Odyssey"), has been described as a ‘Bard’.</p>
<p>Yet, if we look to the actual definition of the word "Bard", we note readily that it is a word from Medieval Welsh. The actual meaning of the word "Bard" encompasses far more than merely being the author of a great text, or set of texts, which survive four, five, or twenty-five centuries. Bards were something altogether different from a mere playwright or author, actually. Much more like troubadours, perhaps. Singularly talented, and not merely limited to authorship, etc. Skilled in performance, battle, song, as well as writing.</p>
<p>I suggest that William Shakespeare is regarded as being the greatest English-speaking 'Bard-like author', largely because of his name, which connotes warrior-like characteristics, or acts (i.e. "shaking a spear"). Part of the tradition of the authentic Bards of Wales is that in addition to being poets, performers, singers, composers, scholars and genealogists for Royalty, they also were accomplished warriors who fought in many battles. So confident of his prowess in battle was Gwalchmai ap Meilyr (1130-1180), author of "Gorhoffedd" (i.e. "The Boast") that he actually wore gold jewelry (a torcque) into battle on behalf of his patron Owain Gwynedd (my 24th great-grandfather, by my calculations).</p>
<p>One might think that, as a Meyler, I would be more closely related to Gwalchmai, but he is actually only a 25th cousin 4 times removed. So, I speak with a degree of relative objectivity, here, being not merely partial to Welsh bards simply because of being related to several. In fact, the other best-known "Gorhoffedd" (a completely different poem) was written by Owain ap Hywel (907-987) who was actually my 29th great-grandfather, although I am much more fond of Gwalchmai's eloquent poem.</p>
<p>In any case, Thomas Rogers (1540-1611), was my 12th great-uncle, and lived 2 blocks away from William Shakespeare in Stratford. Thomas' grandson, was John Harvard, whose name is somewhat better recognized. I may not be related to Shakespeare, but I do deeply respect his incredible mastery of the English language, while, at the same time, being somewhat strict on the meaning of the word "Bard".</p>
<p>I hope I have been fair!</p>
<p>Clearly, William Shakespeare cannot be considered a Bard, unless, perhaps, the pen itself is somehow mightier than the sword.</p>New "Laws" Enforcing Hate-Crimes Against Recruiterstag:recruitingblogs.com,2018-08-23:502551:BlogPost:20846892018-08-23T06:00:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"> I've lived in California my entire life, and I suspect that my state would probably still belong to Mexico instead of the USA, if it hadn't been annexed after the discovery of gold in 1849. Apparently, the concept of "Capitalism" and "Business" is what America wanted in California, and that is why we are part of this Nation. I’m actually a seventh-generation Californian, whose great-great grandfather founded UCLA and (essentially, thereby) the entire UC…</div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"> I've lived in California my entire life, and I suspect that my state would probably still belong to Mexico instead of the USA, if it hadn't been annexed after the discovery of gold in 1849. Apparently, the concept of "Capitalism" and "Business" is what America wanted in California, and that is why we are part of this Nation. I’m actually a seventh-generation Californian, whose great-great grandfather founded UCLA and (essentially, thereby) the entire UC school system. My great-grandfather designed the LA Harbor, one of the largest harbors in the world. Another great grandfather started the profitable “Entertainment Industry” in Los Angeles, by recruiting the first professional performers in the 1890’s. Another great-great grandfather was the first Protestant/Baptist Minister in the state of California. I have long roots here, and I feel like I have a right to be here, and to practice a Capitalistic ideology with freedom.</div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"> Nonetheless, certain people in "Government" (i.e. State Government) have introduced a new bill in California which would make all "unsolicited" email contacts (even about highly legitimate job opportunities, offered free of any charge whatsoever) illegal. This is tantamount to outlawing my job, in many ways. This is clearly unconstitutional on multiple grounds, including it being a “hate crime” against people in my profession, a restriction of Freedom of Speech, and interference with interstate commerce (which is a RICO violation of the US Federal codes), and a blatant violation of Federal Law (i.e. the CAN-SPAM act).</div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"> So, given the wording of the new law, if (as a Recruiter) I research that someone is potentially a perfect match for a job requirement that involves a PhD, expertise in 3D printing, and other rare skills like ‘rheology’ and ‘biomimetic materials’; I am potentially at risk to send that person a one-line email: "Are you interested in a great job opportunity using your skills?" Apparently, it gets even worse if I actually include a whole one-page job description. According to the law (the new law under consideration) it doesn't matter if the 'job offer' is completely legitimate, how much the offer is, or how well-researched the inquiry is... “Unsolicited email” is always unsolicited, no matter if many other avenues have been tried to approach the candidate (phone, letter, doorbell-ringing, etc.)</div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"> First of all, though, these aren't really "job offers"... they are actually inquiries about potential interest in job offers, IF the candidate is really interested AND the employer is, too. The term "employment offer" would be actually be specious and highly presumptive if taken literally, simply because there are inherently and obviously other potential candidates. The “offer” is not even possible to extend to an unknown candidate on a first email, anyway, basically. This is common sense... So, the language used in the legislation might itself provide a clear "opt out" for any recruiter who uses email to approach potential candidates.</div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"> Also, the language of the law is sufficiently broad that it encompasses "any commercial email"... Such as when a job applicant sends a resume to a company which has advertised an open position. According to the letter of the law, stupidly written by clownish Socialists, apparently, anyone who sends me a resume I don't like automatically owes me $100, or $10000, or $1000000, depending on what nit-wit law you want to use as "precedent". Maybe I should be happy with this. I get unrequested resumes all the time, and I am never rude to them, and often volunteer free career advice which is highly valuable...</div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"> Frankly, this law is stupider than stupid. We actually pay our Legislators to do intelligent work, and instead they are creating laws that not only violate Federal Law, but are actually "Hate Crimes" against people in specific professions, apparently. Not only that, but unfortunately, “Anti-spam” legislation has mostly produced nothing but more spam. For example, China has a death-penalty for spam, and they are still the most notorious and prodigious producers of spam in the World, today.</div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"> In the USA, we have spammer legislators in office, for the most part, who send us email that demonstrates complete lack of literacy or ability to think rationally. An example would be the mail I received from a California Senator I will not name, just this month. Yet, these thugs and goons have decided to give themselves immunity for "political" email spam... even though it is obviously (and heinously, corruptly) commercial.</div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"></div>
<div class="_2cuy _3dgx _2vxa"> I don't know about you, but I'm disgusted. Write your Senator and/or Congressman and tell them to get their heads out of their ***.</div>How NOT To Get The Job (for ChemEs)tag:recruitingblogs.com,2018-08-09:502551:BlogPost:20835022018-08-09T23:57:32.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p>IF you are looking for a job, and are a Chemical Engineer, or perhaps any other kind of highly-qualified, highly employable person, here is my advice:</p>
<p>The job market is currently good -- according to the Media, the Anti-Media, and many other indicators; but Summer is always a slower time in the Job Market (except when it isn’t), so now it’s probably a wise time to sit down, take note, and figure out ways to avoid NOT getting the job you want, when it’s pretty clear to you that: (1)…</p>
<p>IF you are looking for a job, and are a Chemical Engineer, or perhaps any other kind of highly-qualified, highly employable person, here is my advice:</p>
<p>The job market is currently good -- according to the Media, the Anti-Media, and many other indicators; but Summer is always a slower time in the Job Market (except when it isn’t), so now it’s probably a wise time to sit down, take note, and figure out ways to avoid NOT getting the job you want, when it’s pretty clear to you that: (1) Yes, that is a good job; (2) I do want that job; and (3) I would accept an offer for that job if one were extended.</p>
<p>Actually, though, jobs are plentiful, and we can always pick and choose, right? Wrong!</p>
<p>I’ve been a professional Recruiter for almost 30 years, and I have both a ChemE degree and a Philosophy degree from the World’s highest-ranked academic department (Princeton University, class of 1981). I have an enormous network of brilliant and outstanding people, and have placed Engineers and Scientists for some of the most outstanding startups in the World, as well as major multi-billion dollar super-corporations that are household names; and one thing I can assure you of is the fact that however plentiful you think the leaves on the “Job Tree” are, there are less of them, even in the most robust Economy, than you would like.</p>
<p>Therefore, in all good Conscience, let me suggest a few things:</p>
<p>(1) Do NOT forget to proof-read your resume. Errors in the resume indicate a lack of seriousness about your professionalism. If you submit a resume with errors, hiring Managers will be inclined to think that you find errors to be trivial -- which is not an impression you want to create! Please double-check not only with spellcheck and grammar-check options, but also ask a literate friend (who is fluent in the language of the country to which you are applying for work) to see if you have made any major errors. Not only that, but also check to make sure that you are not using bizarre type-fonts or orange paper with black ink, etc. Odd formats do not impress anyone, except in extremely rare cases.</p>
<p>(2) Do NOT expect all the good jobs to be advertised on ‘LinkedIn’, ‘Indeed’, or other conventional job-boards. Instead, do ACTIVELY contact companies that you have an interest in about jobs. Researching Dun & Bradstreet is good advice, but even more so, try researching Crunchbase or AngelList, etc. One very negative aspect of relying upon online Internet job-boards is that you will inevitably be bombarded with spam from numerous sources, and with dubious likelihood of positive results, if you post your resume with them. Instead of doing that, restrict yourself to replying to bona-fide ads for specific positions.</p>
<p>(3) Do NOT treat “cover-letters” like they are an outmoded formality without any use. In fact, they are highly useful for job applicants who present resumes to companies, because they allow the Candidate to explain what he/she has done previously that makes a good “fit” or match, with the position. A blase’ attitude about formalities like cover-letters, correct spelling and punctuation in resumes, and lack of concern about actually TARGETING where you want to send your resume are all hall-marks of a job-search conducted with less-than-superior skills. You can do better! You are the hunter, yourself, and you need to use cunning to find your quarry.</p>
<p>(4) Do NOT forget to follow up with Companies that you have applied to! This is perhaps the biggest error that job applicants make. You can always contact the Human Resources department of any company, or the hiring manager for the job, IF you are determined enough to do it. HR Staff are usually overwhelmed with their own duties, so getting back to potential new hires is hardly on their to-do list. Make the call yourself! Introduce yourself, explain why you are interested in the Company, and what job(s) you are interested in. Do NOT by shy! Also, try to avoid calling more than a few times per day... Do NOT put yourself in an awkward position of “stalking” your future Employer.</p>
<p>I hope these tips are helpful. I have many more, and am happy to provide them.</p>Fighting "Fake News" in the Recruiting Worldtag:recruitingblogs.com,2017-07-06:502551:BlogPost:20294512017-07-06T04:00:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p>I was just listening to a discussion of the multiple legal infractions involved in threatening to slander someone for conducting perfectly legal business and it reminded me very much of my own experiences several years ago. Reiterating my position on the illegal conduct of the now-defunct "Fordyce Letter", they were involved in a conspiracy to extort and defame me, prior to going out of operation.</p>
<p>Here is a link to the 2013 article in question, which was never retracted, and is still…</p>
<p>I was just listening to a discussion of the multiple legal infractions involved in threatening to slander someone for conducting perfectly legal business and it reminded me very much of my own experiences several years ago. Reiterating my position on the illegal conduct of the now-defunct "Fordyce Letter", they were involved in a conspiracy to extort and defame me, prior to going out of operation.</p>
<p>Here is a link to the 2013 article in question, which was never retracted, and is still clearly a potential criminal offence which has not passed its statute of limitations (5 years): <a href="https://www.eremedia.com/fordyce/memo-to-tech-recruiters-they-really-dont-like-you/">https://www.eremedia.com/fordyce/memo-to-tech-recruiters-they-really-dont-like-you/</a></p>
<p>The law is extremely clear that extortion or coercion (threats of harassment, hatred, libel, slander, etc. against anyone conducting business and exercising freedom of speech under his perfectly legal Constitutional rights) is completely prohibited -- which is what David Heinemeier Hansson did, and what John Zappe publicly aided and abetted, thereby satisfying the requirements for Criminal Conspiracy according to Federal Law. Moreover, since David Hansson is not of US origin, based upon this rash act, he can be permanently barred from US citizenship. I haven't seen any native-born Americans making such enormous mistakes, except for John Zappe.</p>
<ul id="post-list" class="post-list">
<li class="post" id="post-3402380241"><div class="post-content authored-by-session-user"><div class="post-body"><p>In the United States it is enormously difficult to remove allegedly defamatory information from the internet. A victim can take the expensive and time-consuming step of suing the author for defamation in court. However, even if a court rules that the statement is defamatory—that is, that the published statement is false and harmful to the subject’s reputation—the victim’s remedy is usually monetary damages. U.S. courts do not generally order that the speech be removed from the internet, out of First Amendment concerns regarding the prior restraint of speech. Even if a victim were to present the website’s registrar with the court’s finding of defamation, registrars are protected by the Communications Decency Act and are under no obligation to remove the offending content (although some registrars will, as a matter of internal policy).</p>
<p>The Texas Supreme Court recently issued a pioneering opinion which alters the legal landscape, at least as it applies to cases brought in Texas. In Kinney v. Barnes plaintiff Robert Kinney, a legal recruiter, left his employer BCG and started a competing company. BCG’s president Andrew Barnes later posted a statement on various websites accusing Kinney of participating in a kickback scheme. Kinney sued, not for monetary damages, but for an injunction requiring Barnes to remove the defamatory statements, and prohibiting him from making similar statements in the future. The trial court declined to grant the injunction and granted Barnes summary judgment on this issue, and the court of appeal affirmed, both finding that an injunction would be an unconstitutional restraint on prior speech.</p>
