5 ms·

I don't use LinkedIn, but I know it has a feature called "endorsements" that does materially the same thing as this, and my understanding is that those endorsem

I don't use LinkedIn, but I know it has a feature called "endorsements" that does materially the same thing as this, and my understanding is that those endorsements aren't taken all that seriously. What makes these more credible? Also, looking at your landing page, it looks like this is company-driven, not candidate driven (that is, I send my resume to the company, which sends it to Searchlight). If I'm in the early stages of the interview process for a company, and they request that I invite a bunch of former coworkers to endorse me on a platform I've barely heard of, there's basically 0 chance that I'll be continuing the application process.

sokoloff 8y ago
> those endorsements aren't taken all that seriously I've only ever heard them mentioned in a work situation in the context of endorsing people for bogus things (like a hard-core C/C++ programmer for PHP and Visual Basic).
- didgeoridoo 8y ago
  Yep. I've been endorsed for "Fierce Conversations", "Bees", and "Potatoes".
- tfehring 8y ago
  Hmmm....maybe I should make a LinkedIn. Think our DBAs will appreciate it if I endorse them for Visio?
- jedberg 8y ago
  You can get endorsed for murder. It's supposed to be for lawyers who specialize in murder cases, but the tag just says "murder". I currently have three endorsements for murder.
  - jhare 8y ago
    Now I have to get this.
kerryxwang 8y ago
We've heard from hiring managers that since LinkedIn endorsements are public and not contextualized, it's hard to understand endorsers' motivation and honesty. Searchlight references are private (hidden to the candidate but viewable to employers that candidates give permission to), tied to a specific work experience and specific work relationship, and ask specific questions. Regarding our landing page, that's a great point! We are a candidate driven product, but we are first focused on employer adoption. That adds legitimacy to our platform when Searchlight reaches out to candidates. In the future, we plan to allow candidates to initiate the Searchlight process themselves - we have already gotten requests from current Searchlight candidates to build this feature. I hear your hesitation to provide references early. It's a new hiring approach. But we've seen that with our positive messaging and candidate engagement process, candidates see Searchlight as an opportunity to stand out. We try to minimize the burden on candidates and references by saving the answers so references don't have to do it again. As our credibility grows over time, we hope that everyone will feel comfortable making a Searchlight profile.
- abraae 8y ago
  Some day you may want to look into the impact of privacy legislation such as GDPR when it comes to your position of "Searchlight references are private (hidden to the candidate but viewable to employers that candidates give permission to)". IANAL, but I have spent many unpleasant days reviewing GDPR and I think it's likely that such data is the candidate's personal data and they are allowed to see it.
  - annawangx 8y ago
    Thank you for the pointer!
  - Godel_unicode 8y ago
    Came here to say this; don't try to operate in the EU.
  - Frenum 8y ago
    California has its own version of the GDPR known as the CCPA that is probably more immediately relevant. https://www.oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa https://www.oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa Also, I'd imagine there would be a huge defamation liability.
abraae 8y ago
This space is gigantic and there is plenty of room for multiple solutions. As others have pointed out, LinkedIn recommendations are public, which skews their content, and they are also subject to recommendation trading and general puffery. Other interesting players are people like Xref (https://xref.com/ https://xref.com/) who automate the reference process - though to respond to your objections, these platforms are used later on in the process (e.g. on short-listing). Many HR technologies are struggling to solve the problem you have highlighted. They want to move from a per-employer solution ("Now that we're about to hire you, please give us 3 references") to an industry standard model ("you'll need to have a Searchlight profile to apply for this job - its a small hassle but you only have to do it once, then you can use it at any of the other jobs you'll be applying for"). Anyone who cracks that code stands a chance of becoming the next mini-LinkedIn.
- tfehring 8y ago
  > This space is gigantic and there is plenty of room for multiple solutions. My concern is that references are a poor signal in general, not that LinkedIn has a monopoly on them. I don't request or look at references, and I haven't provided references to a potential employer since I was in high school.
  - annawangx 8y ago
    We agree that reference checks as they are done today at the end of the hiring process are under-leveraged. With Searchlight, we believe that we can make them much more useful.
    - sidlls 8y ago
      Why do you believe that? There are a number of problems with references, and bias (both positive and negative) is perhaps the most difficult to overcome.

