Hey ​@mpryor04, great question:
Experience Match Score Impacts:
In general, Ideal Candidates, Skills, and Related Titles all carry greater weight in the calibration than the years of experience, which means Match Score impact should be limited.
However, Calibration is sometimes more art than science, and the best control many customers have found is to have recruiters and hiring managers do an initial feedback on the first 5-10 matches during the intake process to catch areas where the calibration may need adjusted.
Additionally, our recommendation is to choose “Years Relevant” rather than “Total Years” in most circumstances. In either case, this slider won’t exclude candidates, only affecting the score rankings.
Profile “Freshness” Issues:
We and our customers had been facing challenges related to the quality and timeliness of profile refreshes in the recent past, So, as LinkedIn is the leader in prospect nurturing, it was a fantastic opportunity to partner directly with them to fix the sourcing experience, deliver trusted candidate insights and save recruiter time as far as we can. I’ve attached a deck with a bit more explanation as well.
This means today, the best ways to keep profiles fresh are:
- Use of LI CRM Connect and live profile view
- Use of our automated profile refresh campaign
- Connection to HRIS data for internal applicant profile freshness
Each of these come with some drawbacks:
- Use of LI CRM requires manual recruiter action and is subject to LI’s profile add limits
- The automated profile refresh campaign requires candidates to actively keep their specific logged-in profile with your org up to date
- Not all customers currently have an HRIS connected.
Profile freshness is a key area of focus, and a key part of our continued partnership with LinkedIn. We see the need as well and understand the workflow limitations. However, given the nature of Calibration set up and current profile quality across customers, our best recommendation is still to include years of experience as outlined above.
