5 connections that will optimize your LinkedIn network in 2018

I can’t tell you how many times I hear from job seekers, “Bob, I don’t want to invite people I don’t know into my network. That’s weird.” My response: The whole idea behind online networking is to get to know new people!

linkedin-alone

That said, if you’re on the job hunt, your networking efforts must amount to more than sending and accepting invitations. You need to optimize your LinkedIn network.

What does it mean to have an optimized LinkedIn network? Simply put, it means the people in your network should be able to help you in your job search – and of course, you should be of assistance to them. You’re only as good as your network.

It also means connecting with as many quality LinkedIn members as you can, as the more connections you have, the better chance you have of being ranked higher and showing up closer to the top of a search by hiring authorities. This said, shared connections between you and the searcher plays an important role.

Now, who should you connect with?

Look at your network in terms of tiers, understanding that LinkedIn users from any tier can lead to new opportunities. This diagram shows the most important tiers starting from the bottom and ending at the top:

Connection

Tier 1: Coworkers

Your most important tier of connections comprises people with whom you have worked – e.g., former colleagues and supervisors. I say these people are your most important connections because they know you well and are involved in the industry in which you work.

Many of my clients who land their jobs quickly do so by utilizing their most important tier of connections as references in order to network with their targeted companies. This is why it is essential that you keep up with your former colleagues. You never know when you’ll need them.

Tier 2: People who share your occupation and industry

The second tier contains people who share with you the same occupation and industry. These people are like-minded and have similar aspirations to yours. They should be the core of your network, your largest audience.

Get to know them well, as they will hear of openings at other companies, as well as their own. You should also communicate with your second-level connections frequently by posting updates, sharing articles, sending direct messages, etc.

Tier 3: People who share your occupation but a different industry

The third tier contains people who share the same occupation with you but are in different industries. If you’re a financial analyst, your third tier would be other financial analysts in industries outside of your own.

These LinkedIn members can also be helpful in your job search, especially if you’re considering a career change. They can provide useful information and sage advice.

Tier 4: People at your target companies

The fourth tier comprises people who work at your target companies. They are usually in other occupations and industries. For example, a third-tier connection might be the vice president of a manufacturing company that is one of your target companies. Perhaps the vice president needs an accountant. You’re not a vice president, nor do you work in manufacturing, but you are an accountant.

Job seekers also question whether they should connect with recruiters. My answer is a resounding “Yes,” as you’ll show up on recruiters searches more often and higher in the rankings, based on your relationship.

Tier 5: Fellow Alumni

The fifth tier consists of your fellow alumni, people who attended the same schools as you did at some point. For this reason, they are more likely to connect with you than complete strangers.

One LinkedIn feature I stress to my workshop attendees is the “See Alumni” option, which allows you to narrow your search of targeted alumni according to a few different filters, such as what they studied, the type of work they do, the companies for which they work, and their location.


While some LinkedIn members may be more likely to make for effective connections than others, you can’t discount anyone. You may be surprised at who leads to your next job.

Interested in optimizing your LinkedIn profile further? Check out “10 Ways to Optimize Your LinkedIn Engagement in 2018.”

If you want to learn more about LinkedIn, visit this compilation of LinkedIn posts.

Advertisements

6 Areas on your LinkedIn profile you should optimize in 2018

If you’re wondering how an optimized LinkedIn profile will help you in your job search, the answer is simple: Your profile needs to be found by hiring authorities (recruiters, hiring managers, and human resources reps). These people can’t find your profile unless you utilize search engine optimization.

linkedin-alone

Hiring authorities approach LinkedIn similarly to the way they approach their applicant tracking systems (ATSs). They search the site for certain keywords denoting titles and areas of expertise. To be found, you must show up in the first 4-6 pages of search results, lest you be overlooked.

Let’s consider the following scenario: A hiring authority is searching for a finance manager with expertise in data analysis; advising senior managers on how to maximize profits; business analysis; forecasting; supervising employees responsible for financial reporting; and legal compliance. A Masters of Business Administration (MBA) is preferred, although not required.

If a given finance manager wants to be found by the hiring authority in this scenario, their LinkedIn profile must contain their title and area of expertise. Furthermore, this information must be listed in all areas of the finance manager’s profile in order to maximize their chance of being found. This information can be worked into the finance manager’s profile through the use of keywords.

