Employer Branding in Practice
A Study on the Use of Employer Branding in Job Advertisements Through Work Values
Master’s Thesis – Graduate School of Communication
Author: Floor Koet
Student number: 10023100
Program: Master’s programme Communication Science Track: Corporate Communication
Supervisor: Lise van Oortmerssen Date: January 28, 2016
Abstract
Different scholars and practicing managers have stressed the importance of employer branding. Employer branding helps organizations attract the best employees who fit the organization. But to what extent do Dutch organizations adjust their job advertisements to their targeted employees? To answer this question, a content analysis is conducted on 350 job advertisements from different organizations in different job industries. The intrinsic and extrinsic work values that were used in the job advertisements were counted. This way, the work values used in the job advertisements could be compared to the motivation of the targeted employees. Results show that public and non-profit organizations use more intrinsic and extrinsic values in their job advertisements than private and profit organizations. This is not entirely as expected, because public and non-profit organizations’ employees are more intrinsically motivated and private and profit organizations’ employees are more extrinsically motivated. Jobs on different levels of experience were also compared. The more years of experience were asked, the more intrinsic and extrinsic values were used in the job
advertisements. This was also not entirely as expected, because experienced employees place more importance on intrinsic values and less importance on extrinsic values. Job
advertisements for management functions did contain more intrinsic values than
advertisements for staff functions, as expected. Here, no difference was found for extrinsic values. So, Dutch organizations do use work values in their job advertisements to attract potential employees, but they should adjust the content of their job advertisements more to their targeted employees.
Employer Branding in Practice
With the economy recovering, shortages on the labour market for professionals stay an important issue, especially in the United States and Europe. The more the economy grows, the greater the shortages on the labour market get. These are the conclusions from the ‘Hays Global Skills Index 2015’, a yearly analysis of the labour market for professionals in 31 countries across the globe, conducted by Hays and Oxford Economics (Hays, 2015). The analysis showed that labour shortages in the Netherlands are not as bad as in some other countries, where economic growth was bigger. Still, in technical and innovative sectors, like the IT sector, where highly skilled professionals are needed, it is a challenge to find good candidates, and it will be a challenge next year. Also, although right now the shortage of talent in the Netherlands appears not as bad as expected, ageing and a low labour force are a worldwide threat for the labour market in the long term.
Labour shortages are a problem for some countries and some sectors already, and it is likely that in the coming years, shortages will grow (Wilden, Gudergan & Lings, 2010). Job seekers will be able to choose from a variety of organizations when deciding where they want to work. This leaves organizations with a challenge. How do they attract the best employees that fit the organization? One way to do that, is through employer branding. Employer
branding can be defined as “the differentiation of a firms’ characteristics as an employer from those of its competitors. The employment brand highlights the unique aspects of the firm’s employment offerings or environment” (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). Through employer branding, organizations try to brand themselves as a preferable employer, to attract suitably qualified and skilled employees in a competitive labour market (Wilden et al., 2010). Scholars see employer branding as a good strategy to attract employees. But do organizations feel the same way? Is the concept merely theoretical, or do organizations really differ in the way they present themselves to potential employees? In this paper, the use of employer branding by organizations will be explored. The following question will be addressed: To what extent do Dutch organizations adjust their job advertisements to their targeted employees?
This question is both societally and scientifically relevant. For organizations who would like to engage in employer branding themselves, it is good to know what organizations already do to portray themselves as an attractive employer. Also, organizations can use the information about employer branding in their market to see how they can differentiate themselves from their competitors. This question scientifically relevant, because several scholars have stressed the importance of employer branding for organizations, but so far no research has been done to find out to what extent organizations use employer branding. It is
argued that employer branding helps organizations to attract the best employees, by making the organization an attractive employer. Therefore, people will want to work for the
organization. (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004; Berthon, Ewing & Hah, 2005; Ewing, Pitt, de Bussy, & Berthon, 2002; Wilden et al., 2010). However, no research has focussed on the question to what extent organizations use employer branding to attract employees. We do know that employees in different sectors value different aspects of their work. For example, employees in the public sector are more intrinsically motivated than employees in the private sector (Georgellis, Iossa, & Tabvuma, 2010; Karl & Sutton, 1998; Rainey & Bozeman, 2000). Organizations should build on this knowledge to brand themselves as great employer and attract the right employees. But so far, no research has been done to find out whether organizations really do use this information. This paper will fill that knowledge gap.
