In recent decade, a lot of emphasis has been placed on developing the concept of Brand. With the advent of globalization and growing multi-national culture, many organisations have realized the importance of positioning themselves well. This explains the increasing awareness among the organizations towards developing a Brand. A Brand can be associated with a unique identity that the organizations try to build for their products, services and organization as a whole. The concept of brand has evolved over the years. Earlier branding was associated with product marketing efforts, now the concept includes not only product or service marketing but also encompasses the concept of "Employer Branding". Employer branding (EB) is an international concept referring to the work with making the identity clear as an employer. The brand signifies a promise that the organizations make not only to motivate and retain its current labor force but also to attract the large pool of labor force existing outside in the market space. It provides an opportunity to the employers to form an image of themselves among their current and prospective employees. Brand is associated with something which is unique, differentiated and difficult to replicate for the competitors. It is a process of creating a perception in minds of the people which help them in developing mental models. By virtue of evaluating these mental models against each other, they make their decision regarding buying a certain product or being part of a certain organization. An association is formed when the brand is capable of developing congruence with their inherent beliefs, values and preferences. A lot of literature in the past has made attempts to explore this concept with many scholars using various terms inter changeably providing their interpretations of the concept. The term employer branding suggests differentiating a ï¬rm's characteristics as an employer from those of its competitors (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). Ambler and Barrow (1996) define the employer brand in terms of benefits, calling it "the package of functional, economic and psychological benefits provided by employment, and identified with the employing company". A concept which has emerged within it is of 'employer attractiveness' (Ambler, 2000; Ambler and Barrow, 1996; Ewing et al., 2002; Gilly and Wolfinbarger, 1998). Berthon et al. (2005) defines employer attractiveness (EA) as the 'envisioned benefits that a potential employee sees in working for a specific organization' and argues that the 'more attractive an employer is perceived to be by potential employees, the stronger that particular organization's employer brand equity' (p. 156). Branding not only is seen as important in establishing a unique identity of an organization but is also a means towards rightly positioning the organization in the labour market so as to attract the right talent. Like mentioned earlier, with increasing globalization and the changing demographics, many organizations are competing for the same 'Talent'. With unequal education standards across the globe and increasing population of generation Xer's replacing the large pool of Baby Boomers, there is a dearth of Talent which is posing challenges for the organizations in procuring the right talent. This has fuelled to what has been termed as the 'War for Talent'. With these changes occurring at a rapid pace in the labour market, organizations have started investing into building strong Employer Brands. More and more firms are striving to achieve 'Best Employer' status to draw attention of the contemporary electronic and print media (e.g. The Economist, 2003) which subsequently positively contributes to the firm's efforts of attracting scarce talented human resources (Branham, 2001; Conference Board, 2001; Sartain and Schumann, 2006).
This where the concept of 'Best place to work' as gained popularity. Best place to work is the one where employees trust the people they work for, have pride in what they do and enjoy the company of the people they work with. Firms have become more serious in their efforts to participate in various BES (Best Employer Surveys), get listed in the same and obtain ranks better than their competitors. In the last decade, there are several BES (e.g., Great Place to Work Survey) which evaluate firms using several parameters and place (or rank) them in the list of great place to work or best place to work (Love and Singh, 2011). These BES, implicitly or explicitly, consider the major indicators of successful EB (see Moroko and Uncles, 2008) therefore these (surveys) may be regarded as one of the best indicators to gauge the success or failure of a firm's EB efforts. Moreover, stakeholders (e.g., prospective employees, industry) have started placing huge importance to these surveys (Joo and McLean, 2006; Love and Singh, 2011). This represents a race to attract and retain the best talent of the industry.
The area of research in such circumstances that has a scope for analysis is related with the sustenance of a brand. A lot of earlier literature has explored the concept of employer branding and related concepts. Also, an attempt has been made towards establishing the relation between an organisation's brand and applicants intention towards applying to the it. But what remains as a salient area for research is that how this relationship is affected over a period of time? What significance does time hold in changing the dynamics of this relationship? How different are expectation and preferences of various groups of applicants coming from various educational levels? What factors can be identified as being the most attractive which make an organization the 'Best place to work'? Through this study an attempt has been made to analyse the significance of the BES in determining the employer brand of any firm. This relationship will further be explored to understand its significance in light of "Sustenance" and the strategic implications that follow.
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
The world of strategic branding has evolved considerably, making the concept of EB even more relevant in the present context. A well-developed branding process creates an esteemed and distinctive brand that stands out among competition and appeals to its target segment. Brand Development has been defined as the process of creating styles and themes that enable organizations to express their mission, values, strategic vision. Brand development enables organizations to give their brand a personality which they can leverage to gain a competitive advantage over their competitors. For decades, companies have aimed at creating brands that are a flagship of their communication by using countless techniques such as identity and image development, positioning and differentiation (Vel, Suhail and Satyanarayan, 2011). It can be understood as having implicit communication with the employees present internally and more importantly with the potential employees present externally.
Review of literature on Employer Branding highlights how this concept has evolved over the years. It has been an area of interest for many scholars over the last few years. Employer branding is a specific form of managing corporate identities by creating both within and outside the firm an image of the firm as a distinct and desirable employer ( Lievenseial, 2007). It is defined as "a targeted, long-term strategy to manage the awareness and perceptions of employees, potential employees, and related stakeholders with regards to a particular firm or a place to work" (Sullivan, 2004). It represents a message that the company wants to communicate to its internal and external audience that is unique and distinct which makes it difficult for the competitors to replicate. The ability to use a brand to convey symbolic benefits to prospective employees makes employer branding especially useful (Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004). Brand is often associated with a unique identity; hence it's important that any form of communication of these symbolic benefits should be consistent and clear to the target segment. When the messages are consistent and credible, the internalization process enables employees to better fulfill the explicit and implicit promises inherent in the brand name and organizational image (Greene, Walls, & Schrest, 1994).
