MICROSOFT
Master Thesis
The perceived effectiveness of internal branding
activities and the moderating effect of an
individualistic character
Youness Aktaou 2-3-2015
Amsterdam Business School
Programme: Executive Programme in Management Studies (Marketing Track)
Research area: Internal branding
Name: Youness Aktaou
Student number: 10684441
Supervisor: Dr. Karin Venetis
2
Preface
This thesis is written in order to finish my MSc Executive Programme in Management Studies at the Amsterdam Business School. I have followed the marketing track and have written my thesis in the field of internal branding. Writing a thesis is a process in which I learned a lot and whereby I was able to utilize all the knowledge I gained during the courses.
During the course ‘Corporate branding’ I decided to focus my research on internal branding, because I wanted to learn about branding from the perspective of the employees. The research question of my thesis is: How is the effectiveness of internal branding activities influenced by an individualistic
character? This research is a starting point for managers in the banking industry to gain insight into
which internal branding activities are more effective when an employee is more / less individualistic.
I would like to thank those who have been involved in my thesis and helped me in any way. Particularly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Karin Venetis, for her coaching, patience, support and feedback during the process of writing my thesis. I also would like to thank all respondents who participated in this research by filling out the survey.
To me, internal branding is a very interesting topic and I hope that you find this thesis interesting to read.
Youness Aktaou March, 2015
Abstract
Internal branding is a topic which has caught the attention of several researchers, because it is a tool to create strong brands and a sustainable competitive advantage. Fundamentally, the rationale behind internal branding is that the success of organizations and brands is influenced by the role of employees. This research explores whether an individualistic character has influence on the effectiveness of internal branding activities. The study has been conducted in the banking industry in The Netherlands.
The results of this study, using data from surveys completed by 76 employees with direct customer-contact in the banking industry, are not totally different from what was expected based on the literature. This study has resulted in important findings. The most important finding of this study is that internal branding will ensure organizational commitment, regardless whether an employee has an individualistic character or not. This means that an individualistic character does not moderate the relationship between internal branding and organizational commitment. So, the effectiveness of internal branding will not be strengthened or weakened by an individualistic character.
However, the correlation matrix showed that individualistic character correlates significant with OCB. Besides, from the four internal branding activities (i.e. training programmes, briefings, group meetings and written communications), only training programmes and group meetings are found to have a direct positive effect on organizational commitment.
Furthermore, organizational commitment is found to be a predictor of OCB.
This corresponds with the first hypothesis and the theory of Punjaisri and Wilson (2011). The directions for further research are mentioned at the end.
4 Table of contents Preface ... 2 Abstract ... 3 1. Introduction ... 5 Internal branding ... 5 Different employees ... 6 Individualism ... 7 Individualistic employees ... 7
Goal of the research ... 8
Research question and sub questions ... 9
Contribution ... 10
Structure of this thesis ... 10
2. Theoretical framework ... 11
Branding ... 11
Internal branding ... 12
The important role of internal branding... 12
Organizational performance and OCB ... 13
Internal branding, organizational commitment and OCB ... 14
Influencing the effect of internal branding ... 15
Individualistic employees ... 16
Conceptual model ... 18
3. Research Methodology ... 19
Sample ... 19
Approach of the research ... 19
Measurements ... 20
4. Results ... 22
Demographic and descriptive analysis ... 22
Reliability analysis ... 24
Normal distribution ... 25
Correlation analysis ... 25
Testing the hypotheses ... 26
Hypothesis 1 ... 26
Hypotheses 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D ... 26
Moderation ... 29
5. Conclusion and discussion ... 32
6. Implications ... 34
7. Limitations and further research ... 35
Reference list ... 37
Appendix 1: Scale items ... 42
1. Introduction
“Employees are seen as having a major influence on how external stakeholders perceive the corporate brand and make sense of its identity and image” (Anixter, 2003; Hatch and Schultz, 2001; Mitchell,
2002; Punjaisri and Wilson, 2011).
“We build the Starbucks brand first with our people, not with consumers. Because we believed the best way to meet and exceed the expectations of our customers was to hire and train great people, we invested in employees” (Howard Schultz).
The first quote shows the important role of employees and especially the second quote implies that the employees must know which values and promises their brand represent. This will be explained in the following section.
Internal branding
Internal branding is a very important topic, as Stuart (2002) has shown that the more employees identify themselves with the organization the more these employees are likely to express that identity in their actions. Internal branding can help to achieve this alignment with the promotion of the brand inside the organization. It can be stated that internal branding is all about letting the customers experience the brand promise through the employees. In the literature there is support for the statement of Howard Schultz, Founder of Starbucks, since internal branding activities lead to better performance of the company (Punjaisri and Wilson, 2011). Furthermore, this is in line with the service profit chain. The Service Profit Chain indicates a strong link between employees, quality of the service and the performance of the company (Loveman and Sasser, 1994).
While some researches, Punjaisri, Wilson and Evanschitzky (2008), divide internal branding activities in mass methods, written memo’s and face-to-face communicatiosn, Matanda & Oly Ndubisi(2013) divide internal branding activities in four different categories. These authors categorize the internal branding activities as follows:
Training programmes;
Briefings;
Group meetings;
6 In a service organization, the delivery of the corporate brand is frequently dependant on staff effectively delivering the core values of the company to the customers (Punjaisri and Wilson, 2011). De Chernatony (2002) argues that the service staff is very important to the corporate brand through the adoption of behaviors which support the set of brand values. Because of this key role of employees, Cleaver (1990) argued that internal branding activities are perceived to be as important as external branding activities in communicating and delivering the brand promise to the customer.
This means that it is very important to be consistent in what is being communicated to the external and internal environment and that employees know what image they are expected to project. Therefore, the messages should be consistent with the mission, vision, values and image of the brand. Employees should deliver the desired brand promise, based on the expectations set by the external marketing activities (Bitner, 1995).
In previous researches it is argued that internal branding activities are carried out with a rationale to align staff’s behavior with the corporate brand identity (Vallaster and de Chernatony, 2006). With the alignment of the employees’ behavior, the gap between the brand promise and what customers perceive can be reduced. That is why the role of the employees is frequently pointed out as crucial.
