Baran Copuroglu
Employer Branding: The Stronger, The Attractive
Baran Copuroglu
egi13bco@student.lu.se
Abstract: Employer branding process that creates the best match possible between the employer and the
employee, leads to a business satisfaction and a person-organization fit. Not surprisingly, an efficient
employer branding strategy also decreases the labour turnover rate within the company and helps to retain
the talent. Naturally, the specified situation is desired by the employer and by the potential employee. In
order to achieve such condition, companies should get their employer brands stronger, in order to attract
the perfect match talents. In this particular master thesis, why the attraction by the potential employees is
increased, given a strong employer brand that is supplied by the employer and what makes the
organization attractive that leads to a business satisfaction is explained.
Key words: Employer Branding, Attraction, Retention, Labour Market.
EKHM51
Master thesis (15 credits ECTS)
June 2014
Supervisor: Michaela Trippl
Examiner: Jerker Moodysson
Website www.ehl.lu.se
1
Baran Copuroglu
Employer Branding: The Stronger, The Attractive
Table Of Contents
1) Introduction Of The Case………………………………………..………………………..3
a. The Research Questions………………………………………………………...5
2) Aim & Justification………………………………………………………….…………….…6
3) Research Design, Methodology & Data…………….…………….……………......6
a. Justification Of The Method…………….…………….…………….………...8
b. Method Limitations……………….…………….…………….…………………..8
4) Expected Benefits…………….…………….…………….…………….…………….……...8
5) Contribution…………….…………….…………….…………….…………….……………...9
6) Previous Research & Theoretical Foundation of Employer Branding……..10
a. The Employer Brand Associations…………….…………….…………..14
b. The Psychological Contract…………….…………….…………….……….23
c. The 5 Values…………….…………….…………….…………….………………..23
7) Analysis…………….…………….…………….…………….…………….…………………..25
a. The Case of PwC…………………………………………………………………...28
8) Conclusion…………….…………….…………….…………….…………….……………....31
9) References…………….…………….…………….…………….…………….………………34
a. Electronic References………………………………….………………………36
2
Baran Copuroglu
1) Introduction Of The Case
Labour market has always been one of the vital cases for the economy, and for
the many parties that are involved in the process. Those interactions are
triggering, activating and fostering the economical enterprises for good. But
then, ‘’Why not make it better?’’ one could ask. A healthier and determined
interactions in the labour market that satisfies both of the parties the best which
leads to a business satisfaction. For some minor labour population, it might not
make a difference where they are working or for who, under what organization
or for which employer (Even though every potential employee has a perception
on the employer´s brand). But for our dependent population, it matters: The
labour that have a clear insight what they want to do and which employer’s
identity they will carry from then on. Have you ever wondered why everybody
has a preference between the companies? What determines it? What triggers us
to apply and wish for our number one choice? Is it a coincidence that most of the
people would love to work in a company that has a strong employer brand? Such
as Google for example. In this master’s thesis, I will be conducting a research
with the approach on the relationship between the strength of the employer
brand and the attraction that is supplied by the potential employees. What is
more, why the companies with a strong employer branding strategy are
successful when it comes to retaining the talented employees within their
company and have a small labour turnover rate.
Most of the people start their college life with the dream of a great career, if they
do not want to end up being an employer. At the beginning, our preferences,
attractions, recognition and wishes for the employers might be narrow or be
‘wrong choices’. But the more we learn and the more we know about the labour
market, our preferences, recognition and consideration for the employers might
change dramatically. But have you ever wondered why do they change over time
so dramatically? That is due to the fact that our perception for the employers are
changing over time according to their employer branding strategies and how we
hear of them from other people or from the employer itself. As it will be
discussed in the thesis later, we also develop an employer brand image for the
3
Baran Copuroglu
recognized employers and these will get stronger or weaker over time. In my
opinion, the reason that in the first times in the university, we do not have a clear
insight about the labour market and most of us have not considered an employer
yet. We recognize whichever company would try to reach us via marketing
themselves. In the senior years, we learn not to recognize all the potential
employees and we decrease the list by considering several, and then what
happens next is that we get the employer of choice.
Naturally, the companies would want to hire the best employee possible that is
available in the labour market, in their industry. Apart from extraordinary
occasions, without a strong employer branding strategy, the companies do not
expect the talents to beg the companies to recruit them. In order to achieve the
will, they need to increase their recognition and consideration in the eyes of the
talented potential employees. Here, employer branding takes place to achieve
the perfect employee-employer match possible.
What is Employer Branding? UNIVERSUM describes it as:
“Employer branding is the process of promoting a company, or an organization, as
the employer-of-choice to a desired target group, one which a company needs and
wants to recruit and retain. The process facilitates the company’s ability in
attracting, recruiting and retaining ideal employees – referred to as Top Talent in
recruitment – and helps secure the achievement of the company’s business
plan”(www.universumglobal.com)
Every employer has an employer brand, which affects the talents to choose
between them. It is common that they might not be aware of the fact that they
own one, but all has one. Similarly every potential employee has more or less an
idea which employer they feel they want to work for and it makes sense to claim
that the stronger the employer brand, the more attractive the employer is for the
potential employees. Naturally, the employers would want the hire the best
option they can and they have to know that it is up to them to increase their
chances, considering the employer branding perspective. By having a stronger
employer brand, they become more and more attractive in the labour market
4
Baran Copuroglu
and as a result, the quality and the quantity of the applicants are increasing. So,
there is a correlation between the employer brand, attraction and the quality and
quantity of the applicants. What is more, an equal important factor is to retain
the talented employee in the company after hiring for the maximum possible
time. By having a stronger employer brand, it is also satisfying the situation of
the employee to stay in the company. Then, the case would show that every
employer would want this to take place, i.e. they want to make their employer
brand stronger. But how so?
The Research Questions
The questions that will be discussed in the research will be varied from why the
stronger, the more attractive to why the stronger, the less labour turnover. In
order to clearly take a look, I will be investigating the two closely related
questions in the labour market with an employer branding (strategy)
perspective.

Why are the employers with stronger employer brands, more attractive
for the potential employees?

Why are the employers with stronger employer brands, more successful
when it comes to retention of the employees within their company?
The reason for choosing such case and mentioned questions was to achieve a
deeper understanding in the topic of employer branding and to clarify the points
that a regular positive ‘idea’ of the company, might not be a coincidence. We tend
to think that of course, a strong brand would be ´consumed´ more and in this
situation, a strong employer branded firm would be more attractive. But what I
wanted here is to see the reason behind it. Why so? Why do we want to work for
the stronger brands? The questions will be answered by introducing the
overview of the process and what are the companies supplying physically and
psychologically to attract and retain.