Organizational identity is another concept that can be described in terms of the perceptions of the image of the organization as formed by the members themselves and their assessment. Organizational identities can be distinguished in two ways, namely (a) members' own perceptions of the image of the organization and (b) members' assessment of others' perceptions of the image of the organization (Filip Lievens, Greet Van Hoye and Frederik Anseel, 2007). It has been posited that both the perceived organizational identity (i.e. insiders' perception of what the organization stands for) and the construed external image (i.e. insiders' perception of what outsiders think the organization stands for) of an organization are related to people's identification with that organization (Dutton and Dukerich, 1991; Dutton, Dukerichand Harquail, 1994). Organizational image can be broadly understood as a collection of knowledge and feelings about an organization (Tom, 1971), or as the general impressions of an organization held by those outside the same organization (Barber, 1998). While contemplating on employer branding and designing initiatives towards its effect, these concepts are to be kept in mind. The effort should be made towards targeting both these identities, i.e. creating a positive identity among the members of the organisation as well as creating a strong magnetic brand that is capable of attracting the best talent of the industry.
Employer Branding
An employer brand conveys the company's value proposition, i.e., the totality of the company's culture, systems, attitudes, and employee relationships and it encourages the employees to share goals to achieve success, profitability, and satisfaction both internally and externally. It involves internally and externally promoting a clear view of what makes an organization different and desirable as an employer. Employer branding efforts are targeted at created or developing a unique value that the organization wants to offer to its current employees as well as prospective employees. The concept has found its origin in the concepts of marketing. It helps organizations establish themselves as the employer of the present staff, as the potential employer for the prospective employees and establishing good relationships with the customers (Roy, 2011). Hence, it can be said that employer branding process is similar to product building where also efforts are put in to create a lasting image of the product in the minds of the consumers. Similar to product branding, employer branding also posits creating a compelling brand promise for employees that mirrors the values and beliefs of the organizations. Through this the organizations make an attempt to attract the right talent with the right skills and holding values and skills which are congruent with those of the organizations. There are many benefits that can be attributed with employer branding. It aids in attracting the best talent available in the labour market, retaining the internal employees by delivering the brand promise made to them. A strong brand also helps in attracting the best talent at a relatively lower wages by leveraging its brand value. Advantages of having a strong employer brand are enhanced attraction, increased retention and employee engagement. Hence, it can be seen that it yields multi fold benefits in the space of talent management where attraction, recruitment and retention of talent is facilitated.
A concept which finds roots in the concept of employer branding is the notion of 'Employer Attractiveness' (Berthon, 2005). Employer attractiveness is the benefit which is perceived as attractive by the prospective employees while exploring employment opportunities. It is on basis of these parameters that the talent pool compares the various employment opportunities present in the market. Hence, more attractive an employer is perceived to be by the potential employees, stronger the particular firms' employer brand equity. Additionally, the concept of EA has several other practical implications. For example, different organizations have diverse EA attributes that they project as their key branding proposition. These attributes significantly contribute in applicant's intention to apply to a firm. Therefore, it's important to understand specific role of various EA attributes and their contribution in building positive image about the prospective employer. It also has practical implications for the firms participating in the BES as they would like to maximize the returns from investment made in EB initiatives. Perhaps, this is more critical for the firms who want to sustain their employer attractiveness and meet the fluctuating expectations and preferences of the dynamic target audience. It may be noted that the specific image that organizations aim to project to its current and potential employees and other relevant stakeholders is the central component of EB (Branham, 2001) therefore, it may be useful to have a clear understanding of the most basic relationship in the organization- the relationship between the employer and the employee. There exist a psychological contract between the employer and the employee. As part of this contact there are various promises or benefits that the employer is liable to fulfill in return of the service or contribution made by the employees. Employer branding strengthens this implicit relationship. The strength of the relationship however depend on the extent these promises is delivered.
Another dimension of employer branding can be analysed with respect to the changing demographics and resulting effects on the workplace environment. Important demographic trends have taken place in the last five years and huge changes are expected to take place in the workforce over the decade. The demographic, economic, sociopolitical and technological shifts are driving five workforce trends (Kapoor, 2010):
• Smaller and less sufficiently skilled
• Increasingly global
• Highly virtual
• Vastly diverse
• Autonomous and empowered
Author Renu Kohli(2010) in her report argues that the inexorable march of market forces, and their interplay with the structural and political dynamics of the country, could end up drawing many unemployed persons into the job market. Firms serious about the BES ranking would try to gauge (e.g., internally through employee satisfaction surveys, exit interviews or externally through market expectation studies) this changing pattern and attempt to align their (HR) strategy to the market requirements. A paper published by Strategic Human Resource Management talks of Employer branding as an example of progressive HR practice. It is an important differentiator in emerging economies like India for talent management. Recent trends have revealed the importance of having an effective employer brand to recruit and retain the right kind of talent needed by the corporation to establish, attain and/or retain its competitive advantage in the marketplace (SHRM Research, 2010). With the baby boomers exiting the workplace (retiring) and the generation X people joining the organizations across the globe, major changes in the workplace practices are expected. This change in the workplace composition will result in an environment where different sets or generations of people will co-exist and work together. Each of these set of people have different backgrounds which give rise to varied expectations and preferences with regard to their choice of employer. While the baby boomers value stability, respect and esteem at work; generation X prefers challenging work assignments, autonomy and global exposure as the key dimensions of any job. In this scenario, it is extremely challenging for the employers to establish a brand that is all inclusive and address the diversity of their workplace. While developing their brand image they have to be prudent with regard to the demand and preferences of each of these segments and own the prerogative of providing them. A brand's reputation is more stable and represents the distillation of multiple images over time (Fombrun and van Riel, 1997). By encompassing the evaluations of all stakeholders, reputation provides a much more representative indication of brand performance (Fiona Harris, Milton Keynes & Leslie de Chernatony, 2001). Hence it becomes essential to capture the perception of the various sections of stakeholders and understand their perception about employer attractiveness. Needs of various segments of labor pool may vary with respect to age, experience, educational qualifications, current employment, gender, etc. Different sections may hold a different view on the factors that they see as important and the perceived associated attractiveness of the firm.