Areas on Your Profile Where Keywords Count

1. Your Name

This area is valuable real estate, as it is weighed heavily in searches. Any certifications or degrees you hold should be included alongside your name, as they will indicate your experience and expertise. So, our finance manager would list their education, “MBA,” after their name.

2. The Headline

This area should be rich with keywords, and it should brand you for your occupation and industry.

Using our financial manager as an example, their headline would read as:

Finance Manager ~ Data Analysis | Business Analysis | Forecasting | Legal Compliance | Maximizing Profits | MBA

Note that you only have 120 characters – including spaces – to work with in your headline. The above example uses 113 characters.

3. The Summary

Your summary should not be brief. Writing a brief summary prevents you from including all the important keywords we’ve identified. In the case of our finance manager, they would want to repeat “finance manager” and the areas of expertise mentioned in the headline above as often as possible.

Note that you have 2,000 characters with which to work in your summary. Something to keep in mind is that visitors only see the first two lines of your summary, unless they select “See more. Read: The 39 most important in your LinkedIn profile summary

4. Experience

The experience section is often overlooked, which is a huge mistake. Each entry in the experience section contains two factors that need to be considered: the job title and the position description.

Our finance manager’s official title is “finance manager” at ABC Company. While this is an accurate title, it doesn’t show their full value. The finance manager should instead list a title similar to their headline. However, you only have 100 characters here, so you have to be more selective. Our finance manager’s title might read:

Finance Manager ~ Data Analysis | Business Analysis | Forecasting | Legal Compliance | MBA

Here, the phrase, “maximizing profits” was removed. “MBA” could be removed instead, but the designation is more important for our finance manager’s purposes.

While the position description must above all else show the candidate’s value by listing accomplishment statements with quantified results, it is also an area on your LinkedIn profile where you can utilize a great deal of space. You have 2,000 characters here to repeat your title and areas of expertise. Don’t squander them.

5. Education / other sections

The education and other sections are also in play. What many people fail to realize is that they can add narratives to their education section. Yes, you’ll list your institution of learning and location (no dates of graduation), but you can also provide some background information.

Our finance manager might tell a story like this: “I fell in love with accounting and other areas of finance on my way to earning my MBA. Of particular interest to me were data and business analysis. I was given the opportunity to learn these skills during an internship at ABC company, which is where I am now employed.” Notice how this narrative employs the right keywords!

You can also benefit from keywords in the featured skills and endorsements sections. Your skills are counted, and some say the number of times you’re endorsed for them increases your ability to be found.

Other considerations when optimizing your LinkedIn profile

Loading your profile with keywords isn’t going to be enough on its own. Being found by hiring authorities also depends on how many people you’re connected with, as well as who your connections are. In addition, engaging with your connections will increase your chances of being found.

Outside your LinkedIn profile

Highlighting your LinkedIn profile on business cards, resumes, links from other social media can further optimize your profile.


Next week, we’ll explore LinkedIn profile optimization further by looking at how to properly connect with other LinkedIn members.

This post originally appeared on recruiter.com.

If you want to learn more about LinkedIn, visit this compilation of LinkedIn posts.

LinkedIn makes changes to People search: smart, or for the sake of changes?

The old saying, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” falls on deaf ears with LinkedIn. For reasons beyond me and others, the new changes LinkedIn has made to Search make little sense and certainly don’t improve a feature that was just fine as was.

Change

I didn’t learn of these changes until a few days ago, but by then I had thoroughly confused someone who was trying to edit one of my articles for his publication. I was explaining to him how to use Filter people by, but he was seeing the new All people filters. I must apologize to him again.

In this post, I’m going to break down the old and the new Search for people and in doing so, figure out why LinkedIn decided to take something that was fairly strong and make changes that make no sense.

The old

Old Search

People Search2

Above we see a the old Search people toolbar, and to the right a partial view of Filter people by. To me this was a straight forward way to narrow a people search.

In the former toolbar we had All, People, Jobs, Content, Companies, Groups, and Schools. (You’re probably wondering, “Why is Bob typing everything I can see?” For prosperity, kind reader.)

You see in the Filter people by box to the right that I’ve chosen my 2nd degree connections who reside in the Greater Boston area and are in the Information Technology and Services area.

I could expand Keywords to type a first name, last name, title, and school.