5
Baran Copuroglu
2) Aim & Justification:
Since it is a highly labour market related research, I believe was well in-line with
the master programme I have been studying. One of my aims is to show how a
perfect match between the employer and the employee would lead to a business
satisfaction with a more enjoyable, satisfactory and efficient working
atmosphere for the both parties.
It is a field that did not benefit much from the literature and not a well-known
topic, which makes me even more excited to make it heard and considered more.
So this constructs another aim for me to help it to be more popular. The
resources were limited and did not have dramatically different perspectives and
mostly re-processing of one another. From what I have experienced reading and
evaluating the literature, I saw that there is not enough or deeper explanations /
investigations on why a stronger employer brand would lead to a higher
attraction. I also aim to clarify that, it does not make a company’s employer
brand stronger if the best people are working there but if an employer’s brand is
strong, then the best employees would like to be employed there. What is more,
I also would like to live and work in a well employee-organization fit. Therefore,
another aim of the paper would be encouraging the employer’s to make an effort
to process a relevant employer branding strategy for a business satisfaction with
better outcomes for the both parties.
Obviously apart from the initial aims, I am aiming to answer the questions of
“why are the employers with stronger employer brands, more attractive for the
potential employees?” and “why are they more successful when it comes to
retention of the employees within their company? “
3) Research Design, Methodology & Data:
The research will be a conducted as a qualitative and an exploratory /
descriptive research. The topic is an appealing field of research for me and it is
6
Baran Copuroglu
resulting with a qualitative research in the end due to specialties of the topic, my
interest areas, the research questions and my style of approach
When it comes to the methodology, I will be conducting my research with the
help of ‘document analysis as a qualitative research method’. As the research
will not host empirical studies of my own, it will construct the suitable base for it,
in my opinion. Document analysis could be defined as a set of processes for
investigating, analyzing, reviewing and evaluating of the documents. Bowen
(2009) suggests that the documents could be in various forms of
‘’advertisements; agendas, attendance registers, and minutes of meetings;
manuals; background papers; books and brochures; diaries and journals; event
programs (i.e., printed outlines); letters and memoranda; maps and charts;
newspapers (clippings/articles); press releases; program proposals, application
forms, and summaries; radio and television program scripts; organizational or
institutional reports; survey data; and various public records.’’(P. 27, 28)
My data will mostly come from the academic articles that I will review in order to
answer my question and assumptions of how companies with stronger employer
brand value / equity is more attractive and why they could retain the qualified
employees longer. The data will be both from electronic and printed material.
Other means than the literature review of the academic articles will be from the
company pages and their publications in their web sites as well as the white
papers and other short or long articles that the employer branding firms use in
their web sites as well as newsletters/daily buzz, their social media pages etc.
After the theoretical part shows us ‘how’s and ‘why’s, I will relate the process to
the research aim in order to answer ‘why the stronger employer brand
value/equity, the more attractive the company is’ concept. Even though the
definitions of the employer branding process could be self-explanatory, I aim to
clarify and add more about the values that are proposed to make it more
attractive. As explained, it would not be the case to answer it with a one, clear
sentence but it is planned to give the overview and have a deeper understanding
in the process to come to a solution. Namely, it is the long term collaborations
7
Baran Copuroglu
and combinations of different benefits, perceptions and psychological matters
are the factors that increases the attraction and retention.
a) Justification of the method
When it comes to the justification why I choose this method, one could tell that
besides it is the most relevant and effective method, I would like to list the
advantages that Bowen (2009) stated too. I have said that it was an effective
method. It is due to the fact that considering the short time interval for the
research, document analysis is more of a time saver and one selects the data
instead of collecting it. What is more, the documents and articles are public and
could be reached and used needless of the author’s consent. In addition to being
easily obtained, it is a very cost-effective method as well. Bowen (2009)
introduces another advantage of the document analysis method that the process
of the research does not affect the documents or articles, meaning that while
conducting the research, data or findings cannot change to prove us wrong.
b) Method Limitations:
One of the concerns that is related to the method is that the documents / articles
are written to investigate another issue than the research we would like to
conduct or the questions we would like to answer. Therefore, there might be
insufficient data in the documents for our research. Yin (1994) also suggests that
there could be problems to retrieve or access the documents as they might have
been blocked. Yin also suggests that the incomplete collection of the documents
could lead to bias in the selections. I also believe reviewing as much documents
as one can is vital in order to make a deep source criticism and avoid biases. But
all in all, in order to clarify, Bowen states that they are just flaws rather than
huge disadvantages and that it is such an advantageous method that it outweighs
the limitations.
4) Expected Benefits
The expected benefits of my research would encourage the companies to make
efforts to increase their employer brand values in order to get more applications
8
Baran Copuroglu
in quality and quantity. (By own research or getting consultancy from employer
branding consultancy companies) This could lead to more business efficiency for
the both parties and result with better outcomes since both the employer and the
employee will be satisfied with what they are doing and what is happening. It
seems to be quite applicable to all sectors, firms and organizations, which makes
it even more appealing (Every employer, has a brand!). A happier, more satisfied
and a more efficient environment in many sectors with better outcomes could be
something that the economies would also want. Another expectation is to make
the employer branding concept benefit from the branding and marketing
literature more, as it has not enjoyed from it vastly and also with different
perspectives.
5) Contribution:
The contribution that I expect to make will be looking at the process of employer
branding from a different perspective: The stronger, the attractive. While the
literature on the topic, states the fact, I will be trying to contribute by
explaining it, relying on the literature. Meanwhile, stressing on the point that a
strong employer branding strategy leads to attraction and that attraction does
not mean itself that a company has a strong employer brand. What I suggest and
propose here is that, the strong employer branding strategy (therefore a strong
employer brand) creates the attraction and attention from the talents. But it
would not mean that an attractive company for the potential employees has a
strong employer branding strategy (or a strong employer brand) due to the fact
that attraction does not create a strong employer brand. Namely, attraction
is caused by the employer brand, but a strong employer brand is not caused by
the attraction.
Counting on the previous research, will try to illustrate why a strong strategy
makes them attractive and not the other way around. As the method is a
document analysis as a qualitative research method, grabbing what the previous
research signaled and trying to explain my point over them would be my
strategy for the contribution of the thesis. What is more, it will contribute to the
9
Baran Copuroglu
understanding of the fact that it is not a coincidence that we, or potential
employees are attracted to the same top employers, as known as the ones with a
strong employer brand.
A suggestion for further research and how the academia could benefit more from
the thesis would be to investigate if and how having a perfect employee –
employer match would affect the firm growth. The business satisfaction between
the talent and the employer which decreases the labour turnover rate and grants
efficiency would mean a much better performance in medium – long term. This
could be relied on the human capital – firm growth theory in order to come with
an answer. What is more, imagining an economy where all the pieces are in the
right place and working in the field that they are the best in, working in the
company that they want the most would be something the macro economies
would like to have, as stated.
