Employer branding and CSR: integrating
strategies
Jos van der Sommen
10586849
Thesis for Master’s degree in communication science:
corporate communication
Supervisor: Dr. James Slevin
27-06-2014
1
Abstract
Over the last couple of years, employer branding and corporate social responsibility are mentioned quite often in communication literature. Still, many organizations are
struggling with their employer branding strategies. Not using employer branding could however weaken an organizations’ competitive market position. Nowadays, some even say that there is an actual “ war for talent” (Elving, Westhoff, Meeusen & Schoonderbeek, 2012) which only confirms how important it is to engage in employer branding. Since employer branding is often about values, corporate social responsibility and the values attached to that could potentially play a role in employer branding strategies. This research therefore tries to bridge these two corporate strategies and stresses that they should be combined and be part of the communication strategy of the entire organization and not be seen as different entities. Four interviews are conducted to investigate if corporate social responsibility is used in employer branding as a tool to attract and attain employees with the same values. Next to that, this research looked at how both employer branding and corporate social responsibility are communicated by organizations. To back up the data from the interviews, the corporate websites of the four organizations are analysed by its content. Results show that corporate social responsibility is not used directly in employer branding by most organizations. Organizations also differ greatly in how and if they communicate employer branding. Corporate social responsibility however, is communicated by most organizations in practically the same way.
Key words: Employer branding, corporate social responsibility, corporate identity,
corporate image, corporate culture and employer branding strategy, corporate social responsibility strategy, communication strategy.
2
Introduction:
Over the last couple of years, employer branding and corporate social responsibility (CSR) have been much discussed in literature. Almost all researchers acknowledge the role and importance of both employer branding and CSR in corporate communication. What these roles are exactly and how employer branding and CSR can be communicated and facilitated best, is a question that still is not answered that easily. Many organizations do struggle with how to communicate their employer branding and are only just starting with it. Not engaging in employer branding however, can be bad for their reputation, image and identity since they could lose good people to their competitors and thus could diminish their competitive
advantage in today’s ever changing market. On the contrary, organizations are finding their way in how to communicate CSR but this is rarely connected to employer branding. Until now, most research has also focused on employer branding or CSR separately. What is interesting in respect to this is that many articles about either employer branding or CSR claim that they should not be separate communication strategies but that employer branding and CSR should be part of the broader communication strategy of the entire organization. It is also suggested that CSR or sustainability should be incorporated in employer branding of organizations and that they should at least be aligned to make sure that all the same values and ideas are communicated.
To give an example of an organization with good employer branding and also CSR initiatives, Google will now be discussed shortly. Google is seen by most people as a good place to work for. This has a lot to do with how potential employees see the organization. In general, Google is seen as a young, innovative and creative brand and is therefore very popular. Their slogan; ‘work hard, play hard’ is often mentioned in the news and Google also gained popularity through movies as ‘The Internship’. This spontaneous popularity of the brand led to Google actually getting more job applications than they have job openings. You
3
could say that Google thus does a really good job regarding employer branding. CSR is not currently used in their employer branding but Google does engage in challenges like climate change, education and poverty alleviation and they do communicate this as values that are important for their organization (Google Company, n.d.).
But what is employer branding exactly and why is it interesting for organizations to do employer branding? This will be discussed in the following part. It can be said that in some way, employer branding has always been there. This because every organization wants to be a good organization to work for and they therefore have certain values that are connected to their identity. When searching for new employees these organizations do not only
communicate about the job role but they also communicate their values. If they want to find the perfect employee for the job, it is suggested that organizations need to make sure this employee has the same values and can therefore ‘fit’ the organization very well (Arthur, Bell, Villado & Doverspike, 2006). Literature also suggest that not only the organization wants their employees and potential employees to fit the organization well (Judge & Bretz, 1992; Gatewood, Gowan & Lautenschlager, 1993) but that current employees and potential
employees can prefer a certain organization over the other because of the values and identity an organization has. This means that organizations should somehow try to distinguish themselves from their competition.
One of the ways in which an organization can distinguish themselves is by doing something back for society. This can be one of their values if they are in a sector that requires it, but organizations can also choose to engage in society because they want to give a good example or simply because it is expected of them. If doing something good for society and being aware of the environment are values of the organization and they actually do things for society to show this, then the organization is engaged in corporate social responsibility (CSR). If this is one of the values of the organization this can also be used in their employer branding.
4
However, CSR or CSR communication is sometimes experienced as quite a challenge because of accusations of greenwashing (Elving & Van Vuuren, 2011).
Since there is not that much literature of both employer branding and CSR combined and how this can be done, the aim of this research is to identify how and if CSR and employer branding can be related or even influence each other. This is important because the lack of literature on this subject could suggest that organizations are struggling with how to integrate these strategies or even with how they should communicate their employer branding or CSR activities. If organizations are actually struggling with these strategies and how they should be communicated this may affect the competitive advantage organizations have and lead to them not getting the right people for the job. Getting more insight into how an integration of
employer branding and CSR could work, could help these organizations and can potentially even benefit their corporate image ( Gatewood et al., 1993), corporate identity ( Lievens et al., 2007) and reputation (Aggerholm, Andersen & Thomsen, 2010; Turban & Greening, 1996). Next to that, it will be investigated how employer branding is managed with regard to CSR and also how both employer branding and CSR are organized in organizations.