Research in the field of internal branding activities has shown that the communicated brand promise needs to reflect the uniqueness of the brand in order to keep the brand’s virtue as a source of competitiveness (Balmer, 2001). Often used types of internal branding activities are daily briefings, group meetings, notice boards, newsletters and logbooks (Punjaisri and Wilson, 2011).
Different employees
Because of the important role of employees in delivering the brand promise, different researchers examined the role of employees and used several characteristics and personal variables in order to make a distinction between employees (Punjaisri and Wilson, 2011; Heneman and Cohen, 1988). These researchers examined the role of personal variables such as age, educational background and length of service. Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) argue that age, educational level and the period an employee is working for his employer influence the effectiveness of internal branding activities.
Other researchers distinguish between employees by describing them as individualistic or collectivistic (Love and Dustin, 2013; Liu et al, 2013; Ramamoorthy et al, 2007).
Parsons and Shills (1951) argued that individualism is a way to describe people who are focused more towards self-interest and reaching their own goals. The opposite of individualism is collectivism, which is a way to describe people who are focused more toward the collective. So an individualist would consider his own goals more important than the interests of the group (Moorman, 1995).
Individualism
As described before, employees can be distinguished on the basis of individualistic and collectivistic characteristics. Love and Dustin (2013) describe that employees with a low score on individualism for example increase the probability that they will engage in taking charge behaviors which can be linked to a high score on organizational citizenship behavior. These voluntary behaviors are necessary for organizational improvements.
Furthermore, several researchers (Love and Dustin, 2013; Liu et al, 2013; Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001; Ramamoorthy et al, 2007) describe that individualistic employees behave different within an organization than more collectivistic employees. Kirkman and Shapiro (2001) came to the conclusion that individualistic employees show greater resistance towards working in a team, were less satisfied and committed to their organization.
Despite the several researches about the role of individualism as a characteristic of employees,
no researcher paid attention tested whether different types of internal branding activities are more effective with individualistic/collectivistic employees.
Since researchers already found evidence that internal branding activities ensure commitment, the aim of this research is to find out what happens with the effectiveness of internal branding activities when an employee is more or less individualistic. This is necessary in order to use the most effective internal branding activities with different types of employees.
Individualistic employees
Since Kirkman and Shapiro (2001) argued that individualistic employees are less satisfied and less committed to the organization it is expected to ignore individualistic employees and to hire only collectivistic employees. According to the research of Hollenbeck et al (2012) this is not wise. Hollenbeck et al (2012) argue that a heterogeneous combination of individualistic and collectivistic employees is associated with higher levels of performance. On the basis of this evidence it is clear that individualistic employees add value to the organization.
8
Goal of the research
Companies pay more attention to internal branding in order to ensure that the employees deliver the brand promise to the customers. Individualism is brought in as a moderator in this research, because the aim of this research is to find out what happens with the effectiveness of every type of internal branding activity, when an employee is more/less individualistic.
It is not clear which type of internal branding activity is more effective with individualistic employees. If research shows that a certain activity is more effective for individualistic employees, the responsible manager can work more efficient and provide the most effective internal branding activities to every employee.
This research is an elaboration of the research of Punjaisri and Wilson (2011). In their research they incorporated personal variables. Punjaisri and Wilson tested the moderating effect of personal variables on the relationship between internal branding and organizational performance. In this relationship between internal branding and organizational performance, organizational commitment was a mediator. Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) found that different types of personal variables, such as age and educational level influence the way employees react on internal branding activities. This research will explore the influence that an individualistic character has on the effectiveness of internal branding activities. The personal variables such as age and educational level are brought in as control variables.
Research question and sub questions
This research seeks to examine whether an individualistic character influences the effectiveness of different types of internal branding activities in the relationship between internal branding and organizational commitment.
This leads to the following research question:
“How is the effectiveness of internal branding activities influenced by an individualistic character of an employee”?
In order to answer the research question above, it is necessary to answer the following sub questions on the basis of the literature review.
What is internal branding?
What are the different types of internal branding activities?
What is organizational commitment and what are the types of organizational commitment?
How does organizational commitment influence organizational performance?
What are the different types of employee characteristics / personal variables? What is individualism?
How do employees with an individualistic character perform within an organization?
10
Contribution
This thesis has both, academic and managerial implications. As mentioned before, the effect of an individualistic character on the effectiveness of internal branding activities is not examined before. So this research contributes to the academic literature by showing whether an individualistic character moderates the relationship between the internal branding activities and organizational commitment. In other words, will the relationship between internal branding and organizational commitment be stronger or weaker when employees possess high levels of individualism.
Furthermore, as the rationale behind the internal branding activities is to align staff’s behavior with the corporate brand identity, it is important to know which internal branding activity is more effective for different types of employees. In the field of managerial contribution, this research will provide managers with knowledge about which types of internal branding activities are more effective in achieving organizational commitment with different types of employees.
This research can support managers with the efficient selection of the right internal branding activities to reach organizational commitment with different types of employees. Since it is important to ensure organizational commitment across all employees and the expectation that individualistic employees are less committed than collectivistic employees, internal branding activities are necessary to create organizational commitment. This research will provide insight in the effectiveness of different types of internal branding activities.
Structure of this thesis
An introduction concerning the topic of this thesis is given in this chapter. Besides the introduction, the research question and contribution are both described in this first chapter. The second chapter will contain the literature review and the hypotheses and the conceptual model. The hypotheses are derived from the literature review. The research design, methodology and data collection will be described in chapter three. The results will be discussed in the fourth chapter, we will support or reject the hypotheses we developed in chapter two. The fifth chapter will contain the conclusion and discussion of this research. The last two chapters will describe the implications, limitations and the necessary directions for future research.
2. Theoretical framework
Branding
A brand can be defined in different ways. In this research the definition of The American Marketing Association is used. The American Marketing Association defined a brand as “A name, term, design, symbol or any other feature that identifies one seller’s good or service as distinct from those of other sellers”. A strong brand offers a company different benefits. Keller (2009) and Hoeffler and Keller (2003) described several possible benefits of a strong brand. According to these researchers, a strong brand can offer for example greater customer loyalty, larger margins and improved perceptions of product performance. These benefits can be created by brand-building activities with the aim to influence the attitude and behavior of customers.
