10 1 1 619 578 PDF
10 1 1 619 578 PDF
10 1 1 619 578 PDF
V. LALE TÜZÜNER
Abstract:
Brands are among firms’ most valuable assets; consequently brand management is a key
activity in many firms. Although firms commonly focus their branding efforts toward
developing product and corporate brands, branding can also be used in the area of human
resource management. The application of branding principles to human resource
management has been termed “employer branding”. Increasingly, firms are using
employer branding to attract recruits and assure that current employees are engaged in the
culture and the strategy of the firm. The employer brand puts forth an image showing the
organization a “good place to work.” The purpose of this paper is to determine the
components of employer attractiveness from the perspective of potential employees.
Throughout this study, the potential employee segments that are related to the
attractiveness components and their demographic characteristics are also examined. 475
respondents were given a questionnaire of employer attractiveness scale and demographic
questions. Final-year undergraduate Business Administration Faculty’s students at
Istanbul University were segmented according to two employer attractiveness components
clusters with each cluster acquiring its own demographic characteristics.
47
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
1. INTRODUCTION
48
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
49
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
the goods and services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them
from those of competitors”. Thus, the key to creating a brand, according to this
definition, is to choose a name, logo, symbol, package design, or other attribute
that identifies a product and distinguishes it from others (Keller K.L., 1998).
Brands are among firms’ most valuable assets; consequently brand management is
a key activity in many firms. Although firms commonly focus on their branding
efforts toward developing product and corporate brands, branding can also be used
in the area of human resource management (Backhaus, K.B., and Tikoo, S., 2004).
Employees can reinforce, strengthen, and even create a brand image for their
products and organizations (Miles, S.J. and Mangold G., 2004). Employee brand-
building behaviors may include courtesy, responsiveness, reliability, helpfulness,
and empathy, among others. Such behaviors have been shown to contribute to
consumers’ perceptions of service quality and may result in higher levels of
customer retention and loyalty (Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V., and Berry, L.,
1988).
The employer brand concept is borrowed from marketing. It helps
organizations focus on how they can identify themselves within their market as an
employer of current staff, as a potential employer to new recruits and as a supplier
or partner to customers (Harding, S., 2003). Employer branding is a relatively new
idea that has to be examined by Human Resources and Marketing academicians.
The term employer branding suggests the differentiation of a firms’ characteristics
as an employer from those of its competitors. The employment brand highlights
the unique aspects of the firm’s employment offerings or environment (Backhaus,
K.B., and Tikoo, S., 2004).
The application of branding principles to human resource management has
been termed “employer branding”. Increasingly, firms are using employer
branding to attract recruits and assure that current employees are engaged in the
culture and the strategy of the firm. Employer branding is defined as “a targeted,
long term strategy to manage the awareness and perceptions of employees, and
related stakeholders with regards to a particular firm” (Sullivan, J. 2004). The
employer brand puts forth an image showing the organization a “good place to
work” (Lloyd, S., 2002; Sullivan, J. 2004). Many firms have developed formal
employer branding or are interested in developing such a program ((The)
Conference Board, 2001).
Employer branding, or employer brand management, involves internally
and externally promoting a clear view of what makes a firm different and desirable
as an employer (Backhaus, K.B., and Tikoo, S., 2004; Cable, D.M., and Turban,
D.B., 2001). Employer branding is essentially a three step process. First, a firm
develops a concept of the particular value it offers to prospective and current
employees. This value proposition provides the central message that is conveyed
by the employer brand. It is of key importance that this value proposition derives
from a thorough audit of the characteristics that make firm a great place to work.
Once the value proposition determined, the second step in employer branding
consists of externally marketing this value proposition to attract the targeted
applicant population. The third step of employer branding involves carrying the
50
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
brand “promise” made to recruits into the firm and incorporating it as part of the
organizational culture. In other words, this last step consists of internally
marketing the employer brand (Lievens, F., 2007).
Employer brands are developed to be consistent with the firm’s product
and corporate brand, but there are also two key differences. One, the employer
brand is employment specific, characterizing the firm’s identity as an employer.
Two, it is directed at both internal and external audiences whereas product and
corporate branding efforts are primarily directed an external audience. In some
cases, the employer branding process can be rolled together with the product and
corporate brand campaign (Backhaus, K.B., and Tikoo, S., 2004).