This research will also try to find answers to the question of why organizations think employer branding and CSR are necessary for their organization and why and if they should be one strategy. When answered, the research question will identify all these aspects and it will hopefully make it possible to draw some conclusions and give some implications of how organizations should organize their employer branding with regard to CSR. This research has scientific value because in most literature, either employer branding or CSR is discussed. With respect to either of them, it is said that they should be part of the larger communication strategy of the organization. If one analyses the topics combined however, they are rarely mentioned as factors that can be combined or influence each other. Apparently, it is not clear how they can influence each other or if they even influence each other. Since both are relevant
5
topics, it will be interesting to find out if they can be combined or can potentially be used to an organizations’ benefit. This not only makes this research relevant for science but also for society. Both employer branding and CSR have to do with making an organization a nice place to work, so maybe if CSR is more often used in employer branding strategies these organizations become even more attractive than they already are. Next to being more attractive, this might also be good for the reputation of an organization but only when they actually live up to their values. Combining employer branding and CSR may also decrease the risk of getting accusations of greenwashing, for example, and thereby diminish the chance of damaging their reputation. This study will hopefully give organizations more insight in how they can best organize their employer branding and CSR separately, but also as a combined strategy.
Theory:
In this paragraph an overview of literature on employer branding and CSR will be given. Next to that, it will be analysed how organizations should manage their employer branding to become an employer of choice and thus be able to distinguish themselves from their competitors. Some potential causes of why organization struggle with this may also become apparent. After that, a link between the literature on employer branding and the literature on CSR will be established.
Employer branding explained
Branding is a much discussed subject in communication literature. There is not just one form of branding but there are many different kinds. Organizations usually focus on the branding of their product or the organization itself (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). All kinds of branding have to do with putting an image of the organization in the minds of the outside world. Putting the right images in the minds of the people however, is increasingly becoming
6
harder because of changes in society such as globalization and diversity in the workplace for example (Celani & Singh, 2010). Due to these changes the importance of attracting and attaining the most qualified people is becoming more and more important for organizations in today’s competitive business market. It can even be argued that there is an increasing “ war for talent” since it is getting harder to find the right people for a job (Elving et al., 2012). One type of branding that can be the answer to this, is employer branding. It appears that
employees are no longer recruited just for their knowledge and skills (Elving et al., 2012) but compatibility between the employees and the organizations is equally important. Perceptions that people have of an organization are therefore crucial in recruiting new employees and in keeping the current employees satisfied (Elving et al., 2012).
A theory that can be helpful when analysing employer branding is signalling theory (Spence, 1973; Celani & Singh, 2011; Elving et al., 2012).Signalling theory can help demonstrate the value of a certain job and organizational characteristics because potential employees usually do not have all the information about an organization and therefore have to rely on certain characteristics to form an image of the organization. These characteristics can be seen as signals that show the potential employees what the job and organization looks like in a day-to-day work environment. Since organizations can choose what information they give to potential employees, they can influence how these potential employees see their
organization. Also, when certain information is absent, potential employees will probably still form an image of the organization based on the signals related to the information they do have (Celani & Singh, 2011).
Gatewood et al. (1993) also claim that the information that is available about an organization determines the perception that people have of an organizations’ image. This image then determines if potential job applicants are still interested and if they pursue their contact with an organization. This also suggests the potential of employer branding since
7
people will have more information at hand when an organization does good employer branding and this can benefit the image of the organization and in turn make people more eager to work at that organization. Also, if more information is available, people will probably make their choice more conscious which may lead to a better fit between the person and the organization (P-O fit; Chatman, 1989). If this person-organization fit is better, this will lead to higher job satisfaction, more organizational commitment and less turnover intentions (Arthur et al., 2006).
Related to corporate image is corporate identity. These are not the same things but to be able to be a good place to work, the corporate identity of the organization and the corporate image of that organization are preferably alike. Lievens,Van Hoye and Anseel (2007) aimed to bridge the research strategies of corporate identity and employer branding. They claimed that it is important to see what factors, both outsiders and insiders of an organization, link or associate with that organization. This because organizations want their employees as well as outsiders to see the organization the way it is and preferably even better. According to
Lievens et al. (2007) employer branding can be very important in supporting and also creating a corporate identity. Both are not things that just exist and therefore have to be communicated. Organizations really have to live up to expectations, just communicating about it does not cover it.
