One of my articles was nominated for an award? Wow! Please vote for me.

Hey, guess what? One of my articles has been nominated for a Recruiting Brief MVP Award. While it is an honor to be nominated, winning the award is not so bad either. That being said, please do what I did.

  1. Go to the Recruiting Brief MVP Award page.

2019 Recruiting Brief MVP Awards

2. Scroll down to the middle of the page.

Jim Stroud was nominated for the 2019 Recruiting Brief MVP Awards

3. When you click the “Other” link, check my article – “If you’re not texting, you’re not recruiting.”

Jim Stroud was nominated for the 2019 Recruiting Brief MVP Awards

Once you’ve voted for me, let me know by sharing your support on social media.

Please and thank you.


Would you ride in a car without a driver?

#12 | Would you ride in a self-driving car? Yeah, neither would I.  As far as the public at large is concerned, they wouldn’t either. One 2018 survey cited only 21 percent of the public was willing to even try riding in an autonomous vehicle.  I think that’s a BIG problem for a lot of startups and major companies who have already invested a lot of money into the technology.  So, what can they do to convince the public to ride in them? Well, I have a few ideas. Tune in to hear them.

Subscribe to this podcast via your favorite podcast platform!

About the host:

Over the past decade, Jim Stroud has built an expertise in sourcing and recruiting strategy, public speaking, lead generation, video production, podcasting, online research, competitive intelligence, online community management and training. He has consulted for such companies as Microsoft, Google, MCI, Siemens, Bernard Hodes Group and a host of startup companies. During his tenure with Randstad Sourceright, he alleviated the recruitment headaches of their clients worldwide as their Global Head of Sourcing and Recruiting Strategy. His career highlights can be viewed on his website at


Hi, I’m Jim Stroud and this is my podcast.

The path to progress is not always easy. Recently, I read a report from the DailyMail which sounded like a harbinger of things to come. Here’s a quote…

“Police in Arizona have recorded 21 incidents in the past two years concerning vigilante citizens who have hurled rocks, pointed guns at and slashed the tires of Waymo’s autonomous vans. In other cases, people stood in front of the vehicles to prevent them from driving, yelled at them, chased them or forced them off of the road…”

This type of reaction to technology is nothing new. In fact, its been going on for a lot longer than you might think. I’ll explain after this message.

{sponsor message}

To fully understand the privacy of Facebook and how it’s likely to evolve, you need to understand one thing…Facebook executives want everyone to be public. As the service evolves, executives tend to favor our open access to information, meaning information you think is private will slowly become public, but that doesn’t mean you can’t be private if you want to. Facebook gives its users the option to lock things down, but users need to be aware of their controls, how to use them and how to prepare for future Facebook privacy changes. Facebook has not and will not make information obvious, and that’s where my special offer comes in. Go to and download “The Very Unofficial Facebook Privacy Manual.” That’s to download your free copy of “The Very Unofficial Facebook Privacy Manual.” One last time, download it now at Operators are standing by.

{End Sponsor Message}

Imagine you are an Entrepreneur and you produced clothing for various customers around the world. One day, a machine was invented that did the work you performed, and it did it faster and more efficiently than you ever could. And to make matters even more interesting, the cost of using machines was cheaper than the cost of employing highly skilled laborers. Sound familiar? If it does, you might be a student of history because that very thing happened in the 19th century and it sparked a movement – the luddite movement.

The Luddites were 19th-century English textile who protested against newly developed labor-economizing technologies, primarily between the years 1811 and 1816. Inventions like the stocking frames, spinning frames and power looms introduced during the Industrial Revolution threatened to replace the highly skilled luddites with less-skilled, low-wage laborers who could run those machines and thus, leave them without work. The Luddite movement culminated in a region-wide rebellion in Northwestern England that required a massive deployment of military force to suppress.

Fast forward to the year 2015 and taxi drivers all over the world are protesting how Uber and its technology has disrupted their way of life. The backlash of the protesting taxi drivers included fires, arrests and unprecedented civil unrest. If you want to know the details, Google the term “uber riots” and be amazed by how far the disdain for Uber goes in certain countries.