Companies in emerging markets expect recruitment and retention of talent to become tougher. In some countries, the supply of talent is lagging behind demand for recruits to such an extent that rapid salary inflation is becoming a problem as companies' battle with their competitors for job candidates. With young workforces, companies not only face the challenge of meeting expectations in a market where talent is in the driving seat. The biggest problem, when it comes to talent shortages, is the increasing gap between what universities provide and what industries need, so companies also need to build close relationships with these institutions to help build the pipeline of skilled employees that can fill their talent gaps (Economist, 2008)
Many scholars and researchers share similar views with respect to the relevance of employer branding in the recent times. Various stakeholders also place a lot of importance on the brand that the organizations establish for themselves in the market. It helps in procuring shareholders trust, generate capital and equity and attract customers as well. Resource based view (RBV) provides the foundation of the concept of employer branding assuming human capital brings value to the firm, and targeted investment in human capital should enhance firm performance (Barney 1991). This framework has special significance at a time when financial markets are increasingly recognizing human capital as a source of value for firms and shareholders (Cairncross 2000). Michaels et al. (2001) propose the explicit development and communication of employee value proposition (EVP) to attract and retain talented employee. EVP helps organizations position themselves as an employer of choice by highlighting the benefits, advantages and value that the employer has to offer to its current and prospect pool of employees. Whether it is a service industry or a knowledge intensive industry such as information technology, employers have realized that the employees (people) and their intellectual capital is the source of competitive advantage in the industry. With these trends pointing towards the value human assets bring to an organization, ignoring branding efforts and isolation will lead to serious repercussions. Employer branding is one of the few long-term solutions to the "shortage of talent" problem.
Employer branding is an activity where principles of marketing, in particular the "science of branding", are applied to HR activities in relation to current and potential employees (Edward, 2010). It involves providing a unique employment experience. In this case, the human resource managers are required to perform dual responsibilities. Apart from being human resource professionals, they are also required to play the role of marketing managers in their respective organizations. Employer branding in many organizations falls under the purview of the talent acquisition strategy. The talent acquisition strategy of any organization is determined through the Human Resource strategy and business strategy. Efforts done in light of employer branding are very similar in nature to those done by typical marketing manager to sell and procure new customers for their products. It includes developing a brand image for their organization and the place of work, highlighting the benefits that the workplace has to offer to its prospective employees, attracting and recruiting the right talent keeping in mind external competitiveness and person job fit principle and delivering the promises made as an employer by enhancing the employment experience of the internal employees. This is challenging considering the complexity of the labour market as evident through our discussion earlier. Hence the role of human resource professional within organizations has enlarged and encapsulates a wide range of responsibilities. Other activities related to the domain f talent acquisition are often guided by the principles of employer branding.
A significant body of research exists in the field of personnel psychology that investigates factors that influence how attractive an organisation is to potential recruits. This has particular relevance to the employer-branding field as one of its central aims is to ensure that an organisation is identifiable and attractive to potential recruits. The greater a company's reputation, the more attractive it tends to be seen by potential recruits (Edward, 2010). As employer branding programmes tend to include external communication drives and attempts to increase recruits' awareness of the organisation and reputation, any information that demonstrates company successes would expect to have a positive impact. But the decision of the applicants to get associated with an organization is influenced by a range of factors and not just its financial success. Therefore, messages included as part of an employer branding communication drive aiming to increase how attractive an organisation is seen as a potential employer will need to provide information over and above that linked to organisational success.
Often employer branding is misunderstood as being an effort to attract and recruit the potential talent pool lying outside the organization. Nonetheless, various definitions and versions of the concept presented by different researchers suggest very prominently that it also includes marketing and branding efforts directed towards internal current set of employees as well. This is where the concept of 'Internal Marketing' comes into light. Internal marketing focuses on communicating the customer brand promise and the attitudes and behaviors' expected from employees to deliver on that promise. Any organization's first customers are its internal employees (Berthon, 2005). Themes such as internal branding and internal advertising have gained significant importance in the recent times. It is not only imperative to attract the best talent from the industry but also to keep the talent present inside the organization satisfied. It is about delivering the promises that the employer makes to these employees and providing the benefits, advantages and value at work that they are entitle for. One of the most effective employer branding strategy is branding through your own employees. Many organizations today have a free portal on their career sites where their internal employees post their experiences. Today, by virtue of popularity of so many online virtual networking net spaces, people have free access to all forms of information and people. When the employees of the organizations speak on behalf of their employer highlighting the advantages they are getting at their workplace, it creates a deep impact on the prospective talent pool available in the market. Such 'word of mouth' marketing is the most effective method of creating credibility in the labour market.
Certain benefits associated with having a strong employer brand are reduced turnover, enhanced employee satisfaction and performance and increase in favorable word of mouth communication. (Miles, 2004; Mangold, 2004). It can also be linked with acquiring strategic recruitment advantage (Wilden, Guderaan and Lings, 2010). Having created a position perception about the organization in the people's mind, human resource professional can leverage this advantage to attract, recruit and retain the best talent available in the industry. This becomes a source of competitive advantage for them compared to their competitors. It is an intangible benefit that the companies can leverage which is difficult to replicate for their competitors. Employer branding also leads to higher employee engagement ad hence, most often HR managers use employer branding strategies to design employee engagement initiative. The basic proposition is to keep your internal employees happy and satisfied and make them your brand ambassadors. Enhanced brand loyalty among the employees will also lead to increased productivity.