It is already mentioned that employer branding is about being a good place to work but next to that it is also about values, policies and behaviours (Backhaus & Tickoo, 2004). This because these are very important in attracting, motivating, and retaining the organization’s current and potential employees (Backhaus & Tickoo, 2004). A fit between the values, policies and behaviours of the organization and those of their employees and potential employees will not only be good for employer branding but can possibly also strengthen the corporate identity ( Lievens et al., 2007) and the corporate image (Gatewood et al., 1993) of
8
an organization. Social identity theory can help explain why. This theory states that people derive their self-concept from belonging to a certain group (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). By belonging to a certain group, people establish their identity and also try to get social approval of the people around them (Highhouse, Thornbury & Little, 2007). This means that the
attitudes people have about something, in this case an organization, are not just determined by its characteristics, but also by how other people think about that organization. This may then influence whether or not people want to be part of a certain group or organization. When an organization has a good reputation or a good corporate image, this cannot just lead to people being more attracted to an organization ( Highhouse et al., 2007) but it can also lead to a higher willingness to identify with that organization (Backhaus & Tickoo, 2004; Celani & Singh, 2011; Lievens et al., 2007). If people outside the organization experience this, or if this is communicated extensively through employer branding, people may want to become part of the organization because of its’ positive image. In this way, a positive image, identity or reputation it is not only good for the organization and its’ current employees, but an
organization can also create advantages because they can differentiate themselves from other organizations and thus distinguish themselves from their competitors (Backhaus & Tickoo, 2004). It has to be said however that the effect will probably be bigger if people share the same values as the organization.
Since employer branding encompasses many different things there are also many different definitions given to the concept. Most definitions do include that employer branding is about promoting a clear view of what makes a certain organization different from others and why it is a desirable place to work. It is also agreed upon in literature that this should not only be communicated outside of the organization but also within the organization (Backhaus & Tickoo, 2004; Aggerholm et al., 2010). To give an example of a definition, Backhaus and Tickoo (2004, p.502) defined employer branding as: “the process of building an identifiable
9
and unique employer identity, and the employer brand as a concept of the firm that
differentiates it from its competitors”. According to this definition employer branding should form the identity of an organization as an employer and this should be carried out internally and externally. It suggest a ‘value proposition’ in which it becomes clear what both current and potential employees can expect from the organization but also what the organization offers them Backhaus & Tickoo, 2004). This is a definition that does take all stakeholders into account but it does not say much about how employer branding should be facilitated.
Aggerholm et al. (2010) take another point of view regarding the definition of employer branding. They state that organizations have changed over the last years and that many of them have adapted sustainable development strategies like corporate social responsibility. Since the organizations changed, their employer branding conditions should also change. Seeing employer branding as a mere tool to manage awareness and perceptions is not enough anymore. From their perspective, employer branding should therefore be defined as: “ the enactment of sustainable employer-employee relationships with the purpose of co-creating sustainable values for the individual, the organization and society as a whole” (Aggerholm et al., 2010, p.117). Of course, one of the main goals of employer branding stays being a good place to work but the branding is not just directed at attracting new recruits and keeping current employees satisfied. It should also be a way of making sure that current employees are engaged in the culture and strategy of the firm (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). This includes employees sharing the same values as the organization they work for.
Employer branding and corporate social responsibility
One of the values that an organization might have is doing something back for society and thus engaging in corporate social responsibility (CSR). Over the last couple of years this is something that has been frequently mentioned in literature. Next to that, it is becoming a bigger and bigger issue in society and organizations are almost forced to apply it if they want
10
to be perceived as respectable and socially responsible organizations in modern society (Morsing, Schultz & Nielsen, 2008).
Although there is some overlap between employer branding and CSR since they are both about values, sustainability and social responsibility are often still ignored in human resource management and thus in employer branding (Preuss, Haunschild & Matten, 2009). A few people however, did investigate employer branding and CSR combined. Aggerholm et al. (2010) for example, claim that there is need to include more stakeholder and relational aspects in employer branding. This means that a broader range of strategic human resource
management and also social responsibility aspects should be included. Next to that, one of the main things they argue is that communication should no longer be seen as a tool or mean for solving certain problems but it should be at the core of the organization and therefore be constitutive of that organization. This in terms of processes and interpretations of meaning among the organizational stakeholders. If argued like this, employer branding and CSR should be part of the communication strategy of the entire organization and not be seen as separate entities. This integration of employer branding and CSR is also likely to be better for the reputation of organizations.
Judge and Bretz (1992) did research on work values and job choice decisions. Their results showed that values significantly predict job choice decisions and that individuals are more likely to choose an organization that shares the same values, even if this means that they get paid less at that organization. This is another example that demonstrates that organizations should be aware of what they communicate during recruitment processes and that values can play a huge role. Related to this, Turban and Greening (1996) discussed the link between corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to potential employees.
Corporate social performance was proven to be related to an organizations reputation but also to their attractiveness as an employer. This suggest that engaging in CSR, or as mentioned by
11
Turban and Greening (1996): corporate social performance, can create a competitive advantage for organizations when attracting new employees.