Brands and brand management matter to an organization, because individual customers or companies are making choices between different products and services (Keller, 2009). A brand can be used to influence the decision making process. In order to create the right associations with the brand in the memory of customers and to elicit positive brand judgments and feelings, branding is very important (Keller, 2009). These associations enable the customers to organize their knowledge regarding the company. Because these associations can take on different forms, it is normal that employees are crucial in influencing these associations in the mind of the customers. The way an employee helps the customer influence the associations in his mind, which can influence the decision making process.
Therefore, different researchers argue that it is important to use branding also for internal purposes. (Punjaisri and Wilson, 2011; Punjaisri, Evanschitzky and Rudd, 2013;Matanda &Oly Ndubisi, 2013 ).
As we will see in the next paragraph, the role of employees is crucial. Especially in a service organization, where employees are involved with every touch point. The way an employee treats a customer influence the associations and indirect also the decision making process.
Therefore, a company must ensure that employees know the values of the company and how to deliver the brand promise. Therefore, internal branding is very important.
12
Internal branding
Internal branding is seen as a tool to make the brand stronger. In order to ensure that all employees understand the business and values of the company, internal branding is a tool to align the organizational culture and internal process with the values of the brand (Vallaster, 2004; De Chernatony and Segal-Horn, 2001; Hatch and Schultz, 2001; LePla and Parker, 1999). The rationale behind internal branding is that employees are important for their employer when it comes to building strong brands (Burmann & King, 2011). This is especially applicable for service brands because almost every touch point means having contact with an employee of the company. This means that employees are crucial for the success of the brand.
The objective of internal branding is to ensure that employees are able to transform brand messages into brand reality for customers (Punjaisri and Wilson, 2007) and thus to deliver the brand promise. Very often, employees influence whether this brand promise is fulfilled or not. Therefore, they need knowledge and skills to fulfill this promise. Internal branding is essential for ensuring this knowledge and skills (Bitner, 1995; George, 1990). With internal branding, employees will know what the brand stands for and thus they will be able to deliver upon the brand promise.
The important role of internal branding
In the field of markets with high competitiveness it is more difficult for a company to have a sustainable competitive advantage. Having intangible assets which are embedded in the culture and capabilities of the company is a way of gaining competitive advantage. According to Kimpakorn & Tocquer (2010) and King and Grace (2007), the quality of the service, customer experience in the store and a strong brand are powerful tools to gain this competitive advantage. Because the perceived quality of the service and having a strong brand largely lies in the hands of employees, internal branding is necessary to ensure that employees deliver the brand promise and customers’ expectations are fulfilled (Punjaisri and Wilson, 2007). Therefore, it is necessary to view the employees as internal customers in order to sell the brand and brand values to them.
Furthermore, internal branding is found to have an indirect positive effect on the financial performance of an organization, because it is found that internal branding has a positive effect on the attitudes and behaviour of employees. These attitudes and behaviour influence customer satisfaction which in turn will result in better financial performance. So, because the behavior of employees is important for the success of an organization, internal branding must ensure an alignment of the behavior with the values of the organization. Berry (2000) argues that branding can also be used to influence the perception of the employees and therefore it is advisable to inform the employees about internal-oriented initiatives (Ling, 2004). That is why Jacobs (2003) argues that a brand represents the relationship an organization has with both, the customers and the employees.
Since the brand represents also the relationship an organization has with the employees, Ramlall (2004) described how important it is to assess the commitment of employees and to ensure that employees want to stay.
Employees can be committed to their brand or organization. In this research, organizational commitment will be the criterium. Organizational commitment is the relative strength of an individual’s identification with and involvement in a particular organization (Mowday, Steers and Porter, 1979) and strongly committed employees recognize the following three factors:
A strong belief in and acceptance of the goals and values of the organization; Willingness to exert effort on behalf of the organization;
Strong desire to remain member of the organization.
Organizational commitment appears to develop consistently over time as employees think about the relationship with their employer. This attitude, should be related to motivation to perform and intrinsic motivation (Mowday, Steers and Porter, 1979) and has a positive impact on the image, associations (Kimpakorn & Tocquer, 2010) and organizational performance (Mowday, Steers and Porter, 1979; Riketta, 2002; Laschinger, 2001).
Hence, highly committed employees are thought to be motivated to exert high levels of energy on behalf of the organization and that is why employees must be committed to the organization. Conclusively, highly committed employees are emotional attached to the organizational and will show more organizational citizenship behaviors (Organ, 1988).
Organizational performance and OCB
Based on the highly competitive markets of today, it is important that organizations look for ways to maximize the productivity and performance of the employees and so also the productivity and performance of the organization (Stamper and Van Dyne, 2003).
Organizational citizenship behavior (here-after OCB) is behavior that is not part of the formal role requirements of the employee, but promotes the effective functioning of the organization. OCB gives answer to the question why several employees voluntary help others in a work environment, without a promise or reward for the offered help and assistance, but a lack of it will not ensure a punishment (Schnake, Dumbler and Cochren, 1993). OCB goes beyond the core task of employees and are considered as positive contributions that support the organization and by creating an environment that promotes OCB, managers enhance the productivity and success of the employees and the organization.
Hence, a high score on OCB is related to better organizational performance (Spector, 2012; Walz and Niehoff, 2000).
14
Internal branding, organizational commitment and OCB
We see organizational commitment as a possible direct effect of internal branding and organizational performance as an indirect effect of internal branding. Studies that have investigated this relationship have showed significant effects. Punjaisri et al (2009) and Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) examined whether organizational commitment could lead to better organizational performance. The findings of this research show that internal branding indeed has a positive effect on organizational performance. In other words, more committed employees means better performance of the organization. Since Spector (2012) and Walz and Niehoff (2000) found that a higher score on OCB is related to better organizational performance, OCB will be dependent variable of this study.
This hypothesis will serve as a test to examine whether the conceptual model is correct, because Punjaisri et al (2009) and Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) found empirical evidence for the relation between internal branding and organizational performance.
H1: Organizational commitment will have a significant positive effect on OCB.
As mentioned before, organizations use internal branding to ensure alignment of staff’s behavior with the corporate brand identity (Vallaster and de Chernatony, 2006) in order to reduce the gap between the brand promise and what customers perceive.
Punjaisri et al (2009), Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) and Matanda & Oly Ndubisi (2013) make a distinction between internal communication tools and training programmes. The internal communication tools Punjaisri et al (2009) and Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) recognize are daily briefings, group meetings, notice boards, newsletters and logbooks. Orientation programmes and development courses are the training programmes they recognize.
