Shared publicly  - 
 
Will Google+ change how you find a job?

A recent update to the +Google Jobs site includes deep integration with +Google+. And while it's limited to Google's own job postings, it could indicate a big shift in the future for how companies list jobs and how potential employees find them. Find out what the changes are and what they could mean here: http://goo.gl/fQVx6

--------------------

#googleplus   #googlejobs
98
68
Reshare's profile photoPattie B's profile photoMike Stuart's profile photoSyed Abdul Razzak Ghani's profile photo
21 comments
 
Interesting update, thanks. Once again, this begs for the addition of #topicchannels. If G+ allowed us to classify our posts by topic, we could set up channels dedicated to our professional lives, linked to a tab on our profiles. This would allow us to build a work-related presence without clashing with our family, social and interest posts.

But I would want some caution with regards to allowing organisations to 'connect' with us in a job search. What information would they see? 
 
This would be so good. I hate the third party job sites which exist at the moment. Each one needs an account, and each spam mails I find.

I'd love to link it to my Google account, get push notifications via an app, distribute CVs from Drive (and edit on the fly), Hangout for preliminary interviews, have deadlines and such synced to my calendar...

The improvements would be insane.
 
a job... no waaaaay... that would be like so friggin awesome man... like i would love to work... you know... but like what... and i have these amazing google search things you know... but... i never really found any... now google is going to help me search... so i just need to search google... my mind is like totally blown right now!

that was me in character... just so you know... Love the idea... hope it will work better then all the crap job search sites
 
Well, now you've done it Google! LinkedIn will go thermonuclear on you now.
 
Nice now away kids could earn money :P
 
+Rob Ferguson If one was asked to enable access to their profile contents for this, it'd come back to the functionality inherent to Circles. Create one for your professional life, don't be an idiot on it, and you're done.
 
+David Metcalfe circles as they are are no good, as only you can put people in them. We need to be able to make public posts on a particular topic or theme, and have other people opt in to them.

A topic channel is really just like a circle, but where you would let others choose to add themselves. The benefit of them would be that, if someone wanted to read posts on a topic such as those related to your profession, they could subscribe to that circle and not get your hobbies, cat memes, sports stuff etc.
 
I have serious privacy concerns. This is a horrendous idea.
 
+Rob Ferguson There's nothing to say the existing system is locked in, so if Google decides to expand on this job search, it's possible they might have an entity you could add to said circles for the desired controls.

As per the topic channel, I pined for this too in the form of subscribable circles, but then Communities came along, which accomplished the same thing. And yes, there are valid criticisms of what they can/cannot do at present, but it is the first version, and is already a solid contender for such functionality.
 
+David Metcalfe but Communities don't do the same thing at all! In some cases they work very well, but:

1) They break the link between person and topic. This link is important in many cases.

2) They Balkanize Google+

3) They have a heavy moderator requirement

So, for example, the "Google Plus Update" and "Railroad Photography" communities work really well for me, as they are well moderated and I enjoy seeing discussion from a wide range of people. However the "Mathematics" and "Android" communities don't work for me, as they are very broad, and I'd rather subscribe to a few knowledgeable commentators / experts for those topics.

With regards to building a professional presence on Google+, say you were a civil engineer and you wanted to write about your profession, how would you do it? If there were a civil engineering community, it would be difficult for employers to look you up in there, as your posts would be mixed with plenty of others. Without topic channels, there is no way to create a 'chain' of posts that can be referenced on your profile, as they would get mixed in with the rest of your public posts. And you might well bore your followers / families, who really weren't that into civil engineering.
 
+Rob Ferguson I would argue that communities with quality posters and healthy moderating accomplish much of the desired functionality for willful subscription to topic-centric posts, but I see where you're coming from.

I'm not sure I see how a topic channel would change this, though, as I see a variety of say, civil engineers posting under a related topic, and a person again being lost in the river of content.

To me, locating content from a specific person comes back to searching. If I search for "David Metcalfe Google+" in the top search bar, I can quickly locate every post I've put out there on the topic, and the amount of content varies naturally based on what circles have what content, and the searcher's presence within those circles. Similarly, if I'm in an Engineering community, and I want to see everything from you on civil engineering in California, I can search for that in a community as "Rob Ferguson civil California" or other combinations of terms.