Reputation is mentioned a couple of times already. Employer branding and CSR do not stand alone. They are often two things that can help built or retain a reputation. However, if things are communicated by the organization and people find out they are not actually doing what they say, this can lead to skepticism and accusations of greenwashing ( Elving & Van Vuuren, 2011). To prevent this, organizations have to be aware of what they are doing and even more on how they communicate this. Only then can they create a situation in which stakeholders are convinced that they are actually engaged in doing good for society. It is clear that CSR can be important for an organizations’ identity, image and
reputation. Using this value in employer branding can possibly establish a situation in which people are even more inclined to choose a certain organization over the other. To get a better view of what CSR is, it will be defined as: “ a company’s role in, and impact upon, the economic, environmental and social framework in which it is embedded” (Golob et al., 2013, p.177).
Based on the literature above the following research question has been formulated:
RQ: How do organizations manage employer branding with regard to CSR?
Method:
The aim of this study is to identify how employer branding is managed in an
organization and how and if this is related to CSR. It is an explorative study that leads to the exploration of several motives for using employer branding and motives for using CSR in employer branding. To analyse and answer the research question, how organizations manage employer branding with regard to CSR, qualitative method will be used. By using this method, the research question that is based in the gathered literature can be analysed
12
empirically. Regardless of which method is used, qualitative research strives for a deep and contextual understanding of people’s motivations and subjective meanings in their life worlds. It is often used when there is not that much known about a certain aspect of society, in this case the link between employer branding and CSR.
The research is an iterative process, meaning that the definitions as mentioned in the theory part will be used as sensitizing concepts. These sensitizing concepts provide direction, suggestions, pose as a guideline in the data collection and analysis and help the researcher to know where to look. At the end of the research the definitions will be exact but until that time the definitions can change and evolve because of new insights.
To be able to answer the research question, semi-structured interviews are conducted and a content analysis of the corporate websites is done. These methods were chosen because the content analysis and the interviews can possibly strengthen one another. It is like a double check to see if what is mentioned in the interviews is also mentioned on the corporate
websites and if it is mentioned, how extensive it is mentioned. By comparing the data from the interviews with the data as gathered by the content analysis it will hopefully be possible to get a satisfying answer to the research question. When conducting semi-structured interviews, a topic list is used as a guideline for the researcher. This topic list entails all the topics and questions that are of importance to the research. These topics will be placed in a logical order so that both the researcher and the interviewee won’t lose track. Because of the topic list, the main questions that will be asked are the same for every interview. The follow up questions and the answers given to them are open. This means that there can be differences between the interviews and this depends on the answers given by the interviewees. The content analysis is contributing to the research because by using this method the data can be described but it is also possible to identify themes, in this case employer branding and CSR. Next to that, content analysis can be a means to check if the data from the interviews are correct. An
13
organization might say that they communicate their CSR initiatives in their employer branding strategies but this may prove to be different than they say. In total, four interviews have been conducted and the corporate websites of all these organizations were analysed by its content. The content analysis took place after the interview so that the interviewer was not biased. All four organizations in which the interviews are conducted are multinationals but they are active in different market sectors. To make the data easier to read, the organizations are referred to as organization A, B, C and D. Two of the organizations, from this point on referred to as organization A and B, work in the services sector, organization C is a
multimedia organization and organization D is active in the recruitment sector.
The interviews and content analyses are conducted from the 6th of May till the 3rd of June. To increase the validity and confidence rates of the research, the interviews and content analyses are done in several different organizations. After the data were gathered, they were analysed. For the interviews this meant that they had to be transcribed. Second, they were analysed using open coding. Open coding is the reading through the interviews and selecting what is relevant by making codes. These codes made it easier to analyse the data because it becomes clear what is said where and in which context. When conducting the content analysis the texts were coded as well. This means that the texts were broken down into several
categories which made it possible to look for specific themes. The most important themes in this research are employer branding and CSR and therefore these are the topics that were analysed. When analysing the data, it was not only investigated if organization use CSR in their employer branding but also how and for what reasons. How both employer branding and CSR are communicated by the organizations therefore also is important. After analysing the data from the single interviews and the content analyses they were all compared and this will hopefully lead to a better understanding and a satisfying answer to the research question of how organizations manage employer branding with regard to CSR.
14
Results:
In this article it was my intention to investigate how employer branding is managed with regard to CSR. This because they are both corporate strategies that organizations find hard to manage. Especially employer branding is seen as a challenge by many organizations. However, organizations increasingly see its potential and therefore it is important to find a good way to manage and communicate it since doing employer branding can benefit their reputation and can give organizations a competitive advantage. Next to that, I wanted to analyse how both employer branding and CSR are communicated by organizations both internally and externally. Obviously, employer branding and CSR can be managed and communicated in many different ways. Which way is appropriate for a certain organization and which is not, often has something to do with the values of that organization. Before I discuss the main question of this research, I will first look at how employer branding and CSR are communicated by organizations. The results that are presented are from the interviews and the content analysis combined.