<p>On appeal to the Texas Supreme Court, however, Texas’ highest court distinguished between statements that had already been published and those that might be made in the future. The court declared that where a statement has been adjudicated by a court and found to be defamatory, the court may issue an injunction requiring the author to remove the speech from places where he had already published it. The decision does not limit an individual’s freedom to make the same or similar statements in the future because, “[g]iven the inherently contextual nature of defamatory speech…the same statement made at a different time and in a different context may no longer be actionable.” The Texas Supreme Court believes that this limited remedy strikes the proper balance between removing unprotected defamatory speech and upholding individual’s rights to speak freely in the future.</p>
<p>This case is seen as a victory for victims of defamatory speech, whose personal or business reputations have been ruined by false accusations that remain on the internet even after a court found them to be untrue, harmful, and unprotected. While the case only serves as biding precedent in Texas, other courts may look to this decision for guidance when determining how to protect individuals’ or businesses’ reputations from false past attacks while preserving the freedom of speech to criticize or otherwise speak about those same people or entities in the future.</p>
<p> -- quoted from a legal opinion</p>
<br/>
<div class="post-body-inner"><div class="post-message-container"><div class="publisher-anchor-color"></div>
</div>
</div>
<ul class="comment-footer__menu">
<li class="voting">R.I.P. Fordyce Letter: Driven into the ground by an unwise editor.</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
</li>
</ul>Solving the Search/"Spam" Problemtag:recruitingblogs.com,2017-03-11:502551:BlogPost:20079122017-03-11T08:00:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557612146?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557612146?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750"></img></a> I wrote this in response to a clever post (although my jaded viewpoint usually sees these kinds of rants as picayune and entirely ignorant of the "Black Art" of recruiting and its enormous complexities: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/hp/update/6246177412950949889" target="_blank">https://www.linkedin.com/hp/update/6246177412950949889</a>)…</p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557612146?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557612146?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a>I wrote this in response to a clever post (although my jaded viewpoint usually sees these kinds of rants as picayune and entirely ignorant of the "Black Art" of recruiting and its enormous complexities: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/hp/update/6246177412950949889" target="_blank">https://www.linkedin.com/hp/update/6246177412950949889</a>)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardcfrost/" target="_blank">Richard Frost</a> I have to admit that while I generally hate rants like yours, I have to make an exception for you. You have handled this obvious complaint with aplomb, humor and courtesy.</p>
<p>Here are the things that strike me as obvious:</p>
<p>1) Recruiters are forced, by necessity, to contact large numbers of people to find candidates that fit very narrow and esoteric skill sets;</p>
<p>2) These job descriptions need to be widely disseminated for the Recruiter to succeed in his/her challenge of identification of the best candidate(s) ;</p>
<p>3) Referrals of other candidates are essential to the business;</p>
<p>4) A Recruiter cannot get referrals without contacting people who aren't necessarily the right person for the job;</p>
<p>5) Everybody hates spam;</p>
<p>6) Recruiters hate spam too, and hate getting accused of spamming when they are earnestly trying to find the very rare candidate that matches the job description, which requires them to contact many people;</p>
<p>7) Recruiters need to use various software tools like Google Search, LinkedIn, etc. to identify people based on fundamental skill-sets (often referred to as "buzzwords" );</p>
<p>8) The software which exists currently is not that perfect, sometimes turning up false leads, etc.;</p>
<p>9) Software for Recruiters and search in general could be improved -- Google sucks, for example and is a lousy search engine compared to what it was just five years ago;</p>
<p>10) Google actually makes most of its money by selling ads, which actually biases search results, resulting in "spamdexing" of various URLs based on how much money they bring in to Google;</p>
<p>11) Spamdexing results in spam, when Recruiters try to process their search results which were intended for an altogether different purpose;</p>
<p>12) Spam is a prevalent problem with about 1 trillion spam emails sent per year, reaping only $200 million in revenues, according to sources: <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/08/all-the-spammers-in-the-world-may-only-make-200-million-a-year/260814/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/08/all-the-spammers-in-the-world-may-only-make-200-million-a-year/260814/</a> ; this is interesting because The Atlantic (one of the oldest publications in the country) was accused of spamming in 2013, and was actually banned from Reddit;</p>
<p>13) Executive Search/Recruiting is an industry that is $400+ billion per year in scope;</p>
<p>14) The value of email from a Recruiter is therefore higher than "spam" -- essentially by about $399 billion , rendering the use of the term 'spam' highly dubious, although connotatively and vernacularly correct. At the same time, "recruiter spam" probably amounts to less than 0.1% of all unsolicited commercial email;</p>
<p>15) Software could easily be improved, with added AI functionality, etc., if Google (and other vendors) would work for free;</p>
<p>16) No one works for free (except Recruiters, apparently);</p>
<p>17) The need is for better search software and better email software with more flexibility, more opportunity and power to personalize, and better "reach" ;</p>
<p>18) This can probably only be achieved with the help of highly-skilled software engineers, who have no interest whatsoever in helping Recruiters make their work more accurate;</p>
<p>19) This attitude of negativity towards Recruiters actually damages the Software Engineering industry and results in more spam, instead of solutions;</p>
<p>20) Let's fix this!</p>DHH Redux: Let's Reexamine This Perfidy!tag:recruitingblogs.com,2016-12-15:502551:BlogPost:19972042016-12-15T08:06:31.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://nicholasmeyler.tumblr.com/post/116340513183/amazoncom-remote-office-not-required">http://nicholasmeyler.tumblr.com/post/116340513183/amazoncom-remote-office-not-required</a></p>
<p>Here is what I have to say about David Heinemeier Hansson's outrageous libel against me, a crime which he committed merely because he received my email for a job opportunity on the same day his puerile book was released... Soap-box standing and so on, dhh is no example of ethical 'cleanliness'.…</p>
<p><a href="http://nicholasmeyler.tumblr.com/post/116340513183/amazoncom-remote-office-not-required">http://nicholasmeyler.tumblr.com/post/116340513183/amazoncom-remote-office-not-required</a></p>
<p>Here is what I have to say about David Heinemeier Hansson's outrageous libel against me, a crime which he committed merely because he received my email for a job opportunity on the same day his puerile book was released... Soap-box standing and so on, dhh is no example of ethical 'cleanliness'. Clearly, he is missing some major brain functions that prohibit most sane people from making such accusations.</p>
<h2><a href="http://t.umblr.com/redirect?z=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FRemote-Office-Required-Jason-Fried%2Fdp%2F0804148988&t=ZDY4NTQ0Zjk5ZTE4ZTMzMTAwY2Y5YmUyMGRmZGNkNGNjZjBhNDg5OSxuamI2alkzNg%3D%3D&b=t%3AsNv0acPjnJMOYRvd0TTUzw&m=1">Amazon.com: Remote: Office Not Required (9780804148986): Jason Fried, David Heinemeier Hansson, Rebecca Lowman: Books »</a></h2>
<p>A Review of “Remote: Office Not Required” or</p>
<p>“Work Advice and Techniques for Hillbillies”</p>
<p></p>
<p>David Heienemeier Hansson has a reputation for journalistic fraud and making grossly obnoxious remarks to people for no reason. He is the type of person who pursues an unnecessary and freakishly dangerous career as a race-car driver, even though he has no need for money, and is the father of a small child. In other words, his judgment is unquestionably questionable, and he has a history of making outrageous and poor decisions with very little or even absolutely no justification.<br/><br/>I will readily admit that I have not read this book, which is why I am reviewing it. In 2013, David Heinemeier Hansson blasted a phony Tweet to his 95,000 followers claiming I had sent him spam without knowing anything about me or my track-record of success and millions of dollars of billing for top-level companies as an executive recruiter, so I consider it equally legitimate to review his book as garbage. The facts show that he was inciting people to cyberstalk me merely for trying to recruit people from his company, whom he apparently thought he actually owned as chattel, ‘justifying’ his wrath (“A cynic cheats inside a wrath” – Nicholas Meyler). We later found out that 50% of his followers on Twitter were actually purchased or fake (using Twitter Audit), and also found out that he has a history of making bizarre accusations and insults to innocent people.<br/><br/>Without reading the book, I can tell you, in all objectivity, that David Heinemeier Hansson loves to do journalistic fraud, and will readily cite fake statistics to prove his points. Upon examination of those statistics however, one realizes that the numbers actually prove the complete or dialectical opposite of what he is saying. One claim he made is that software engineers are so highly-sought after that they receive job offers every day. This is clearly false, but what he meant was that he and his colleagues receive email notices of job opportunities very frequently (not offers). However, he then pointed to a website <<a href="http://www.recruiterspam.com%3E">www.recruiterspam.com></a>;, which apparently “proved” his assertions; and, when I did the math, it turned out that these “scientists” were actually receiving only about one email every three months – in other words, about 1/90th of the amount of email that they originally claimed.<br/><br/>There is a good reason why software engineers are at the lowest end of the payscale for engineers (although still well-paid, because they are almost engineers), simply because they often don’t possess the the hardcore intellectual skills “real engineers” have. Factually, even starting salaries for Chemical Engineers in the lowest-cost-of-living region in the USA are still higher than some Ruby coders with 20 years of experience and a PhD.<br/><br/>So, what is this book really about? Again, not having read it, despite being sympathetic to the idea and benefits of working remotely, I suggest it is about running an illegal distillery in the Ozarks and being a pimp to barefoot, naked and pregnant female employees. I’m quite certain of this, even though I never opened up the book, because that’s the kind of scientific methodology I learned from David Heinemeier Hansson’s journalism and the kind of statements he makes. Other things I learned from my brief interaction with the creative “dhh” as he goes by on Twitter were that he thinks it’s very cool to do age-discrimination and make age-related insults to people who have nonagenarians and Nobel winners in their family, that cyberbullying and libel are fun pastimes, and that searches for PhDs and top-level scientists “are really the same as viagra ads.”<br/><br/>So, using his own examples and logic, his own techniques, methodologies, and bizarre behavior patterns (which resemble those of someone who has recently smoked 'bath salts’), this is clearly a book that any Hillbilly who wants to set up an illegal brothel in the Ozarks should read. </p>Privacy Vs. Security: Are You Ready?tag:recruitingblogs.com,2016-12-09:502551:BlogPost:19969042016-12-09T02:13:21.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<h3>Introduced by Nicholas Meyler</h3>
<p>In my effort to invent new ways to extend and expand the range of possibilities available to Executive Recruiters/Management Consultants, I am currently working on a fascinating project with Inventor Doug Peckover who was awarded priority rights to the invention of “tokenization” security in 2005. Doug’s invention is now widely used (in various modified forms) throughout the secure payments industry, and companies like ApplePay, SamsungPay,…</p>
<h3>Introduced by Nicholas Meyler</h3>
<p>In my effort to invent new ways to extend and expand the range of possibilities available to Executive Recruiters/Management Consultants, I am currently working on a fascinating project with Inventor Doug Peckover who was awarded priority rights to the invention of “tokenization” security in 2005. Doug’s invention is now widely used (in various modified forms) throughout the secure payments industry, and companies like ApplePay, SamsungPay, GoogleWallet, etc. all use tokenization methodologies to prevent fraud and hacking.</p>
<p>The difference with the approach used by Doug Peckover is that he envisions a world where quantum computer hacking will be possible in the next ten years… meaning that ANY form of cryptological security will become obsolete due to vastly superior combinatorial computation power.</p>
<p>Doug’s 17 patents, which I am trying to find buyer(s) for, will protect against quantum computers as well as a multitude of other threats. I see my role in this effort as a logical extension of the duties of a Headhunter, in that it is not only candidates, but ultimately the Intellectual Property that they produce that is our most valuable stock-in-trade.</p>
<p>So, I refer all readers (and especially anyone involved in the industry of IoT, Data Security, Cybersecurity, or Online Payment) to take a look at Doug’s article. Please contact me if you have further interest!</p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>Privacy vs. Security: Are You Ready?</strong> by Doug Peckover</p>
<p>Privacy and security are in the news every day, but these reports are long on the problems and short on any solutions. So what are the most urgent problems and how can we solve them?</p>
<p>First, some definitions because they are very different: privacy protects people while security protects companies and government agencies. Both are important but for very different reasons. Let's look at IBM's cognitive computing. Watson has superb technology but faces some real challenges.</p>
<div class="slate-resizable-image-embed slate-image-embed__resize-full-width"><img src="https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAjrAAAAJDQ2MzNhOTVhLTkzZWEtNGEwMC05ODgwLTE1ODM5M2Q1NTc3MQ.jpg"/></div>
<p>It seems that the more tools we have, the more varied and complex the threats become. Whack-a-mole is alive and well in most companies. So with new threats like the <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/you-have-european-customers-doug-peckover?trk=mp-author-card" target="_blank">GDPR regulations</a> and <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/quantum-computing-dummies-doug-peckover?trk=mp-author-card" target="_blank">quantum computing</a>, how bad will things be in 5 or 10 years? Actually, not too bad at all. A single technology may solve both privacy and security.</p>
<p>As the original inventor of token security, I know that it can be used for much more than just securing Apple Pay and Google Wallet. In fact, solving privacy and security at the same time actually provides far greater control. Here's how this would help IBM's Watson (the features in red are probably needed first).</p>
<div class="slate-resizable-image-embed slate-image-embed__resize-full-width"><img src="https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAefAAAAJDc3OTBiNDA0LWNkZDYtNDE2ZS1hZDUzLTU4MWQ3YTZhODlmZg.jpg"/></div>
<p>Some of the privacy features protect IBM from the hefty EU fines of €20 million or 4% of IBM's global sales (more details <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/you-have-european-customers-doug-peckover?trk=mp-author-card" target="_blank">here</a>), while others are needed because IBM is targeting the financial and healthcare industries.</p>
<p>Apple's needs are very different because it makes money by selling hardware and not customer data. Tim Cook uses <a href="http://fortune.com/2015/06/03/apple-google-photos-privacy/?xid=yahoo_fortune" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">privacy</a> to differentiate from Google.</p>