I could also expand Connections of to view mutual connections of the person I choose. If I chose my close connection, Kevin Willett, I saw all 932 mutual connections. Holly crap.

As well, I could expand Current companies, Past companies, and Industries, which I mentioned above. Pretty self explanatory. Not shown in this screen capture are Profile language, Nonprofit interests, and Schools.

This was the old setup. It was simple and effective. What you’ll see below is what my  friend saw as I was explaining the old view. (I have to admit I was loosing my patience with him.) Essentially the functionality of the new way to search for people is no different.


The New…

New Search

I’m not going to spend an hour going through the changes to the new toolbar, other than to say 1) the font seems to be lighter and 2) everything that was under More above, save for Jobs and Content, can also be found under People (below) when you hit the down button.

New People Search2

Filter people by has become All Filters

This appears to be the revelation; instead of the nice, neat box shown above, we now have a drop-down from All Filters which is now called All people filters that contains the same filtering components as the older version. Why did LinkedIn make this change? This message, which appears below All Filters, tells us why:

All your filters

Granted all the filters are expanded, which must be the reason LinkedIn made the changes. I never had a problem with Filter people by. Perhaps others did. I’m curious to know from LinkedIn why they made these changes to the toolbar and Filter people by.

New All Feature filters

What’s nice about these changes: the new toolbar allows quick access to Locations, Connections, Current Companies.

If my tone sounds frustrated it’s because I am. The major reasons for my frustration is because I don’t see a major improvement to what I considered to be a strong feature. Is this new look more aesthetically appealing? No.

If you like the changes LinkedIn made to People Search, let me know why.

If you want to learn more about LinkedIn, visit this compilation of LinkedIn posts.

 

6 reasons keeping you from asking for help during your job search

And what to do about it.

You know the “Golden Rule” of networking: offer help before asking for help. This is good in theory. When you give first, others will return the favor. It may not be the person to whom you gave a slam-dunk lead, but the favor will eventually be returned.

Professional man

Many take this golden rule to heart, almost to the point where they don’t ask for help. It’s as if they don’t believe they deserve being helped with their job search, which to me is a huge shame. Here are some reasons why you might not ask for help and what to do about it.

1. You feel shame

I understand the feeling of the shame and embarrassment of being unemployed, because I’ve been there. Even though I was laid off when the company for which I worked was acquired, I felt like I had let myself and my family down. I know now that the shame I felt was irrational.

What do. What’s rational is realizing that your friends, relatives, neighbors, former colleagues understand that people lose their jobs. It’s part of human nature to, at one point or another, be unemployed. In fact, some of these people were probably unemployed. So, put your shame aside and ask them for help.

2. You don’t think you need help

Many people who haven’t had to look for work for  many years don’t anticipate how difficult the job search can be. Take an executive who’s risen to the top of her career. She’s was in the position of hiring candidates. Now the roles are reversed, and the way employers are hiring have changed.

What to do: Like the executive, you need to understand the job search has changed and be willing to accept help from those who are trained to help you, as well as from other job seekers who have been in the job search more recently. Even executive-level job seekers struggle in the job search.

3. You’re too proud

Some people who are unemployed are too proud to ask for help, because to ask for help is a sign of weakness. From an early age we grew up believing independence is admired and a sign of strength. Helping others is what we should do.

What to do: Now is the time to swallow your pride. If you’ve been helping others throughout your life, or even more recently, accept help from others. Believe it or not, people are willing to help. Social psychologist point out that helping others gives us a sense of pride and happiness, so make other people happy by asking for help.

Being Polite

4. You don’t know who to ask

Knowing who to ask is difficult for some job seekers. They ask me who to approach. My answer to them is “everyone.” As absurd as it may seem, anyone can be of assistance. These are what we call the superficial connections.

What to do: Certainly you will ask your former colleagues and supervisors, as they are you top tier. Beyond that look to your community, including friends, relatives, neighbors, etc. Organized networking groups, buddy groups, and professional associations are also a great source of help.

5. You don’t know how to ask

“Excuse me, do you know of any jobs available?” This is what you wonder, and this is what you want to ask someone who might know this answer. But it is wrong, because it puts people on the spot and makes you appear desperate.