When looking at how employer branding is communicated, there are many differences to be found, especially when looking at how and if employer branding is communicated externally. Only two out of four organizations mention employer branding on their website, these are organization B and D. If mentioned, the word employer branding is not used but the values of the organizations are described along with why the organizations have these values. When doing the content analysis, it was found that one of the organizations actually added a description of what the employees of that organization are and should be like. This was done because this organization believed that employees, as well as potential employees, should have a good view of what is expected of them by the organization but also about what they can expect from the organization. As put by the interviewee from organization B:
15
…It is all about expectations, it’s about what can be expected from us but also what we expect from our employees.
Next to mentioning employer branding on their website, organization B and D also mentioned employer branding in their annual report. However, it was mostly the values that were communicated and what they meant for all stakeholders. It was not specifically
mentioned as employer branding. Organization C did not mention employer branding at all externally and organization A did not mention it directly but they did mention quite a lot about their corporate brand in their annual report and some values were connected to this as well.
When communicating externally, all four organizations were very aware of what was communicated and they also said that they do not necessarily communicate something different outside the organization but that the point of view is different. In other words, one can say that it is the same story but with a different focus. When talking about external communication, subjects like corporate image, reputation and identity were mentioned by all organizations. Like the interviewee from organization D said:
…I think when you are communicating things outside the company you want to make sure you give the right image of what you do, but it’s more like attraction tools. The message is what can you find here, this is what we offer, you have examples of employees who have a
successful career and why they joined us, so it is different when you recruit someone than when someone is here because then you need to make sure that this promise is still there.
This quote really shows that organizations are very careful in communicating things externally and that they try not to mention too many things externally. Organization C, the organization that did not mention employer branding on their website nor in their annual report, did not communicate externally about employer branding at all.
16
When looking at how CSR is communicated externally, it becomes apparent that CSR is more frequently mentioned outside the organization than employer branding. All four organizations mentioned CSR, or sustainability, on their website. They even had different sections that were solely dedicated to their CSR initiatives and the values connected to them. CSR was also extensively mentioned in their annual reports. Organizations A, B and D even had a separate annual report just for their sustainability or CSR initiatives. These
organizations however, do say that the external communication about it is mostly about numbers, goals and targets that the organizations have set for themselves and whether or not they reached them. In the other organization, organization C, CSR was mentioned in the annual report in a separate section but it was not an annual report on CSR in itself. Values are also a part of the external communication but to a lesser extent. Organizations mostly
communicate what they are doing and not why they are actually doing it. Interestingly, all four organizations mentioned the term ‘greenwashing’ in their answers but they all said their organization is not at risk of getting accusations of greenwashing because they actually do what they say and do not exaggerate about it.
The internal communication on employer branding and CSR is arranged quite
differently from the external communication. It seems that inside the organization, employer branding is used more often. Organizations B, C and D use employer branding in their internal communication. In these organizations the values of that organization are a central point in everything that is communicated. Organization D even mentioned that in general, all the people working at the organization are practically the same and that this is because of their employer branding and the values embedded in it. If someone starts working there and does not share the same values, that person will probably not like it there and start looking for another job quite soon.
17
and D) say that the internal communication is way more important than the external communication. They say that external, they want people to have the right image of the organization but this image can never be true if the organization does not live up to it.
Organizations should therefore really start with having well-arranged internal communication and values should be part of this communication. Organization A did not use employer
branding specifically in their internal communication but in general, this organization also put great effort in their internal communication. The interviewee from organization B also
mentioned that part of their internal employer branding is also the concept of ‘leading by example’. Communicating values and expectations is not enough, even internally, employees really have to see it too and if you want your employees to behave in a certain way, this has to start with top management. Values, behaviours and expectations should therefore be part of the entire culture of the organization. This is what that interviewee answered on a question about the internal and external communication of employer branding of that organization:
…Employer branding really is the DNA of the company. It is who you are, what you do and what you stand for so whatever you share externally has to be carried, communicated and embedded internally otherwise it is not credible.
Although employer branding is mentioned often and sometimes even embedded in everything the organizations do, it is not mentioned as often as CSR. Not even internally. All four organizations mention their CSR initiatives internally. They do not only mention what they do as an organization but they also try to involve their employees in it. Three out of four organizations ( A, B and D) even encourage their employees to engage more in CSR
themselves. This can be by making people aware of the environment and trying to get them to turn off the lights in the office when no one is there or by printing two sided. Next to that, these three organizations also try to get their employees to volunteer in projects that they are already supporting and organization A even encourages their employees to think of things to
18
do themselves, like participating in a run to raise money for a certain charity for example. Both employer branding and CSR are mostly communicated internally through an intranet or newsletters. Three out of four organizations (A, B and D) also provided certain trainings for their employees because they wanted their employees to keep learning and evolving so that they could get better and better. They all said this was part of their internal employer branding as well since their employees get to learn more about the organization and its values. Next to that, it is also part of employer branding externally since these trainings are often part of the promise an organizations gives to potential employees and they do have to live up to this promise in order to stay a good employer and keep their good image and reputation. Like the interviewee of organization D put it:
…It is about engaging your employees and keeping them satisfied and make them able to grow and these trainings are a way of providing that…… we want to be number one and therefore we need the number one people and in order to get them we need to have a strong employer brand. Only then people will come and find you and also stay with you.