Matanda & Oly Ndubisi (2013) do not make a distinction between different internal branding activities, so they take internal communication in general and trainings in general.
The biggest difference between these internal branding activities is the participation of the employees. As an employee it necessary to participate actively during orientation programmes and development courses. In contrast to the orientation programmes and development courses, the employee can decide whether to read the newsletters, notice boards and logbooks. Furthermore, there is a difference between the way the information is transmitted to the employees. When receiving verbal information, it is very important to focus. Written information offers the possibility to read the documents at a later time.
Despite the many studies in the field of internal branding, no research examined the effectiveness of each internal branding activity. Hence, it is necessary to determine which internal branding activities should be examined in this research. Conclusively, we combined the researches of Punjaisri et al (2009), Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) and Matanda & Oly Ndubisi (2013) and determined to examine these four internal branding activities:
Training programmes;
Briefings;
Group meetings
Written communications.
As described before, Punjaisri et al (2009), Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) showed that internal branding in general has a significant positive effect on commitment of employees. The expectation is that every internal branding activity will have a significant positive effect on the organizational commitment of employees and hence the following hypotheses are proposed.
H2A: Training programmes will have a significant positive effect on organizational commitment. H2B: Briefings will have a significant positive effect on organizational commitment.
H2C: Group meetings will have a significant positive effect on organizational commitment.
H2D: Written communications will have a significant positive effect on organizational commitment.
Influencing the effect of internal branding
Since the effect of internal branding can be influenced by different factors, several researchers examined the effect of internal branding and the role of different factors.
Situational variables and personal variables can influence the effect of internal branding.
Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) examined whether personal variables as age, educational level and length of service influence the relationship between internal branding and commitment. Despite the significant effect of internal branding on brand commitment and brand loyalty, Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) found that these relationships are influenced by the personal variables. The relationship between internal branding and brand commitment and brand loyalty is stronger when employees are younger than 30 years. Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) and Simons and Enz (1995) argue that this could be explained by the fact that older employees have built up more commitment and loyalty towards their brand and organization. Hence internal branding has less influence on their commitment and loyalty.
Educational level seems to have a positive effect on the relationship between internal branding and commitment and loyalty of employees towards their brand and organization. Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) show evidence that employees with a lower educational level are always loyal and committed. The opposite of this is applicable for the length of service.
16 The longer an employee works for an organization, the more influence internal branding has on the
commitment and loyalty of employees.
So, different internal branding activities require different levels of participation of employees and Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) showed that personal variables influence the effect of internal branding. Now we know that the effect of internal branding can be influenced by personal variables, it could also be possible that the character of an employee influences the effect of internal branding. One way to distinguish between employees is to make a distinction between individualistic and collectivistic employees. (Love and Dustin, 2013; Liu et al, 2013; Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001 and Ramamoorthy et al, 2007.
Individualistic employees
Dividing employees in a individualistic group and a collectivistic group, means that it must be recognized that the characteristics will ensure that employees behave different within an organization (Love and Dustin, 2013; Liu et al, 2013; Ramamoorthy et al, 2007).
Individualists can be described as people who are oriented more towards self-interest and reaching their own goals, so they consider their own interests more important than the interests of the group (Parsons and Shills, 1951). Collectivists are described as people who are oriented toward the collective and look out for the well-being of the group and show less resistance towards working in a team, were more satisfied and committed to their employer and perform more OCBs (Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001)
Furthermore, collectivists are more likely to seek ways to achieve goals set by the group, even though these solutions are not directly related to their own goals. Hence, collectivists will perform more organizational citizenship behavior (here-after OCBs) than individualists, because these OCBs are not required but considered helpful to the group (Moorman and Blakely, 1995). OCBs are on the job behaviors which are discretionary, not formally or directly recognized by the organizational reward system, yet promote the effectiveness of the organization (Organ, 1990).
While it seems logical that a company with only collectivistic employees would perform better, Hollenbeck et al (2012) showed evidence that a heterogeneous combination of individualistic and collectivistic employees is associated with higher levels of performance. They ensure the right balance in the team. This means that, despite the fact that individualistic employees want to be distinct and superior to everything and everyone to achieve their own goals (Liu et al, 2013), they are necessary within an organization to form a team with the other employees.
Since OCBs are performed to support interests of the organization even though they may not directly lead to individual benefits, the findings that collectivists show these behaviors more than individualists, that internal branding activities are useful to achieve the goals of the organization
and that some internal branding activities require more willingness from the employee the following four hypotheses are proposed.
H3A: Individualistic character will moderate the relationship between training programmes and organizational commitment, i.e. the effect of training programmes on organizational commitment will be stronger for collectivistic employees than for individualistic employees.
H3B: Individualistic character will moderate the relationship between briefings and organizational commitment, i.e. the effect of briefings on organizational commitment will be stronger for individualistic employees than for collectivistic employees.
H3C: Individualistic character will moderate the relationship between group meetings and organizational commitment, i.e. the effect of group meetings on organizational commitment will be stronger for individualistic employees than for collectivistic employees.
H3D: Individualistic character will moderate the relationship between written communications and organizational commitment, i.e. the effect of written communications on organizational commitment will be stronger for collectivistic employees than for individualistic employees.
18
Conceptual model
The conceptual model for this research is shown in the following figure. As a summary, this study will investigate how an individualistic character influences the effectiveness of different types of internal branding activities.
3. Research Methodology
The hypotheses above were tested by the conducted empirical research. In order to answer the research question of this study, a survey was conducted. Because this study aims to describe causal relationships between different variables and moderating factors, this study is an explanatory study. Furthermore, it is a cross-sectional research as the data were collected at a particular moment. This chapter describes the sample of the study, the measurement of the variables and the research procedure.
Sample
The population that is targeted for this study are employees working in the service industry. Furthermore, they must have direct contact with customers. An example of these kind of employees are employees working in banks, restaurants, research firms and so forth. Because the big differences between service firms, this research will focus on only one industry. For this study, the banking industry is chosen to conduct the research. The banking industry is chosen because of several different banks in The Netherlands. This means that it will be easy to obtain respondents from different types of banks. For example, the sample can include employees working at ING Bank (serving the low segment), ABN AMRO MeesPierson (serving the luxury segment) or Royal Bank Of Scotland (serving business segment). Including the different banks, the expectation is that this will ensure a huge variation for internal branding activities, which is the independent variable of this study.