<div class="slate-resizable-image-embed slate-image-embed__resize-full-width"><img src="https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAgwAAAAJDcxNzQ5YzZjLTU3ZWYtNDJkYy05MGEyLWZmYzA5MTQ1ZDk3YQ.jpg"/></div>
<p>Google's needs are different again because of the way it uses personal data. The EU is making Google the poster child for non-compliance and the fines could be in the billions of dollars. But there's a silver lining - tokens would not only bring Google into compliance, but the "shared/sold data control" would also permit Google to - for this first time - sell data about individuals <em>without compromising anyone's privacy</em>.</p>
<div class="slate-resizable-image-embed slate-image-embed__resize-full-width"><img src="https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAjFAAAAJDFmMmQ1OTBlLWM0YjYtNGM0Zi1hYjg3LWQ3MDU5MGZlZDI1Zg.jpg"/></div>
<p>Cloud apps like Office/365, Google Docs, Salesforce, etc. are mainly concerned about better control and security.</p>
<div class="slate-resizable-image-embed slate-image-embed__resize-full-width"><img src="https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAlvAAAAJDhlNjBlNmNhLTQ0NWMtNDQ5Mi1hZTY2LTcyNGQ4MTRmMTJmYw.jpg"/></div>
<p>EU privacy laws are adopted by other countries like Canada, Mexico, Japan, etc. so Fortune 500 companies must be careful. Thankfully, there's a simple way for legacy databases to covert from encryption to tokens without having to make program changes. Tokens also enable retroactive data control which protects companies from new privacy regulations that are sure to be required.</p>
<div class="slate-resizable-image-embed slate-image-embed__resize-full-width"><img src="https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAlgAAAAJGQxYmNlMTcxLTdmZTItNGI2Mi05YjMwLWU5ZWE5MDIzNjVjNQ.jpg"/></div>
<p>DOD, Homeland Security, and other government agencies are all about security. If authentication or permission fails for any reason, "embedded forensics" logs the event, denies the request, and can even plant monitoring s/w on the requesting device (see <a href="http://www.google.com/patents/US7937579" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">figure 8</a> of this patent).</p>
<div class="slate-resizable-image-embed slate-image-embed__resize-full-width"><img src="https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAgcAAAAJGIwMTI1MDAwLTA5MTEtNDM0Mi1hNTg4LWJmMDA5MzZhYjE3Mw.jpg"/></div>
<p>Some industries have special needs. For example, hospitality firms offer services to people on the move. Controlling the movement of personal data is one of the most stringent parts of the EU regulations, so these firms have special compliance requirements.</p>
<div class="slate-resizable-image-embed slate-image-embed__resize-full-width"><img src="https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAk-AAAAJDQ1ZDRkMzRhLTU3N2QtNDNlMy1hYTI0LTRhMzdkMWM4ZDJhYQ.jpg"/></div>
<p>The biggest <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/23/us/politics/a-new-era-of-internet-attacks-powered-by-everyday-devices.html?emc=edit_th_20161023&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=47943517&_r=0" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">growth inhibitor</a> for IoT devices is the lack of security, and tokens provide this because they are data centric and not device centric. IoT security is crucial to avoid problems like <a href="http://www.popsci.com/hackers-could-soon-hold-your-life-ransom-by-hijacking-your-medical-devices?src=SOC&dom=tw" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">this</a> and <a href="http://venkat-alagarsamy.blogspot.in/2016/08/iot-next-level-of-terrorism.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">this</a>.</p>
<div class="slate-resizable-image-embed slate-image-embed__resize-full-width"><img src="https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAgbAAAAJDFiOTg2NDBkLWMwNjAtNGY0YS1iYzE3LTA3NTkxM2I2Y2Q0Mw.jpg"/></div>
<p>Finally, consulting firms have the most to gain (and lose) by tooling up to offer full services to their clients.</p>
<div class="slate-resizable-image-embed slate-image-embed__resize-full-width"><img src="https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAdtAAAAJDEwMGQ5OTliLWE0MjYtNGNiNC1iOTA4LTc0Y2UzMjA2YjI1Ng.jpg"/></div>
<p>Tokens have been designed to manage new compliance needs and security threats, while at the same time enable new services and revenue models.</p>
<p>Is your company ready?</p>If You Have European Customers...tag:recruitingblogs.com,2016-11-05:502551:BlogPost:19923502016-11-05T21:00:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<h3><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557611368?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-left" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557611368?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300"></img></a> Introduced by Nicholas Meyler</h3>
<p>In my effort to invent new ways to extend and expand the range of possibilities available to Executive Recruiters/Management Consultants, I am currently working on a fascinating project with Inventor Doug Peckover who was awarded priority rights to the invention of “tokenization” security in 2005. Doug’s invention is now widely used (in…</p>
<h3><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557611368?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="300" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557611368?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300" class="align-left"/></a>Introduced by Nicholas Meyler</h3>
<p>In my effort to invent new ways to extend and expand the range of possibilities available to Executive Recruiters/Management Consultants, I am currently working on a fascinating project with Inventor Doug Peckover who was awarded priority rights to the invention of “tokenization” security in 2005. Doug’s invention is now widely used (in various modified forms) throughout the secure payments industry, and companies like ApplePay, SamsungPay, GoogleWallet, etc. all use tokenization methodologies to prevent fraud and hacking.</p>
<p>The difference with the approach used by Doug Peckover is that he envisions a world where quantum computer hacking will be possible in the next ten years… meaning that ANY form of cryptological security will become obsolete due to vastly superior combinatorial computation power.</p>
<p>Doug’s 17 patents, which I am trying to find buyer(s) for, will protect against quantum computers as well as a multitude of other threats. I see my role in this effort as a logical extension of the duties of a Headhunter, in that it is not only candidates, but ultimately the Intellectual Property that they produce that is our most valuable stock-in-trade.</p>
<p>So, I refer all readers (and especially anyone involved in the industry of IoT, Data Security, Cybersecurity, or Online Payment) to take a look at Doug’s article. Please contact me if you have further interest!</p>
<p>The best formatted version is <a href="http://t.umblr.com/redirect?z=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fpulse%2Ffilling-leadership-vacuum-doug-peckover%3Ftrk%3Dprof-post&t=NTJmZTlhZmNmODZhYjIxOTY5NGJmNTAwNmNmYTg4OWI0NDAxNTE5MCxab0loaTl3VQ%3D%3D&b=t%3AsNv0acPjnJMOYRvd0TTUzw&m=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/filling-leadership-vacuum-doug-pecko…</a> but I also provide the text, below.</p>
<h2>Written by: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/doug-peckover-1112a5" target="_blank">Doug Peckover</a></h2>
<h3>Founder at DT Labs, LLC</h3>
<p>... Your world is about to change. In less than 20 months, a new EU privacy law will be enforced. It's called the General Data Protection Regulation and you should start preparing for it now.</p>
<p>The GDPR has tough new rules and even tougher enforcement that you can read in this excellent <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/gdpr-tale-elephant-blind-men-monique-altheim-esq-cipp-us-e-cipm?trk=eml-b2_content_ecosystem_digest-network_publishes-69-null&midToken=AQHpi953SvVUUg&fromEmail=fromEmail&ut=3hh_QWRxBqUns1" target="_blank">article</a> by IBM's Monique Altheim. If you ignore the GDPR, your firm may be fined up to € 20 million or 4% of its <em>global</em> annual turnover. Doing business with EU customers will never be the same!</p>
<p>My interest in EU privacy came from two events:</p>
<ul>
<li>I designed the first in-store retail management system at Harrods of London and learned how privacy in Europe is much more than a compliance issue - it's a cultural expectation that is only now being enforced.</li>
<li>The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LexisNexis_Risk_Solutions#Major_security_breaches" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">ChoicePoint data breach</a> made it clear that many companies have no clue how to protect personal data.</li>
</ul>
<p>I designed a solution calling it 'pointers' and seven months later the industry gave it another name: '<a href="http://www.shift4.com/company/newsroom/content/pr_20051005.cfm" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">tokenization</a>.' There are many legal GDPR issues, such as if you're allowed to collect personal data in the first place. I focus on the tricky part - how the collected data must be stored, accessed, moved, and deleted. Data management will never be the same!</p>
<p>Here are some of the things that my design anticipated and will be required:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Data security</strong> usually means encrypting it, but this is <em>not</em> a long-term solution. There's emerging technology called quantum computing that puts encryption at great risk (watch a few minutes of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q4z6HnB-Tg&t=46m14s" target="_blank">this video</a>). I anticipated this, so tokens cannot be cracked even with infinite computing power. But be careful because other token designs still use SSL for traffic to and from the token vault, which just moves the risk!</li>
<li><strong>Access, rectification, and erasure</strong> are a nightmare for most companies because personal data is stored in many locations. My design anticipated this by having tokens in various files point to a single copy in the central token vault. Accessing, changing or erasing this data - and changing what apps can access this data - greatly simplifies the lifecycle data management, including compliance with the dreaded <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">Right to be Forgotten</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Cross-border data transfer restrictions</strong> means that regulations get tougher when personal data moves outside the EU. Tokens make this easy because personal data is centrally located and does not move, while the de-identified data can move without restriction. Personal data (name, contact info, etc.) is only needed occasionally when the person has to be contacted, so this is much easier to manage.</li>
<li><strong>Breach response</strong> is tricky because breach detection is measured in weeks or even months, so response times are already a problem. Tokens again anticipated this because personal data must be requested by an app, the requesting party must authenticate, and the party must have permission before the data is released to the app. If the who, what, when, where, or why is invalid, the request is denied, so breach detection <em>and</em> response times are completely eliminated.</li>
<li><strong>Data portability</strong> gives EU citizens the ability to move their personal data from one company to another. Tokens again make this easy because a single copy of the data is stored in the token vault and can be moved or assigned to another company.</li>
</ul>
<p>There are parts of my design that are not required, at least for now:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>The</strong> <strong>Right to be Forgotten</strong> (also called Eraser) currently applies to search results, but the GDPR could be extended so that search engines like Google cannot scrape personal data in the first place. This means that EU citizens would require control of their data in unknown servers, including the cloud.</li>
<li><strong>Control of email </strong>after it has been sent is not a part of the GDPR, but is technically possible. Data Loss Prevention (DLP) can block personal data as it's being sent from a company, but there is already <a href="http://www.fourthsource.com/email-marketing/gdpr-rules-mean-digital-marketers-especially-light-brexit-21490" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">talk</a> about DLP being mandated for email <em>after</em> a message has been sent.</li>
<li><strong>IoT device use </strong>is going to explode and will be used to collect personal data (why else would Google pay <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/13/technology/google-nest/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">$3.2 billion</a> for a thermostat company?) This one is obvious - the GDPR will be extended to limit the data collected by IoT devices.</li>
<li><strong>Embedded forensics</strong> may be required to help alert about possible breaches, gather data about stolen devices, take a pictures of the perpetrators, etc. It's technically possible and the EU may require these security enhancements.</li>
<li><strong>Security that gets stronger</strong> seems like an obvious future requirement. Encryption strength is based on when data was created, and this gets weaker over time. Token strength is based on when data is accessed, so with biometrics, GPS, etc. token security actually gets stronger over time. We can expect the EU to mandate new ways to protect its citizens, and tokens enable this to be retroactively applied.</li>
</ul>
<p>Some firms like Google are <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/04/13/technology/how-europe-is-going-after-us-tech-giants.html?_r=2" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">fighting</a> new EU regulations but they will fail because the EU has home field advantage and will not budge from this popular way to protect its citizens. But the GDPR is more than just about privacy - it's a way for EU companies to level the playing field with U.S. companies. For this reason, we can expect the regulations and enforcement to get even tougher for cloud data, mobile data, IoT devices, etc. We can also expect other countries to follow the EU's privacy lead as they have in the past. Embracing the GDPR will help your firm protect its international markets.</p>
<p>The GDPR will push you way out of your comfort zone, but so will the threat of quantum computers, the lack of control for cloud data, and patent trolls looking for creative ways to extort you. The good news is that tokens help solve all of these problems and yes, I've been granted patents that can help protect your firm.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Republished from LinkedIn: <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/you-have-european-customers-nicholas-meyler?trk=mp-author-card">https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/you-have-european-customers-nicholas-meyler?trk=mp-author-card</a></p>How to Beat the ‘Bots – Advice for Applying to Jobs Onlinetag:recruitingblogs.com,2016-10-17:502551:BlogPost:19903442016-10-17T04:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557598690?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-left" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557598690?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300"></img></a></p>
<p> Ever since the first online job application process was used, several decades ago, the practice of automation of the process has continued, and even accelerated at a dizzying rate. Today, it is very customary for most larger companies (and even small startups) to use Candidate tracking software which tries to make life easy for those that are doing the…</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557598690?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="300" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557598690?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300" class="align-left"/></a></p>
<p> Ever since the first online job application process was used, several decades ago, the practice of automation of the process has continued, and even accelerated at a dizzying rate. Today, it is very customary for most larger companies (and even small startups) to use Candidate tracking software which tries to make life easy for those that are doing the hiring, but which often (according to candidates) screens inappropriately or too rigorously based on key-word search, producing inconsistent results.</p>