6) Previous Research & Theoretical Foundation of Employer Branding
An earlier approach to the field of employer branding has been conducted by
Backhaus and Tikoo (2004). They have hosted a great insight for the process and
future of the field (beginning from the date they published, and even from now
on) as many other authors of articles and researches quoted them, used their
material and presented us what they contributed, developed and got benefit of it.
It was quite surprising in my research process that I have seen many quotations
from their studies, which actually led me to give more importance and use more
from their material as it has a high reliability, popularity and ‘experience’. They
have defined the term of employer branding in many ways and perspectives
which will help us to grab the topic in a better way and from different
perspectives. In a very short manner, they have suggested that the branding
principles and their application to the HRM (Human Resource Management) is
what employer branding term is all about. (501)
Sullivan, (2004) was another very important author when it comes to our topic.
He had great works on the topic and supplied quality information to the
10
Baran Copuroglu
literature in my opinion. How he defined the term employer branding might
seem on a different perspective but if we look closely we could see how closely
related all the definitions and perspectives are. He is suggesting that it is a long
term strategy, in order to increase the awareness and perceptions of the
potential talents or employees (as well as all the stakeholders that are related to
a firm). (Backhaus & Tikoo page 501)
A very important finding to answer the thesis questions from the Conference
Board Report on employer branding (conference board, 2001) is that the
organizations figured out that a good and effective employer brand causes a
competitive advantage. It is stated that it is due to the fact that it helps the
employees to internalize the company values and in the end increases the talent
/ employee retention in the company, as well as attracting. (Backhaus & Tikoo p
501)
Even though the topic of employer branding does not have a vast and broad
literature in the branding agenda as mentioned, there are several articles and
investigations that are explaining the concept. Most of the literature that I will
review will be about some explanatory articles on the topic and I will try to select
the right date to relate and use to serve answer my research questions.
The demand for being positively distinguished in the eyes of the potential
employees from the competitors is of course a mission for the employers. They
need to be aware of the fact that apart from the improvements in their products
and their corporate brand, they have to introduce the branding in their human
resource management, namely the employer branding. Backhaus and Tikoo
(2004) describes that the employer branding is a 3-step process. Which consists
of a proposition and internal & external parts.
1) Employer Value Proposition (EVP): First step is to develop a value what
the employer is offering and will offer to the potential and current
employees & it is a ‘central message’ of the employer brand showing that
it is the place to work. (“Employer Value Proposition is a unique set of
11
Baran Copuroglu
offerings, associations and values that will positively influence the most
suitable target candidates to choose an employer.” (Carlo Duraturo))
2) Marketing: The second step of the process is the process of marketing
and ‘spreading the word’ for the defined employer value proposition step
in order to attract and get attention from the potential / prospective
talented employees and to increase the quality and quantity of the
applicants. (External Marketing)
3) Promise Keeping: The third and the last step of the employer branding
process is to show that the employer value proposition was not only a
proposition. Incorporating the proposition and blending it in with the
working and organization culture is an important step to show they have
made the right choice. (Internal Marketing)
Tuzuner and Yuksel (2009) states that:
“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.”
(P. 58)
According to Backhaus and Tikoo (2004) the assumption of the practice of
employer branding is that the human capital brings value to the firm. Also,
Priem and Butler (2001) suggest that the human capital works as a vital resource
and that creates a competitive advantage. Furthermore, when it comes to the
brand equity, the brand equity is described as sets of assets and liabilities
connected to a brand which are adding to or subtracting from the firm’s product
or service value. (Aaker, 1991) But in our case of the employer brand, Backhaus
and Tikoo (2004) suggests that “In terms of employer branding, brand equity
applies to the effect of brand knowledge on potential and existing employees of
the firm. Employer brand equity propels potential applicants to apply. Further,
employer brand equity should encourage existing employees to stay with and
support the company” (P. 505)
12
Baran Copuroglu
Priem and Buttler (2001) states, it is proven that human capital acts as a vital
resource that is leading to a competitive advantage. This is, so to speak, “The
practice of employer branding is predicted on the assumption that human capital
brings value to the firm, and through skillful investments in human capital, firm
performance can be enhanced.” (Backhaus and Tikoo, 2001)
Another assumption that serves to answer the research questions is about the
external marketing part of the process. It is suggested that the external
marketing process of the employer branding process grants the employer, to be
the employer of choice. By this, it is assumed that there is a correlation between
the distinctiveness of the brand and acquiring distinctive human capital, namely
making the employer more attractive for the talents. What is more, as Backhaus
and Tikoo (2004) presents, after the empoyees / recruits are attracted to the
brand of the employer, they also start to have their own assumptions that they
will carry into the company so they would be backing the firm’s own values and
enhances their commitment to the particular firm.
Aaker (1991) presents the term brand equity as “a set of brand assets and
liabilities linked to a brand that add to or subtract from the value provided by a
product or service to a firm and / or to that firm’s customers” We can also take it
as a definition in employer branding field. Here, Backhaus and Tikoo (2004)
contributes to the brand equity in terms of employer branding by stating that the
brand equity (in employer branding) applies to the effect of the firm’s brand
knowledge on the existing or new (potential) employees and employer brand
equity gets them to apply to the firm. What is more, and is important for our
other question (retention) is that the employer brand equity also encourages the
employees that are already working there to be retained within the company and
support the company.
Before we get to the point of analyzing the findings, the social identity theory
has a lot to offer in terms of backing the linkage that is between the employer
brand and the attraction. Tayfel (1982) states that the theory itself assumes that
13
Baran Copuroglu
the people develop their own self – concept from the membership in some social
groups. I will be talking about the social identity in the following sections.
a) The Employer Brand Associations
This section is investigating what are the employer brand associations and how
they are affecting to overall perspective for the firm’s brand value, by also
introducing the brand image, functional versus symbolic benefits in the eyes of
the talents. Experiencing the bigger picture of the associations are also playing a
vital role in terms of answering the research questions and encouraging me to
think deeper in the understanding of the topic.
Firstly, I would like to introduce the term ‘brand association’ in regular branding
terms and I see fit that consulting Aaker (1991) would be a great choice since he
explained it quite short and understandable regarding the others. Basically
Aaker suggests that the brand associations are ‘whatever it comes’ to our
(consumers’) minds when we see / hear of a brand. (Thoughts and ideas)
Backhaus & Tikoo (2004) comments about it that the brand image is
determined by the brand associations. Speaking of the brand image, I see fit to
expand it a bit with the help of functional versus symbolic benefits.