The paper is structured as follows: first, relevant theories and previous research on employer branding will be discussed. The concept of employer branding will be examined, followed by information about job attributes and their value in different sectors. Then the research method will be explained, followed by the results of the study. Lastly, the
conclusions, points of discussion and recommendations for further research will be addressed.
Theoretical Framework
Employer Branding
When an organization tries to brand itself as an attractive employer for both current and future employees, the organization engages in employer branding (Wilden et al., 2010). The
employer brand contains psychological, economic and functional benefits that are provided by employment and identified with the employer (Wilden et al., 2010). To build a good employer brand, organizations should differentiate from their competitors by highlighting the unique characteristics of the organization (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). The focus of employer branding is mostly on future employees, because there is a permanent shortage of skilled workers anticipated in the new economy (Berthon et al., 2005; Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). Especially in the knowledge-based economy the shortage of skilled workers is big. This is due to this economy depending on the knowledge of their employees. And knowledge comes with experience and intelligence. Therefore, this economy needs highly skilled and experienced workers to perform the jobs. The shortage of these workers leads to great challenges for organizations (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). Organizations have to make an effort to
differentiate themselves in order to attract talented employees, by building a compelling and strong employer brand. That way, job seekers will see the organization as a great place to work (Berthon et al., 2005; Edwards, 2009; Ewing et al., 2002; Foster, Punjaisri & Cheng, 2010; Wilden et al., 2010).
Employer branding is a three step process (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). First, an organization needs to develop a value proposition that will be embodied in the brand. This value proposition is a concept of what value the organization offers employees and will be the central message of the brand. Values must be extracted from the organization, so that the brand is a true representation of the organization and potential employees who fit the organization will be attracted (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004; Berthon et al., 2005, Foster et al., 2010). With a truthful employer brand, employees who are attracted by the employer brand will actually be attracted by the organization as it is, and not by a misleading image of the organization. Second, the employer brand is communicated externally, to the targeted potential employees. It is important that the employer brand is consistent with the other
branding efforts of the organization, so that there is brand alignment, and a consistent image is spread (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004; Berthon et al., 2005, Foster et al., 2010). Finally, the
employer brand has to be spread internally. That way de brand promise is incorporated in the organizational culture. This creates a workforce that is committed to the values and goals of the organization (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). In this paper, we will focus on the second step of employer branding.
To find out if these branding efforts really pay off, Wilden et al. (2010) interviewed 30 job seekers about employer image creation and employment selection criteria. The interviews were held in Australia, job seekers from different cultural backgrounds were interviewed (Australia, Canada, Germany, India and Singapore). Wilden et al. (2010) found that
information about an employer is really important for job seekers, after they considered the organization a potential employer. The first impression of the organization must give job seekers the feeling they want to work for that organization. If this is the case, brand
investments of organizations have a positive effect on employer attractiveness. Furthermore, brand equity is very important. For job seekers to create a positive image of the employer, employer branding has to be aligned with other branding efforts. Also, clarity and credibility of the employer brand affected employer attractiveness. So, employer branding efforts seem to have a positive effect on the image job seekers have of an organization. To create a good employer brand, organizations should really invest in the brand, the employer brand must be
aligned with other organizational brands, and the employer brand must be clear and credible (Wilden et al., 2010).
Job Advertisements
Job advertisements play an important role in employer branding (Powell, 1984). They are an important medium in the recruitment process. The recruitment process can be roughly divided into two stages. The first consists of the early recruitment practices, aimed at getting people to apply for the job. The second stage consists of recruitment practices performed after
applicants applied for the job. A survey amongst 200 graduating students who participated in job interviews showed that information about job attributes that participants gathered before the interview (for example through the job advertisement) did have an effect on their intention of accepting the job (Powell, 1984). The recruiting practices, the behaviour of the recruiter during the interview, did not have an effect on the intention of accepting the job. Therefore, job attributes presented to applicants in the early recruitment practices are very important. There should be enough and accurate information about the job and the organization for applicants, so that they can make a weighted decision about accepting the job (Powell, 1984).