<p> This problem is substantial, because unless using the exact key-words sought after by the hiring manager, presumably picked specifically for each individual job, then one’s resume goes into the pile of the rejected. Candidates might argue that their resume clearly indicates experience in a specific skill, but that the use of the keyword was unnecessary—because it would be tacitly assumed by any knowledgeable human reader. </p>
<p> PHASE ONE</p>
<p> There is a solution to this, which is somewhat more time-consuming, but which really is highly advisable for any job applicant who seriously wants to get the job – read the job description carefully, and focus on the key “buzz words” that the job description’s author has chosen to list. These words, realistically, NEED to be in your resume for you to pass the screening process of the computer program. So, without lying or exaggerating, you need to individually “tailor” your resume for each specific position, and make sure that you use those keywords appropriately within the text of your resume.</p>
<p> As a recruiter, I have seen dozens of thousands of resumes, and I have actually seen a number with a tag-like list of keywords, perhaps a paragraph long, at the end of the resume. This will not work, since screening programs are designed to also reject this approach. Your best bet to getting your resume seen is to organically include the appropriate words within the text of your resume, selectively and in such a manner that it doesn’t look artificial or contrived. It is not wrong to even insert phrases used in the job description into your resume, if done sparingly and accurately.</p>
<p> For example, if a job description calls for experience with HPLC, organic synthesis, colloidal separations, and characterizations using cyclic volt-ammetry, your resume will be rejected unless you legitimately use those words in the text. Of course, if you choose to use the words without having the experience, you will end up with a lot of explaining to do and probably a very short phone interview which will be the last time that company will probably ever contact you.</p>
<p> So, never lie, but do make sure that your resume directly responds to the details of the job description, unequivocally using the words that are most easily recognized by the automated process. Do not use non-standard type fonts or formats in your resume, either, because these will simply be confusing and once again lead to peremptory rejection. Do not include photos or illustrations, either, unless you are certain that a human being will review the resume. Personally, I love resumes with great photos of experimental data, etc., but I am a human, not a machine. If you are working with a recruiter, the rules are different, but you should still try to use the appropriate key-words as much as possible. </p>
<p> PHASE TWO</p>
<p> This brings us to the second prong of the attack. All too often, candidates assume that there is nothing to do once the resume has been submitted but wait for rejection or the much smaller chance of getting a request for an interview. This is too passive and will generally not yield the best results. My suggestion is to follow up appropriately with the HR department, for one, and even more importantly, with whoever is actually the hiring manager, if you can find that out.</p>
<p> LinkedIn often provides information (though not always) about who actually placed the job description, and who the position reports to. It is, therefore, worth taking some extra time to research any position you are applying to, using LinkedIn, Google, Spoke or other tools which can give you the name of a human contact – this is key because humans can think, whereas computer programs cannot.</p>
<p> It is quite OK to call the front desk of the company and ask specifically “Do you know who is the manager in charge of hiring the chemical engineer to do scale-up and pilot line design?” (for instance). The worst that can happen is that they won’t tell you… But, if you can get the name, you have an edge.</p>
<p> It is an ancient belief (think of the story of “Rumpelstiltskin”) that if you have a person’s name, you have power over them – this is certainly true, because it enables you to at least address and communicate with them. Use this information wisely to potentially start a conversation – and don’t be shy of sending a resume to the actual human who is really recruiting for the position, instead of just relying on the ‘bot. If you can, go ahead and send a resume to this human, as well. Many times, email addresses can be searched, and certainly, even if exact emails can’t be found, you can still try the old-fashioned snail-mail hardcopy of a resume, too! Try calling and contacting this actual human and stating that you are strongly interested in the position, and at least leave a message discussing your qualifications (30 seconds to a minute, but not longer) … As long as it’s truthful, just dropping the buzzwords on a phone message to the right decision-maker can help push your resume to the top of the pile… and don’t forget to leave your number! Make sure it’s clear and audible. Don’t speak too fast.</p>
<p> The solution to the process of anonymization, compartmentalization, and sequestration that accompanies automation of the job-application process is to be a Human and persist in your efforts. Since attitude is so critical in hiring, the mere fact that you distinguish yourself by taking extra steps (phone call, getting names, sending resumes directly to the human involved) can only work to your advantage – you have absolutely nothing to lose. Just don’t come across as an “odd-ball”, though. Call once or twice, not fifty times, etc. Don’t show up at the job location without an appointment, unless you can really pull off Will Smith’s trick from “The Pursuit of Happyness”! But, if you can, anything you do to distinguish yourself from other candidates can work to your advantage – so long as you make a good impression. </p>
<p> The fact is, most resumes are sent to HR, and not to the hiring manager him/herself. HR people are not technical people (generally) and they are also overworked, looking for ways to save time, so they rely on ‘bots, whereas a hiring manager will have more likelihood of knowing when a buzzword has been tacitly expressed without actually using it. You can also send your resume to more than one hiring manager, if you are clever. All too often, resumes go to HR with perfectly-qualified applicants who never see the light of day, because the HR manager is too busy, or because the hiring manager may not have communicated fully with the HR department. </p>
<p> Woody Allen once said “90% of success is just showing up.” This means if you can get your resume in front of a real human, you have dramatically increased your odds. Take this message to heart!</p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/beating-bots-primer-candidates-age-online-job-nicholas-meyler?published=t">https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/beating-bots-primer-candidates-age-online-job-nicholas-meyler?published=t</a></p>"Filling a Leadership Vacuum" by Doug Peckovertag:recruitingblogs.com,2016-10-13:502551:BlogPost:19899582016-10-13T00:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p>Introduction:</p>
<p>In my effort to invent new ways to expand the range of possibilities available to Executive Recruiters/Management Consultants, I am currently working on a fascinating project with Inventor Doug Peckover who was awarded priority rights to the invention of "tokenization" security in 2005. Doug's invention is now widely used (in various modified forms) throughout the secure payments industry, and companies like ApplePay, SamsungPay, Verifone, etc. all use tokenization…</p>
<p>Introduction:</p>
<p>In my effort to invent new ways to expand the range of possibilities available to Executive Recruiters/Management Consultants, I am currently working on a fascinating project with Inventor Doug Peckover who was awarded priority rights to the invention of "tokenization" security in 2005. Doug's invention is now widely used (in various modified forms) throughout the secure payments industry, and companies like ApplePay, SamsungPay, Verifone, etc. all use tokenization methodologies to prevent fraud and hacking.</p>
<p>The difference with the approach used by Doug Peckover is that he envisions a world where quantum computer hacking will be possible in the next ten years... meaning that ANY form of cryptological security will become obsolete due to vastly superior combinatorial computation power.</p>
<p>Doug's 17 patents, which I am trying to find buyer(s) for, will protect against quantum computers as well as a multitude of other threats. I see my role in this effort as a logical extension of the duties of a Headhunter, in that is not only candidates, but ultimately the Intellectual Property that they produce that is our most valuable stock-in-trade.</p>
<p>So, I refer all readers (and especially anyone involved in the industry of Data Security, Cybersecurity, or Online Payment) to take a look at Doug's article. Please contact me if you have further interest!</p>
<p>The best formatted version is <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/filling-leadership-vacuum-doug-peckover?trk=prof-post">https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/filling-leadership-vacuum-doug-peckover?trk=prof-post</a> but I also provide the text, below:</p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>"Filling a Leadership Vacuum"</strong></p>
<p>by Doug Peckover</p>
<p>The lack of security leadership from most companies is breathtaking. I used to work for HP, so I'll use HPE as an example: for some types of data it uses tokenization and for everything else, it uses encryption.</p>
<p>The type of tokens HPE uses are called "stateless" because many servers can each generate millions of tokens independently. Its data sheet is careful to say this "effectively mitigates the risk of security breaches." Mitigate means make "less severe, serious, or painful." This hints that there's room for improvement. In fact, the static tables used by servers working independently means the tokens can be easily hacked. And since when do random tokens have to be generated when needed? They can easily be generated in advance and provided when needed. Like many companies, HPE's token security is deeply flawed (click <a href="http://www.dropbox.com/s/h6e8ejci1tw75ug/HPE%20New%20Tokenization%20Thoughts%209-22-16.doc?dl=0" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">here</a> for details).</p>
<p>So, how about encryption? It turns out that there is something that that no major firm wants to talk about. Take a few minutes to see how quantum computers will have a "devastating impact" and cause a "potentially catastrophic failure."</p>
<p>The standards body NIST <a href="http://www.bankinfosecurity.com/interviews/tackling-quantum-computing-threats-to-cryptography-i-3163" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">says</a> this threat will "take 10 to 20 years" to fix. A Wired <a href="http://www.wired.co.uk/article/quantum-computers-quantum-security-encryption" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">article</a> ends with “I would sure have sleepless nights if I had to ensure the long-term secrecy of data.” You'd think that major firms would admit there's a problem and would have a clear strategy for its customers, but I cannot find one.</p>
<p>So, is there a solution? As it turns out, there is and it's hiding in plain sight. You even have one on your car - something that secures everything about you - where you live, your criminal record, household income, the presence of children, etc. It's your license plate, yet you think nothing about driving around where everyone can see it.</p>
<p>In computers, these are a different type of "token" and, according to the U.S. Patent Office, I'm the inventor of the solution for both of HPE's problems. The only way this type of security can be broken is by breaking its authentication before access is granted to other files. And with things like biometrics and GPS, tokens are actually getting stronger over time. Firms betting on encryption certainly cannot say this.</p>
<p>Done properly, tokens also do things that encryption was never designed to do:</p>
<ul>
<li>Reduce breach detection and response times to zero.</li>
<li>Enable new privacy compliance, including the Right to be Forgotten.</li>
<li>Support Data Loss Protection <em>after </em>data has been shared.</li>
<li>Listen to hackers trying to break your security.</li>
</ul>
<p>Companies are busy supporting their customers, and I appreciate that. But there's a "catastrophic failure" that will soon affect every one of these customers. It will be interesting to see which company decides to fill this leadership vacuum.</p>Why Do Recruiters Spam Candidates?tag:recruitingblogs.com,2016-09-20:502551:BlogPost:19870492016-09-20T05:00:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557604599?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-left" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557604599?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300"></img></a> Allison Kruse wrote a thoughtful article on the issue of excessive amounts of email being sent by recruiters. I do applaud her concern and think that she has a good point. </p>
<p>At the same time, I wonder how many placements she has made in the realm of technical search, where there are sometimes extremely few candidates that can perform a certain job, and a huge number…</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557604599?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="300" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557604599?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300" class="align-left"/></a>Allison Kruse wrote a thoughtful article on the issue of excessive amounts of email being sent by recruiters. I do applaud her concern and think that she has a good point. </p>
<p>At the same time, I wonder how many placements she has made in the realm of technical search, where there are sometimes extremely few candidates that can perform a certain job, and a huge number of possible candidates to research. </p>
<p>In any case, she has some valid points. Here is her article: <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-do-recruiters-spam-candidates-allison-kruse?trk=prof-post">https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-do-recruiters-spam-candidates-allison-kruse?trk=prof-post</a></p>
<p>Here is my response:</p>
<p><span>I would like to offer a dissenting opinion, while acknowledging that poorly-written email is a definite turn-off to many candidates. Still, I think reaction to emails varies drastically by market sectors. There are some industries, like software, where mass emails simply don't work.</span></p>
<p><span>There are other sectors, like chemical engineering and chemistry, electrical engineering</span><span class="more-container">, etc., where it works amazingly well. I've repeatedly been told that my emails always contain the most exciting and interesting jobs in the industry, and I get many requests to put people on my email lists. I've also received many other compliments. Perhaps the level of professionalism exhibited in the email is another factor... maybe most recruiters are simply doing a very poor job of it. I have people on my email list that have been reading my blasts for 15 years or more, in many cases.</span></p>
<p><span class="more-container">The fact of the matter is simply that a well-polished, well-written job description email is a much more efficient way to advertise an open position than painstakingly going to every single candidate.... If you are working in a field with 50,000 skilled scientists, you really can't approach each one of them individually, and they know that. I usually work with PhDs who almost never complain, probably because they realize how hard a job it is to actually find the very best people... On the other hand software engineers have a tendency to complain; but I've also placed PhD Software engineers who were great guys, and never said anything negative about the email approach, and have been on my friend lists for over a decade.</span></p>
<p><span class="more-container">I try to use both a wide-spread mailing approach (and I have a complaint rate of about 1 per 20,000 emails), as well as a pin-point targeted approach with complete personalization to each individual that I can establish as a qualified candidate. The truth is, you can't really predict which approach will work best, in any given situation.</span></p>