To start with, and to have a better understanding of the brand image, it is
important to begin with the benefit terms and their explanations. They play an
extremely important role in understanding what makes an employer, an
employer of choice and why they are attractive in the eyes of the (potential and
current) employees. The two analogous terms (functional and symbolic) defines
the employer brand image. It is expressed that the functional benefits of the
employer brand are consisted of the units of the employment, which are enticing
and wanted in objective manners such as the high salaries, corporate benefits &
corporate perks, leave allowances, a company car, fuel and so many other
elements that are related to this kind of understanding. When we come to the
symbolic benefits, (which might differ from person to person) one can easily tell
how they differ by saying that they refer to perceptions on firm’s prestige, as
14
Baran Copuroglu
well as the social approval. Those facts make the potential employees
automatically imagine that they would love to work for that specific firm.
Backhaus and Tikoo (2004) has a great paragraph that is giving insights on the
benefits:
“Product related attributes describe the product in objective and tangible terms
and relate to functional benefits that are derived from using a product or service.
Non product related attributes represent consumers’ mental imagery and
inferences about a product rather than what they think the product does or has
and correspond to the symbolic benefits that consumers seek to fulfill their social
approval and personal expression needs” ( Page, 505)
In terms of recruitment process, it also works in a similar way. If we look at it, we
could see that in the recruitment process, the attraction from the applicants
would be raised by the wanted employee related attributes that they believe that
the specific firm has and has to offer. What is more, the potential applicants has
already a `ranking´ in their minds. So, at the end it mostly leads to the automatic
elimination of the companies with weak employer brands in their mind.
We can conclude the section with reminding that we have said that the brand
associations are the determinants of the brand image. Keller (1993) suggests
that the brand image is “an amalgamation of the perceptions” which are linked to
the product / non-product related elements. What is more, he adds to the
description, stating that the functional and symbolic benefits, which are in the
heart of the brand associations, are also another key factors for the brand image.
The more this paper is getting self-explanatory, the more we are close to the
answers it reveals, without doubt the attractive companies are having the perfect
balance within the symbolic and functional benefits, as well as the fact that it
triggers their boost in the employer brand value and the number of applicants.
Even though the whole picture looks like a ‘the chicken and the egg’ problem, one
could see that it is a step by step process, initially beginning from the companies.
15
Baran Copuroglu
Figure 1: Employer Branding Framework
(Source: Backhaus and Tikoo 2004, page 505)
Figure 1 is a great framework that I ran into many times in many different
articles and papers while I was preparing this thesis. Indeed, thinking myself, it is
not a coincidence that it is used quite often. The employer branding network
figure shows the overview of the process in an understandable and a short
manner, as the old German dictum says “mastery lies in limitation”.
I have indicated prior that the employer brand is developed by the brand
associations. So here in the figure above, one could see that the potential
employees are developing an image of the employer brand via the employer
brand associations. In order to take it from the beginning, the employer brand
associations are actually the outcomes of the specific firm’s employer branding
activities and process. One could clarify here that employer’s will to increase /
strengthen their employer brands, will be followed by the employer brand
associations’ development and the development of the image. In which, as we
could see from the figure, finalized by the employer attraction. I believe this
point is one of the most vital parts of the master’s thesis in terms of answering
the research question as the firm’s activities are triggering it and ends up with
being more distinctive and attractive. It is fortunate that ‘the chicken and the egg’
problem is getting clearer as we proceed in the process.
16
Baran Copuroglu
Telling more about the figure, one could tell that the upper line is indicating the
phase of attraction, where they second (lower) straight line illustrates us the
retention process. We can start with the attraction line by stating the employer
brand associations that I have explained above in the very last paragraphs. We
know now, that by the developed employer brand associations, an employer
image is generated in the minds of the potential employees. Finally, it leads to the
attraction. The stronger, the attractive. The second line below shows us the
retention, loyalty and productivity process. The organization identity and the
organization culture that is developed by the employer branding process and
this great functional and psychological experiences are leading to the loyalty of
the employee. Being happy and satisfied in what they do, of course, will lead to
the productivity of the employee and a win-win situation for the employer and
the employee. What is more, the loyal and satisfied employees would serve as
another source of spreading the image of the company to the other talents in the
labour market.
“As prospective employees also develop employer brand associations based on
information sources that are not employer controlled, effective employer branding
takes a proactive approach by identifying desired brand associations and then
striving to develop these associations.” (Backhaus & Tikoo, Page. 505-506)
We have now seen that the role of the employer brand image is important in the
attraction process. There is also another approach by Byrne and Neuman (1992)
which, states that the image’s role in attracting is actually related to the
similarity attraction and / or person – organization fit. By looking at Cable
and Judge’s works (1996, 1997), it is suggested that the employer brand image is
compared by the potential talents, potential employees and applicants with their
own set of values, wishes, needs and personalities. What we can actually tell
from here is that if the there is a great “match” between the values of the two
parties (the potential employee and the firm itself), then it would mean that (in
the most cases) the potential employee would be more attracted to that specific
firm.
17
Baran Copuroglu
During the “Previous Research & Theoretical Foundation of Employer Branding”
section, I have indicated how the social identity theory and employer branding
are related with each other and how it supports the linkage between the
attraction from potential employees and the employer brand image. As a short
reminder, the social identity theory was suggesting that the membership in some
social groups is making people derive an own self - concept. What is more,
Underwood, et. al. (2001) states that the self-concept is contributed by the
reputation of the social group. But then, here, one could ask that “So does not it
have a relation with the employer branding process if the talents are developing
and matching their own values and the closer the value the more attracted they
are?” The answer is: It does have a relation. Backhaus and Tikoo (2004) explains
the situation with the increasing awareness approach. They suggest that once the
employer brand awareness increase, the consumer (potential employee in our
case) is developing an identification with the employer brand. They indicate that
if the perception of the brand is positively high, then the potential employee
becomes better identified with the product (firm).
“As social identity theory suggests, in the end, the consumer (potential employee)
purchases the brand (firm) because of the positive self-concept that results from
feeling membership with the brand. In a similar manner, as potential employees
find positive aspects of the employer image, they are more likely to identify with the
brand, and will more likely choose to seek membership whit the organization for
the sense of heightened self – image that membership promises.” (Page 506)
When we consider the specific fields of employment one could tell that, in the
similar / same industries and related sectors, there might be many employers
with similar or same benefits of image. Besides the fact that it is, being totally
right, I see fit to state that that is where employer branding would take place.
Yes, in the same industry, job related inputs are quite similar and the employers
find it quite hard to step up and differentiate themselves from their competitors,
(As employers) tells Livens and Highhouse (2003). They further suggest that in
an occasion like this, in order to develop a fine employer image, the importance
18
Baran Copuroglu
of effective employer branding strategies to convey the symbolic benefits is
very high. Here, Lievens and Highhouse (2003) had a great explanation over the
symbolic benefits’ power. They state that the symbolic attributes of the employer
has an additional value on the functional benefits such as remuneration and
‘corporate perks’ when it comes to explaining the firm’s perceived attractiveness
to be employed there.