There are of course multiple ways to gather information about an employer. Different studies found that job advertisements are an important source of information for job seekers, and organizations can use job advertisements to their advantage. Collins and Stevens (2002) looked at the effects of different early recruitment practices. They surveyed 133 graduate students with degrees in engineering about the effects of publicity of the employer,
sponsorship, word-of-mouth advertising and recruitment advertising. They found that these early recruitment practices combined had the biggest effect on attitudes toward the company and perceived job attributes. But recruitment advertising alone also had an effect on students’ perceptions about the company’s attributes and the job opportunity. Walker, Field, Giles and Bernerth (2008) also stressed the importance of job advertisements. These advertisements play an important role in initial perceptions of the organization, as several researchers suggest (Barber & Roehling, 1993; Breaugh & Starke, 2000; Chapman, Uggerslev, Carroll, Piasentin, & Jones, 2005; Dineen, Ling, Ash, & DelVecchio, 2007; Jones, Schultz, & Chapman, 2006; Highhouse, Beadle, Gallo, & Miller, 1998; Rynes & Miller, 1983, as cited in Walker et al., 2008). Walker et al. (2008) investigated what cues people use in their search for information. They found that both content of the job advertisement and peripheral cues are important. The more experienced the applicant, the more important the content of the advertisement becomes.
Thus, job advertisements are found to be an important source of information for applicants. Organizations can use this knowledge to their advantage. The products or services of a company create an image about the company, but also the information a company provides about itself through a corporate website or job advertisements influences the way applicants see the company (Cable, Aiman-Smith, Mulvey, & Edwards, 2000). The beliefs of job applicants about a company’s culture can therefore be managed in the early stage of
recruitment (Cable et al., 2000). However, it is important for organizations to think carefully about the message they want to spread. As Powell (1984) stated, organizations should provide job applicants with realistic job previews. They should give applicants enough and accurate information about the job and the organization. That way, applicants won’t be persuaded into a job and an organization they think they like, but which is not like they expected. Realistic job previews will lead to more positive job attitudes and lower turnover rates. So, employees will like their job and are more likely to stay for a long time. This is also what Askehave (2010) states when she talks about the importance of recruitment messages. There should be alignment between the recruitment needs and the textual choices in advertisements. When the advertisement focuses on the wrong attributes, or only on one part of the attributes, the wrong people will apply for the job. Organizations should really think about their culture and the characteristics of current employees, in order to attract employees that fit the organization.
Work Values and Job Attributes
Employers can use information presented in job advertisements to build a strong employer brand and attract the right employees. But what information should they present? To brand an organization as a favourable employer, characteristics or attributes that contribute to this image should be used, in the form of work values and job attributes. These two concepts will now be discussed in more depth. Values can be defined as intrinsic, enduring perspectives of what is fundamentally right or wrong (Rokeach, 1973, as cited in Judge & Bretz, 1992). Work values are values applied to work settings (Judge & Bretz, 1992). They affect the way people behave on their job, because people behave according to their values. It is important for organizations to pay attention to employees’ work values, because they affect the organization as well. People’s values cannot be changed easily, and experiences in the organization are not likely to alter people’s values (Judge & Bretz, 1992). Therefore, it is important for
organizations to attract employees who share the organizational values. Misalignment
between organizational work values and employees’ work values has negative consequences. This misalignment has a negative impact on job satisfaction and organizational commitment,
and it causes increased intentions to turnover (Cennamo & Gardner, 2008). So, employees whose values differ from the organization’s values, are likely to enjoy their work less, commit themselves less to the organization, and intent to leave the organization. These effects
negatively impact the organizations effectiveness. Thus, it is important for employers to hire employees who match the organizational values.
Not only organizations seek employees who share their values. Job seekers, on their account, seek organizations who have the same values as they do. Judge and Bretz (1992) found in their experiment that organizational work values had an important influence on job seekers’ decisions. Job seekers were more likely to choose jobs where the values were similar to their own values. That is, when organizational work values were known. For people to be able to choose an employer who carries out their values, employers must be open and clear about their values. In their branding, they should therefore use their values, so that they attract employees who share these values.
Work values can be operationalized in job and organizational attributes, which then can be shared, for example through job advertisements. These attributes are very important in the recruitment process. Research has shown that applicants base their decisions of accepting a job mainly on the attributes of the job and the organization, and not on recruitment practices (Powell, 1984; Thomas & Wise, 1999; Turban, Forret & Hendrickson, 1998). Employer attractiveness, or the benefits a potential employee sees in working for an organization, is based on different dimensions of job and organizational attributes. So, applicants base their expectations of an employer and a job on the attributes that are tied to the job and the organization. These attributes will be discussed in greater detail below.