External marketing of the employer brand establishes the firm as an
employer of choice and thereby enables it to attract the best possible workers. The
assumption is that the distinctiveness of the brand allows the firm to acquire
distinctive human capital. Further, once recruits have been attracted by the brand,
they develop a set of assumptions about employment with the firm that they will
carry into the firm, thereby supporting the firm’s values and enhancing their
commitment to the firm (Backhaus, K.B., and Tikoo, S., 2004).
Employer attractiveness is defined as the envisioned benefits that a
potential employee sees in working for a specific organization. It constitutes an
important concept in knowledge-intensive contexts where attracting employees
with superior skills and knowledge comprises a primary source of competitive
advantage. The more attractive an employer is perceived to be by potential
employees, the stronger that particular organization's employer brand equity
(Berthon, P., and Ewing M., Hah, L.L., 2005).
3. METHODOLOGY
Over the past few years, the concept of employment branding has entered
in the lexicon of HR specialists and particularly consultants (Martin G., Beaumont
P., Doig R., and Pate J., 2005). Employer and employee branding is an important
activity that a modern HR department should focus for the organization to be
competitive and help to ensure that HR function becomes more of a strategic force
in a company’s business activities (Edwards M. R., 2005). Employer branding
focuses on how the company is seen by current and potential employees with the
aim of “winning the war on talent” (Ulrich D., 1997). This has important
implications for how HR departments recruit and retain staff (Edwards M. R.,
2005). An employer brand has been defined as the “company’s image as seen
through the eyes of its associates and potential hires” and is intimately linked to the
“employment experience” of “what it is like to work at a company, including
tangibles such as salary and intangibles such as company’s culture and values”
(Ruch W., 2002). Although employer branding has become a popular topic in the
HR practitioner literature, empirical research is still relatively scarce. A first group
of studies focused on the first step in “employer branding”. Generally, these
51
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
I. Factor
Attractiveness General/ I. SEGMENT
Components Integrated CHALLENGERS
of Firms in Expectations
Demographic Employer
Characteristics Branding
Concept II. Factor
Competitive
Expectations II. SEGMENT
INTEGRATERS
52
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
The questionnaires were distributed during the final exam period and answered by
the students who are taking the exams, therefore 475 questionnaires were collected.
The population which consists of the final year students in the Faculty of Business
Administration would be in the labour market soon, so they are the prime
candidates of the employer branding activities.
The data was analyzed using SPSS for Windows 15.0 statistical package.
The first analysis focused on descriptive statistics and instrumental reliability, and
then the structure of the model was considered. Principle factor analysis was used
for determining the components of potential employees’ expectations in employer
attractiveness. Potential employee segments in relation to their expectations about
employer attractiveness dimensions were determined by k- means cluster analysis.
In order to examine demographic differences (age, gender, socio- cultural
variables) between potential employee segments, chi-square analyses were also
performed.
53
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
54
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
55
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
For testing the second hypothesis of the study, “H2: Potential employees
are clustered differently in relation to their employer attractiveness dimensions’
expectations,” a k-means cluster analysis was performed. To eliminate systematic
error for determining cluster numbers in k-means method, several attempts has
been made in relation to k numbers and finally it was decided to select the k
number as two. With the use of the selected k number, the appropriate findings for
interpreting the data as well as for clustering have been achieved. As shown in
table 3, from a total of 475 respondents, 207 of them were placed in the first
cluster, and 177 in the second. In table 3, F values in the content of cluster analysis,
significance levels and final cluster centers can also be seen. The variables that
were involved in cluster analysis were evaluated at α = 0,005. According to the
results of the analysis, each cluster represents significant differences from
statistical point of view.
As final cluster centers are interpreted in table 3, respondents in the first
cluster reach the highest value for the second factor titled as competitiveness factor
while their lowest score is in the first factor titled as integrated employer branding
factor. Therefore, the name “challengers” was given to the first cluster.
The respondents in the second cluster are the lowest in the competitiveness
factor. They reach the highest value for integrated employer branding factor. The
name “integrators” was given to the second cluster according to their expectation
factor.