What to do: Simply by letting people know that you’re out of work will put them on notice. They’ll keep you in mind when they hear of openings. Ping people occasionally is what I tell job seekers. Send an email to them to let them know about your search, but don’t always make your pings about your job search.

6. You don’t know when to ask

There are the premature askers–such as a person who asks for help immediately upon sending a LinkedIn invite—and the Johnny come lately askers—the person who summons up the courage after a positions been filled.

What to do: You’re at a professional association event speaking to an insider at a company for which you want to work? Now is  the time to ask for help. Remember reason number 5; don’t ask for a job. Rather, ask if you could connect on LinkedIn or if the person would have time to give you advice on your job search.


Asking for help can be difficult at times; it can even take courage. However, during the job search it’s a necessity. As I tell job seekers, “Going it alone will make your job search longer…much longer.”

Photo: Flickr, Дŋøŋ ДђḾęĐ

Who’s on your team during the job search?

Recently in a Résumé Writing workshop, I asked an attendee to tell the story behind a verbose accomplishment statement she had on her résumé. (Yes, I ask interview questions in Résumé Writing.) Immediately she used the personal pronoun “we.” I called her on this, and she said she’s still in the mindset of team. I get that.

teamwork

But in the job search, who’s on your team? You could say your buddy group, career advisors, friends, spouse, etc. But when it really comes down to it, you’re the one who is dealing with the ups and downs of the job search; submitting your résumé; engaging on LinkedIn; going to networking events; sitting in the hot seat; and following up.

How to answer a question the incorrect way

I ask a workshop attendee, “Tell me about a time when your diligence paid off in completing a project on time.” An incorrect answer goes like this:

We were responsible for putting out the quarterly report that described the success of our training program. We worked diligently gathering the information, writing the report, and sending it to the Department of Labor. We met our deadline and were commended for our efforts.”

Here’s the problem: there’s nothing about the job seeker’s role in the situation. As the interviewer, I don’t want to hear about what the team accomplished, nor will employers. I want to hear about a candidate’s contribution to the overall effort.

How to answer a question the correct way

Here’s the question again:  “Tell me about a time when your diligence paid off in completing a project on time.”

This answer, using the STAR formula, is more satisfying, as it describes the candidate’s specific contribution.

Read this article, Use 6 important components when telling your interview stories.

Situation

As part of a five-member team, we were charged with writing a report necessary to continue funding for an outside program.

Task

I was given the task of gathering information pertaining to participant placement in jobs and then writing a synopsis of their training and jobs they secured.

Actions

I started with noting how I recruited 20 participants for the training program, a number I’m happy to say exceeded previous expectations of 10 participants. This required outreach to junior colleges, vocational schools, and career centers, where people desiring training were engaged.

Step two involved writing detailed descriptions of their computer training, which included Lean Six Sigma and Project Management. Then explaining how this training would help them secure employment in their targeted careers. I collaborated with the trainers to get accurate descriptions of the two training programs.

Next, I interviewed each participant to determine their learning level and satisfaction with the program. All but one was extremely satisfied. The person who was not satisfied felt the training was too difficult but wanted to repeat the training. She noted she was very happy with the expertise of our trainer.

As well, I tracked each participant over a period of four months to determine their job placement. Jobs were hard to come by, so at times I approached hiring managers at various manufacturing companies in the area in order to speed up the process. I engaged in finding jobs for four of the twelve people, even though it wasn’t my responsibility.

Finally I took the lead on writing a five-page report on what the members of the team and I had accomplished in the course of  three months. Other members of the team were of great help in making sure all the “is” were dotted and “ts” were crossed and that the report was delivered on time to Boston.

Result

The result was that we delivered the report with time to spare and were able to keep funding for the project for another year. I worked hard and was integral to proving to the DOL that the project was successful, but it took a lot of collaboration to bring project all together.

Note: when appropriate, job candidates need to mention the contributions of those who helped in the process. It is not only about the candidate.


Certainly there are times when employees require the assistance of others, but they always have a specific role in the situation.  Prospective employers want to hear about the candidates’ role in the situation, not the teams’ overall role. It is best to answer the question using the STAR formula, which demonstrates the situation, task (your), action, and result.

Photo: Flickr, Mehul Pithadiya

 

One major turnoff for interviewers: lack of transparency from candidates

Three questions that snag job candidates.