Due to lack of a precise list of individuals who are working in the banking industry, non-probability sampling is used. There are several types of non-probability sampling, but the type used for this study is called snowball sampling. This means that individuals who meet the criteria of the population will be identified. These people will be asked to send the questionnaire to other people of whom they think they meet the criteria. For this study, it was necessary that the respondents were employed within the banking industry. This will ensure that the data will be derived from employees working in the banking industry. As a result, there will be variation within the independent variable and the moderating variable.
Approach of the research
To gather respondents for this study, the survey was distributed online. The survey was developed in Qualtrics and was distributed via Linkedin and Facebook. Respondents were asked to use a couple of minutes to fill out the survey. Colleagues, friends and people on Linkedin and Facebook that met the criteria for the research were asked to fill out the survey and to forward it to their acquaintances. Because it was expected that the online survey would reach enough respondents who met all the
20 requirements necessary to participate in this research, it was not necessary to conduct an offline
survey.
The survey started off with personal questions about the respondents, to ensure that they met the requirements. In these questions the respondents were asked which bank they work for, if they have direct contact with the customers. These questions were followed by questions regarding the moderating variable, dependent variable and mediating variable.
Measurements
For this study, measurement scales from prior studies were used. Since these studies were in English and in order to mitigate the possibility that respondents would misunderstand the questions, the constructs were not translated into Dutch. Furthermore, the survey was pre-tested in order to gain feedback whether the questions were understandable. In the pre-test, twenty respondents were asked to fill out the survey. After it was pre-tested, no big adjustments were necessary.
Independent variable
The independent variable of this study is internal branding activities. Internal branding activities is measured by the scales of Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) and Matanda & Oly Ndubisi (2013). The classification of the different types of internal branding activities is derived from the latter. In their study Matanda & Oly Ndubisi (2013) distinguish between the following four different types of internal branding activities:
Training; Briefings;
Group meetings;
Written communications.
For every internal branding activities a seven item scale was used. Three items were derived from the study of Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) and four items were derived from the study of Matanda &Oly Ndubisi (2013).
This seven-item scale measures this variable with items such as “During the training I am clearly
informed about the brand mission” and “I clearly understand my role in relation to the brand mission, after attending the briefing”. Respondents were asked to respond on a seven-point likert
Mediating variable
The mediating variable of this study is organizational commitment. Organizational commitment is measured by the scale of Porter et al (1974). This thirteen-item scale measures this variable with items such as “I am proud to tell others that I am part of this organization” and “I really care about
the fate of this organization”. Respondents were asked to respond on a seven-point likert scale.
1= Strongly disagree and 7= strongly agree.
Moderating variable
The moderating effect of this study is individualism. Individualism is measured by the scale of Wagner and Moch (1986). This nine-item scale measures this variable with items such as “People in
a group should realize that they are not always going to get what they want” and “I prefer to work with others rather than work alone”. Respondents were asked to respond on a seven-point Likert
scale. 1= Strongly disagree and 7= Strongly agree.
Dependent variable
The dependent variable of this study is OCB, because a higher score on OCB is related to better performance (MacKenzie et al, 1991) and indicates that employees perform on the job behaviours which are discretionary and not formally recognized by the organizational reward system but promote the effectiveness of the organization (Organ, 1990). This sixteen-item scale measures this variable with items such as “I carry out activities that serve to improve my institution” and “I do not
want to take extra breaks”. Respondents were asked to respond on a seven-point Likert scale. 1=
Strongly disagree and 7= Strongly agree.
Control variables
Since the study of Punjaisri and Wilson (2011) shows that age and education influence the effect of internal branding activities on commitment, these variables were included as control variables. Although the length of service did not significantly influence the effect of internal branding activities in the research of Punjaisri and Wilson (2011), it is included in this research because it is expected that employees will be more committed if they work longer for their employer.
22
4. Results
In this chapter the results of the statistical analysis will be discussed. The data has been analyzed with SPSS statistics 20. The demographic and descriptive statistics will be described first. Furthermore, the used scales were tested on reliability where-after the hypotheses were analyzed.
Demographic and descriptive analysis
The survey was completed by a total of 79 respondents. Since Qualtrics shows a message in case respondents forgot to answer a question, there were no missing data in the survey. But due to outliers, the responses of three respondents were deleted. Their responses would influence the outcomes of the majority of the respondents and therefore, these three responses were deleted and thus N=76.
The response rate was 71,8 % and some respondents started the survey without completing it and therefore the responses of 15 respondents were deleted.
The majority (57,9%) of the respondents were females and 42,1% of the respondents were males. The fact that the survey was filled in by more females than males is not surprising.
King & Grace (2012) stated that gender division is common when the sample is part of a population that works in the service industry.
Besides, the respondents varied in age between 18 and 65 years old and the majority of the respondents were between 26 and 35 years old.
Furthermore, almost half (40,8%) of the respondents had a master degree and almost half (42,1%) of the respondents worked less than three years for their current employer.
Conclusively, most respondents are highly educated and almost half of the respondents filled out that they have been working less than three years for their current employer. This means they did not experience much internal branding activities. The longer an employee works for his employer, the more internal branding activities he has experienced. Furthermore, more than half of the respondents are between 26 and 45 years old. Age and educational level are found to have an influence on internal branding (Punjaisri et al (2007), Punjaisri and Wilson (2011). Therefore, these findings can influence the results of this study.
Table 1. Demographic and descriptive statistics
Variables N=76 Percentages Gender: Females Gender: Males 57.9% 42.1% Age 18-25 years Age 26-35 years 25% 39.5% Age 36-45 years Age 46-55 years Age 56-65 years Educational level: MBO Educational level: HBO Educational level: WO 26.3% 3.9% 5.3% 10.5% 48.7% 40.8% Employer: Abn Amro
Employer: Rabobank Employer: KNAB Employer: Chaabi Bank Employer: SNS Bank Employer: ASN Bank Employer: Triodos Bank Employer: ING 22.4% 22.4% 3.9% 17.1% 3.9% 2.6% 1.3% 26.3% Length of services: less than three years
Length of service: 3-5 years Length of service: 5-10 years
Length of service: more than 10 years
42.1% 35.5% 17.1% 5.3%
24
Reliability analysis
To determine whether the items can form a reliable scale, it is necessary to conduct a Cronbach’s alpha test. The internal consistency of the used variables was measured by performing seven reliability tests. A score between 0.6 and 0.8 means sufficient reliability.