Not all studies about job and organizational attributes use the exact same set of attributes, but large overlap exists between studies. Berthon et al. (2005) identify five factors of job and organizational attributes that contribute to employer attractiveness. Measurements used in other studies (Edwards, 2009; Jurgensen, 1978; Powell, 1984; Thomas & Wise, 1999; Turban, Forret & Hendrickson, 1998) all match these factors. The first factor of job and organizational attributes Berthon et al. (2005) identify is interest value, which relates to an exciting work environment where high-quality, innovative products or services are created and an employee can use his creativity. The second factor is labelled social value. This factor includes good relationships with colleagues and a good atmosphere in the organization. The third factor is the economic value, which contains salary, job security and opportunities for promotion. The fourth factor is labelled development value. This factor relates to the extent in which an employee can develop himself. Therefore the employer should provide recognition
and self-confidence, and there must be opportunities for career development. The last factor is
application value, this value relates to an environment where an employee can use his abilities
and apply his knowledge and also teach others.
All attributes can be divided into two overarching types of work values, intrinsic and extrinsic values (George & Jones, 2012). People with intrinsic work values place importance on the components of their work. They value the work itself. People with extrinsic work values on the other hand, value the material or social rewards that they acquire when working. They value the consequences of their work (George & Jones, 2012). In the classification of Berthon et al (2005), the economic and social and values are more extrinsic, whereas the interest, development and application values are more intrinsic. A lot of research has been conducted on intrinsic and extrinsic work values. Now, two lines of research will be
discussed. They will show that it is sometimes better for an organization to focus on intrinsic values to find the right employee for a job, and sometimes an organization should focus on extrinsic values to find the right candidate.
Work Values in Different Sectors
Several scholars have looked at work values and job attributes that motivate employees in different sectors, to see whether there is a difference in motivators for employees in these sectors (Benz, 2005; De Cooman, De Gieter, Pepermans & Jegers, 2011; Georgellis et al., 2011; Karl & Sutton, 1998; Rainey & Bozeman, 2000). One comparison that is frequently made, is between the public and the private sector. Scholars have found that employees in the public sector are attracted by intrinsic rewards rather than extrinsic rewards, and employees in the private sector value extrinsic rewards more. These findings are derived from surveys, where employees in different sectors were asked to rank aspects of their job that motivate them, or that they find important. Several studies found that employees in the private sector rank ‘high income’ or ‘good wages’ higher than their public sector counterparts, while public sector employees rank intrinsic values higher, such as interesting work or a feeling of
accomplishment in their work (Georgellis et al., 2011; Karl & Sutton, 1998; Rainey & Bozeman, 2000).
Another comparison is made between profit and non-profit organizations. We see a similar picture here. For employees in non-profit organizations, the work they do is more important than the money they earn. They are intrinsically motivated and get motivated the ideas and vision of the organization (Benz, 2005). Employees in non-profit organizations are motivated by their own values and work according to them, they also work for outcomes that
are personally meaningful. People in profit organizations on the other hand, are more
extrinsically motivated. They respond to social pressure and material rewards (De Cooman et al., 2011).
We see that employees in the profit and private sector are motivated by similar values, and employees in the non-profit and public sector are motivated by similar values. This is not surprising, since these sectors overlap to a large extent. Most organizations in the private sector are profit organizations, and almost all public sector organizations belong to the non-profit sector. But since there are differences, both comparisons are examined in this study. Charities for example are private organizations in the non-profit sector. And some
governmental organizations are public organizations who are ought to make a profit. Why do differences in work values between the sectors exist? As stated earlier, people’s values don’t change easily, and a job is not likely to change an individual’s values (Judge & Bretz, 1992). Therefore, people will search for a job that fits their values. Because when you can fulfil values that are important to you on your job, you will be satisfied with your job (Karl & Sutton, 1998). People who are intrinsically motivated and place high emphasis on serving the public or working for a worthy cause, choose to work in public or non-profit sector. The values of these organizations match the individual’s values (Georgellis et al., 2011; Jäger, Reggiani, Schempp, 2013). People who place great emphasis on the money they make in a job, won’t choose a job in the public or non-profit sector. In these sectors, residual earnings cannot be distributed, and therefore monetary rewards are impossible to give (Benz, 2005).