What all four organizations have in common is that they believe communicating about the values of the organization is very important. Especially because they all want to be a good employer and in order to be that, values have to be attached to the organization. However, only two out of four organizations (B and D) actively communicate about it both internally as well as externally. Apparently internal communication is perceived to be more important in employer branding and organizations are still working on how they can best show their employer brand to the outside world in a credible way.
CSR, on the other hand, is communicated quite extensively both externally and internally by all four organizations. It is mentioned on all the corporate websites and most CSR sections on the websites even have different topics and these different topics have webpages of their own. Also, when looking at the attention that is given to CSR in the annual
19
reports of the organizations and the fact that organizations A, B and D even had separate annual reports on CSR, this shows that organizations really put effort in communicating and therefore also engaging in CSR. The annual reports of the four organizations could all found on the corporate websites of the organizations
Next, it is time to analyse how and if CSR is used in employer branding. Like
mentioned before, employer branding has a lot to do with values and engaging in CSR can be one of these values. All four organizations were engaging actively in CSR. They were also communicating about it a lot, both internally and externally. Only two out of four
organizations (B and D) however, used CSR in their employer branding strategies. These organizations said to do this because CSR or sustainability really are at the heart of the organization. It really is embedded in everything they do, so whether it is employer branding or their corporate strategy as a whole, CSR is always part of it. Like the interviewee from organization B put it:
…We do not make the split there very firm between CSR and employer branding. It is all one culture and it has got CSR in it as a key ingredient.
Both organizations that do link employer branding and CSR are active in many countries. One of the organizations said that there is a difference between the ways and the extent to which employer branding and CSR are linked in these countries. As mentioned by organization B, they are linked in every country but in some countries this is more visible than in others:
...In several countries you can also see how CSR and employer branding are interconnected. It is connected in every country but in different ways because it does depend on local
20
One of the two organizations that did not link employer branding and CSR,
organization A, is an organization that does not do much regarding employer branding at all. They are a market leader in every sector they work in so they probably do not need to do employer branding that extensively since they have a really strong corporate brand. They do engage in CSR a lot and communicate about it quite extensively and this also shows in their corporate brand. It can therefore be said that there still is a link since CSR is a huge part of what they do as an organization. The other organization, organization C, does inform their new employees on what they do on CSR through a workplace document that describes how they can get to work and what the values of the organization are but that is only when they just got the job. Like the interviewee from organization C said:
…They do hear about it and in that way it is sort of connected but it does not go further than that.
To summarize these findings, it can be said that the four organizations did see the benefit of connecting CSR to their employer branding strategies. They also said that both CSR and employer branding are becoming more important and that they experience that most of all the younger generation really asks organizations to be socially engaged. One of the
interviewees, surprisingly the interviewee from organization A, actually said that they have to use CSR in their recruitment because an increasing amount of people ask them what they do regarding CSR. According to this interviewee, potential new employees are even selecting organizations on base of their CSR policies. So even though this organizations does not engage in employer branding explicitly, it does see the benefit of using CSR in employer branding, or in this case, using CSR in their recruitment strategies.
21
Conclusion/Discussion
In this article I did research on how employer branding is managed with regard to CSR. Other than that, I also looked at the way in which both employer branding and CSR are communicated by organizations. These topics were investigated since organizations are currently only starting to engage in employer branding and to reach its full potential, organizations need to know how they can best organize this. This because organizations increasingly have trouble distinguishing themselves from their competition and this can be a risk for their reputation, image, identity and can diminish their competitive advantages. In other words, organizations need to find ways to communicate employer branding effectively to be, and continue to be, seen as a good employer and therefore as an organization that people actually want to work for. CSR can be connected to employer branding because they both are about values. Since former research also implies that they should be part of the broader communication strategy of organizations (Aggerholm, et al., 2011), this is a relevant topic to research. Especially, as research indicates that it is increasingly becoming harder to find the right people for the right job and that there even is ‘a war for talent’ (Elving et al., 2012). Doing good employer branding and adding values connected to CSR might make this easier for organizations, since they can present themselves better. It might also be a good thing for potential employees since they can now make a conscious choice and see what organization fits them best. The organizations that contributed to this research differed in the extent to which they engaged in employer branding. On the contrary, all organizations
engaged in some form of CSR and most of the time really extensively. A few conclusions that can be drawn from this research will now be discussed.
Managing internal and external communication on employer branding
Regarding employer branding and the way it is communicated by organizations, there are some differences to be found between how it is communicated internally and externally.
