Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses

Glassdoor, the Iconic Job-Hunting and Reviews Website, Has Been Bought For $1.2 billion (recode.net) 48

Posted by msmash from the done-deal dept.
Glassdoor, the popular job-hunting platform that gives people a window into conditions at hundreds of thousands of companies, has agreed to be acquired by Japan's Recruit Holdings for $1.2 billion cash. From a report: Recruit Holdings, a large Japanese human resources company that owns other job sites like Indeed, spent eight figures in cash to acquire the decade-old company. Glassdoor hadn't raised new money in about two years, when it was valued by investors at around $860 million, so it likely needed to decide whether to raise more money, sell or try to go public. The company reportedly was at least considering an IPO in the second half of 2018 and was interviewing banks that could take them there.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Glassdoor, the Iconic Job-Hunting and Reviews Website, Has Been Bought For $1.2 billion More

Glassdoor, the Iconic Job-Hunting and Reviews Website, Has Been Bought For $1.2 billion

Comments Filter:

  • Glassdoor accuracy? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    How accurate have others found salary info on GD? I particularly use it for salary research but I find I can get more money than the numbers on GD. Iâ(TM)m just never sure how much more I could get if I asked.

    • Well, apparently the new owners spent eight figures in cash to acquire Glassdoor for $1.2B, so if typical Glassdoor salary figures are off by only one order of magnitude, they're still an improvement...

    • Very few companies provide their salary ranges even if you ask.

      But, the site has other benefits such as reviews and info on the company. While some of this info is on the various websites, itâ(TM)s nice having it in one place.

      Unlike Indeed.com, glassdoor is not a job posting aggregator.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by rnturn ( 11092 )

        ``Unlike Indeed.com, glassdoor is not a job posting aggregator.''

        Really? I still get job postings from them. And not very accurate ones, i.e., listings for jobs that are no longer active, are already filled, whatever. It was common for a while to hear from recruiters that jobs were no longer available and then, a week later, see them show up in Glassdoor's emails.

        But that's not my biggest beef with them. I traded emails for a week or so asking them why they were grabbing your Facebook profile photo to us

  • I found before that glassdoor was occasionally a good source for jobs that were open, and often a good source for jobs that were no longer open. The problem that it won't solve - that no other website I'm aware of is doing anything to solve - is that of getting applications read by actual human beings. Employers more often than not have a blind loyalty to using algorithms (that more often than not are employed by HR people who don't understand them) to quickly filter out applications. The result of this is that many qualified job seekers never get a chance to talk to anyone.

    • Are there any well-known ways to bypass this system? That will actually get your resume onto someone's desk and not get it tossed because "they didn't follow protocol" or what-not?

      • You should be networking versus using online job sites. Knowing somebody will get you in the door or, at least your resume seen. Many hiring managers cut off reviewing resumes after they get so many. So, if you are determined to use online sites, get your resume/application in very early.

        Leverage LinkedIn and keep it up to date. But, donâ(TM)t ask people you donâ(TM)t know for referrals. You can, however, contact people of interest and ask about their job and company culture. Ask them for an

    • A person's time is more valuable than a computer algorithm's and if you have hundreds of applications, there's no way any one person could hope to evaluate them all. There's also no guarantee that the HR person is any better than an algorithm either, or at least not so much so to be worth the extra cost. It's even more expensive if you want applicants to talk to your developers, engineers, etc. that are actually capable of assessing an applicant so you need some way of getting a shortlist of candidates.

      I

      • job applications at comcast are really bad very long it's your full application + personality test + Big skills matrix to fill out.

      • A person's time is more valuable than a computer algorithm's

        But that comparison only matters if they both get useful results. If your computer algorithm is generating lots of false positives and a few bad false negatives, you might have been better off getting a properly qualified human to do it anyway.

        I've worked for smaller businesses where senior technical people personally examined the CVs for anyone who wasn't clearly ruled out. The admin staff in front were mostly there to avoid legal issues, clerical errors and time-wasting by CV-spamming agencies with their

        • One thing I encountered when I was on the job market in recent years was that the same job opening would be re-posted a few months later from the same company, and for a job that almost certainly would have only hired one person. This tells me that most likely they either didn't find someone who fit the job, or they offered the position to someone and were turned down. Yet over the course of that happening no human made any attempt to contact me or gave any indication that they had seen my application. I

    • some of the algorithms discrimination

  • Isn't Recruit the 80s/90s corruption company? (Score:5, Informative)

    by mccalli ( 323026 ) on Wednesday May 09, 2018 @10:19AM (#56580650) Homepage
    Looked it up - yes, it is. [wikipedia.org]. I don't know the state of things now - is anyone in Japan able to comment on Recruit's current reputation?
  • >> a large Japanese human resources company that owns other job sites like Indeed

    It would be politically incorrect to say why, as a huge fan of "Big Trouble in Little China", that I found this phrase very, very funny.
  • Years ago I used to work at Japanese companies like Fujitsu and Sony. Ever since then I still get contacted for jobs that require being fluent in Japanese. I even got a international call from a hiring manager in Tokyo who tried to interview me in Japanese. That was weird.

  • Corporate Shills for their Golfing Buddies (Score:3)

    by Seven Spirals ( 4924941 ) on Wednesday May 09, 2018 @10:42AM (#56580854)
    The minimize negative feedback and give all the corporate sponsors a chance to maximize their positive image. The point was supposed to be finding out that your new potential employer is actually a hellhole with a crazy boss, insane hours, and populated by your wonderful new no-deodorant H1B co-workers. The only reason that's helpful to Glassdoor is that they can then blackmail the company in to paying to improve their image on Glassdoor.

  • I wonder what they want with this company. I've looked at it from time to time, and it's mostly people complaining about their bad experiences or fresh grads comparing offers and perks from Accenture vs. KPMG vs. IBM for entry-level management consulting positions.

    Maybe someone convinced them that they can mine the data with AI the way Microsoft is trying to do with LinkedIn?

    Honestly, if someone can solve the transparency problem that happens when finding a new job, I'd pay a billion dollars for the company

Slashdot Top Deals

If a subordinate asks you a pertinent question, look at him as if he had lost his senses. When he looks down, paraphrase the question back at him.

Close