Now fast forward to 2018 when people are attacking Waymo’s autonomous vans. When I read the article, my reflex was to dismiss the concern as neo-luddites fighting the inevitable future. However, as I read more about why the people were attacking the autonomous vehicles, I had to admit to sharing some of their concerns. Here are a few quotes from an article posted by The Next Web.

“One Arizonan, from the city of Chandler, became so fed up with the sight of Waymo‘s vans in his neighborhood that he stood on his lawn pointing a pistol at the human safety driver inside of one as it passed his home. He told police he wanted the person in the car to be afraid, presumably to send the message that self-driving cars aren’t welcome. He’s one of dozens of citizens (on record) who’ve engaged in wildly dangerous acts provoked by, apparently, nothing more than the idea of a car driving itself.”

Here’s another one…

“People have thrown rocks at Waymos. The tire on one was slashed while it was stopped in traffic. The vehicles have been yelled at, chased and one Jeep was responsible for forcing the vans off roads six times.”

And one more…

“Why are people so angry at self-driving cars? After all, none of the reported incidents we’ve seen indicate the people attacking machines and harassing their human safety drivers are experiencing road rage. It doesn’t appear as though anyone got cut off by a robot, or got tailgated, or had one sitting at a green light in front of them. It seems the existential threat that driverless cars represent is the sole catalyst for these outbursts.”

As I read deeper into the article and others like it, the resentment was not that the autonomous vehicles were taking people’s jobs away. It was primarily a safety concern. In March 2018, Elaine Herzberg was killed by a self-driving Uber vehicle and no one wants to see that history repeat itself. I get it. It is a very real concern. So, what can be done about it? What can car companies do to make the general public feel better about autonomous vehicles? Well, I have a few ideas…

“The Society of Risk Analysis” published a report in the Risk Analysis journal which sought to determine how safe is safe enough for self-driving vehicles to be accepted by the general public. According to their research, the answer is approximately four to five times as safe as human-driven vehicles. So, how do you do that?

Let’s say that all autonomous vehicles must be linked to a big brain in the sky that records every accident and every fatality caused by an autonomous vehicle. Once that incident is recorded, everybody sees what happened and every variable that contributed to the accident (weather conditions, human beings not paying attention, whatever). As soon as new data hits the system, a community of scientists works on a solution and programs that solution into all autonomous vehicles so the same accident, under the same conditions will not happen again. Furthermore, inside the autonomous vehicle is data detailing how many days since a fatality was caused by an autonomous vehicles. That data would be or should be, accessible to people before and after they ride in an autonomous vehicle; all so that they can feel empowered to make a decision that’s best for them. Make sense? Maybe not. I’m curious. How would you make autonomous vehicles safer?

If you love what you heard, hate what you heard or, don’t know what you just heard, I want to know about it. You can reach me at my website – In addition to finding source material and related information for this podcast episode, you’ll find other goodies that I hope will make you smile. Oh, before I go, please financially support this podcast with a little somethin’-somethin’ in my virtual tip jar. (There’s a link in the podcast description.) Your generosity encourages me to keep this podcast train chugging down the track. Whoot-whoot, whoot-whoot, whoot-whoot…

Links related to this episode:

Music in this podcast

Seven Ways to Make LinkedIn Better

Jim Stroud - Sr. Director at Randstad SourcerightBack in 2014, I was between opportunities and interviewing with diverse companies. The two companies that held my interest the most were my beloved employer – Randstad Sourceright (Yay!) and LinkedIn. During my interviews with LinkedIn (I had several), I shared a plethora of ideas that I thought would take their platform to the next level. It was not until recently that I stumbled across my notes and revisited the suggestions I made to LinkedIn, three years ago.

As I reviewed my writings, I wondered what would have happened if LinkedIn did all I suggested back then? Would they have had more product offerings today? Would they have resisted a buyout from Microsoft because they were too big to fail? And then I thought, what if I had shared these ideas with some of their competitors? Would LinkedIn had been forced to do similar innovations to keep up or to remain dominant? Hmm… I guess I will never know and that kind of bugs me.