For employers to attract the right employees, it is thus important to stress the values that are important for the employer. That way, job applicants are able to decide whether the job and the employer matches their values. Based on the differences in work values found in different sectors, the following hypotheses are formulated.
H1a: Job advertisements in the public sector will focus more on intrinsic values than job advertisements in the private sector.
H1b: Job advertisements in the public sector will focus less on extrinsic values than job advertisements in the private sector.
H2a: Job advertisement in the non-profit sector will focus more on intrinsic values than job advertisements in the profit sector.
H2b: Job advertisements in the non-profit sector will focus less on extrinsic values than job advertisements in the profit sector.
Work Values in Different Positions in the Organization
Although work values are relatively stable (Judge & Bretz, 1992), studies show that work values seem to change somewhat over time. In different studies that examined work values of employees in the public and private sector, a difference was found between lower and higher professional and management levels. Employees at the higher professional and management levels in the public sector are more intrinsically motivated than their colleagues at lower levels in the organization (Rainey & Bozeman, 2000). Cherrington, Condie, and England (1979) found that age has an impact on work values, when controlling for other variables. Older workers are more intrinsically motivated, while younger workers are more extrinsically motivated.
This change in work values can be explained by need theories. Need theories are a group of theories that try to explain motivation through ones needs (George & Jones, 2012). If you have a need, you are motivated to fulfil that need, motivation comes from an outcome you want to reach. The two best known need theories are Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Alderfer’s ERG theory (George & Jones, 2012). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is a very famous theory, however its practical use in organizations in never established (e.g. Hall & Nougaim, 1968; Schneider & Alderfer, 1973; Wahba & Bridwell, 1976). Alderfer’s ERG theory found more support (e.g. Arnolds & Boshoff, 2002; Wanous & Zwany, 1977). According to this theory, there are three different need categories: existence needs,
relatedness needs and growth needs (George & Jones, 2012). Existence needs are the basic needs for human survival. In an organizational setting this means safe working conditions and receiving enough pay to support your basic necessities. Relatedness needs are your needs for good interpersonal relations, in an organizational setting these relations are with direct and indirect colleagues. Growth needs are the needs for self-development and creative and
productive work. Meaningful work is also important for this need to be met (George & Jones, 2012). Existence needs relate the most to extrinsic work values, and relatedness and growth needs relate the most to intrinsic work values. According to ERG theory, when your needs on one level are met, you move on to the next level. You can move back to a lower level of needs when those needs are not met anymore (George & Jones, 2012). Wanous and Zwany (1977) indeed found that higher level needs became more important once needs on a lower lever were satisfied. The needs of top managers and frontline employees were compared in a survey
with over 500 respondents (Arnolds & Boshoff, 2002). Top managers are primarily motivated by growth needs, and frontline employees are primarily motivated by relatedness needs and existence needs in the form of payment. Thus, top managers are more intrinsically motivated, and frontline employees are more extrinsically motivated.
These findings tell us that more experienced employees and employees on a higher level in the organizational hierarchy are more intrinsically motivated. To attract employees, organizations should therefore use more intrinsic work values in their advertisements for experienced employees or employees on a management level, and more extrinsic work values in their advertisements for inexperienced employees and employees on an operating level. Because organizations have become more interested in employer branding over the last years (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004; Berthon et al., 2005; Ewing et al., 2002), we expect that
organizations will brand themselves by their own values, in a way that will make them an attractive employer for the targeted future employees. Therefore, the following hypotheses are formulated.
H3a: Job advertisements on a management level will focus more on intrinsic values than job advertisements on an operating level.
H3b: Job advertisements on a management level will focus less on extrinsic values than job advertisement on an operating level.
H4a: The more years of experience are asked in a job advertisement, the more the focus will be on intrinsic values.
H4b: The more years of experience are asked in a job advertisement, the less the focus will be on extrinsic values.
Method
Sample
In this study, a quantitative content analysis was conducted. This method was used because it best suites the subject of study, job advertisements. To be able to say anything about the content of job advertisements, it is best to analyse the advertisements themselves. Therefore, a content analysis was conducted with job advertisements as the registration units. Because of the limited amount of time available for the study, a sample of 350 Dutch job advertisements
was coded. The sample consists of online job advertisements, which were obtained at the 23rd and 24th of November and the 9th of December, 2015. Job advertisements from both public and private, and profit and non-profit organizations were included in the sample. Only advertisements written in Dutch were included in the sample, because the codebook was in Dutch. Only job advertisements from the organization itself were included, job advertisements from recruitment agencies were excluded from the sample. Advertisements for both
permanent and temporarily jobs were included in the sample.