CLUSTER ANALYSIS
ANOVA
Final Cluster Centers
1 Cluster 2 Cluster
Sig.. F COMPONENTS
CHALLENGERS INTEGRATERS
“Integrated Employer
,000 151,383 -,49199 ,57538
Branding”
,000 222,530 “Competitiveness” ,56030 -,65527
Number of Cases in each Cluster 1 Segment 2 Segment
Valid: 384 Missing: 91 207 177
Table. 3 Final Cluster Centers, Number of Cases in Each Cluster and ANOVA
56
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
By examining all of these findings, the respondents in the first cluster can
be named as “challenger” ones while the second cluster can be titled as
“integrators.” Therefore, it can be concluded that "H2: Potential employees are
clustered differently in relation to their employer attractiveness dimensions’
expectations" is accepted.
5. CONCLUSION
57
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
letters, data (Dessler G., 2005). Thus, is a really customer- oriented approach. For
employers, workplace flexibility can be a key strategic factor in attracting and
retaining the most talented employees (Mondy W. R., Noe R.M., and Premeaux S.
R., 2002). In 2006, 44 percent of Intel’s staff regularly worked from home
(Koeppel G., 2005). In the long- term telecommuting arrangements can create
competitive advantage for the company over its competitors.
The second cluster which seems to be distributed by genders equally,
relatively more women respondents, paying attention to integrated employer
branding. As mentioned earlier, the respondents in this cluster want to work in a
non-competitive work environment, however in a more brand- oriented working
place. The place that they want to work in should create a value for the potential
applicants. In other words they want to see the relation between the communicated
brand identity and employer brand identity.
58
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
should be careful of creating value proposition for its brand/brands and transfer it
to employees and identifying potential employees’ requirements and their
characteristics. Finally they should keep track of what their competitors offer in
other words, benchmarking.
For further research we have some suggestions to the academicians and
practitioners who are interested in the employer branding concept. In this study
final year students expectations regarding employer attractiveness are examined.
In another research the longitudinal study of the perceptions of final-year students
before and after entering the workforce would help in determining their perceptions
of employer attractiveness.
As it is mentioned in the paper, this research has been conducted with the
potential employees who are not part of the labour market yet. So this study was
focused on the first step of employer branding. The third step of employer
branding involves carrying the brand “promise” made to recruits into the firm. In
other words, this last step consists of internally marketing the employer brand
(Lievens, F., 2007). Further studies concentrate on the current employees in the
context of internal marketing.
Another related study could be the link between corporate social
responsibility and branding activities. The studies show that new graduates are
becoming increasingly concerned about a company’s values and how socially
responsible they are when considering where to work (Edwards M. R., 2005;
Backhaus, K. B., Stone, B. A., and Heiner, K., 2002).
Finally, several authors highlight the importance employer branding in the
context of human resource management and marketing. The aim of the scholars
and practitioners should be finding the integration points of these two disciplines in
companies.
7. REFERENCES
59
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
60
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
61
JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS JUNE 2009
Schneider B., Smith D.B.,Taylor S., and Fleenor J. (1998). “Personality and
Organizations: A Test for Homogeneity of Personality Hypothesis”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 83, pp. 462- 470.
Sullivan, J. 2004, “Eight Elements of a Successful Employment Brand”, ER Daily,
23 February, available at:
www.erexchange.com/articles/db/52CB45FDADFAA4CD2BBC366659E26892A.
asp = April 14, 2004 cited in Backhaus, K.B., and Tikoo, S. (2004),
“Conceptualizing and Researching Employer Branding”, Career Development
International, Vol. 9, No.4/5, pp.501-517.
(The) Conference Board, (2001), Engaging Employees Through Your Brand. The
Conference Board, New York, NY cited in Backhaus, K.B., and Tikoo, S. (2004),
“Conceptualizing and Researching Employer Branding”, Career Development
International, Vol. 9, No.4/5, pp.501-517; Backhaus K. (2004), “An Exploration of
Corporate Recruitment Descriptions on Monster.Com”, Journal of Business
Communication, Vol.41, No 2, April, pp. 115-136.
Thorne K. (2004), “ What’s In a Name?” Personnel Today, November 30, 2004,
p.18.
Thorne K. (2007), “Employer Branding in Practice Opinion Paper”, February,
pp.1-13.http://www.hda.co.uk/corporate/hda-overview/documents/hda-
employerbranding-KayeThornefeb07.pdf= 21 July, 2008.
Ulrich D. (1997), Human Resource Champions: The Next Agenda For Adding
Value and Delivering Results, Harward Business School Press, Boston, MA.
62