What we have to take into consideration here is that the organization that
employs, starts to promote about how is the employment experience is in their
organization, in the recruitment phase (before the actual recruitment) These
could be the statements that are about the career improvements and other
opportunities. Therefore, these messages are intended to raise attraction from
the right and best possible candidates. One also should not forget about the
importance of the realistic messages / statements, to be discussed during the
following section.
After explaining the process of developing, one could tell that it might be easy for
employers to develop a message and an image, promise the perfect symbolic and
functional benefits, in order to attract the best potential employees and have an
outrageous advantage both in the labour market and against the competitors.
That would be a completely wrong statement in my opinion. As an example, one
can imagine a fairly new company, promising extremely good standards and they
might think that they have created a very strong employer brand image. In
practice, it might not sound as sincere as it is thought. It is, of course, highly
likely that they would get a high number of applications, but in our case quality
and quantity should work together and in this scenario, it would not turn out as
the company wants, in terms of qualified applicants in very large amounts. Here,
Backhaus and Tikoo (2004) emerge to clarify a very vital point in terms of this
possible insincere approach. They are referring to the content of the employer
brand message. They suggest that once the message includes plentiful and
accurate information, it is important regarding the potential recruit’s
perceptions. Namely, the accurate information could serve to boost the accuracy
19
Baran Copuroglu
of the recruit’s perceptions of the employer / organization. It is also very
important and a sensitive issue not to forget to propose a realistic statement.
“While the adequate and honest employer branding messages are important for organizational
success, information on realistic job preview suggests that well-balanced messages are also
important.”
(Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004 P.507)
What it is meant by the realistic job previews is that the fact that they should
include both negative and positive aspects & information about the experience of
employment in that particular organization says Maglino and Ravlin (1999)
Figure 2 – Employer Branding Process Conceptualization. Miles and Mangold (2005, P.537)
In figure 2, one can see a process that is supported with a strong feedback
system. As a starter, there is the organization as an employer and its mission and
values that they have developed and aiming at. Once the goals and the
organization culture is set, a desired brand image is developed based on the
messages that the organization’s mission and values. Further, Miles and Mangold
(2005) illustrate the sources and the modes of messages. They divided the
sources and modes in to two sections: Internal and External. Within the internal
sources and modes we see the human resource management systems, public
relations systems as the formal aspects. In the informal aspects, one can see the
organization culture and coworker influences as well as PR systems again. When
it comes to the external sources of modes and messages we see the advertising
20
Baran Copuroglu
and PR systems as the formal; and customer feedback as an informal aspect for
the external messaging. Soon to be mentioned outcomes, has a strong feedback
relationship with these steps of the organization, mission and values, desired
brand image and the sources and modes of messages. If we take a look at the
employee psyche we see the important aspect of the psychological contract. I
will be writing more about the psychological contract in the very following
pages. The process is resulting with a position of organizations offerings in the
potential employees’ mind (attraction), current employees’ satisfaction
(retention) and a favorable reputation for the company and as stated, it feeds
the organization values, desired brand image and the sources and modes of
messages.
Figure 3 – Brand value pyramid. (Franca and Pahor 2012, P.94)
Figure 3 is a brand value pyramid that was prepared by Franca and Pahor
(2012). Showing how employer branding – recruitment process works, in terms
of the elimination that is done by the potential employee. A successful employer
branding process requires a good marketing of the Employer Value Proposition
(EVP), as we have discussed in the previous parts. First step was to develop an
21
Baran Copuroglu
EVP, and market it and spread the work out in the second step. As seen in the
figure, the first step starts at the recognition process. The better the EVP and the
marketing of it, the more the company gets recognized. The second phase of
consideration would be highly related to the EVP. The potential employee will
make the eliminations according to his/her values and narrow down the list to
‘consideration’ phase form ‘recognizing’ phase of the all companies that are in
his/her sight. The third phase: Employer of choice! We can see here is that, (if we
consider the triangle as the brand value) the higher the brand value rises, the
less employers left to consider. Naturally, imagining the peak point of the
triangle, there would lie THE employer of choice. Oppositely, with a very weak
employer branding strategy, as the bottom of the triangle, one might not even
recognize the company. Regardless of the fact that it might be a very good place
to work in, the process consists of several steps, if they want to be attractive and
make their way up to the employer of choice phase and consistently increase
their value.
After we have discussed some terms and the process of the employer branding, I
see fit to add more derivations of descriptions for employer branding. As Ambler
and Barrow (1996) discussed, it is a combination of the psychological, functional
and economic advantages and benefits that is appeared with the existence of the
employment, which is identified with the company that is employing. What is
more, Cooper (2008), described it as a long-term process / strategy of awareness
and perception management of the existent or potential employees of the
specific firm. Those strategies and the process, targets to make the company, the
employer of choice. The explanation itself holds a great power and value in terms
of satisfying the aim of this thesis. Management of the perceptions and the
awareness, besides serving to give the company a stronger employer branding,
it also automatically increases the attraction from the potential employees and
makes the firm attractive. The link between the stronger-attractive constructs a
powerful basis for the understanding of the findings for the thesis. Van dam
(2006) suggests it as a process that is targeting to have a strong attraction for
the potential and current employees. Collins and Han (2004) and Kucherov and
Zavyalova (2012) serve M. Wallace (2014) to come up with this paragraph:
22
Baran Copuroglu
“Firms with a strong employer brand exhibit a number of features: high
recognition and positive image in the labour market, adherence to the promises
of the psychological contract, unique economic and symbolic features that are
valuable to potential employees, accurate differentiation as an employer, and
stable policies and activities for positioning the company in the labour market.
Successful employer branding has been shown to increase the quantity and
quality of job applicants.”(2014, p. 21-22)
The Psychological Contract
There is another concept / approach by Foster et al. (2010) which is about the
psychological contract between the employer and the (potential) employee. As
we have discussed, there are needs and expectations demanded by the potential
employee, and there is the benefits that are (promised to be) supplied by the
employer. The potential employee steps in and makes a comparison between
his/her expectations & needs and the functional, economical and
psychological/symbolic benefits that is promised or stated by the brand promise.
The reason for this “unconscious” comparison is to see and understand if
employee’s demand and employer’s supply has a well fit. That would also make
the two parties a well fit for each other. Here, the most important part (in my
opinion) of the employer branding process should be considered: Promise
keeping. In the previous sections, I was trying to clarify the fact that it cannot be
that easy to give many promises out of the blue, just to attract the best talents.