A conversation with my daughter in the past aroused in me emotions of both concern and relief. Two conflicting emotions you’re thinking. Yes, two conflicting emotions, but the feeling that stays with me is the feeling of relief.

Honest Abe

The feeling of relief because she was truthful about her faux pas, her display of bad judgement. All was forgiven, although not forgotten. “This is what the truth accomplishes,” I told her.

This is what you get when you ask your kids to be honest. This is what you get when you ask for honesty, regardless of the response.

What interviewers get from their job candidates at an interview aren’t always honest responses. Candidates are guarded, weighing every word they say, because they feel one wrong answer can blow the deal. They don’t have faith in the interviewers being understanding of mistakes made in the past.

Questions addressing candidates weaknesses

When I spring the question, “What is your greatest weakness?” on my workshop attendees, I often get a moment of silence. Their minds are working like crazy to come up with the correct answer. They think the best answer is one which demonstrates a strength, not a weakness.

No job candidate wants to disclose a real weakness. They don’t want to kill their chances of getting the job, so they creatively elude the question, or even lie.

What I impress upon my workshop attendees is that interviewers want transparency, not a coy answer they’ve heard countless times. The “weakness” question is the one that gives them the most trouble.

So they come up with answers like, “I work too hard,” or, worse yet, “I’m a perfectionist.” I tell them these questions rank high on the bullshit scale, to which they laugh. But it’s true. These answers are predictable. They’re throwaway answers, wasted breath.

Be smart, though. Don’t mention a skill as a weakness that is vital to the position at hand. Talking about your fear of  public speaking, when it’s a major component of a position requiring public speaking skills, would be a major problem and probably eliminate you from consideration.

Another question job candidates struggle with is, “Why did you leave your last job?” For those who’ve been let go this can be a struggle. Transparency is required here just like the weakness question.

Unfortunately you may have been let go from your previous position, which means you may have done something wrong; or maybe it was just a conflict in personality with your manager. Whichever the case may be, be transparent, rather than trying to make up a phony story.

For example, “My first manager worked well together because he was clear about his deadlines. However, with my recent manager, I didn’t get a clear sense of when financial reports were due.

This became a problem on a few occasions, which I take responsibility for. Because of this, I’ve learned to ask about strict deadlines.”

Note the person explained the situation succinctly (this answer must be short) and explained how she learned from the experience. This demonstrates transparency and self-awareness.

A final difficult directive might be, “Tell me about a mistake you made and how you dealt with it.” This directive is one that many people are not prepared to answer. When I ask my clients this question, they pause, or might say, “I never thought of this question.”

Like the weakness question, you don’t want to choose the most detrimental mistake you’ve made. The time you cost the organization a $3 million account due to poor follow-through with a huge client is not the example you want to bring up.

However, interviewers want an honest answer. They also want you to tell as story about this mistake. This is where a brief STAR story comes in handy. Read this post to learn how to use the four components necessary to answer this directive.

make mistake

People make mistakes, they do

Smart interviewers understand that just as job candidates make mistakes, managers also make mistakes. No one is flawless in the interview process. Nonetheless, they don’t want to hear candidates dancing around their questions. It’s a waste of time and just makes the job candidate look silly.

Furthermore, interviewers want to hear self-awareness, meaning that you know your weaknesses, and are doing something to correct them. If your greatest weakness is a fear of public speaking (this is not a major requirement of the job), maybe you’ve been attending Toastmasters to get over that fear.

If you can’t admit that you slip every once in awhile, you lack not only self-awareness, but also emotional intelligence, which is a key component of your personality. Not all interviewers want the purple squirrel, the candidate that is perfect and elusive.

Employers want people who can do the job—have most of the required skills—and the motivation to take on challenges. So if candidates don’t have some  non-consequential skills, they need to own up to it. Their understanding of self and limitations is part of their EQ, which is not a given in everyone.


Back to my daughter

It’s tough as a parent to realize your daughter, or son, is not perfect and makes poor judgement calls. Life would be easier if you didn’t have to deal with these minor issues, but they are part of life.

I appreciated her transparency and, as a result, trust her more than if she hadn’t told the truth. In addition, I understand she’ll make mistakes in the future. This is not too different than a conversation that an interviewer and job candidate have. Interviewers will trust candidates more when the candidate is honest….to a point.

I’m sure there was more to the story than my daughter wanted to disclose.