A score higher than 0.8 means good and excellent reliability. All the items had a score higher than 0.8 (see table 3).
Table 2. Cronbach Alpha scores of variables
Variables N α Items Individualistic character 76 .933 9 Organisational performance 76 .840 16 Organisational commitment 76 .913 12 Training 48 .929 7 Group meetings 50 .890 7 Briefings 37 .919 7 Written communications 53 .940 7
A Cronbach Alpha score > 0.7 is seen as reasonable internal consistency, > 0.8 as a good internal consistency and > 0.9 as perfect internal consistency.
Thus, we can conclude that the measurement scales are reliable and can be used for this analysis. Furthermore, based on the reliability of the scales it was not necessary to delete items in order to increase the Cronbach’s Alpha.
Normal distribution
The analysis started with a normality check. In order to determine whether the data is normally distributed, it is necessary to compute the skewness, kurtosis and the normality tests.
Because the kurtosis and skewness showed a value between 1 and -1, the histogram and q and q plots showed normal results we can conclude that the data is normally distributed.
Table 3. Mean and standard deviation
Variables Mean Std. Deviation
Individualistic character 4.48 1.31 OCB 5.63 0.55 Organisational commitment 5.36 0.89 Training A 5.16 0.98 Group meetings B 5.29 0.93 Briefings C 5.28 0.91 Written communications D 4.75 1.22 Note. N=76. A: N=48. B: N = 50. C: N=37. D: N=53.
The table above shows that the means of all variables are very high.
This means that the respondents of this research score very high on OCB, which is an indicator of better organizational performance. This is also applicable for organizational commitment, group meetings, briefings and trainings. These variables are perceived as very high.
Furthermore, the respondents score also relatively high on individualistic character.
Correlation analysis
The correlation matrix is shown in table 4. The first thing to notice is that trainings (r=0.299, P<0,05) and group meetings (r=0.308, P<0,05) correlate significant with organizational commitment. Group meetings correlate more with organizational commitment than trainings, but this difference is not significant.
Furthermore, the correlation matrix also shows that individualistic character correlates significant with OCB (r=0.263, P<0,05). This correlation is positive and may indicate a direct relationship between individualistic character and OCB. Furthermore, organizational commitment correlates with OCB (r=0.534, P<0,001).
Table 4. Pearson correlations between variables.
Variables Mean ± SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 1. Individualistic character 4.48 ± 1.31 2. OCB 5.63 ± 0.55 .263* 3. Organisational commitment 5.36 ± 0.89 -.078 .534** 4. Training N= 48 5.16 ± 0.98 .358* .217 .299* 5. Group meetings N= 50 5.29 ± 0.93 -.059 .171 .308* .196 6. Briefings N= 37 5.28 ± 0.91 .235 .175 .154 .420* .403* 7. Written communications N=53 4.75 ± 1.22 .283* .002 .149 .466* .083 .164 *P<0.05, **P<0.001.
26
Testing the hypotheses
In order to test the three hypotheses, regressions were conducted.
In order to test the hypotheses, linear regressions were performed. It is only allowed to perform a regression if the residuals are normally distributed, the regression model is linear and if the regression model is homoscedastic. The scatter plot showed that the homoscedasticity meets the requirements.
All hypotheses are tested in an unadjusted model and an adjusted model. The unadjusted model does not consist control variables. The adjusted model consist the control variables age, educational level and length of service.
Hypothesis 1
In order to test the first hypothesis “organizational commitment has a positive effect on OCB”, a multiple regression analysis was conducted. The results show that organizational commitment is a predictor of OCB in both, the unadjusted and adjusted model. In the unadjusted model,
organizational commitment explains 29% (R2= 0.29) of the variances within OCB (β=.53, t=5.437,
P<0.001). When adjusted for age, educational level and length of service, organizational
commitment explains 35 % (R2= 0.36) of the variances within OCB (β=.45, t=3.870, P<0.001).
Thus, organizational commitment has a positive effect on OCB and the higher the organizational commitment the more OCB’s are shown.
Therefore, H1 is supported. Table 5 shows the results of this analysis.
Table 5. The association between organisational commitment and OCB.
Unadjusted model Adjusted model #
Variables Estimate t-value β R2 Estimate t-value β R2
Intercept 3.851 11.637** 3.479 6.884**
Organisational commitment 0.331 5.437** 0.53 0.29 .280 3.870** 0.45 0.35
Note.N=76. ∞<0.*P<0.05, **P<0.001. # = adjusted for age, education and length of services.
Hypotheses 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D
In order to test whether the single internal branding activities influence organizational commitment, four multiple regression analyses were performed to test the following hypotheses:
H2A: Training programmes have a positive effect on organizational commitment. H2B: Briefings have a positive effect on organizational commitment.
H2C: Group meetings have a positive effect on organizational commitment.
In the questionnaire, the respondents were asked whether they have experienced a certain internal branding activity or not. If they had not experienced a certain internal branding activity, the question was skipped automatic. Hence, 48 respondents indicated that they have participated in a training programme of their current employer. Furthermore, 50 respondents indicated that they have participated in a group meeting of their current employer, 37 respondents indicated that they have participated in a briefing of their current employer and 53 respondents indicated that they have received written communication messages from their current employer.
The results show that some internal branding activities are a predictor of organizational commitment and other internal branding activities not.
Furthermore, the analysis was performed for the unadjusted model and adjusted model.
The results show that training programmes are a predictor of organizational commitment and this relationship is significant (β=.30, t=2.126, P<0.05) with an explained variance of 9% (R2= 0.09). When adjusted for age, educational level and length of service (β=.25, t=1.938, P<0.10), it results in a trend to an explained variance of 39% (R2= 0.39).
Therefore, hypothesis 2A is supported.
Furthermore, the results show that briefings are not a predictor of organizational commitment in both, the unadjusted model (β=.15, t=0.922, P>0.05) and the adjusted model
(β=-.03, t=-0.187, P>0.05). Hence, hypothesis 2B is rejected.