<p><span class="more-container">Most recently, my client (a major Energy company) told me that they found my approach to be the best experience they had ever had with a recruiter (and they have used many)... Similarly, my candidates that I identified by email were extremely pleased that I found them at all, and have been ideal and very cooperative to work with. All of my clients are very loyal to my work, and I almost always get repeat business. Similarly, my candidates are very friendly, cooperative, upbeat, highly professional, and rarely have anything negative to say.</span></p>
<p><span class="more-container">When I have had negative results, it has been almost exclusively from software engineers who basically lied about receiving so many job offers that they just hate recruiters. I actually researched this and found that they were receiving about 1/10th the amount of recruiter email that they were claiming. I've also had people curse me for sending them a "bad match" when I know for certain it was extremely accurate, and I had done my homework (due diligence) extremely fastidiously. So, I think mostly the critics are lying. You can also tell because they tend to come from rather inferior colleges, and tend to be paid substantially less than the vast majority of skilled technical people who don't complain about recruiters networking with opportunities.</span></p>
<p><span class="more-container">So, I'm not buying this "recruiterspam" nonsense. I've been doing this for a long time, and it has worked great in every high-tech industry with the exception of a small subset of the software industry... Most people have very positive reactions to well-constructed email offering them a six-figure job opportunity. If they don't like it, they are welcome to unsubscribe. But, the bottom line is that whatever approach you use, it has to be one that works. If it's not working, then fix it.</span></p>Épée, "Human Factors" and Headhuntingtag:recruitingblogs.com,2016-08-27:502551:BlogPost:19830442016-08-27T06:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557603159?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" target="_self"><img class="align-left" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557603159?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300"></img></a></p>
<p>From a Historical perspective, Recruiting has certainly been around for thousands of years, and, expectationally, will definitely continue to exist for a long, long time (at least if Humanity continues to exist). </p>
<p>But, will "Headhunting" continue to exist? The mere word evokes images of primitive savages with curare-tipped darts hiding in…</p>
<p><a width="750" href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557603159?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" target="_self"><img width="300" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557603159?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300" class="align-left"/></a></p>
<p>From a Historical perspective, Recruiting has certainly been around for thousands of years, and, expectationally, will definitely continue to exist for a long, long time (at least if Humanity continues to exist). </p>
<p>But, will "Headhunting" continue to exist? The mere word evokes images of primitive savages with curare-tipped darts hiding in the jungles of the Amazon or New Guinea, intent on predation of fellow Humans... </p>
<p>Yet, it was perhaps the World's greatest Executive Recruiter, Gerard Roche, Chairman of the Board of Heidrick and Struggles, Inc. (the Search firm that placed the CEO of Google, and charged a fee of $100 million), who said: "'Headhunting' is a great term for it -- because we really do look for the best, and the brightest." Far from being a term of derision, Roche converted the moniker "Headhunter" into an automatic accolade.</p>
<p>Still, let us return to the question of the persistence of this Industry called "Headhunting":</p>
<p>Let's look at the definitions:</p>
<p>re·cruitrəˈkro͞ot/<em>verb </em>gerund or present participle: <b>recruiting</b></p>
<ol>
<li>enlist (someone) in the armed forces."they recruit their toughest soldiers from the desert tribes"<ul>
<li>form (an army or other force) by enlisting new people."a basis for recruiting an army"</li>
<li>enroll (someone) as a member or worker in an organization or as a supporter of a cause."there are plans to recruit more staff later this year"</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ol>
<p> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p>
<p>"Headhunting," on the other hand, was basically invented in the mid-1920's, as a profession. We are nearing our 100th year as a field of professional endeavor, but we can't be safe to become complacent, yet. </p>
<p>head·hunt·erˈhedˌhən(t)ər/<em>noun</em></p>
<ol>
<li>a person who identifies and approaches suitable candidates employed elsewhere to fill business positions."a headhunter offering you a wonderful new position at a higher salary"</li>
</ol>
<p>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p>
<p>With the advent of Artificial Intelligence and "Social Media", it does make sense to have concerns about whether the relatively "young" profession of Headhunting could be done instead by automation, more efficiently, saving time and money, by computer proxy. Yet, the presence of "Human Factors" is always important, as well (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Pew">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Pew</a>)</p>
<p>I learned this (eventually) because my family was friendly with the brother of Richard Pew for many years. Richard and John Pew (Richard's brother) both attended Cornell University, like my father and grandfather did. Richard Pew was an American Épée fencer who finished 4th in the Melbourne Olympics in the 1950's; higher than any other American fencer, in any weapon, for 24 years. This was a record that stood for 28 years, set by a mathematician and engineer from Cornell University; not surpassed until Peter Westbrook won a Bronze in Men's Sabre in the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles. </p>
<p>Most recently, however, it was my club-mate and fellow Princeton-grad friend Soren Thompson who led the US Men's Épée Team to the World Championship in Paris just a few years ago... This was a defeat of the French Team that had been World Champions 8 years in a row. This was an unprecedented event in U.S. Men's fencing, although Mariel Zagunis had previously triumphed as World Champion in Women's Sabre (an event that didn't even exist, officially, when I was first learning how to fence).</p>
<p>Soren and I shared the same coach (Michael D'Asaro Sr.) and bouted together multiple times. I was never able to beat him. Still, I very much doubt that any of this U.S. Fencing History would have happened without the pioneering efforts of Richard Pew, who was also the President of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (<a href="https://hfes.org">https://hfes.org</a>).</p>
<p>The point that I am making, simply, is that "Human Factors" cannot be ignored or replaced that easily. Even with perfect Artificial Intelligence, Humans are still needed to deal with the candidates identified, because of the enormous complexities of the possible permutations of possible situations that can arise. No "program" can deal with all the eventualities involved in the process of Headhunting and hiring. </p>
<p>"Fencing robots" do exist, and they are formidable, but the physical complexities of programming a fully-autonomous robot to fence (within the rules, of course!) is far, far simpler than programming an automated Headhunter/Recruiter. This may happen within my lifetime, but I doubt that the precious "Human Factors" elements can ever be replaced. </p>Is There Really a Gene for Headhunting?tag:recruitingblogs.com,2016-07-30:502551:BlogPost:19798332016-07-30T01:00:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557596497?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-left" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557596497?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300"></img></a> As someone with scientific training, related to a Nobel geneticist (a farmer/agriculturalist) it has piqued my curiosity whether or not there really is a "gene" for hunting (and/or "headhunting"). Using the results of my DNA test from Ancestry.com, I plugged them into a computer model called "Eurogenes K7" on the Gedmatch.com site. </p>
<p>This particular computer model is…</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557596497?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="300" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557596497?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300" class="align-left"/></a>As someone with scientific training, related to a Nobel geneticist (a farmer/agriculturalist) it has piqued my curiosity whether or not there really is a "gene" for hunting (and/or "headhunting"). Using the results of my DNA test from Ancestry.com, I plugged them into a computer model called "Eurogenes K7" on the Gedmatch.com site. </p>
<p>This particular computer model is specifically designed to identify Western European Hunter/Gatherer genes similar to those found from 8,000 year old archeological digs in the Loschbour, Belgium cave site.</p>
<p>Statistically speaking, highest values for this gene are found in Estonians and Lithuanians, where values run to as high as 50%.</p>
<p>My results, as you will see, are much higher (by 20 to 50%) than even those found in the highest-frequency population. This is interesting, because I am also undeniably related to a very substantial (world-famous) family of farmers... One would therefore expect me to have a much lower amount of the WHG genes.</p>
<p>However, in light of the fact that I am a Headhunter (and a proud one, at that), it seems fairly clear that the "hunter" genes have proven dominant, in my case. I think that this makes a decent start for establishing why it is that most people are not capable of being Headhunters... they don't have the biological make-up for it.</p>
<p>Next time someone tells you: "Anybody can be a Headhunter"... just ask them what their genetic makeup is on the Eurogenes K7 model and see what they say.</p>
<p>As far as actual hunting goes, I don't particularly like guns or killing game, although I enjoy fishing and hunting rock-scallops while diving. My 'hunting instincts' are channeled almost entirely into Recruiting.</p>
<p>Here are the test results I was speaking of:</p>
<p></p>
<h2>Eurogenes_ANE K7 Admixture Proportions</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.gedmatch.com/fcgi-bin/ap_mix2tw_blk.fcgi"><br/> <span>This utility uses the Eurogenes ANE K7 model, created by Davidski (Polako). Questions and comments about this calculator</span><br/> <span>should be directed to him at his </span></a><a href="http://bga101.blogspot.com.au/" target="_blank">Project Blog</a><a href="https://www.gedmatch.com/fcgi-bin/ap_mix2tw_blk.fcgi"><span>. Revised 2014-Sep-12</span><br/> <br/> <span>Kit Number: M001350 Iteration: 123 Delta-Q: 1.635908e-08 Elapsed Time: 16.25 seconds</span><br/> <br/> <br/></a></p>
<table>
<tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" valign="middle" width="91">Population</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" colspan="2" align="right">Chr--> 1 </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">4</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">5</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">8</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">10</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">11</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">12</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">13</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">14</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">15</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">16</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">17</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">18</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">19</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">20</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">21</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">22</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="13" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">ANE</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E9E9FF" align="right">16.4</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EEEEFF" align="right">13.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F2F2FF" align="right">10.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E5E5FF" align="right">20.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EAEAFF" align="right">15.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EDEDFF" align="right">13.5</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E9E9FF" align="right">16.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E9E9FF" align="right">16.4</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EDEDFF" align="right">13.8</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EFEFFF" align="right">11.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E6E6FF" align="right">19.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F3F3FF" align="right">8.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E9E9FF" align="right">16.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EFEFFF" align="right">12.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F0F0FF" align="right">11.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E6E6FF" align="right">19.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#ECECFF" align="right">14.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EFEFFF" align="right">12.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F1F1FF" align="right">10.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F1F1FF" align="right">10.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E4E4FF" align="right">20.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E7FF" align="right">18.5</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="13" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">ASE</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FDFDFF" align="right">1.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FBFBFF" align="right">3.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FCFCFF" align="right">2.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FBFBFF" align="right">2.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F8F8FF" align="right">5.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FCFCFF" align="right">1.8</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FDFDFF" align="right">0.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FDFDFF" align="right">0.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FDFDFF" align="right">0.8</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FBFBFF" align="right">2.8</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F7F7FF" align="right">6.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FAFAFF" align="right">3.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F9F9FF" align="right">4.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F5F5FF" align="right">7.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FEFEFF" align="right">0.2</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="13" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">WHG-UHG</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#AEAEFF" align="right">63.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#B3B3FF" align="right">58.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#9595FF" align="right">82.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#A9A9FF" align="right">67.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#A7A7FF" align="right">68.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#AEAEFF" align="right">63.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#B4B4FF" align="right">58.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#B4B4FF" align="right">58.5</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#A9A9FF" align="right">66.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#A6A6FF" align="right">68.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#B0B0FF" align="right">61.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#A7A7FF" align="right">68.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#A3A3FF" align="right">71.8</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#A7A7FF" align="right">68.5</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#A8A8FF" align="right">67.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#A1A1FF" align="right">73.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#A9A9FF" align="right">66.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#ADADFF" align="right">63.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#AEAEFF" align="right">62.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#ABABFF" align="right">64.