Photo: Flickr, Limmel Robinson

4 reasons why the applicant tracking system is ineffective

My wife has an ongoing argument with Amazon’s Alexa. “Alexa, play WBUR.”

“I don’t understand your question.”

“No, Alexa….Play WBUR….Alexa, play WBUR.”

“Playing a station from Boise Idaho.”

“Argh.”

alexa

As I watch this interaction, it demonstrates how technology and humans don’t always jive. This transaction between my wife reminds me of how the applicant tracking system (ATS)—of which there are hundreds—doesn’t work for the following reasons.

People are only human

No matter how hard I try, some job seekers don’t send résumés tailored to specific jobs. Instead they send generic résumés to every job, exclaiming in aspiration, “Why don’t I get interviews? I’ve sent hundreds of résumés and gotten no interviews; not even a phone interview.”

For years I’ve been preaching to job seekers that keywords are the trick with the ATS. I tell them that they can identify keywords from the job postings by using software as simple as http://www.tagxedo.com or http://www.wordle.net to create word clouds, and then do the same to compare their résumés to job postings. Or they can use a more scientific method using http://www.jobscan.com.

Take the time to dissect the job post to understand the required major requirements and skills. Modify your Branding Headline, Performance Profile, Experience section, essentially everything to fit the job post.

The ATS is not human

The ATS can’t do human; it doesn’t know you as a person who has so much more to offer than the requirements for the job at hand. It is designed to do one thing: parse résumés for keywords. Only if your résumé contains the keywords—and density of them—will it be delivered to the hiring authorities who will read it.

Learn more about the ATS by reading 8 things you need to know about applicant tracking systems.

The ATS is so exact in the keywords for which it searches; there is no room for error. It doesn’t  digest the following words (in bold) in this sentence written by a job seeker: “Demonstrate organizational skills by coordinating events that garnered 98% participation from municipality constituents.

It recognizes the following words (in bold) from a job posting: “Must coordinate events for functions that attract an extremely high percent of participants. Candidates must be extremely organized

Here is where the job candidate fails in matching the three keywords.

  1. coordinating doesn’t equal coordinate.
  2. participation doesn’t equal participants.
  3. Organizational doesn’t equal organized.

The ATS promotes a failing system

The ATS is brilliant because it eliminates as many as 75% of hundreds of résumés submitted for one job. This makes hiring authorities’ lives more manageable and keeps them sane. Most large, and many midsize, companies use applicant tracking systems. One source rates the top 99 applicant tracking systems.

For years we’ve realized that the hiring process is deficient in various ways. When human meets machine, the process fails. You submit your application through an ATS, which does a great job of rating your résumé among others (remember keywords).

However, if your résumé doesn’t meet the ATS’s criteria, you’re out of luck for that job. What the ATS can’t determine is perhaps the most important aspect of a candidate’s potential, emotional intelligence (EQ). The ATS focuses strictly on the skills stated on your résumé; it does not sit across from you in an interview.

The ATS also delivers unqualified people to interviews. This might be attributed to career developers, such as myself, who advise job seekers on how to get by the ATS. (Surely not all people who can play the ATS game are unqualified.) The ones who are unaware of mechanics of the ATS, are being passed by for less qualified people.

The ATS perpetuates job boards

Job boards are chum line. If you’ve ever gone deep-sea fishing, you know what it means to use chum line. Scraps like squid, clams, fish parts, and basically anything that would attract large fish are thrown overboard. The bait attracts any fish who happen to be near the surface.

Hiring authorities reason that they might not get the perfect candidate, but there are job seekers out there who are qualified enough. In other words, what they don’t see, they won’t miss. This thinking is human nature, but it is also faulty.

The ATS allows employers to accept more résumés, convinced the most qualified candidates will be presented to them. Further, the résumés that don’t pass the ATS the first time will be stored for future perusal. Hiring authorities will have a trove a future candidates to look at. This is of no solace to job seekers who need a job now.

The job board’s success rate ranges from 2%-10%. The marriage between it and the ATS is a perfect union.


Friend or foe, the ATS is no better than Alexa. My wife eventually taught the machine to find the radio station she desired, but it took some teaching and frustration. Will the ATS be smarter? Will it be more human? More intuitive? If Alexa is any indication, there might be hope.

Photo: Flickr.com, Victor Gonzalez Couso