sokoloff 8y ago

> those endorsements aren't taken all that seriously I've only ever heard them mentioned in a work situation in the context of endorsing people for bogus things (like a hard-core C/C++ programmer for PHP and Visual Basic).

didgeoridoo 8y ago
Yep. I've been endorsed for "Fierce Conversations", "Bees", and "Potatoes".
tfehring 8y ago
Hmmm....maybe I should make a LinkedIn. Think our DBAs will appreciate it if I endorse them for Visio?
jedberg 8y ago
You can get endorsed for murder. It's supposed to be for lawyers who specialize in murder cases, but the tag just says "murder". I currently have three endorsements for murder.
- jhare 8y ago
  Now I have to get this.

kerryxwang 8y ago

We've heard from hiring managers that since LinkedIn endorsements are public and not contextualized, it's hard to understand endorsers' motivation and honesty. Searchlight references are private (hidden to the candidate but viewable to employers that candidates give permission to), tied to a specific work experience and specific work relationship, and ask specific questions. Regarding our landing page, that's a great point! We are a candidate driven product, but we are first focused on employer adoption. That adds legitimacy to our platform when Searchlight reaches out to candidates. In the future, we plan to allow candidates to initiate the Searchlight process themselves - we have already gotten requests from current Searchlight candidates to build this feature. I hear your hesitation to provide references early. It's a new hiring approach. But we've seen that with our positive messaging and candidate engagement process, candidates see Searchlight as an opportunity to stand out. We try to minimize the burden on candidates and references by saving the answers so references don't have to do it again. As our credibility grows over time, we hope that everyone will feel comfortable making a Searchlight profile.

abraae 8y ago
Some day you may want to look into the impact of privacy legislation such as GDPR when it comes to your position of "Searchlight references are private (hidden to the candidate but viewable to employers that candidates give permission to)". IANAL, but I have spent many unpleasant days reviewing GDPR and I think it's likely that such data is the candidate's personal data and they are allowed to see it.
- annawangx 8y ago
  Thank you for the pointer!
- Godel_unicode 8y ago
  Came here to say this; don't try to operate in the EU.
- Frenum 8y ago
  California has its own version of the GDPR known as the CCPA that is probably more immediately relevant. https://www.oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa https://www.oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa Also, I'd imagine there would be a huge defamation liability.

abraae 8y ago

This space is gigantic and there is plenty of room for multiple solutions. As others have pointed out, LinkedIn recommendations are public, which skews their content, and they are also subject to recommendation trading and general puffery. Other interesting players are people like Xref (https://xref.com/ https://xref.com/) who automate the reference process - though to respond to your objections, these platforms are used later on in the process (e.g. on short-listing). Many HR technologies are struggling to solve the problem you have highlighted. They want to move from a per-employer solution ("Now that we're about to hire you, please give us 3 references") to an industry standard model ("you'll need to have a Searchlight profile to apply for this job - its a small hassle but you only have to do it once, then you can use it at any of the other jobs you'll be applying for"). Anyone who cracks that code stands a chance of becoming the next mini-LinkedIn.

tfehring 8y ago
> This space is gigantic and there is plenty of room for multiple solutions. My concern is that references are a poor signal in general, not that LinkedIn has a monopoly on them. I don't request or look at references, and I haven't provided references to a potential employer since I was in high school.
- annawangx 8y ago
  We agree that reference checks as they are done today at the end of the hiring process are under-leveraged. With Searchlight, we believe that we can make them much more useful.
  - sidlls 8y ago
    Why do you believe that? There are a number of problems with references, and bias (both positive and negative) is perhaps the most difficult to overcome.