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#BBBBFF" align="right">52.5</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#B3B3FF" align="right">58.6</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="13" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">East_Eurasian</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F9F9FF" align="right">4.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FBFBFF" align="right">2.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FDFDFF" align="right">1.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FBFBFF" align="right">3.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FCFCFF" align="right">2.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FCFCFF" align="right">1.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FBFBFF" align="right">3.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="13" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">West_African</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FCFCFF" align="right">1.8</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FEFEFF" align="right">0.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FDFDFF" align="right">0.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FEFEFF" align="right">0.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FEFEFF" align="right">0.4</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FBFBFF" align="right">2.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FEFEFF" align="right">0.4</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="13" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">East_African</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FEFEFF" align="right">0.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FDFDFF" align="right">0.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FEFEFF" align="right">0.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FCFCFF" align="right">1.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FBFBFF" align="right">2.4</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FDFDFF" align="right">1.5</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F8F8FF" align="right">5.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FEFEFF" align="right">0.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FDFDFF" align="right">1.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F9F9FF" align="right">4.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FEFEFF" align="right">0.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FCFCFF" align="right">1.6</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">- </td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="13" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">ENF</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E6E6FF" align="right">19.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E1E1FF" align="right">23.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F9F9FF" align="right">4.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F0F0FF" align="right">11.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F4F4FF" align="right">8.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E7FF" align="right">18.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E4E4FF" align="right">20.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E4E4FF" align="right">20.8</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EAEAFF" align="right">15.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EAEAFF" align="right">16.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EDEDFF" align="right">14.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E2E2FF" align="right">22.5</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F0F0FF" align="right">11.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E8E8FF" align="right">17.3</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#ECECFF" align="right">14.7</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#F4F4FF" align="right">8.0</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EAEAFF" align="right">16.1</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#EDEDFF" align="right">13.4</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E3E3FF" align="right">21.4</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E9E9FF" align="right">16.9</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E6E6FF" align="right">19.2</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#E1E1FF" align="right">22.7</td>
</tr>
<tr><td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">Number of SNPs eval:</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">14382</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">14691</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">12621</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">10611</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">11232</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">12243</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">9857</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">10382</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">9179</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">9937</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">9135</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">9058</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">6754</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">6192</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">5826</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">5854</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">5061</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">5777</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">3384</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">5006</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">2911</td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="8"> </td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="right">2545</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><a href="https://www.gedmatch.com/fcgi-bin/ap_mix2tw_blk.fcgi"> </a></p>
<p>If you are a Headhunter (as most of the readers on this site are), and have an interest in genetic genealogy, please feel free to contact me and share genomes, if you like. Even though this clips off at gene 14 (of 22), you can clearly see ALL my chromosomes have WHG markers above those of the Estonian/Lithuanian control group, with "world's highest WHG frequency" in the general population.</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p><img/></p>Google Announces "Quantum Cryptography" Initiativetag:recruitingblogs.com,2016-07-09:502551:BlogPost:19764582016-07-09T03:00:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557591765?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-left" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557591765?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300"></img></a> Let's face it -- quantum computers are real, and they will eventually be able to crack any kind of encryption. This means data cannot be safely stored. We've already seen major hacking by the Chinese, Russians, etc. of NSA, DOD and other classified institutions' data. The highly probable leak of, and successful hacking of, Secretary of State Clinton's data is probably just…</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557591765?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="300" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557591765?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300" class="align-left"/></a>Let's face it -- quantum computers are real, and they will eventually be able to crack any kind of encryption. This means data cannot be safely stored. We've already seen major hacking by the Chinese, Russians, etc. of NSA, DOD and other classified institutions' data. The highly probable leak of, and successful hacking of, Secretary of State Clinton's data is probably just the tip of that iceberg which will eventually and inevitably sink the "Titanic" (which I would compare to Google's new quantum-encryption key).</p>
<p>Today, Google announced a quantum cryptography initiative: <a href="http://www.toptechnews.com/article/index.php?story_id=020000MIXF4S">http://www.toptechnews.com/article/index.php?story_id=020000MIXF4S</a></p>
<p>I've been busy trying to "sell" people and Companies on the virtues of anticipating this threat to data security for a while now, ever since being asked to represent an Inventor with Intellectual Property (i.e. patents) in a new mode of data storage that is completely resistant to Quantum Computers, and any other known mode of hacking, using "tokenization".</p>
<p>The relevant patents were awarded priority by the USPTO in 2005 -- fully 11 years ahead of Goofle's announcement today. And, to be quite frank, any cryptographic key is susceptible to decryption (i.e. "being broken") by sufficiently advanced and sufficiently fast algorithms and computers.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, a radically different idea does exist: "Tokenization". This is a methodology which is totally resistant to cracking, because of the fact that it prevents recovery of almost any data at all, without resorting to cryptography.</p>
<p>Wingate Dunross, Inc. (my company) is currently brokering this Intellectual Property for Clients smart enough to see the long-term value. This is clearly a departure from the conventional or traditional role of the "Headhunter", but, in my opinion, is clearly a logical evolution or "next stage" for the profession.</p>
<p>We, as Headhunters, deal in a very special commodity: "Mind". Mind is actually priceless, and the fees we charge for connecting a source of great IP (Intellectual Property) with a buyer are laughably small.</p>
<p>Maybe I am preaching to the choir, but I think this is a new direction for our mutually-chosen profession that is worthy of thought, consideration, and investigation. </p>Headhunters as Brokers of Intellectual Propertytag:recruitingblogs.com,2016-06-24:502551:BlogPost:19741342016-06-24T04:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557594981?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-left" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557594981?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300"></img></a> Intellectual Property Brokerage: Headhunters (like me) don't sell Intellectual Property, but we do sell introductions and connections with Inventors and Innovators who create valuable IP (Intellectual Property). How does one become a broker of Intellectual Properties (via referrals) and how does that work? How should one be paid? I often think that my ability to refer very…</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557594981?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="300" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557594981?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300" class="align-left"/></a>Intellectual Property Brokerage: Headhunters (like me) don't sell Intellectual Property, but we do sell introductions and connections with Inventors and Innovators who create valuable IP (Intellectual Property). How does one become a broker of Intellectual Properties (via referrals) and how does that work? How should one be paid? I often think that my ability to refer very valuable IP to potential buyers is far more valuable than my recruiting services, but how does that Industry operate, and how can one conjoin that with superior excellence at Recruiting skills?</p>
<p>The value of Intellectual Property (for example, with Independent candidates who own their own IP, not as employees of a company they work or worked for) is significantly greater than the commission a Recruiter earns.</p>
<p>Still, the value of a Headhunter's network, of many thousands of gifted individuals who might wish to purchase remarkable IP (on behalf of their companies, etc.) enables him/her to have a "cat-bird seat" (i.e. privileged position) in this Realm.</p>
<p>I once placed someone with about a $Billion in IP, and received a fine paycheck for it, about $75,000. Still, the IP that individual was able to create later was also worth another $Billion, and IP Brokers typically earn a 25% fee (from what I have read). The work I did was short-changed (in certain logical ways of thinking) by millions of dollars. I would probably have enjoyed cashing that check, if it had existed.</p>
<p>How can one make this business model work? Who has any ideas? Any Capitalists around?</p>On The Value of CEOs and Headhunterstag:recruitingblogs.com,2015-11-21:502551:BlogPost:19315272015-11-21T01:00:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557579925?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-left" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557579925?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300"></img></a> In response to an excellent article in Financial Times (Nov. 16, 2015) by Andrew Hill, I posted this and was pleased to receive 'editor's pick' notice. Here is a link to the article, which I have previously posted on LinkedIn and elsewhere:…</p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557579925?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="300" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557579925?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="300" class="align-left"/></a>In response to an excellent article in Financial Times (Nov. 16, 2015) by Andrew Hill, I posted this and was pleased to receive 'editor's pick' notice. Here is a link to the article, which I have previously posted on LinkedIn and elsewhere:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/fa3f12ae-89f3-11e5-9f8c-a8d619fa707c.html#axzz3rztuRUnF" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Financial Times Article</a> (click on the highlighted link to read "Headhunters and CEOs are less valuable than they think")</p>
<p>My comments:</p>
<p>"If CEOs are highly-paid and lowly rated, the people who pick them must share part of the blame." -- True! And, therefore, it follows that the companies who pick the wrong search firms must share the blame too.</p>
<p><a href="http://nicholasmeyler.tumblr.com/post/96209740878/what-is-my-work-worth" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://nicholasmeyler.tumblr.com/post/96209740878/what-is-my-work-worth</a><br/> <br/> Perhaps the main reason headhunters aren't really assessing success of the candidates they place is because companies are using the wrong headhunters. The bulk of retained CEO searches go to the "giant" search firms like Korn-Ferry, Heidrick and Struggles, Russell Reynolds, etc. (all of them great companies). Still, they are companies with nothing left to prove... they don't necessarily have the 'fire in the belly' that smaller boutique firms have. <br/> <br/> I've been a recruiter for 26 years, have a technical degree in Chemical Engineering and graduated from Princeton University's Philosophy Department (Highest-rated academic department in the World at the time), and I have research skills that are clearly unmatched by my competitors even in the the more massive firms like KF and RR. Yet, I rarely see CEO searches (although I did place someone who much later ended up CEO of Gateway Computers, very early in my career). <br/> <br/> The problem is that the competency of the Search Giants is something people take for granted -- complacency results, and striving to identify the best possible candidates is diminished. <br/> <br/> Perhaps a more "disruptive" approach to hiring CEOs would work better for many companies. Quit relying on the "big name" firms and try out the much more agile, independent and sometimes very superior recruiters who work at small boutique firms instead, and then see how they perform... That's a strategy that would shake things up!</p>What Not To Do When Publishing Articlestag:recruitingblogs.com,2015-10-28:502551:BlogPost:19223882015-10-28T01:00:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p>I like to publish small snippets periodically, because it's fun to write and think, and I like to share my thoughts with others. However, it's another matter altogether when I see someone with a year of experience in recruiting, after previously being a hairdresser, passing off a classic article on "Counteroffers" on LinkedIn as his own work. </p>
<p>3000+ views is a lot of attention for a recruiter to grab, but it would certainly have been much more ethical to do his own work, wouldn't…</p>
<p>I like to publish small snippets periodically, because it's fun to write and think, and I like to share my thoughts with others. However, it's another matter altogether when I see someone with a year of experience in recruiting, after previously being a hairdresser, passing off a classic article on "Counteroffers" on LinkedIn as his own work. </p>