The results show that there is a significant relationship between group meetings and organizational commitment in both, the unadjusted and adjusted model. In the unadjusted model, group meetings explain 10% (R2= 0.10) within organizational commitment (β=.31, t=2.242, P<0.05). In the adjusted model, group meetings explain 45% (R2= 0.45) of the variance within organizational commitment (β=.26, t=2.358, P<0.05). Hence, hypothesis 2C is supported.
The results show also that written communications are not a predictor of organizational commitment, in the unadjusted (β=.145, t=1.077, P>0.05) and adjusted model
(β=.05, t=0.442, P>0.05). Therefore, hypothesis 2D is rejected.
28
Table 6. The association between training, group meetings, briefings and written communication with organisational commitment.
Unadjusted model Adjusted model #
Variables Estimate t-value β R2 Estimate t-value β R2
Intercept 4.293 7.961** 4.232 6.372** Training A 0.218 2.126* 0.30 0.09 .179 1.938∞ 0.25 0.39 Intercept 3.678 4.861** 3.305 4.628** Group meetings B 0.316 2.242* 0.31 0.10 0.268 2.358* 0.26 0.45 Intercept 5.034 7.660** 5.270 6.648** Briefings C .113 0.922 0.15 0.02 -0.021 -0.187 -0.03 0.37 Intercept 4.991 11.099** 4.925 8.688** Written communications D 0.099 1.077 0.15 0.02 0.035 0.442 0.05 0.36
Note. ∞<0.*P<0.05, **P<0.001. A: N=48. B: N = 50. C: N=37. D: N=53. # = adjusted for age, education and length of services.
Additionally it is interesting to examine whether differences exist in organizational commitment between the respondents who filled out that they have participate in training programmes, group meetings and briefings and have received written communications versus respondents who did not participate in training programmes, group meetings and briefings a have not received written communications. To analyze these possible differences, an independent T-test was performed.
The results show that there is no significant difference between respondents who joined training programmes (T=-.673, P>0.05), group meetings (T=.167, P>0.05), and received written communications (T=-1.353, P>0.05), versus respondents who did not join these projects in organizational commitment. However, there is a significant difference between respondents who participated in briefings and respondents who did not participated in briefings in organizational commitment (T=-2.698, P<0.01, Mdifference=-0.526). Respondents who participated in briefings
(M=5.63, SD=0.67) have a higher score on organizational commitment than respondents who did not join briefings (M=5.10, SD1.00).
It can be concluded that whether employees participate in training programmes, group meetings and receive written communication or not, there is no significant difference in the score on organizational commitment. The respondents felt committed even without participating in training programmes, group meetings and receiving written communications.
Respondents who participated in briefings felt more committed than respondents who did not, but this research showed also that briefings are not a predictor of organizational commitment.
Table 7. Differences between respondents who joined the internal branding activities versus respondent who did not join these activities in organizational commitment.
Variables N=76 Mean difference t-value p-value
Training -0.161 -0.673 0.505
Group Meetings 0.036 0.167 0.868
Briefings -0.526 -2.698** 0.009
Written communications -0.330 -1.353 0.158
∞P<0.1, *P<0.05, **P<0.01. The groups are 0=No versus 1=Yes.
Moderation
To test whether individualistic character moderated the association between training programmes, group meetings, briefings and written communication messages, the following four hypotheses were proposed:
H3A: Individualistic character will moderate the relationship between training programmes and organizational commitment.
H3B: Individualistic character will moderate the relationship between briefings and organizational commitment.
H3C: Individualistic character will moderate the relationship between group meetings and organizational commitment.
H3D: Individualistic character will moderate the relationship between written communications and organizational commitment.
To test these four hypotheses, four multiple regression analysis were performed.
The first step was to centralise the independent variables. The second step was to centralise the hypothesized moderator: individual characteristics. Next, the centralised independent variables were multiplied by the centralized hypothesized moderator. This created four interaction variables. These new variables are in table 7 defined as the interaction between the centralized independent variable and the centralized hypothesized moderator.
To analyse whether individualistic character moderates the relationship between the internal branding activities and organizational commitment, two models (i.e. model 1 and model 2) were created. Model 1 displays the main effects of the independent variables and the main effect of the moderator on organisational commitment. Model 2 displays the interaction between the independent variables and the moderator.
The results show that there is a significant main effect of training programmes on organizational commitment in model1 (β=.361, t=2.374, P<0.05). However, there is no significant main effect of individualistic character on organizational commitment (β=-.162, t=-1.064, P= n.s.).
30 In model 2, the interaction between the centralised training programmes variable and the centralised
suspected moderator are added. The results show that the interaction effect is not significant
(β=.233, t=1.676, P= n.s.). The effect of training programmes on organizational commitment is the same for all levels of individualistic character.
For group meetings, the results show that there is a significant main effect of group meetings on organizational commitment in model1 (β=.309, t=2.222, P<0.05). However, there is no significant main effect of individualistic character on organizational commitment (β=.017, t=.122, P= n.s.). In model 2, the interaction between the centralised group meetings variable and the centralised suspected moderator are added. The results show that the interaction effect is not significant
(β=-.013, t=-0.076, P= n.s.). The effect of group meetings on organizational commitment is the same for all levels of individualistic character.
For briefings, the results show that there is no significant main effect of briefings on organizational commitment in model1 (β=.127, t=0.734, P=n.s.). Furthermore, there is no significant main effect of individualistic character on organizational commitment (β=.114, t=0.656, P= n.s.).
In model 2, the interaction between the centralised briefings variable and the centralised suspected moderator are added. The results show that the interaction effect is not significant
(β=.298, t=1.582, P= n.s.). The effect of briefings on organizational commitment is the same for all levels of individualistic character.
For written communications, the results show that there is no significant main effect of written communications on organizational commitment in model1 (β=.178, t=1.223, P=n.s.).
Furthermore, there is no significant main effect of individualistic character on organizational commitment (β=-.100, t=-.692, P= n.s.).
In model 2, the interaction between the centralised briefings variable and the centralised suspected moderator are added. The results show that the interaction effect is not significant
(β=-.010, t=-0.067, P= n.s.). The effect of briefings on organizational commitment is the same for all levels of individualistic character.
Thus, individualistic character is not moderating the relationship between the internal branding activities and organizational commitment. Therefore hypotheses 3A, 3B, 3C and 3D are rejected.
Table 8. The moderation of individualistic character on the association between training programmes, group meetings, briefings and written communication with organisational commitment.