The advertisements were obtained from two employment websites,
nationalevacaturebank.nl and werkenbijdeoverheid.nl. The website nationalevacaturebank.nl was originally chosen as the website to collect the job advertisements, because this site is elected as the best job site in the Netherlands for the last six years, and a lot of organizations post their vacancies on this site. Therefore this website has a large and broad collection of job advertisements. Furthermore, the website has got a very useful selection tool, which made it possible to easily exclude the advertisements that did not fit the sample. However, this website did not have a lot of advertisements from public and non-profit organizations, therefore the second site, werkenbijdeoverheid.nl was also used. Werkenbijdeoverheid.nl is the official recruitment website of the Dutch government. Of course, using a second website could affect the results of this study. However, some advertisements appeared on both websites. These advertisements were compared, to see if any differences between them existed. This was not the case. Therefore, it can be assumed that the fact that the advertisements were shown on another website did not affect the content of the job
advertisements. Of course, only one advertisement from the two was included in the sample. To ensure the hypotheses could be tested properly, other aspects of the job
advertisements were held as constant as possible. Therefore, as little websites as possible were used to collect the sample, and only jobs from industries that exist in both public and private and profit and non-profit organizations were collected. Job advertisements from three different industries were collected: jobs in communication, marketing and PR, jobs in legal work and economical and financial jobs. As table 1 shows, public and non-profit
organizations did not have a lot of job advertisements in communication, marketing and PR functions. Of course communication functions do exist in these organizations, and some public and organizations also have marketing and PR functions. However, marketing and PR functions appear less in public and non-profit organizations. Because the website
nationalevacaturebank.nl has only one filter for communication, marketing and PR functions, the choice was made to include them all in the sample.
At first, 300 job advertisements were collected. Advertisements were collected per job industry. When there were less than one hundred job advertisements available for the search criterion (for example, functions in legal work), all advertisements matching this search criterion were collected. When there were more than one hundred advertisements available, a sample of one hundred advertisements was randomly selected. In the job industry legal work, less than a hundred job advertisements were available. To get to the sample of 300, extra job advertisements from the other two job industries were randomly selected. During the coding process it became clear that there was time to code another fifty job advertisements. First, all new job advertisements in the job industry legal work were collected. After that, job
advertisements in the other industries were collected. Table 1 shows the distribution of the different industries in the sample. The variable years of experience asked is a continuous variable. For table 1, the variable is categorized.
Table 1
Distribution of the Job Advertisements in the Different Job Industries
Communication, Marketing, PR Legal Economic, Financial Total Categories N % N % N % N % Public organization 12 3.4 24 6.9 58 16.6 94 26.9 Private organization 101 28.9 52 14.9 103 29.4 256 73.1 Non-profit organization 18 5.1 27 7.7 61 17.4 106 30.3 Profit organization 95 27.1 49 14.0 100 28.6 244 69.7 Staff function 77 22.0 67 19.1 133 38.0 277 79.1 Management function 36 10.3 9 2.6 28 8.0 73 20.9 0 years of experience 43 12.3 25 7.1 30 8.6 98 28.0 1-3 years of experience 31 8.9 14 4.0 56 16.0 101 28.9 4-6 years of experience 13 3.7 8 2.3 37 10.6 58 16.6 7-9 years of experience 1 .3 0 0 3 .9 4 1.1 10> years of experience 1 .3 0 0 0 0 1 .3 Unclear 24 6.9 29 8.3 35 10.0 88 25.1 Total 113 32.3 76 21.7 161 46.0 350 100
Variables
For each job advertisement, the type of organization, the job industry and the level of the function was coded. Jobs were coded as management level jobs when it was mentioned in the job description that the employee would lead a person or a team. When the job did not include any leadership activities, it was coded as a staff function. For the years of experience asked, the minimum number of years of experience asked was coded. When a job required
experience, but no explicit amount of experience was mentioned, it was coded as ‘unclear’. Intrinsic and extrinsic work values were measured using a list of values. This list is based on the values from George and Jones (2012), and was complemented with values used in other studies (Berthon et al., 2005; Jurgensen, 1978; Powell, 1984; Thomas & Wise, 1999; Turban, Forret & Hendrickson, 1998). The complete codebook can be found in appendix A. To measure the appearance of the values in job advertisements, it was coded per value how many times this value appeared in a job advertisement. So when the value ‘payment’ was not mentioned in the job advertisement, a zero was coded. When it was mentioned once, a one was coded, when it was mentioned twice, a two was coded, and so on. Before the coding started, the values were discussed by two coders, to improve the validity of the measurements. It was discussed what words or sentences were coded as a value, and what words or sentences were not.