So, just for giggles, I thought I would share the ideas I had for LinkedIn back in 2014. I invite any and all thoughtful comments so long as you remember that these notions are circa February/March 2014. (Oh! Forgive me in advance if this seems a bit rambly; because it is.)


LinkedIn already detects when someone is sprucing up their profile. What if a significant percentage of a company’s employees are updating their profile over the course of a few days or week? LinkedIn says to itself, “Hmm… looks like your company is about to layoff a bunch of people.”

So, as a service to job seekers…

A) LinkedIn looks at your work history, present employer and previous job searches then, starts suggesting jobs of interest to you.

B) LinkedIn goes further and analyzes your skills, professional interests and your LinkedIn groups; surmises that you have a lot in common with these companies and shares jobs that may be of interest to you.

C) LinkedIn looks at the companies it is pitching to you and where they recruit from and suggests that you explore opportunities there because a lot of people from your present company tend to migrate there.

Doing this helps a job seeker increase their chance of being hired quicker and gives employer leads in line with their preference. If this algorithm does not work for some (for whatever reason, maybe they do not have enough of a career to analyze?), LinkedIn suggests that they pattern their search according to trends.


Umm… Say, for example, jobs in the healthcare industry is trending high for left-handed nurses. Your skills suggest that you might be a match for left-handed nursing jobs. However, you are not very responsive. Before you know it, LinkedIn is showing you adverts for online classes that would put you on the pathway of being a left-handed nurse or some other job that is trending hot.

To take these classes, that will make you an even more attractive candidate, you login to the online classroom with your LinkedIn profile. Once the class is completed, your scores are on a LinkedIn page. You can then link to your academic grades and have them display prominently on your LinkedIn profile. Unless you decide to opt out, LinkedIn sends a list of top scorers to companies who have paid to receive news on top students as soon as their grades post. (wink)
Musings of Man and Machine by Jim Stroud

New Book: Musings of Man and Machine: How Robots
and Automation Will Change Recruiting


LinkedIn should buy Lynda or consider buying something like it. Why? Imagine this scenario! LinkedIn partners with high schools to give students free online classes that will prepare them for future roles. High scorers are matched with a mentor for a day, to ask what it’s like to do the work they do. LinkedIn gets members now and for the future. LinkedIn trains for the future. LinkedIn sets the standard for credentials in certain markets. LinkedIn takes the professional community to a new level. And each year, LinkedIn produces a trends report based on government stats, annual articles and LinkedIn data. It becomes the most quoted HR related report in history and cited on most (if not all) leading publications. Just a thought…


If I knew who was most likely to respond to my emails, I would reach out to them first. That being said, what if LinkedIn sent an email to passive candidates on a monthly basis and asked them if they were happy working for Company X? If a significant percentage of employees at a certain company are unhappy, Company X would get notified that they may want to boost their retention strategies. (I, then,  suggested they check out for inspiration or possible acquisition. At least, I think I did. I should have if I did not.)


Candidates who graduate from a certain school, location, relevant job titles and are following your company fit the profile of your typical hire. As such, they get a high “recruitment probability” score and as such, appear higher in the search results based on your company when logged into LinkedIn recruiter. This will make LinkedIn Recruiter a more desirable purchase.


LinkedIn should buy DocuSign! When someone virtually signs a document online, their signature links to their LinkedIn profile. In this way, LinkedIn becomes your online ID for your business and inseparably linked to your professional brand. Also for the sake of reputation management, let companies add comments to their blogs that are ratified by logging into LinkedIn.


LinkedIn should produce more business intelligence reports. Like the kind of reports “Business Insider” and Gartner produces. This would cause the business world to see LinkedIn as more than a recruitment tool and expand their customer base beyond HR.

Okay, so, those were all the notes I had on the topic. What do you think? Would these ideas still work in 2017? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below and don’t forget to subscribe to my blog, if you have not already.



The Future of Email and its Impact on Recruiting

During the SourceCon conference, I had the pleasure of being a guest on the “Talk Talent To Me” podcast with Rob Stevenson. After catching up with one another, we discussed some of the finer points of my presentation, “Email, I love you! You’re perfect. Now, change.” Listen in to see what you missed.

By the way, check out my lucky socks! (Thanks Rob!)

My lucky socks