Backhaus and Tikoo (2004) adds to the discussion that failed delivery of the
promise would affect the reputation and would serve as a ‘dimmer’ for the
employer brand value instead of making it stronger as the employer targeted
initially. Therefore, it plays a vital role to give accurate promises and more
importantly, to deliver what is promised. It is true that “Positive signals attract
potential recruits to position in the organization.” (Wallace et.al 2014 P.24) but
the employer must keep it deliverable.
The 5 Values
Berthon et al. (2005) supplied a different and an alternative approach for the
benefits that are set or promised by the employer to the employees. Their
23
Baran Copuroglu
approach consisted of 5 main benefit categories that they have discussed. In
addition to our symbolic and functional benefits, they have introduced the
alternative 5 benefits as:
1) Interest Value
2) Social Value
3) Economic Value
4) Development Value
5) Application Value
They have indicated that all these values are based on the perceptions that an
organization delivers, so that the potential employees will have their own ways
of perception, and compare with their values and create (or not) a fit for the
organization.
The Interest value is explained by the perceptions on the work environment.
They suggest that the “innovative employment procedures and policies” and a
“stimulating work environment” would be the examples for the interest value
that could be messaged by the employer. So to speak, a working environment
that fosters the employee’s abilities and talents in order them to create/produce
or be much more effective and efficient. The second value, the social value that
can be understood from its name, could be explained by the perceptions of the
employment atmosphere and social benefits. These could be exemplified by a
friendly and joyful, satisfying and an enjoyable atmosphere, which also boosts
individual work and teamwork. When it comes to the economic value, Berthon et
al. (2005) describe it by the economic compensation that is supplied by the
employer and in addition to this above average payment, it is stressed that the
job security is a quite important point as it would make the talented applicants
doubt and rethink about the application if there is a high turnover within the
firm as well as if there is not a ‘security’ to continue working for a reasonable
time interval. What is more, in the economic value, they also considered the
career prospects as an important point. If the talent perceives the company as a
gateway to the great career advancements within the company, then it is also an
24
Baran Copuroglu
economic value based perception and a very vital point for the understanding of
the topic. The fourth value, namely, the development value basically could be
explained by the ‘recognition’ of the works that is conducted by the employee.
Besides getting recognized and appreciated for the work, it is also very attractive
if the employer enhances their career by supplying relevant quality and quantity
of experiences. So to speak, acting as a higher education body, as a school and a
teacher in my opinion. The last but not the least, the application value defends
the fact that, it is attractive if the employer supplies the skills and abilities to the
employees in order them to turn the theory into practice. This could be both in
doing what they have to do in work, or by training and teaching others.
6) Analysis
Figure -4 Benefits, importance and delivering difficulties.
(Source: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/content_images/fig/0770190604001.png)
Figure 4 demonstrates the benefits / attributes that could be supplied from an
organization as an employer, in a delivering hardship perspective. The very
bottom part of the triangle, namely the attributes are the easiest pieces to deliver
to a ‘customer’. Here, we mean the potential employees / talents as customers.
These attributes are the features or processes that are to be demonstrated to the
potential employees. We have said they are easy to deliver but they are not so
meaningful (important) to the talents and are very open to imitation since they
25
Baran Copuroglu
are very basic features to copy. The functional benefits that we have discussed
before as high salaries, corporate benefits & corporate perks, leave allowances
etc. holds the medium spot in terms of difficulty to imitate, difficulty to deliver
and as the importance that it holds in the eyes of the potential employees. Not
surprisingly, the hardest challenge for the companies if they want to be very
attractive and quite differentiated from their competitors in terms of talent
acquirement & in the labour market is the development and the delivery of the
symbolic benefits to the potential employees. The emotional, self-expressive
benefits that are provided to the potential employees is the hardest aspect to
copy from another company or a competitor. These are the results of different
values and missions, different strategies and different desired brand images that
are developed over time. So it is not only the hardest challenge to imitate, but it
is also hard to deliver to the symbolic benefits / messages to the potential
employees.
One can tell that employer branding is one of the most important field in this
age's business activities since it creates the perfect condition for both the
employee and the employer, which is leading to an efficient business satisfaction.
These years, most of the companies have the tendency to cut on costs so they are
offering not high salaries as before and want to do business with the lowest cost
that they can achieve. What is more, the talents are looking for the best company
option meanwhile the companies are targeting to employ the talents. But they
have to offer something special to appeal to these talents however, in most of the
cases they do not offer high salaries or extra benefits hence they become an
''ordinary'' company in the eyes of the talents. One can tell that these companies
are not looking for ''ordinary'' talents either. In these conditions, employer
branding takes place and maximizes the utilities for both parties by creating
supply-demand and a business satisfaction.
The brand value of everything is very important in the eyes of people as well as
in the eyes of the talents, especially in consuming societies such as Turkey. To
make it attractive, one should increase the brand value of the product/service.
26
Baran Copuroglu
Employer branding is an increasingly important topic hence it is a profitable
investment, which increases the company's brand perception and is appealing to
many talents. In order to exemplify, Apple -successfully- created a sub-society as
''Apple-Users''. Within this terminology, Apple-Users feel belonged to this
community and feeling themselves better using it than the same qualified but
different-branded devices. It is quite easy to comment on this behavior since
Apple's brand value that they have created is very high.
Employer branding is targeting the same high brand perception, but companywise. By increasing the brand perception of the company with the help of
employer branding services, it becomes similar with the Apple example and
make the talents bond with the firm regardless of the salaries they get and
equalize themselves with the company's brand value, so that the self satisfaction
and the business satisfaction could be achieved. What is more, the talent wants
to be retained in the firm as he/she feels bonded with the company just like most
of the Apple-Users purchasing only Apple products, but higher models/versions.
One can now tell that, that is the exact reason why talents are choosing mostly
Multinational companies instead of local companies: the brand value of the
multinational companies is higher! In some cases even though the salary in local
-medium or large scaled- companies is higher, talents are attracted to the high
brand valued multinational companies and feeling as part of the high value
community. Here, the importance of employer branding is that it helps the local
medium-large scaled companies to be appealed by the talents, which creates a
win-win situation where it achieves new business fields and enlarging these local
companies. The impact of this consultancy on multinational companies is to be
the ''shining-stars'' in their own sector. That is why I can clearly state that
employer branding is on the top management agenda, growing with importance.
Here, as another example, Hutton (2001) describes the case of the British
railway firm called Railtrack. The firm hosted an employer branding campaign
in order to improve the associations for their potential employees. During this
campaign, they have aimed to emphasize how they had career flexibility and
career opportunities. (As one could recall, those are the functional benefits and
27
Baran Copuroglu
the firm chose to focus on increasing the functional benefits for the employer
brand association and employer brand image developing process for the
targeted group: talents.) This way, it is stated that they were able to increase the
number of qualified employees by 30% for the professional positions. This is a
great number and a great result both to show the importance of the employer
brand activities effects, and their effects on the attraction, and naturally to
support answering the research question(s).