22
In general, this difference lies in the extent to which it is communicated. It seems that
internally, a lot more is communicated and externally organizations are still a bit reluctant to communicate too much. Internally the values of the organizations, and thus employer
branding, seemed to be communicated quite often. This is done because organizations really want their employees to fit the organization and they believe it is important that their
employees share the same values and are committed to the culture and strategy of the organization. From the literature, it was indeed expected that values are very important for organizations and their potential and current employees (Judge & Bretz, 1992) and that employees and potential employees are actually looking for organizations that fit their values best (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004; Arthur et al., 2006).
Regarding the external communication this means that organizations should be very aware of what and how they communicate. Employer branding will only be able to affect the reputation, image and identity if the external communication is done in a clear, consistent and credible way ( Lievens et al.,2007; Gatewood et al.,1993). What did become clear from this research is that whatever is communicated externally, really has to be carried internally. Being a good employer and having a good employer brand can therefore only be established when the values that are expressed externally are embedded in the entire culture of the organization.
Managing internal and external communication on CSR
Other than employer branding, many organizations do not only do a lot regarding CSR, they also communicate quite extensive about it. Still, differences can be found in the way CSR is communicated internally and externally. This difference mainly lies in the focus of the communication. Internally the focus is more on what the employees could do to engage in CSR themselves and about accomplishments the organizations has already had regarding CSR. Externally, the communication is more aimed at presenting goals of the organization and also reporting about what they did regarding CSR in numbers and statistics. For example,
23
if they met last year’s expectations regarding the planned decrease of waste or having green offices. When looking at the literature, this could be expected. Especially since CSR can be a subject that touches many people on the personal level and therefore organizations are always at risk of getting accusations of greenwashing (Elving & Van Vuuren, 2011). Some
organizations choose not to communicate more than absolutely necessary to prevent this. The organizations that took part in this research however, all were not afraid of getting accusations of greenwashing. This could be indicating that organizations are actually finding a good way to communicate or not to communicate certain aspects of what they are doing but further research is needed to able to actually say something about this.
Should employer branding and CSR be one strategy?
From the literature, it was expected that CSR and sustainability would often still be ignored in human resource management and thus in employer branding (Preuss et al., 2009). This does not seem to be the case anymore. Organizations really try to make employer branding and CSR part of their larger communication strategy and they try to communicate about it in a clear and credible way. Some organizations already have employer branding and CSR embedded in everything they do and, like mentioned by Aggerholm et al. (2011), both employer branding and CSR are then part of the communication and business strategy of the entire organization and are not seen as separate entities. Still, when looking at how employer branding is managed with regard to CSR, it seems that organizations often do not specifically use CSR in their employer branding strategies. They do seem to be interconnected in most organizations since the values are interconnected but only one organization said that a firm split between them was not there. In this organization both employer branding and CSR were part of the organization’s culture and since this culture had CSR as a key ingredient, it was also used in their employer branding. When asked however, the organizations definitely saw the benefit of using CSR in their employer branding. This especially because people are
24
increasingly asking what these organizations do regarding CSR. So, to answer the research question; most organizations do see the benefits of using CSR in their employer branding but most of the time, CSR is not used in their employer branding strategies yet. All organizations did however agree on the fact that it seems logical to combine them since they are
interconnected because of the values that are embedded within employer branding and CSR. To conclude, it has to be said that while most organizations are already engaging in CSR, employer branding is still experienced as quite a new phenomenon so organizations are currently only setting up strategies and trying to find good ways to communicate employer branding. In a couple of years it will probably be possible to give a better answer to the research question as posed by this research.
Limitations and implications for future research
This research has some limitations regarding the data. Only four interviews were conducted and these were all conducted within multinationals. These multinationals did not operate in the same sector however, so the data can be generalized to a larger public. Still, more interviews could probably give a better insight in how employer branding is managed with regard to CSR. Next to that, the timeframe of this research was quite short so maybe more data could have been gathered over a larger period of time. For future research, it would be interesting to do a longitudinal study because many organizations refused to participate since they were only just starting with their employer branding programs. It might be a good idea to research what they plan to do and then compare it over time with what they actually accomplish regarding employer branding and then potential effects can also be measured. For example, to see if employer branding really leads to a better fit between a person and
organization or if including CSR in employer branding makes organizations more attractive. A case study in an organization that is starting with employer branding might also be
25
only coded by one person so it might be that someone else would interpret the data on the websites differently. Other than that, it can be said that this research did give a few insights in why organizations should engage in employer branding and CSR and also why they should be one and the same strategy since the reasons for doing both can overlap.
References:
Aggerholm, H. K., Andersen, S. E., & Thomsen, C. (2011). Conceptualising employer branding in sustainable organisations. Corporate Communications: An International
Journal,16 (2), 105-123.
Arthur, W., Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., & Doverspike, D. (2006). The Use of Person
Organization Fit in Employment Decision Making: An Assessment of Its Criterion Related Validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91 (4), 786–801
Backhaus, K., & Tickoo, S. (2004). Conceptualizing and researching employer branding.
Career Development International, 9 (5), 501-517.
