My Photo

Feedback

  • We are a CHiMBY recommended career advice site
  • Recruiting.Com
Post of the Week Award

« Indeed and JobCentral Recognized by Job-Hunt.org | Main | Prediction – Indeed will nip at the heels of HotJobs in 2007 »

January 05, 2007

Comments

Paul Forster

You say 'what if CareerBuilder was willing to pay the vertical job site to list their ad first'. This is possible on Indeed.com as any job publisher can sponsor their jobs on a pay-per-click basis to get their jobs listed at the top. HOWEVER, these sponsored jobs are clearly marked as Sponsored Links so there is no conflict with the ranking of our unpaid organic results. I would be surprised if other vertical search engines don't also operate this way.

Paul
http://www.indeed.com - one search. all jobs.

Bob Wilson


Hi Paul,

Thanks for the clarification. Indeed does an excellent job of making it clear to users which ads are 'organic' and which are 'paid placement'.

I didn't intend that section of the post to refer to 'paid placement' jobs; rather, a source might pay to be first in the organic results if there are duplicates.

For example, if I search for an IBM engineer in Houston on Indeed, you display 46 unduplicated results, plus a message that says:

"We have removed 24 job postings very similar to those already shown. To see these additional results, you may repeat your search with the omitted job postings included."

So, what if CareerBuilder and Monster both have the same IBM ad, and CareerBuilder wants to pay you to make sure that the CareerBuilder ad shows in the initial results, pushing the Monster ad into the 'similar to those already shown' category?

Chad Sowash

Many thanks Bob, I appreciate the knowledge.. Here's a couple quick comments..

1) No question scamming is a problem, but since JobCentral is a "trusted source" Job Search Engines could automatically "trust" those jobs provided by the JobCentral feeds which would allow for heightened organic relevance.

2) SEM(r) on JSE is smart and every company should look at PPC recruiting (sponsored ads) to supercharge their candidate traffic immediately. But this is entirely different from organic relevance. Thanks for the clarification Paul..

3) Does freshness matter as it pertains to open positions which reside on corporate career sites? No... If the position's open it's fresh and relevant.

Thanks again Bob! I'm an avid reader, keep spreading the knowledge!

Tony M

I'm with Chad on this one. Original jobs found on an employer's website should always be given more weight than duplicate ones found on job boards. The problem is that direct-employer jobs take more time to index and often involve less structured jobsites. I imagine most JSEs would prefer to include more direct-employer jobs, but the economics of gathering these positions make it easier to rely on the large job boards.

Bob Wilson


Excellent points Tony. Thanks for posting.

Bob :-)

Tom

did a search for VP software engineering on Indeed and Simplyhired and noticed that though both did return some jobs with the same title in the first two pages. there were also jobs in there which were not "relevant" to me. I think this is still a problem. Also interested in knowing how these new aggregators are allowed to do waht they are doing i.e. aggregating content without specific permission ( i am guessing here)from all the corporations and job boards( apart from those generous with RSS feeds). I do know that this is an industry and google leads it but is there no law moderating aggregation ?

bob wilson


Hi Tom,

Thanks for posting feedback.

I agree that the quality of the search results on Indeed and SimplyHired could be better ... but the same is true of almost every general job board. The technology exists to provide higher relevance, but so far the market hasn't demanded a change.

Aggregating can be problematic from a legal standpoint, but indexing generally is not ... and indexing is what Indeed and SimplyHired are doing.

The distinction between aggregating and indexing is substantial ... aggregators scrape the full contents of other sites and then display this content as their own; while indexers scrape the content to make it searchable, but they only display a snippet of the text, provide source attribution, and provide links to the original material on the original site.

Bob

The comments to this entry are closed.