<p>3000+ views is a lot of attention for a recruiter to grab, but it would certainly have been much more ethical to do his own work, wouldn't it? Here is the cut-up version passed off as original work ("pearls of wisdom") by a one-year recruiter:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-you-should-never-accept-counter-offer-greg-mendham?trk=hp-feed-article-title-share">https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-you-should-never-accept-counter-offer-greg-mendham?trk=hp-feed-article-title-share</a></p>
<p>This is not wholly plagiarized verbatim, but way too much, all the same. Good headhunters should immediately recognize this as the classic article by Paul Hawkinson, published in the 1980's. He was an editor of The Fordyce Letter, back in the days when Fordyce was still a respected publication.</p>
<p>Here is the original article: </p>
<h2 class="post-title"><a href="http://npaworldwide.com/blog/resources/counteroffer-acceptance-road-to-career-ruin/">Counteroffer Acceptance – Road to Career Ruin</a></h2>
<p><strong><em>A raise won’t permanently cushion thorns in the nest!</em></strong><br/> By Paul Hawkinson<br/> Courtesy of: National Business Employment Weekly</p>
<p>Mathew Henry, the 17th century writer said, “Many a dangerous temptation comes to us in fine gray colors that are but skin deep.” The same can be said for counteroffers, those magnetic enticements designed to lure you back into the nest after you’ve decided it’s time to fly away.</p>
<p>The litany of horror stories I have come across in my years as an executive recruiter, consultant and publisher provides a litmus test that clearly indicates counteroffers should never be accepted. … EVER!</p>
<p>I define a counteroffer simply as an inducement from your current employer to get you to stay after you’ve announced your intention to take another job. We’re not talking about those instances when you receive an offer but don’t tell your boss. Nor are we discussing offers that you never intended to take, yet tell your employer about anyway are “they-want-me-but I’m staying-with-you” ploy. These are merely astute positioning tactics you may choose to use to reinforce your worth by letting your boss know you have other options. Mention of a true counteroffer, however, carries an actual threat to quit.</p>
<p>Interviews with employers who make counteroffers, and employees who accept them, have shown that as tempting as they may be, acceptance may (and usually does) cause career suicide. During the past 20 years, I have seen only isolated incidents in which an accepted counteroffer has benefited the employee. Consider the problem in its proper perspective.</p>
<p>What really goes through a boss’s mind when someone quits?</p>
<p>* This couldn’t be happening at a worse time.<br/> * This is one of my best people, if I let him quit now, it’ll wreak havoc on the morale of the department.<br/> * I’ve already got one opening in my department. I don’t need another right now.<br/> * This will probably screw up the entire vacation schedule.<br/> * I’m working as hard as I can, and I don’t need to do his work, too.<br/> * If I lose another good employee, the company might decide to ‘lose’ me too.<br/> * My review is coming up and this will make me look bad.<br/> * Maybe I can keep him/her on until I find a suitable replacement.</p>
<p>What will the boss say to keep you in the nest?<br/> * I’m really shocked I thought you were as happy with us as we are with you. Let’s discuss it before you make your final decision.”<br/> * I’ve been meaning to tell you about the great plans we have for you, but it’s been confidential until now.”<br/> * The VP has you in mind for some exciting and expanding responsibilities.<br/> * Your raise was scheduled to go into effect next quarter, but we’ll make it effective immediately.”<br/> * You’re going to work for whom? You can’t be serious.</p>
<p>Let’s face it. When someone quits it’s a direct reflection on the boss. Unless you’re really incompetent or a destructive thorn in his side, the boss might look bad by “allowing” you to go. His gut reaction is to do what has to be done to keep you from leaving until he’s ready. That’s human nature. Unfortunately, it’s also human nature to want to stay unless your work life is abject misery. Career change, like all ventures into the unknown, is tough. That’s why bosses know they can usually keep you around by pressing the right buttons.</p>
<p>Before you succumb to a tempting counteroffer, consider these universal truths:<br/> * Any situation in which an employee is forced to get an outside offer before the present employer will suggest a raise, promotion or better working conditions, is suspect.<br/> * No matter what the company says when making its counteroffer, you will always be considered a fidelity risk. Having once demonstrated your lack of loyalty (for whatever reason), you will lose your status as a “team player’ and your place in the inner circle.<br/> * Counteroffers are usually nothing more than stall devices to give your employer time to replace you.<br/> * Your reasons for wanting to leave still exist. Conditions are just made a bit more tolerable in the short term because of the raise; promotion nor promises made to keep you.<br/> * Counteroffers are only made in response to a threat to quit. Will you have to solicit an offer and threaten to quit every time you deserve better working conditions? Decent and well-managed companies don’t make counteroffers…EVER! Their policies are fair and equitable. They will not be subjected to “counteroffer coercion” or what they perceive as blackmail. If the urge to accept a counteroffer his you, keep cleaning out your desk as you count your blessings.</p>
<p>......................................................</p>
<p>The advice is still great. The ideas are worth sharing. I have had all my candidates read this article prior to receiving an offer from my client for decades, now. That way they are "innoculated" against the threat of counter-offer, and better prepared with how to deal with them when they do happen.</p>
<p>Still, I think we should try to keep our work original, don't you?</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>Searching for Fluorescent Reptilestag:recruitingblogs.com,2015-10-06:502551:BlogPost:19195892015-10-06T06:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557574294?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557574294?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750"></img></a></p>
<p><br></br> Recently, a new scientific discovery was made, which was that a fluorescent sea-turtle of the Hawksbill variety was discovered in Papua, New Guinea. I haven't been to Papua, yet, but it is on my 'bucket list'.<br></br> <br></br> Apparently, scientists had never previously conceived the idea of a fluorescent sea-turtle, although various corals, sponges and other…</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557574294?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557574294?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p><br/> Recently, a new scientific discovery was made, which was that a fluorescent sea-turtle of the Hawksbill variety was discovered in Papua, New Guinea. I haven't been to Papua, yet, but it is on my 'bucket list'.<br/> <br/> Apparently, scientists had never previously conceived the idea of a fluorescent sea-turtle, although various corals, sponges and other mono-cellular critters fluoresce all the time.<br/> <br/> My thought is that this is short-sighted of scientists, although I understand that (like good recruiters), they have both feet anchored in Reality.<br/> <br/> Here is an article on this new find: <a href="http://www.pulseheadlines.com/explorers-glowing-turtle-ocean-guinea">http://www.pulseheadlines.com/explorers-glowing-turtle-ocean-guinea</a>...<br/> <br/> Is this really less common than "purple squirrels" (see my article <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/radical-reductionist-analysis-purple"></a><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/radical-reductionist-analysis-purple-squirrel-idiom-nicholas-meyler?trk=mp-author-card">https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/radical-reductionist-analysis-purple-squirrel-idiom-nicholas-meyler?trk=mp-author-card</a>) ??</p>
<p>Perhaps it is.</p>
<p>However, I still remember the incredibly vivid fluorescence of lizards I've seen at altitudes above 6,000 ft on the High Sierra Trail. Brilliant flaming cerulean azure indigo underbellies are hard not to remember. Methinks that Scientists are a slightly forgetful lot, not to recall such things.<br/> <br/> Next, let's get paid our 33% commission on the salaries (not salamanders) of all the fluorescent reptiles we find. We'll get very rich!</p>SETI, Snowden and Searchtag:recruitingblogs.com,2015-09-30:502551:BlogPost:19178842015-09-30T03:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p>Since the 'invention' of fire, there have been times when History was clearly diverted from a previous course by intervening events and the influences of people. In this instance, I offer an example wherein an otherwise "free agent" has become ensnared in his own web of deception, by becoming a parrot of my own recruiting pitch to Time-travelers. Apparently, he wants "out" of this Universe, entirely. I can understand, to some degree.…</p>
<p></p>
<p>Since the 'invention' of fire, there have been times when History was clearly diverted from a previous course by intervening events and the influences of people. In this instance, I offer an example wherein an otherwise "free agent" has become ensnared in his own web of deception, by becoming a parrot of my own recruiting pitch to Time-travelers. Apparently, he wants "out" of this Universe, entirely. I can understand, to some degree.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/edward-snowden-says-alien-transmissions-might-be-encrypted-180956710/">http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/edward-snowden-says-alien-transmissions-might-be-encrypted-180956710/</a></p>
<p>The fact that Edward Snowden tried to claim authorship for my "Encryptment Thesis" theory may tip the scales towards a guilty judgment... Passing off someone else's hard work as one's own is possibly indicative of a character flaw of selfishness. Sometimes the scales of History are tipped by what seem very minor and trivial things at the time they occur, which later assume an enormous and entirely unexpected gravity.</p>
<p>Someone named <a href="http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.funnyordie.com%2Fnicholasmeyler&h=YAQGB-Djs&enc=AZPtn8iazhzPblI1voB52tZuLLRxXpKL_tHUbhAGkCOxjyorPKcyryGbnzKzMlCXyOFm1ZYKabx7Lvm_CBGUshcjmHdKaPCtcB3HqVGAMqUObneoyLK3419Eyu6_lESCZISomsIFf7rO6gyoliaykN_KgL69ccgu2NGQ8ci2qgzWyGzijBci7iv65q5xI2t8VIE&s=1" target="_blank">nicholasmeyler</a> (hah! me) wrote a book about aliens, time-travel and cryptography in two volumes called "The Encryptment Thesis" (note the the initials of Encryptment Thesis are "ET"). However, since his theory worked too well, he decided to keep it under wraps and encrypted it.</p>
<p>[ 32 ] Meyler, Nicholas, 1959- Letters and essays on time-travel : the encryptment thesis. TXu000676618 1995<br/>[ 33 ] Meyler, Nicholas James, 1959- Encryptment thesis II : Letters from a chrononaut : foreshadowings of the 9/11 tragedies / by Nicholas Meyler. TXu001072182 2002</p>
<p>This is actually a theory I developed quite a while ago. It is not original with Seth Shostak (head of the SETI project) nor with Edward Snowden. I named the concepts involved "The Encryptment Thesis" (please note that the initials of Encryptment Thesis are "ET"). My theory also predates Stephen Hawking's latest revisions to his Black Hole Information Loss Paradox, in that I demonstrate, conclusively, that information is still preserved, but in an encrypted state that must be deciphered. I use intuitionistic logic and concrete examples based on Kripkean "Naming and Necessity" and other methods of logical reasoning and deduction, entirely bypassing the need for complex mathematics*.</p>
<p>What Snowden doesn't appear to understand is that nothing is "hidden" by encryption of Alien messages. Rather, the Information itself exists in a state of passive "encryptment" which is not clearly intentional encryption in any way, state or form. "Encryption" implies intention and intension. "Encryptment" merely implies a "statal passive" encrypted-ness, which was my point, since the mechanism of the encryptment of Alien (faster-than-light) Information transmission is currently unknown.</p>
<p>The whole point of my theory "The Encryptment Thesis" is that Alien transmissions are not intentionally hidden, but are designed to be only decipherable using concepts of faster-than-light Information Transmission. Some of these codes have already been "cracked", by me... decades ago. A culture with faster-than-light travel would not think in the same linear fashions humans do, but would naturally communicate at infinite Information Transmission rates. Since the human mind doesn't think that way, we construe the communication as "encrypted", although it is no more encrypted than a very thick Scottish brogue, for example.</p>
<p>Parenthetically, perhaps I should explain that I am a professional with 26 years of experience in the industry known as "Executive Search." Search is what I think about all day every day, and the people I search for are mostly creative inventors. I once placed someone with over 391 awarded patents (in the top 30 list of prolific inventors worldwide). It is therefore a practical necessity for me to invent and develop techniques and methodologies of Search which are effective in finding and recruiting such people. Many of these techniques are relevant to the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, and indeed, I believe there has been a very fruitful cross-pollination of ideas.</p>
<p>_________________________________________________</p>
<p>* If Hawking is correct in the latest revision of his theory of Black Holes, when he asserts that the boundary-sphere outside the Black Hole formed by Hawking Rad<span class="text_exposed_show">iation (anti-particle pairs which correspond to the Information content of whatever 'falls into' the Black Hole) is actually a Hologram containing all information which enters the Black Hole, THEN shouldn't we conclude that nothing ever actually enters a Black Hole, since it would be annihilated at the surface/"firewall"? </span>Moreover, wouldn't this also imply that a person who enters a Black Hole would no longer be the same person, but instead be a doppelgänger of the previous Self? Events that occur along the 4d/5d-axis of "imaginary Time" (iTime) do not correspond to human concepts and innate linguistic conceptual brain-structures or grammatical structures, do they? The same holds true for any events of faster-than-light Information Transmission. </p>Do We Really Need to Be Afraid of Artificial Intelligence?tag:recruitingblogs.com,2015-09-09:502551:BlogPost:19156112015-09-09T23:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557568067?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-left" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557568067?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750"></img></a></p>
<p>Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk both think that Robots and Artificial Intelligences might eventually try to take over the world and destroy life as we know it, in a "Terminator" kind of doomsday scenario. </p>
<p>I think people like Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk are frightfully clever people, but I would like to point out where humans retain an advantage over…</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557568067?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557568067?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-left"/></a></p>
<p>Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk both think that Robots and Artificial Intelligences might eventually try to take over the world and destroy life as we know it, in a "Terminator" kind of doomsday scenario. </p>
<p>I think people like Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk are frightfully clever people, but I would like to point out where humans retain an advantage over Artificial Intelligence, even at a sport or game where computers can clearly outplay all human competition: chess. Ever since Kasparov lost a game to Deep Blue, this has been a known fact. All the same, I say that in irrationality (and intuition) is Humanity's salvation... because computers will never be able to think like the crazy, mad people that live on this planet.</p>