Strategic Implications of Employer Branding
The concept of employer branding is also of relevance with respect to the rising globalization. Organizations are not only concerned with creating a brand which is locally recognized but are eying towards creating a 'global brand' that is well respected and reputed internationally. This is an extremely difficult task. It requires organizations to create one unique value proposition for themselves that talent present across the globe can identify with. This is easier said than done. This essentially means that organizations today have to invest their time, energy, resources and expertise in gauging the diverse set of expectations that talent across the various parts of the world have from their prospective employers. Next crucial step is of communicating the benefits to these talent chucks spread across the geography in order to attract the towards the organization. This can yield various benefits. Organizations can then develop a highly talented mobile workforce that is aware of the global practices and becomes a source of competitive advantage vis-à-vis their competitors. With the world shrinking at such a rapid pace, people are required to think globally. And to make this happen, organizations have to adapt a more global perspective with regard to talent. This implies that all human resource practices including recruitment, talent management, branding, employee engagement etc have to be designed keeping in mind the primary goal of attracting, recruiting and retaining the best talent across the globe.
Here, we can also look at the significance of employer branding in Indian context. Employer branding as a concept started gaining recognition after 1996. It took decent amount of time before the Indian organizations became aware of the concept and its significance in operating in the Indian talent landscape. Not many organizations realized the importance of having a clear, robust and powerful employer value proposition for themselves. This often resulted in weak strategies and lax support from the senior management of the organizations with respect to branding. Human resource professionals also took some time before realizing the significance of this concept and the possible benefits that it can yield in area of talent attraction and management. The concept is of relevance in the current scenario. Not just in context of India but all the emerging economies of the world. Parts of world such as Latin America, Brazil, China and India are considered as the new hubs of development of the world. These emerging economies have very unique and differentiated talent landscapes from the developed economies. The state of talent, employment opportunities, unique demographics and scope for development make them attractive to the developed world. More companies are investing and entering emerging markets. This implies that there is a pertinent need for talent from these areas. Talent in these countries is not readily available. There is a dearth of 'right local talent' that the companies want to establish themselves in these markets. This again leads to what we have discussed earlier as the 'war for talent', where organization are fighting for the same set of talent. According to a recent survey by LinkedIn, 83% people agree that employer brand has significant impact on ability to hire great talent. That makes it one of the top priorities for the companies and human resource professionals. Benefits of having targeted employer branding efforts are better person job fir, reduction in recruitment cost, lesser recruitment effort required in the long run, ability to attract and hire the best talent from the industry, better relationship with the customers and investors who attribute a firms' success to its reputation and brand image. These benefits make employer branding a powerful proposition as well as strategic tool in the corporate ecosystems.
Some challenges that employers may face are with respect to increasing expectation of the talented work force. These talented individuals have come to realize that they no longer have to fall at mercy of accepting the conditions of work imposed by the employers. They are aware that there exists a scarcity of talent in the market which gives this segment of qualified professionals an edge. They leverage this by exercising their braining power to demand higher salaries, better work arrangements and other benefits at workplace. The practice of job hopping has also become very prevalent in the recent times. People are no longer emotionally attached to their work place and do not find it difficult to switch their place of work for some enhanced benefits. It is extremely difficult to demand employee loyalty in such a scenario where 'Talent' does not find it difficult to change their jobs. Also, more and more organizations have realized that people are its biggest source of competitive advantage today. Human capital or intellectual capital can be banked upon to generate business results, get the buy in of the investors, trust of their customers and acquire financial success. Key position sand key people present in the industry are often poached by the competitors by offering better remuneration or profile. In the advent of such subtle practices, job of human resource managers becomes challenging with regard to protecting the human capital it has acquired over the years. They have to ensure that there is minimum out flux of talent and at the same lost employees are compensated by getting the right talent from outside. Loosing internal talent also has cost implications. EB efforts are set with an aim of increasing employee loyalty and also attracting great talent from outside. This will yield cost advantages in the long run. A brand elicits emotional response from the customers (Davies, 2008). Commitments from the end of the employees can be assessed in terms of emotional affinity felt by the employee towards his job. EB efforts are designed by finding the trigger such emotional responses. This can be achieved by first being aware of the needs and wants of the employees and identifying what they value most. Hieronimus et al. (2005) emphasize "the need for companies to determine which attributes are most important to specific types of potential employees". Most organizations focus on providing for the operational and transactional benefits. But, it has been found that intangible benefits have a positive correlation with respect to creating emotional affinity among the employees. This affinity is further enhanced when the employee experiences congruence between his values, needs & expectations and the values & benefits offered by his employer.
Various efforts made in light of employer branding include capitalizing the social and virtual media through actively using social networking platforms such as facebook, linkedIn, twitter etc to connect to a wider range of talent pool. Organizations also invest heavily on creating career web pages and career websites providing relevant information about their companies. They also highlight awards and accolades that they think will attract the applicants. Campus branding efforts are also of strategic importance for the purpose of attracting the nascent talent present in various colleges. Companies hold seminars, competitions to enhance their campus presence and generating interest among the students.