In the end, again, we should never forget that it would be wrong to expect that
the employer brand value is increasing if the attraction is increasing in my
opinion. It is the employer brand value that increases the attraction, not the
other way around.
• Defining and marketing a value propostition
• Increasing the employer brand value with an effective
Increasing
strategy, causing an increase in attraction.
EB* Value
• Quality and quantity of the applications are increased.
• Qualified applicants increase the talent population
Increasing
within the firm.
Attraction
More
Talents
• Business efficiency for both of the parties.
• A great outlook for the company, bringing more
attraction.
Figure 5 – Employer Brand value, increasing the attraction.
(*Employer Branding, Source: Own Figure)
a) The Case Of PwC
We all know PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and what it does. It is an assurance,
tax advisory, financial advisory consulting company. The answer for the reason
why I chose PwC as the case is to show what can a strong employer branding
28
Baran Copuroglu
strategy could lead and might lead. Google is a top case in the employer branding
agenda tops the rankings as the most attractive employer in business but PwC
was more attractive in the terms of investigating the case in my view, as Google
has already proven itself and has an enormous employer brand. According to
UNIVERSUM’S survey, pretty much everyone listed Google as their employer of
choice. Also, PwC has a great ranking in the survey. The reason behind the fact
that most of the students, talents and people in the labour market knows about
the firm is nothing but a strong employer branding strategy. Unsurprisingly, it is
also a very attractive company in the eyes of the potential employees. According
to the recently held UNIVERSUM employer rankings, it kept its place as one of
the leading attractive employers regionally and gained the 4th place in the
World’s Most Attractive Employers index in 2013. Charles Macleod, the Head of
Global Sourcing at PwC states that they tend to follow different strategies in
different nations (DeAndres 2014). Of course, these are some minor but
important actions, not a completely different employer branding strategy.
The selection of the talents is a key strategy for PwC. They should be quite
careful when it comes to the selection between over one million applicants for
the graduate programs and they cannot leave it to the chance factors. For
example, some companies tend to leave it to the computer and technological
services in order to make the selection / elimination and other limitations while
decreasing the number of the prospective employees. But in PwC, their strategy
is to pick the talents by hand and not leave it to the computer / chance factors. As
it might be a huge trouble for the human resources department, their other
strategy is to list very specific, open and clear requirements and qualifications in
order to stop under qualified applicants to apply to the position(s). Once again, if
the selection is not made right, then what is the use of the employer branding
strategies? It is a key issue for PwC and they seem to successfully handle the
situation. Even though there are some few numbers of under qualified applicants
applying, PwC tends to overcome the problem and grant employment around 5%
of applications, to the well-selected talents, says DeAnders.
“By having such a rigorous selection process, PwC can more accurately place students with the right
29
Baran Copuroglu
skills into the right place. Securing students who are the perfect fit for the position means
candidates can have a more productive and beneficial early experience in their career, and are more
likely to be successful in the future, at PwC or elsewhere.”
(DeAnders, 2014 Para. 8)
PwC is a place that focuses on the experience. They do want the talents to
network and communicate between the colleagues inside / outside the office and
try to turn these into advantages in the long term. The head of global sourcing at
PwC, Charles Macleod states that they tend to use empathy and try to figure out
what would the talent want and what they get from the experience of working at
PwC. He further adds that the talents would like to have something in their
resumés that they would be proud to show in the future. In my opinion, in this
manner, the companies, which have strong employer brands, act as an “institute
of education”, like a university or as an educational programme. Speaking of
acting as an educational institute, they offer several graduate programs for the
students. This trainee positions offer variety of real work life experiences and
insights to the prospective talent and serves them to create a clear picture what
they want from a working experience. Also, it is a great way to “capture” the
talent before his / her exposure to the labour market and plant PwC seeds!
As talent market competition increases, there will be an evident shortage of candidates with
quantitative abilities and those who possess these skills will have a competitive edge. PwC offers
training into these fields for its employees and student programs.
(DeAndres, 2014 Para. 15)
One might question that if it is also important to retain the employee, why do
they aim to get them ready for the future experiences? The actual fact is that,
even in the student programs the initial aim is to offer a permanent contract once
they complete the “unforgettable” experience. Their goal is to turn around 8090% of the ‘short - termers’ into permanent talents within their company and
they consider this percentage as a successful outcome.
Maintaining and retaining talent is one thing, but sustaining an attractive brand requires even
more effort. PwC knows the importance of attracting prospects by generating brand awareness of
their value proposition. Regarding talent recruitment, PwC has different tactics of maintaining
relationships with students, both those involved with the program, and those they hope will
become interested. As most smart companies do, PwC targets first year students and high school
graduates to introduce them to PwC and helps guide them into realising their potential career
choices. By maintaining a relationship with pupils throughout their schooling, students will have
PwC in mind when choosing an internship or graduate program.
(DeAndres, 2014 Para. 18)
30
Baran Copuroglu
If we look at their value proposition, one can see that it might not be a
coincidence at all: “Delivering the opportunity of a life time”
8) Conclusion
Even though employer branding might not be an extremely popular topic and
something that has emerged a long time ago, from the first company in the world
until today, all the organizations as an employer had / has an employer brand.
Even if they might not have known the fact, they voluntarily or involuntarily
increased their brand values by certain activities and strategies. It was an
interesting and an exciting process to contribute in such field that should be
extremely important and that has been quite undervalued in my opinion. Finally,
I would like to finish the process with a short conclusion to sum up all the points,
give more understanding in terms of answering the research questions and key
issues that could be used for further research, once again.
How important it is for the talents to work in their dream firm, in a perfectmatch place and in an environment that everybody is positioned well in the
labour market & in the companies, knowing what to do, enjoying it and being
productive that leads to efficiency and satisfaction for the both parties and even
for the company micro? Even though, one can not specify that individually, this
study shows how important it should be, relying on the provided research,
theories and its results. The art of developing the right images and following the
right track to attract and retain the potential employees in the hectic talent
market, led me to wonder about the characteristics and specialties of the topic.
Therefore, several questions came to my mind as “What makes a company
attractive”, “What are the determinants when we apply for a job / decide for an
employer.” “Are the companies with strong employer brand values more
attractive?” Finally, after a little bit of research, I have figured out the most of the
questions even without much effort.