<p>In this example from one of my recent games on Internet Chess Club (<a href="http://www.chessclub.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.chessclub.com</a>), I played this King's Indian Defence. I find it interesting that the computer has analyzed this position to 29 half-moves depth (according to it), and it wants me to capture (recommends that I capture) White's knight at c3. After White plays the forced recapture Qxb3, Black has a beautiful fork with Ne2+ (forking King and Queen)... definitely a beautiful move choice and Black is evaluated at 0.93 pawns ahead....</p>
<p>However, I totally disregarded that possibility (never even thought of it), and I automatically moved Qb4 after th<span class="text_exposed_show">inking 14 seconds. The Stockfish 5 computer program immediately evaluates this as a better move (1.46 -- more than 0.5 pawns).... thinking for about 8 minutes, Stockfish 5 moved its evaluation of my move up to 1.58. So, it clearly agrees that I made a superior move to what it is able to calculate. </span></p>
<p>After only 35 minutes of calculation, Stockfish 5 evaluates my move choice at 1.84 (nearly 2x the value of the move it had calculated on its own after about 8 minutes)... Based on the rules of Elo rating calculations, this would yield me a "Performance Rating" of 3683 (on that move! not necessarily anywhere else).... and because speed chess generally reduces player ratings by as much as 600 points (I have played many FIDE rated Masters with ratings of under 1700 at speed [5 minute] chess), that could actually yield me a "performance rating" of 4283, which is pretty high.</p>
<p>Yeah, OK. I got lucky! No human has ever achieved a rating above 2900, but the theoretical maximum for a "performance rating" earned by playing against a human would be 3300...</p>
<p>What's interesting about this is the fact that Stockfish 5 has a rating of 3284 (which is 400 points above any human rating ever achieved -- meaning that the probability of Stockfish 5 beating any world champion is about 80%)....</p>
<p>Doubling the calculation time, after 73 minutes of calculation, Stockfish 5 still thinks 20...Qxc3+ is the best move, even after I showed it conclusively that 20 ... Qb4 is superior.... which it recognizes immediately. This is a calculation to 36-ply, meaning 18 moves by each side... a calculation involving 3.7 billion nodes (which are distinct variations evaluated by the computer)... It took me 14 seconds to come up with a better move, without even calculating and just playing the first thing that popped <span class="text_exposed_show">into my head.</span></p>
<p><strong>The intuitive human mind can still calculate faster than 200 million positions per second, based on that fact.</strong></p>
<p>The computer has calculated 3.7 billion variations, each to a maximum depth of 36 half-moves... simple multiplication should give us a rough estimate at the minimum number of positions calculated as at least 133 billion positions calculated in 73 minutes.... this comes out to 30 million positions per second, which is less than one magnitude of order off from the original estimate of 200 million positions per second, so it must be 'fairly accurate'. I let it run another hour or two and it examined 10 billion variations (nodes), but still couldn't come up with the better move 20...Qb4!</p>
<p>Realistically, if the computer can't come up with the better move in 2 hours, it can't really be thinking creatively like a human can... that much is obvious. So, in a day and age where we need to worry about Terminators and AI Robots coming to get us, I just suggest that is nice to know that Human Intelligence can still outperform computer programs that calculate over 200 million positions per second, and which could easily defeat the world-champion, Carlos Magnussen (or whatever his name is).</p>
<p>Not to belabor the obvious, but if a computer can't perform better than this, how will they ever replace humans as recruiters? The computer SEARCHED through 100+ billion positions (i.e. "candidates") but couldn't evaluate them correctly, so it failed in its mission... and proved the unreliability of computers being trusted to do a human's job.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking could still be very correct... <a href="https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/robot-startups-to-watch/%3E">https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/robot-startups-to-watch/</a>;</p>Why Should I Use a 'Spammer' Like You as a Recruiter?tag:recruitingblogs.com,2015-07-20:502551:BlogPost:19060442015-07-20T04:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p> </p>
<p>I sometimes receive email from people who appear to have mental illness, asking the question: “Why would I use a spammer like you as a recruiter?” Although this is clearly a loaded question, based on the false presumption of email contact by recruiters being ‘spam’, it does deserve an answer and provokes thought.</p>
<p>Firstly, you can call anything you want whatever you want to, up to a point. Shakespeare wrote “A rose by any…</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I sometimes receive email from people who appear to have mental illness, asking the question: “Why would I use a spammer like you as a recruiter?” Although this is clearly a loaded question, based on the false presumption of email contact by recruiters being ‘spam’, it does deserve an answer and provokes thought.</p>
<p>Firstly, you can call anything you want whatever you want to, up to a point. Shakespeare wrote “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” You may call the Hope Diamond a ‘piece of carbon’, and you may certainly call Stephen Hawking a ‘primate’, and you would still be partly correct, since diamonds ARE made of carbon, and people ARE primates.</p>
<p>In the same way, email from a recruiter might seem like ‘spam’ to some, although the actual value of an email from a recruiter (compared to spam) is about 4x as high as the ratio between the value of a diamond and a sample of carbon of equal weight. The entire spam industry, worldwide, is worth about $100 million per year in revenues. In contrast, the recruiting industry, which does extensively use email to contact candidates, is a $400 billion per year industry. </p>
<p>True 'Spam' is actually sent at the rate of about 100 billion emails per day, with single servers or senders often blasting out as many as 10 million per day. In contrast, an extremely active recruiter might send a few thousand email per day (on average), at most. So, the numbers are nowhere near comparable, and anyone who calls email recruiting solicitations ‘spam’ is stretching a point. Also, most spam actually is completely outside the law, breaking all the provisions of the CAN-SPAM act quite wantonly, whereas any email I send is 100% in compliance with the law, and easily ‘unsubscribable.’ </p>
<p>I really don’t want any email of mine going to anyone who doesn’t actually want to receive it… Real spammers don’t care. Totally different situations, unless you think that diamond= “a piece of carbon” and “Stephen Hawking”=primate, of course.</p>
<p>So, apart from that, what can I do for you? </p>
<p>The point I am making is that nowadays there are many searches which cannot be solved except by extreme measures. I have had the rare or unique opportunity to demonstrate the effectiveness of email recruiting techniques because I have worked on multiple searches that were open and unfilled for over a year (in one case five years), and I was still able to rapidly find excellent candidates within 24 to 72 hours. This can only be done by very thorough and highly accurate, well-targeted email campaigns. Clearly, the ‘spray and pray’ mentality doesn’t work, nor is it remotely true that a well-designed email recruiting campaign is anything but highly Utilitarian, ethical and justified in many cases... in other words, pretty much the antithesis of spam. Also, merely being able to source and identify the appropriate emails to send to is a skill which is actually quite hard to acquire, since these kinds of 'lists' cannot be bought.</p>
<p>While other people are saying ‘it can’t be done’, I and my firm are actively and accurately doing it – the searches no one else can do. That’s why I get paid more than 90% of the recruiters at other “top search firms” like Korn-Ferry, Spencer Stuart, Heidrick and Struggles, Russell Reynolds, etc. I get paid more, even though I offer fees that are highly discounted (50% less than many of the above) because I consistently produce results, more rapidly, with less turnover, higher customer satisfaction and in greater volume.</p>
<p>I’m also a firm believer in a ‘multi-pronged’ approach. So, I will place ads sometimes, make many phone calls to contact candidates in addition to emails, and I will also network through GooglePlus, LinkedIn, Twitter, and Industrial Societies (IEEE, AIChE, SPIE, etc.). There is no ‘one size fits all’ approach in Executive Search. I am constantly surprised by what great candidates I continually keep finding, in the most unexpected sorts of ways.</p>
<p>If you want to bet on something with very good odds, that costs less and is more likely to be successful, that’s why you should contact me. I have a great track record, and being related to a Nobel winner and Isaac Newton, I have a love for Science and Engineering that most other recruiters don’t. My passion for the field synergistically augments my work.</p>
<p>Some Examples:</p>
<p>10 retained placements at Rasna (3<sup>rd</sup> fastest-growing startup in the Nation, later sold to PTC for $500 million)</p>
<p>17 placements at Nantero (featured on the cover of Scientific American as revolutionary nanotechnology, half of company acquired by Lockheed Martin)</p>
<p>5 placements at NanoH2O (sold to LG Chem for $200 million)</p>
<p>10 retained placements at MicroDisplay, Inc. (miniature high-res LCD chips)</p>
<p>11 placements at TE Connectivity (world’s leading connectivity company)</p>
<p>Placed prolific Inventor with 391 granted patents and 356 patent applications still in process (extracted from Micron) with a $1million sign-on bonus. He led company to $billion+ revenues by solving key production issues.</p>
<p>Placed prolific Inventor with 170 patents at TE Connectivity (extracted from Xerox)</p>
<p>My first retained search (1989) identified a candidate in under two weeks, who accepted the job and spent 12 years with the company, rising to VP status. All the other search firms in the World had been unable to produce any candidates at all for several months.</p>
<p>…that’s my track record, in a few brief highlights, and that is what I can do for you!</p>Discuss Amongst Yourselvestag:recruitingblogs.com,2015-06-05:502551:BlogPost:18933342015-06-05T04:48:28.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557558618?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557558618?profile=original" width="492" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557558618?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1557558618?profile=original" width="492" class="align-full"/></a></p>Hilarious Idea and Presentation of Software Languagestag:recruitingblogs.com,2015-04-15:502551:BlogPost:18780502015-04-15T23:59:10.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p><a href="http://carlcheo.com/startcoding?utm_content=buffer4052d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=update">http://carlcheo.com/startcoding?utm_content=buffer4052d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=update</a></p>
<p><a href="http://carlcheo.com/startcoding?utm_content=buffer4052d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=update">http://carlcheo.com/startcoding?utm_content=buffer4052d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=update</a></p>Just For Fun: How To Respond to Scam IRS Tax Fraud Callstag:recruitingblogs.com,2015-04-11:502551:BlogPost:18768832015-04-11T03:37:03.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p>I've gotten three calls in the past two days from people with very thick Indian accents claiming that I have been indicted for tax fraud and that it is a "non-bailable charge" which will result in me being jailed if I do not pay quickly. This is a prevalent scam these days, which the IRS has warned the public about.</p>
<p>Apart from the fact that I my Dad works with the IRS, (he has a special license to practice tax accounting defense in front of the IRS that most accountants don't have), I…</p>
<p>I've gotten three calls in the past two days from people with very thick Indian accents claiming that I have been indicted for tax fraud and that it is a "non-bailable charge" which will result in me being jailed if I do not pay quickly. This is a prevalent scam these days, which the IRS has warned the public about.</p>
<p>Apart from the fact that I my Dad works with the IRS, (he has a special license to practice tax accounting defense in front of the IRS that most accountants don't have), I knew this was a scam because I saw the phone number listed as a scam by multiple other people on a reverse phone-lookup site that I googled.</p>
<p>I wanted to call back and tell them that I'm very excited to have won the lottery and that I've never won anything so special before... and act like I'm totally deaf to the concept of paying taxes... "When will you present me with the oversize check? Will there be media attention? Will my name be announced as one of the grand prizewinners?" </p>
<p>I do have to say, though, that these scammers have a lot more integrity and class than the Fordyce Letter. At least they put me on hold and played the Chopin Polonaise for me. They hung up on me four times in a row. I guess they figured out that I just want to play with their heads, before I detach them.</p>How Does One Become a Headhunter?tag:recruitingblogs.com,2015-04-04:502551:BlogPost:18761002015-04-04T00:30:00.000ZNicholas Meylerhttps://recruitingblogs.com/profile/NicholasMeyler
<p>Some of you might have some great answers, too. It's an interesting question!</p>
<p><a href="http://www.quora.com/How-does-one-go-about-becoming-a-headhunter/answer/Nicholas-Meyler-1">http://www.quora.com/How-does-one-go-about-becoming-a-headhunter/answer/Nicholas-Meyler-1</a></p>
<p>No prior experience in Human Resources is required. Probably it is a negative, even, to some people. HR People and Headhunters are different breeds, like cats and dogs (which sometimes get along very…</p>
<p>Some of you might have some great answers, too. It's an interesting question!</p>
<p><a href="http://www.quora.com/How-does-one-go-about-becoming-a-headhunter/answer/Nicholas-Meyler-1">http://www.quora.com/How-does-one-go-about-becoming-a-headhunter/answer/Nicholas-Meyler-1</a></p>
<p>No prior experience in Human Resources is required. Probably it is a negative, even, to some people. HR People and Headhunters are different breeds, like cats and dogs (which sometimes get along very well).</p>
<p>It helps to have industry connections, but what really helps more is knowing how to make connections. It's the skill you have in contacting people, connecting with them, researching them, listening to them, etc. that is more important than the actual connections themselves, usually.</p>
<p>What Headhunters need is a passion for the industry of recruiting itself, and an educational background that matches the industry they recruit in. Sales skills, communications skills, critical thinking skills, research skills, determination, resilience, self-starting, etc. are all vital to becoming a really good recruiter.</p>
<p>Most people who try to become recruiters will fail. "Nine out of ten startup companies fail" is a pretty well-known statistic. With recruiters, it is more like 95% that fail to last more than a few years. Most people who try to become a Headhunter will not even be able to close a single deal in their first six months. Those that can (and succeed) have a shot at becoming a real recruiter.</p>
<p>I worked as a support recruiter for my first five years, closing three deals in my first month. I'm the only person I've ever personally met that could do that. It was still a long, hard road to becoming a self-sufficient recruiter. You really need to view recruiting as a calling, more than a profession.</p>
<p>People who are "mavericks" tend to make better recruiters. It is not a job for conformists, lazy people, or people who believe everything that they are told. It requires a singular independence that few people have, as well as plenty of intelligence and creativity.</p>
<p>It is one of the best jobs anyone can possibly have, but there are plenty of ups and downs and problems to solve. If you are a problem-solving type, who is determined to succeed, and you like helping companies find great people and like helping great people find great jobs, this could be for you. I hope this helps.</p>
<p>I've always wondered how to make a good recruiter, too. My firm has hired about 300 people over the years, trying to train them to be recruiters. Maybe a dozen out of those few hundred really succeeded.</p>