It would be incorrect to think that employer branding is a standalone concept and its efforts are just a part of the wide gamut of HR activities. Creating an employer brand for an organization is not just a HR prerogative or a few days work. It involves integration of efforts of HR managers, line managers, top leadership and employees as well. There is a synergistic relationship between employer brand and culture. We have argued earlier that employer branding involves a two-fold agenda. One is to attract and recruit the talented individuals present outside in the labour market. Other is to retain the internal talent. Employer brand basically mirrors the cultural norms and realities existing within organizations. There are various factors that influence the basic DNA of any organizations. These may be the industry that it operates in, business environment, competitor's profiles and talent requirements specific to the skills that the industry demands. Hence, the first step is to identify key skills, knowledge and expertise that are relevant for the organization's business. The second step is towards identifying the target labour segment which possess those skills, values, knowledge and expertise. Third step in the process shall be to run organizational diagnostics to identify the gap in the current talent strategy and then define a clear, unambiguous and targeted employer branding proposition. The aim here is to build an ecosystem which resonates with the needs and wants of the current and prospective set of employees. In this process, HR managers need to explore new approaches to sourcing and managing talent in their organizations. The most critical step in creating a powerful employer brand is the process of communicating the brand promises.
2.4 Best Employer Survey
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT
3.1 Theoretical Background
There is an abundance of literature focusing on applicant attraction strategies and organisational recruitment practices to help organisations compete for talent (Barber et al., 1994; Rynes and Barber, 1990). However, brand equity perspective to recruitment is only recently being looked into (Collins and Stevens, 2002; Cable and Turban, 2003; Collins, 2007). Job seekers' reputation perceptions impact job pursuits because reputation is used as a signal about job attributes and influence what job seekers expect from organizational membership. Brand image or employer brand highly influences a prospective candidate's decision to choose a particular employer over the other. The concept of employer attractiveness holds significance here. Certain envisioned benefits associated with joining a particular organization that increases his inclination to be part of that organization. Hence, it can be concluded that the message that is communicated to the outside pool of talent has to be developed carefully and propagated with discretion. This message should be consistent and clear. It should clearly highlight the benefits that the workplace will offer to its employees. All recruitment efforts are then directed towards communicating these messages and symbolic benefits to the prospective pool of candidates. This is done with an aim of attracting the right talent with the right skills, capabilities and values to ensure person-job fit. The extent to which an organization conveys valid information about jobs and its values, culture and work environment, applicants' ï¬t perceptions are likely to be more accurate (Cable & Judge, 1994; Kristof, 1996).
There may be various factors that may influence a prospective employee's decision to apply to a firm. Different organizations have different employer attractiveness attributes that they project as their key branding proposition. These attributes significantly contribute in applicant's intention to apply to a firm. An applicant will be more likely to apply if the envisioned benefits that she sees in working for a particular firm matches with the set of factors that are of importance to him. The personal determinants may influence her perception about a particular firm and lead to higher or lower intention to apply to that firm. If an applicant sees a particular firm offering these benefits, her perception about the firm may change thereby influencing his intention to apply to that firm. Several scholars (e.g., Balmer and Greyser, 2002) have cogently argued that meaningful incongruence between the different identities and images of an organization can cause problems for a firm with its relevant stakeholders. Thus, it may be important for organizations to dispose of a common framework to accurately depict the various company identities and images (Lievens, Hoye and Anseel, 2007). Employer branding activities and initiatives facilitates this process and various recruitment practices are inspired by it.
3.2 Hypothesis Development
Several researchers have found a significant relationship between organizational image and the early recruitment outcome of intentions to apply to the organization. Gatewood, Gowan and Lautenschlager (1993) found a significant positive correlation between the image of an organization and job seekers' likelihood of applying to that organization. Literature (Agrawal and Swaroop, 2009; Collins and Stevens, 2002; Gomes and Neves, 2011; Slaughter, et al, 2004) also confirms a positive relationship between the EA and prospective applicant's intention to apply. One such effort to win the war for talent is through participation of firms in the best employer surveys. Several firms participate in BES every year and compete to procure a better position or maintain their positions. The firms appearing in the BES rankings are perceived as the best places of employment. Many firms and official sources engage in producing such list of best places of employment. The presence or absence of firms on these surveys' list may influence an applicant's intention to apply to them. This leads us to the first two hypothesizes where I attempt to explain the relationship between an applicant's intention to apply as a function of EAs and consequence of the presence of a firm in BES.
H1: Employer attractiveness attributes significantly influences the applicant's intention to apply to a firm.
However, earlier researches show that employer familiarity affects prospective employee's application behaviors (intention to apply) and job seekers prefer familiar employers than to unfamiliar employers (Gatewood, Gowan and Lautenschlager, 1993). It is also established in the recruitment literature that an organization's overall familiarity is related to applicants' perceptions of a company's attractiveness as an employer, with more familiar organizations being perceived as more attractive (Cable and Graham, 2000; Cable and Turban, 2001; Gatewood, Gowan and Lautenschlager, 1993; Turban and Greening, 1997). Hence, it can be argued here that the relationship between employer attractiveness and intention to apply may be mediated or moderated by the applicant's familiarity with an organization. This relationship will further be explored in the following discussions.
These BES have picked up popularity in the last five to six years. There are many national as well as international surveys where firms participate year on year basis. Firms make conscious efforts to build themselves an attractive employer brand, and communicate (for example through BES) about their EB efforts and the outcome of such efforts to their relevant target audience. Success or failure of their efforts can be visualized in terms of their standing (rankings) in the BES. Now, the challenge is not just to appear in the BES, but to fight for the best position or rank. If we look at the career webpage of many organizations, we can find various citations on the awards and ranks that the firms have achieved on some of these surveys. This is basically part of branding initiatives where the aim is to highlight the achievements and accolades acquired by one organization as compared to its counter parts in the industry. These efforts are also relevant with regard to the campus branding initiatives done in many graduate and under graduate colleges to attract and recruit the fresh graduates. Students are also familiar with the reputation of these surveys and companies try to leverage this by highlighting their standing vis-a-vis their competitors.