31
Baran Copuroglu
Since it is quite appealing to me to investigate the labour market and its
specialties, and especially the field of employer branding, I needed to look
deeper. After learning a major part of the initial questions, it made me wonder
and helped me to develop my original research questions. I understood that the
strong branding leads to attraction and several benefits would make a company
attractive. But why? This approach brought me the research questions itself and
helped me to develop the master thesis. I have not came across with such
literature that explains the reason behind the attraction to the employer, given it
has a strong employer brand. That made me even more attached and excited to
develop a study on the reasons behind and help to answer “Why are the
employers with stronger employer brands, more attractive for the potential
employees?” And “Why are the employers with stronger employer brands, more
successful when it comes to retention of the employees within their company?”
One might tell that, after reading through the master thesis, the questions are
actually closely related to each other. We have seen that employer branding is a
process and it is not only a one-shot move. Therefore, after attracting the
employees, it is important to keep your promise to retain the talents within. The
“Promise Keeping” phase was the third and the last phase of the process if it is
recalled. During the thesis process, I believe I have kept it easy to understand
and relate that the 2 research questions actually have very similar answers and if
we consider the whole process of employer branding, they have the same
answer: If an organization as an employer, that has developed their mission and
values, created a realistic value proposition, supplied highly valued functional
and symbolic benefits, marketed itself and values well and kept the promise then
it is absolutely successful in attracting and retaining the top talents in the highly
competitive labour market (and more importantly, talent market). Therefore, I
can also clearly state that the process would make a firm more advantageous in
terms of qualified recruits in the labour market.
All in all it was quite exciting to conduct a research and bringing a perspective of
the relationship between the attractiveness of a firm and their employer brand
values. There is a high correlation between the strength and the attraction, but
one should not forget that only attraction would not lead to a stronger brand
32
Baran Copuroglu
value in my opinion. But a strong employer brand would lead to attraction
sooner or later and boost their applications both in quality and quantity. Hoping
that contributing to the literature in such view also would trigger the further
research in investigating quantitatively about the micro growth for the
organization. Deeper understanding, supported with the theories that were
investigated in this thesis signals us the efficient business atmosphere and
possibilities for personal & micro advancements and developments. I, myself am
planning to conduct further researches on a long run perspective about the
micro growth for the companies that are efficient in the employer branding
strategies relying on human capital – firm growth theories using growth data for
companies that are willing to co-operate.
I would like to end the master thesis thanking Lund University, LUSEM,
department of Economic History, programme in Economic Growth, Innovation
and Spatial Dynamics and for my supervisor for giving me chance to investigate
such field that lacked from the literature, and that it fulfilled my expectations to
the fullest while conducting the research.
“Who would not like to work in such companies with strong employer brands?”
Baran Copuroglu, May 2014
33
Baran Copuroglu
References:
1) Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a
Brand Name, The Free Press, New York, NY.
2) Ambler, T. and Barrow, S. (1996), “The employer brand”, Journal of Brand
Management, Vol. 4, pp. 185-206.
3) Backhaus, K., & Tikoo, S. (2004). Conceptualizing and researching employer
branding. Career development international, 9(5), 501-517.
4) Berthon, P., & Ewing, M., et al. (2005). Captivating company: Dimensions of
attractiveness in employer branding. International Journal of Advertising, 24(2),
151–172.
5) Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method.
Qualitative research journal, 9(2), 27-40.
6) Byrne, D. and Neuman, J. (1992), “The implications of attraction research for
organizational issues”, in Kelley, K. (Ed.), Theory and Research in
Industrial/Organizational Psychology, Elsevier Science Publishers, New York, NY,
pp. 29-70.
7) Cable, D.M. and Judge, T.A. (1996), “Person-organization fit, job choice
decisions and organizational entry”, Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, Vol. 67, pp. 294-311.
8) Collins, C. J., & Han, J. (2004). Exploring applicant pool and quality: The effects
of early recruitment
practices, strategies, corporate advertising, and firm reputation. Personnel
Psychology, 57,685–717.
9) Cooper, K. (2008). Attract, develop and retain: Initiatives to sustain a
competitive workforce. Spring Hill, Qld: Mining Industry Skills Centre.
10) Foster, C., & Punjaisri, K. et al. (2010). Exploring the relationship between
corporate, internal and employer branding. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 19(6), 401–409.
11) Franca, V., & Pahor, M. (2012). The strength of the employer brand:
Influences and implications for recruiting. Journal of Marketing & Management,
3(1), 78–122.
34
Baran Copuroglu
12) Hutton, P. (2001), “Aligning the organization around the brand”, paper
presented at the Partnership Conference on Developing and Building a
Successful Strategy for Brand Communication.
13) Keller, K.L. (1993), “Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customerbased brand equity”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, pp. 1-22.
14) Kucherov, D., & Zavyalova, E. (2012). HRD practices and talent management
in the companies with the employer brand. European Journal of Training and
Development, 36(1), 86–104.
15) Lievens, F. and Highhouse, S. (2003), “The relation of instrumental and
symbolic attributes to company’s attractiveness as an employer”, Personnel
Psychology, Vol. 56, pp. 75-102.
16) Meglino, B.M. and Ravlin, E. (1999), “When are realistic job previews most
effective”, paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meetings,
Chicago, IL, August.
17) Miles, S. J., & Mangold,W. G. (2005). Positioning southwest airlines through
employee branding. Business Horizons, 48, 535–545.
18) Priem, R.L. and Butler, J.E. (2001), “Is the resource based view a useful
perspective for strategic management research”, The Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 26, pp. 22-40.
19) Sullivan, J. (2004), “Eight elements of a successful employment brand”, ER
Daily, 23 February, available at:
www.erexchange.com/articles/db/52CB45FDADFAA4CD2BBC366659E26892A.
asp
20) Tajfel, H. (1982), “Social psychology of intergroup relations”, Annual Review
of Psychology, p. 33.
21) Tuzuner, V. L., & Yuksel, C. A. (2009). SEGMENTING POTENTIAL EMPLOYEES
ACCORDING TO FIRMS’EMPLOYER ATTRACTIVENESS DIMENSIONS IN THE
EMPLOYER BRANDING CONCEPT. Journal of Academic Research in Economics
(JARE), (1), 47-62.
22) Underwood, R., Bond, E. and Baer, R. (2001), “Building service brands via
social identity: lessons from the sports marketplace”, Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, Vol. 9, pp. 1-14.
23) Wallace, A. P. M., Lings, I., Cameron, R., & Sheldon, N. (2014). Attracting and
Retaining Staff: The Role of Branding and Industry Image. In Workforce
Development (pp. 19-36). Springer Singapore.
35
Baran Copuroglu
24) Yin, R. K. (1994). Discovering the future of the case study method in
evaluation research. Evaluation Practice, 15(3), 283-290.
Electronic Sources:
1) WWW.UNIVERSUMGLOBAL.COM
2) http://universumglobal.com/2014/05/pwc-offers-graduates-theopportunity-of-a-lifetime/ (Nicole DeAndres)
36