Further, one can save searches like these that are outside of communities, and quickly pull them up later as desired. I'm sure this will come to communities as well, given how large and unruly some of the content streams have become.

Between the two, I'd rather work with searches, and see Google include more powerful searching abilities. To pull off topic channels in a more precise way for yourself, I'd probably lean towards the use of hashtags, since they're supported and undervalued on G+ so far.

If you still feel the above is insufficient, perhaps you could elaborate on the perceived differences for additional clarity so that I understand better.
 
A 'topic channel' sounds an awful lot like a blog. Why not just put up a blog?
 
+Marc Thibault for the same reasons that a lot (most?) active people on Google+ use it as more of a blog than a pure Facebook-style social network. The interface, commenting system, hangout integration etc are great. The constraints imposed (lack of formatting choices) help focus your efforts on the content, rather than the style.

The problem is that people tend to be very general (lovely weather, nice cat picture, I ate a good burger), or very specialised on a single topic such as photography, a major hobby, or their profession.

This leaves Google+ somewhat underutilised. Too often, people have to self-censor, for fear of boring or irritating their core audience. Does my mother want to see another Android post mixed in with my family photos? Should I post a few good restaurant reviews, or will my followers be bored of that? 

There is much that is great about Google+, but it still falls short when it comes to connecting the right person with the right post.

And really, why shouldn't people be able to opt in to see the content that they want to see from you?
 
+David Metcalfe not all communities are well moderated or attract quality posts. There might not even be a community on a topic you liked. Perhaps you could start one, but they take a lot of effort to maintain well.

In the hypothetical Civil Engineering community you might have a mix of professional engineers, students, spammers, heavy equipment fanbois etc. And if that's what you want, great. I'm not suggesting for a moment that Communities should be rolled back. Some work really well.

But you might not want to wade through all those posts, you might just want to hear from a few professional engineers. Maybe because they are working on a project that interests you, or maybe because they write well on the subject. The only way to achieve this would be to subscribe to them, through topic channels. Too many engineering posts cluttering your stream? Drop the ones that bore you. Your choice. And as you've selected the subscriptions yourself, there's no spam either.

Search and hashtags have their place, but lack structure. When you search for Mountain Lion do you mean the OS, the animal, or something else? And with search, you have to keep going back again and again each session to find those posts. Subscribing to channels would bring the content you liked to you. 
 
+David Metcalfe another thing, hashtags wouldn't save my parents from my geekery, as they would still find all my irrelevant public posts mixed in with the pictures of their grandchildren that I share with them.

Tuning out noise is an important goal of topic channels that hashtags and search couldn't help with! 
 
+Rob Ferguson Alright. I follow you semantically, but I'm having a hard time imagining what a topic channel would look like. Could you describe a workflow for this? Particularly one that doesn't create a feature that largely just duplicates existing functionality?
 
+David Metcalfe topic channels would look very much like circles, and would integrate closely with them. So creating a new channel would be much like creating a new circle, but unlike a circle other people would add themselves to it. As topic channels would be public, when viewing someone's profile there would be the option to refine posts by channel, whether by way of a tab or a menu.

Posting to channels would be integrated with posting to circles. In the share box, your channels would just be a few more options along with your circles. You could share to circles only, one channel only multiple channels, multiple circles, or any combination of channels and circles.

Subscribing to topic channels would be similar to when you subscribe to someone now, and put them in a 'following only' circle. The difference would be that you would see a check box of their channels (if they have any) and you would pick the channels you wanted to see. Or subscribe to all.

The reason for calling them channels, rather than 'opt in circles' is that it makes clear that there is a difference between subscribing to someone's posts and adding them to a circle, the latter being for family and friends. That way, when you share something personal with 'My Circles', you know it's not going to any of your channels too. And the current 'Following Only' circles would be renamed 'Collections' to make it clear that when you share to circles, you're not sharing to these.

Channels wouldn't replace search, but could help it. If you had a friend who had a 'Food' channel, you could search just that channel using the term "New York" for restaurant reviews/recommendations in that particular city etc.
 
What if I like to post entertaining and trollish stuff in my G+? That stuff is for me and my friends, not for any of my potential employers.
 
how many posts can we post from website daily in Google plus
Add a comment...