It can be argued that the firms appearing higher in the BES rankings are perceived as the better places of employment than the firms lower in ranking. The fluctuations in the ranking of the firms can have an effect on the applicant's intention to apply. This leads us to an unexplored area of study which tries to analyze the relationship between the presence or absence of the firms in the BESs and the applicant's intention to apply. It is assumed that if a firm has been consistently appearing on these surveys then it will always (till it is present in BES) be perceived as the employer of choice by the prospective employees leading to higher intention apply. This phenomenon can be described as 'sustenance of employer attractiveness'. One of the primary goals of the firms while participating and securing ranks in the BES is to signal to target audience about strong commitment of the firm towards providing the best place to work. Firms attempt to send a message that they respect and consistently meet expectations of their current workforce, and are able to provide the attributes most valued and desired by the prospective employees in the labor market. By sustaining their position on the BES they try to communicate a stronger message to their prospective employees. Literature has explored the relevance or employer branding and it's implication on recruitment, selection and other talent management practice. But what remains as a considerably unexplored area is related to the sustenance of this brand and its strategic implications for organizations.
It has been observed that the attributes that are important to the labor market change with new developments, opportunities and trends. With the fierce competition between the firms and dynamic work environments, sustaining a brand can lead to various benefits to the organizations. In Indian context itself, we have seen how the Indian conglomerates have been able to sustain their brand over the decades. TATA's have always been mirrored with values, ethics and excellence. They have been able to leverage their brand in the labour market in attracting the best talent of the country. In today's scenario, where world is facing increasing vulnerability amidst extremely risky and dynamic circumstances, importance of sustainability and stability has gained importance. People in the labour market may be inclined towards employment opportunities which are creditable and consistent in maintaining their brand promises. Hence, through this study, I attempt to further explore how applicant's intention to apply to firms varies for firms that have been consistently appearing on the BES. Also, what may be interesting to explore is the differences in the most important EA attributes set for each of those firms which have been consistent in maintaining their brand. In other words, for an applicant the significance of one EA attributes or combination EA attributes may change over time. This change occurs because of the change in the preferences of the applicants as well as the change in the perception of the firm vis-a-vis its competitors. Well-managed brand is so powerful that it can overcome almost any other competitive advantage. Today's global competition forces firms no matter their sizes to look for new sources of sustainable competitive advantage that are unique over time (Arnold, 2000), intangible in nature and protective (Delgado-Ballaster and Munuera-Aleman, 2005). Brand equity from the marketing perspective stems from the greater confidence that the external audience place in a brand than they do in its competitors (Lassar, Mittal and Sharma, 1995). Changes in the perception of the firm, of the labor pool, with respect to its competitors result in changes in the relative importance they place on various EA attributes. This change in the desirable attributes will significantly affect the applicant's intention to apply to a particular firm. Additionally, the attributes that are seen as attractive for a particular firm may be very different from the attributes seen as attractive for another firm, even though both have been consistent in sustaining their brand value. This signifies the importance of sustaining one's employer brand with time and evolving attractiveness attributes that contributes to the applicant's intention to apply. Based on the above discussion, next hypothesis follows:
H2: In prospective applicant's evaluation, the significance of employer attractiveness attributes in the applicant's intention to apply may vary for different firms consistently listed in BES
Researchers (Cable and Judge, 1996; Cable and Turban, 2001; Highhouse et al., 1999; Powell and Goulet, 1996; Wilden, Gudergan and Lings, 2010) suggest that the importance of EA attributes and its influence on candidate's intention to apply may fluctuate according to various characteristics of labor market such as age, gender, location, education, current salary, work experience and individual or group preferences. Therefore, we include these variables as control variables in order to capture the true effect of EA attributes on applicant's intention to apply.
3.3 Research Questions
What are the expectations of each segment of labour pool (graduates, post graduates, work experienced) from their prospective employers?
Literature suggests a positive relationship between Employer attractiveness and intention to apply. What happens to this relationship overtime for firms consistent in their listing in BES?
What are the strategic recruitment implications of this relationship?
Are the employer attractiveness factors significant for all the firms consistent in their rankling?
APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
4.1 Firm Selection
To select firms for this study, three major BES have been considered which are comprehensive and regularly conducted in India. These surveys are:
The Great Place to Work Institute's Survey of 'India's Best Companies to Work For'
The Aon Hewitt's 'Best Employers Survey in India'
Business Today's study of 'Best Companies to Work For'.
Those firms have been selected which were present in all of these three surveys. These surveys provide the list of firms which have been considered either great or best place to work or good on EA indicators. Using these surveys, a sampling frame was generated: firms which consistently appeared in these surveys from 2007 to 2011 (total 8 firms). Finally, four firms were selected randomly (Table 4.1) and is identified as a sample set.
Table 4.1: Firms Selected for the study
Sample Set
(Firms consistent from 2007 to 2011 BES)
American Express India Pvt. Ltd
Marriott International Inc.