Celani, A., & Singh, P. (2011). Signaling theory and applicant attraction outcomes. Personnel Review, 40(2), 222-238.
Chatman, J.A. (1989). Improving interactional organizational research: A model of person organization fit. Academy of Management Review, 14, 333-49.
Elving, W., & Van Vuuren, M. (2011). Beyond identity washing: Corporate social responsibility in an age of skepticism. Akademija MM (Slovenian Journal of Marketing), 17, 49-55.
26
Elving, W. J. L., Westhoff, J. J. C., Meeusen, K., & Schoonderbeek, J. (2012). The war for talent? The relevance of employer branding in job advertisements for becoming an employer of choice. Journal of Brand Management, 1-19.
Gatewood, R. D., Gowan, M. A., & Lautenschlager, G. J. (1993). Corporate image, recruitment image, and initial job choice decisions. The Academy of Management Journal, 36(2), 414-427.
Highhouse, S., Thornbury, E. E., & Little, I. S. (2007). Social-identity functions of attraction to organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103, 134-
146
Judge, T. A., & Bretz, R. D. (1992). Effects of work values on job choice decisions. Journal of applied psychology, 77(3), 261-271.
Golob, U., Podnar, K., Elving, W. J., Ellerup Nielsen, A., Thomsen, C., & Schultz, F. (2013). CSR Communication: quo vadis? Corporate Communications: An International
Journal, 18, 176-192.
Google Company, Corporate Social Responsibility. (n.d.). Retrieved May, 2nd 2014 from http://www.google.cn/intl/en/about/company/responsibility/
Lievens, F., Van Hoye, G., & Anseel, F. (2007) Organizational Identity and Employer Image: Towards a Unifying Framework*. British Journal of Management,18, 45–59.
Morsing, M., Schultz, M., & Nielsen K. U. (2008). The ‘Catch 22’ of communicating CSR: Findings from a Danish study. Journal of Marketing Communications, 14,97-111.
Preuss, L., Haunschild, A., & Matten, D. (2009). The rise of CSR: implications for HRM and employee representation, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 20 (4). 953-973.
27
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In J. A. Williams & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Turban, D.B., & Greening, D.W. (1996). Corporate social performance and organisational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 658-72.
Appendix A
Interview Scheme Introduction:
Good afternoon, my name is Jos and I follow the master corporate communication of the Graduate School of Communication of the University of Amsterdam. First I would like to thank you for your time for having this interview. This interview will focus on different aspects of employer branding and corporate social responsibility en the way they are communicated. The interview will last about one hour. I would like to record the interview because this will help me with the processing of it. The interview is completely confidential; nowhere in the transcript will your name or the name of the organization be written. I will also delete the recording when I’ve finished transcribing it. I will use the transcript of this interview to make an analysis that I will use to write my master thesis. Do you have any questions before we start?
General questions
What is your function in the organization? How long have you been doing this function? Employer
branding general
What, in your definition, is employer branding?
How do you apply Employer branding in your organization/how do you advise it to other organizations?
Why is employer branding so important for your organization? CSR general What, in your definition, is CSR?
What do you do on the people, profit, planet side? FU: on which side do you focus?
How do you apply CSR in your organization?
Stakeholders Who or what are the stakeholders of your employer branding and CSR? Do you feel you respond well to stakeholders’ needs?
Do you think your stakeholders are aware of your employer branding/ CSR practices?
28
activities?
How do you think your stakeholders perceive the organization?
Employees Are your employees involved in Employer branding and CSR activities? Do you think your employer branding and CSR have an influence on the commitment of your employees?
FU: no Why not? FU: Yes, please explain
Which has the bigger influence in your opinion? FU: Why/why not?
Communication How do you communicate your employer branding? Where lies the main focus of your employer branding? Do you mention employer branding on your website? FU: how do you use your website for employer branding Do you mention employer branding in your annual report?
How do you communicate employer branding internally and internally? Is there a difference between your internal and external employer branding communication?
If you communicate employer branding, where lies the main focus? What values are connected to your organization?
Are these values also mentioned in your employer branding? Is CSR one of the values of the organization?
How is your CSR communication shaped? Do you mention CSR on your website? FU: how do you use your website for CSR Do you mention CSR in your annual report?
How do you communicate CSR internally and externally? Is there a difference between your internal and external CSR communication?
Do you use CSR in your employer branding strategies?
What is/would be the extra value of combining employer branding and CSR?
Do you think your organization would have an even better communication strategy if both where combined?
Employer branding and CSR benefits
What, do you think are the effects of your employer branding strategies/CSR strategies?
Why do you think it is so important?
What are your own motivations for engaging in employer branding/CSR? Did you choose the organization for certain reasons and can these be connected to either employer branding, CSR or both?
What do you want to achieve with employer branding and CSR? Do you have an ultimate goal?
That were all my questions. Do you want to rephrase your answers somehow?
Do you have any extra information or remarks that you have not been able to answer during the interview?