Model 1 Model 2
Variables Estimate t-value β R2 Estimate t-value β R2
Intercept 4.431 8.000** 4.296 7.823**
Training N=48 0.264 2.374* 0.361 0.267 2.452* 0.366
Individualistic character -0.84 -1.064 -0.162 0.11 -0.070 -0.897 -0.135
Moderator 0.109 1.676 0.233 0.17
Model 1 versus Model 2: R2 change= 0.053, P-value F change = 0.101
Intercept 3.621 4.055** 3.572 3.226
Group meetings B N=50 0.317 2.222* 0.309 0.325 1.840∞ 0.316
Individualistic character 0.11 0.122 0.017 0.10 0.013 0.135 0.019
Moderator -0.009 -0.076 -0.013 0.10
Model 1 versus Model 2: R2 change= <0.001, P-value F change = 0.940
Intercept 4.913 7.148** 4.310** 5.574**
Briefings C N=37 0.093 0.734 0.127 0.199 1.410 0.271
Individualistic character 0.053 0.656 0.114 0.04 0.054 0.683 0.116
Moderator 0.132 1.582 0.298 0.10
Model 1 versus Model 2: R2 change= 0.068, P-value F change = 0.123
Intercept 5.142 10.246** 5.152 9.741
Written communications N=53 0.118 1.223 0.178 0.117 -0.688 0.176
Individualistic character -0.55 -0.692 -0.100 0.03 -0.056 1.185 -0.102
Moderator -0.004 -0.067 -0.010 0.03
Model 1 versus Model 2: R2 change= 0.001, P-value F change = 0.947 Note. ∞<0.*P<0.05, **P<0.001. Moderator variables were calculated by multiplying the centralised predictors in model 1.
Furthermore, it is important to determine whether there is multicollinearity within the presented regression analysis and in order to determine this, the variance inflation factor (VIF) was analysed. O’Brien (2007) stated that a VIF score above 5 indicates a multicollinearity problem within the regression model. In these regression models, all the variables had a VIF score between 1 and 1,5. Therefore, there is no multicollinearity problem.
32
5. Conclusion and discussion
The aim of this research was to investigate whether an individualistic character moderates the
effectiveness of internal branding activities in the banking industry with customer-facing employees. This study contributes to our knowledge whether an individualistic character influences the
perceived effectiveness of different internal branding activities for customer-facing employees. Furthermore, if the effectiveness of internal branding is influenced by the character of an employee, the manager can work more efficiently by investing in the most effective internal branding activities.
As expected and in line with existing research (Punjaisri and Wilson, 2011) the first hypothesis is accepted. Regression analysis showed a positive relationship between organizational commitment and OCB. This means that more committed employees show more OCB, which is related to better performance of the organization and therefore H1 is accepted. This can be explained by the fact that committed employees identify themselves more with the organization.
Furthermore, as partially expected and also partially in line with existing research (Punjaisri et al., 2009; Punjaisri & Wilson, 2011), regression analysis showed that training programmes and group meetings have a significant effect on organizational commitment and therefore H2A and H2C are supported. We found no evidence for the relationship between briefings (H2B), written
communications (H2D) and organizational commitment. Therefore, H2B and H2D are rejected. These findings are partially in line with existing research in this field. Punjaisri, Wilson and Evanschitzky (2008), Punjaisri et al (2009) and Punjaisri & Wilson(2011) examined the effect of internal branding in general without making a distinction between all internal branding activities and found that internal branding has a positive effect on organizational commitment.
In this research, internal branding is divided in four categories and only training programmes and group meetings are found to have a significant positive effect on organizational commitment and hence, H2B and H2D are rejected.
Employees need to be familiar with the brand and brand values, before they can be committed to the organization and deliver the brand promise. Hence, some internal branding activities ensure that they can identify with the brand values, values and image.
The additionally performed independent T-test showed that no significant difference exists between respondents who participated in training programmes, group meetings and received written
communications and respondents who did not in organizational commitment.
Only respondents who participated in briefings are more committed than respondents who did not, but this research also showed that briefings are not predictors of organizational commitment. Therefore, this leaves room for further research.
Another interesting finding is that an individualistic character is not found to be a moderator in the relationship between the internal branding activities and organizational commitment. The regression analysis showed that individualistic character did not significantly moderate the relation between training programmes, briefings, group meetings and written communications and organizational commitment; hence hypotheses 3A, 3B, 3C and 3D were not supported. Despite the fact that it was expected that an individualistic character will moderate this relation and that briefings and group meetings will have significant more effect on individualistic employees due to the different levels of participation (Punjaisri and Wilson, 2011), this expectation was not supported in this research. The rejection of H3A, H3B, H3C and H3D could be due to the fact that the respondents in this research already scored high on individualistic character, because the results showed high means on the moderator. Therefore, it is difficult to analyse the difference between individualistic and
collectivistic respondents. Suggestions for further research are given in the last chapter.
Despite the fact that individualistic character is not found to be a moderator, it was useful to involve this variable in this research. The correlation analysis showed that individualistic character correlated positively with OCB. This may be an indication for a direct relationship between OCB and an individualistic character.
34
6. Implications
First of all, this research showed that the internal branding activities are perceived different and that training programmes and group meetings have a significant effect on organizational commitment, while briefings and written communications do not have that effect. An interesting finding of this study is that this influence is regardless of the character of the employee. This finding is important for HR managers / marketing managers because it makes it possible for managers to work more efficiently by using the most effective internal branding activities and it emphasizes the important role of internal branding again. Internal branding is important when we see that the delivery of the brand promise depends of the employees (Punjaisri et al, 2009) and Punjaisri & Wilson, 2011) and that committed employees perform better (Mowday, Steers and Porter, 1979; Riketta, 2002; Laschinger, 2001). The last statement is also confirmed by the results of this study.
Secondly, we saw that age, educational level and length of service have a significant influence on the explained variance of training programmes and group meetings within organizational
commitment. The explained variance of training programmes went from 9% to 40% and the explained variance of group meetings went from 10% to 45%. Thus an increase of age, a higher educational level and a longer length of service ensures more organizational commitment. A
practical implication for managers could be to select also older employees with a higher educational level and to ensure that the employees want to stay at their employer. Younger employees with a lower educational level are more attractive from the economic perspective, but for the longer term it could be wise to change that idea.