Qualcomm
Earlier the concept of employer value proposition (EVP) has been cited. This is an essential talent acquisition initiative that most firms engage in. aim is to develop a unique value proposition for the firm clearly highlighting the job attributes for attracting the prospective candidate pool. Defining, creating and nurturing an employer brand require expertise in communication (Minchington, 2008). In the process of communicating employer brand, firms have to ensure external communication for the target talent pool as well as internal communication for the existing employees. Firms decide their employer branding strategy and design employee value proposition. For the purpose of communicating their EVP, the selected firms have used various communication channels such as newspapers, hoardings, companies' video on YouTube, webcasts, podcasts, career fairs, community events, company events and career websites. Recently, the role of social media like Facebook, Twitter is also increasing and all the firms are using it to most of their advantage. The efforts have been highlighted in the table 4.2:
Table 4.2: Employer Branding Communication Efforts of the Selected Firms
Firm
Communication effort
Qualcomm
Various initiatives for internal branding communication such as: Idea Quest, Intern QIN(INQIN)- which provides networking opportunities for interns
Innovation Tech Association, Qualcomm innovation network and QIN venture fests for innovation, these help to promote the organisation as a brand that takes innovation seriously
Marriott
Hotels
The unique employment branding strategy that includes Marriott's "Find Your World" brand line
Partnership with Evviva brands to frame their employer branding strategies
Facebook game "My Marriott Hotel"
A blog for university students
Well thought employer branding strategy and consistency in employer brand message
Using engaging imagery (e.g. the physical working environment inside the Google
offices) in the message
Videos and articles published around the world about Google as an employer
Localized rather than centralized approach involving all Googlers across the globe in
employee branding communication
Using employer branding attributes that are highly emotive which are developed by
delivering an employment experience that is aligned with its target audience
4.2 Scale Selection
Berthon, Ewing and Hah (2005) provide a comprehensive 25-item scale to measure EA which has been tested for its reliability and validity. Two more items have been added by Roy (2008) in Indian context. Thus, we use 27-items scale to measure EA 2 (see Appendix 1 Table 2). Three-item scale and two-item scale, drawn from literature, has been used to measure intention to apply (Gomes and Neves, 2011; Roberson, Collins and Oreg, 2005; Taylor and Bergmann, 1987) and organization familiarity (Collins, 2007; Lievens, Hoye and Schreurs, 2005) respectively. Respondents were asked to provide their response on a seven-point scale from one (i.e., strongly disagree) to seven (i.e., strongly agree) for each firm in a sample set. Each respondent replied to only one sample set (i.e., four firms) and they, on an average, took about fifteen minutes to complete the questionnaire. The questionnaire was executed using the web services of surveymonkey.com. Reliability statistics (Cronbach's alpha) for EA scale was 0.972.
4.3 Respondents
For the purpose of the study, students pursuing their under graduates or master and people with work experience were found suitable. In this way, it was possible to capture the perception of candidate pool which is in their final year and will soon be entering the labour market. At the same time, a sample of work experience people were also considered who are operating in the labour market and already carry certain perception about the various firms, job market situation and the industry dynamics.
Total 78 students (48 male and 29 female) from various B-Schools responded to the standard questionnaire. The students were pursuing professional degree (MBA, PGDBM, BTech, etc); and 32 and 24 respondents were studying at undergraduate and post graduate level respectively while rest 21 respondents were already employed (but looking for job change) with a work experience of one year or more. The student respondents were in the final year of their studies, and had either started searching or planning to search for a job. Thus, profile of selected respondents made them appropriate prospective employees from the external job market.
DATA ANALYSIS
5.1 Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics, correlation, analysis of variance (ANNOVA), factor analysis and regression techniques have been used for the purpose of testing the hypothesis and analyzing the data. Table 5.1 shows descriptive statistics for the variable such as age, years of experience, salary, organizational familiarity, group preferences and intention to apply.
Table 5.1: Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Age
79
1.25
26.00
22.00
2.66
Exp
79
0.00
5.00
0.55
1.00
Sal
79
1.00
6.00
4.61
2.11
avgOrgFam
79
1.00
6.00
3.94
1.06
avgIntApp
79
0.96
6.33
3.89
1.00
avgGrpPrf
79
1.05
7.00
4.85
1.13
Table 5.2 displays mean and standard deviation scores for each firm of our sample set for all the EA factor, group preference, organizational familiarity and intention to apply scores.
Table 5.2: Mean and standard Deviation
Factors
American Express
Qualcomm
Marriott
EA1
3.45 (1.37)
3.70 (1.27)
3.01 (1.85)
3.30 (1.41)
EA2
3.62 (1.08)
3.70 (1.17)
3.10 (2.12)
3.53 (1.46)
EA3
3.13 (1.53)
3.57 (1.51)
2.70 (2.20)
3.43 (1.82)
EA4
3.21 (1.13)
3.58 (1.55)
2.71 (2.21)
3.40 (1.79)
EA5
3.93 (1.61)
3.74 (1.49)
5.26 (1.80)
4.48 (1.69)
EA6
3.19 (0.99)
3.52 (1.26)
2.51 (1.87)
3.31 (1.43)
EA7
3.60 (1.23)
3.89 (1.54)
3.04 (1.65)
3.54 (1.32)
EA8
3.36 (1.29)
3.65 (1.35)
3.30 (1.87)
3.48 (1.43)
EA9
3.28 (1.18)
3.54 (1.14)
3.62 (1.16)
3.62 (1.24)
EA10
3.36 (1.10)
3.53 (1.19)
2.78 (1.83)
3.69 (1.57)
EA11
2.89 (1.25)
4.03 (1.51)
3.04 (2.01)
3.45 (1.39)
EA12
3.23 (1.21)
3.49 (1.26)
2.87 (1.81)
3.50 (1.25)
EA13
3.21 (1.36)
3.64 (1.22)
2.73 (1.99)
3.27 (1.65)
EA14
3.10 (1.12)
3.89 (1.22)
2.86 (1.90)
3.73 (1.47)
EA15
3.38 (0.99)
3.54 (1.08)
2.99 (1.49)
3.59 (1.62)
EA16
3.44 (1.41)
3.78 (1.21)
3.45 (1.68)
3.92 (1.45)
EA17
3.45 (1.16)
3.70 (1.11)
3.07 (1.57)
3.66 (1.33)
EA18
3.25 (1.42)
3.44 (1.63)
2.90 (1.55)
3.43 (1.70)
EA19
3.13 (1.18)
3.13 (1.44)
3.19 (1.61)
3.28 (1.63)
EA20
2.92 (1.34)
2.99 (1.41)
3.13 (1.76)
3 (1.67)
EA21
3.28 (1.20)
3.25 (1.35)
3.51 (1.22)
3.86 (1.73)
EA22
3.45 (1.19)
3.18 (1.33)
3.12 (1.52)
3.76 (1.81)
EA23
2.78 (1.17)
3.54 (0.87)
3.27 (1.88)
3.71 (1.49)
EA24
3.12 (1.44)
3.27 (1.13)
3 (1.64)
3.18 (1.48)
EA25
3.52 (1.60)
3.52 (1.54)
2.74 (1.50)
3.17 (1.54)
EA26
3.31 (0.99)
4 (1.69)
3.32 (1.84)
2.97 (1.74)
EA27
3.22 (1.23)
3.26 (1.24)
3.88 (1.80)
3.81 (1.68)
avgIntApp
4.37 (1.56)
3.97 (1.57)
6.01 (1.43)
4.74 (1.79)
avgOrgFam
4.18 (1.73)
3.99 (1.56)
6.01 (1.41)
4.63 (1.75)
avgGrpPrf
3.23 (1.35)
3.97 (1.75)
2.69 (2.12)
3.03 (1.72)
Note: figure in parenthesis represents standard deviation
ANOVA was performed to examine the difference in mean scores of different applicant sets intention to apply in the four firms. The three applicants set that have been considered are graduates, post graduate and work experience people. ANNOVA was performed to understand the difference in intention to apply scores for each of these categories. Results (Table 5.3) show statistically non significant differences (P-value 0.279 and F value 1.298) in prospective applicant's intention to apply across three categories.
Table 5.3: Analysis of Variance: Intention to apply
Descriptive Statistics
One way ANNOVA
Sample Set
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Std. Error
Source of Variance
Sum of sqaure
df
Mean square
F
1
32
3.75
1.18
0.21
Between Groups
2.382
2
1.191
1.298
2
24
4.16
0.74
0.15
Within Groups
67.915
74
.918
3
21
3.93
0.75
0.16
Total
70.297
76
5.2 Factor analysis:
Four factor analyses were carried to identify number of unique dimensions of EA attributes for the firms in sample set; and factor scores obtained through this analysis were used to generate factor scores for each firm. Firm wise factor analysis is stated below:
Firm 1: American express:
The first table of output (table 5.4) indicates KMO index for sampling adequacy as 0.615 which is satisfactory. Also, we get significant value (p value .000) for Bartlett's test of sphericity.
Table 5.4: KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity
Approx. Chi-Square
Df
Sig.
The analysis produces six factors that have Eigen values more than 1 with total variance of 73.292 percent (Table 4.5). Looking at the proportions of variance, we see that the bulk of the variance attributable to the retained factors was explained by the first (general) factor (29.54 percent out of 73.292 percent) in the initial solution. But, using the Scree plot (Figure 5.1) which shows a sharp change in slop from the fourth factor, we can conclude that only four factors can be retained.
Figure 5.1: Scree Plot (American Express)
The next table (Table 5.6) of rotated component matrix presents the loadings of variables on the factors (or components) for the rotated solution. Here, the criteria of suppressing small coefficient with an absolute value of less than 0.6 have been used. Based on this analysis, we can observe that different EA attributes load on mainly four different factors which can be identified and defined on the basis of a pattern that we observe among the items. Thus, four different factors that can be defined here are: Culture value, Economic value, Development value and Application value.
Factor 1, 'Culture value' assesses the extent to which an individual is attracted to an employer that provides a working environment that is fun, happy, provides good collegial relationships and a team atmosphere. This factor has the maximum number of items loading on it. Factor 2, 'Economic Value' assesses the extent to which an individual is attracted to an employer that provides above-average salary, compensation package, job security and promotional opportunities. Factor 3, labeled 'Development value', assesses the extent to which an individual is attracted to an employer that provides recognition, self-worth and confidence, coupled with a career-enhancing experience and a springboard to future employment. Factor 4, 'Application value' assesses the extent to which an individual is attracted to an employer that provides an opportunity for the employee to apply what they have learned and to teach others, in an environment that is both customer orientated and humanitarian (Berthon, 2005).
Table 5.6: Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1
2
3
4
5
EA19AmExp
.904
EA21AmExp
.846
EA24AmExp
.804
EA23AmExp
.800
EA18AmExp
.746
EA11AmExp
.678
EA20AmExp
.674
EA26AmExp
.797
EA22AmExp
.764
EA25AmExp
.733
EA12AmExp
.731
EA14AmExp
.679
EA13AmExp
.734
EA7AmExp
.728
EA17AmExp
.670
EA9AmExp
.621
EA6AmExp
.612
EA8AmExp
.608
EA2AmExp
.601
EA10AmExp
.810
EA3AmExp
.763
EA4AmExp
.761
EA1AmExp
.638
EA16AmExp
.828
EA15AmExp
.661
EA5AmExp
EA27AmExp
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 9 iterations.
Firm 2: Qualcomm
The analysis indicates KMO index for sampling adequacy as 0.634 which is satisfactory. Also, we get significant value (p value .000) for Bartlett's test of sphericity.
The analysis (Table 5.5) produces seven factors that have Eigen values more than 1 with total variance of 76.817 percent. But, using the Scree plot (Figure 5.2) which shows a sharp change in slop from the fourth factor, we can conclude that only four factors can be retained.
Figure 5.2: Scree Plot (Qualcomm)
The next table (Table 5.7) of rotated component matrix presents the loadings of variables on the factors (or components) for the rotated solution. Here, the criteria of sup