Inter-Coder Reliability
To measure the reliability of the codebook, inter-coder reliability was measured using
Krippendorff’s Alpha (Hayes & Krippendorff, 2007). To measure inter-coder reliability, thirty units of the sample were coded by two coders. Before the two coders started coding, the codebook was discussed and some units were coded together, to see if the coders interpreted the codebook the same. After that, the final codebook was defined and the coders
independently coded thirty units. Inter-coder reliability was measured over this subsample. The results can be found in appendix B. The inter-coder reliability was sufficient for most variables. Only the variables exiting work environment and making important contributions scored a Krippendorff’s Alpha below .8. The variable exiting work environment scored an alpha of .45 and the variable making important contributions scored .74. The coders discussed these two variables again to reach agreement on the definition of the variables. Furthermore, all deviations were discussed, so that agreement was reached about the entire sample that was double-coded.
Analyses
To test the hypotheses in this study, t-tests were conducted. T-tests are used to calculate whether the mean scores of two groups differ. The dependent variable in these test is the number of values (intrinsic or extrinsic) that were counted in the job advertisements. In the analyses, both the total number of values and the number of unique values counted in the job advertisements was used. T-tests with both the total number of values used and the number of unique values used are conducted to see if there exists a difference between them. It could be that one or two intrinsic values are used a lot in one group while in the other group more intrinsic values are used, but only once or twice in an advertisement. When looking at the total number of values used, this difference will be invisible. When looking at the number of unique values used, this difference will become visible.
The independent variables are the groups between which the difference in occurrence of values is expected. One independent variable, ‘years of experience asked’, is not a
dichotomous but a continuous variable. Therefore, a t-test cannot be conducted. To calculate whether the usage of values in job advertisements differed with years of experience asked, simple linear regression analyses were conducted.
Some variables were a little skewed. Table 2 shows the different variables and their descriptive statistics. The variables intrinsic values and extrinsic values are the sum of all intrinsic or extrinsic values present per job advertisement. The variables unique intrinsic
values and unique extrinsic values show the amount of unique intrinsic or extrinsic values
present per job advertisement. The minimum score shows the smallest amount of intrinsic or extrinsic values in one advertisement, the maximum score shows the largest amount of intrinsic or extrinsic values in one advertisement. As you can see three variables are somewhat skewed, with a skewness between .5 and 1. These are the variable years of
Table 2
Descriptive Statistics and Skewness.
Variables N Min Max M SD Skewness SD Skewness
Years of experience 262 0 10 2.15 2.09 .60 .15
Intrinsic values 350 0 20 5.90 3.23 .72 .13
Extrinsic values 350 0 25 5.24 4.21 .93 .13
Unique intrinsic values 350 0 9 3.93 1.71 .14 .13 Unique extrinsic values 350 0 8 3.13 1.92 .27 .13
experience, which is the years of experience asked in the job advertisement, and the variables intrinsic values and extrinsic values, which are the sum of all intrinsic or extrinsic values
named in the job advertisement. The skewness of these variables is less than one, which makes them only a little skewed. Because of the size of the sample, all variables are treated as normally distributed in the analyses.
Results
Values in Job Advertisements
All work values, both intrinsic and extrinsic, were found in the job advertisements. Of course, some values occurred more frequently than others. Tables 3 and 4 show the distribution of intrinsic and extrinsic values in the job advertisements. We see that the intrinsic work values
interesting work and opportunity to learn are mentioned most. Payment and job benefits are
the extrinsic work values that are mentioned most. There are also some differences in the frequency of occurrence for different values. For example, the variables opportunity to learn and responsibility are both mentioned in 57 percent of the job advertisements, but opportunity
to learn is mentioned more per advertisement. We also see that the variable interesting work
is mentioned in a lot of the advertisements, but it is not mentioned much per advertisement.
Table 3
Descriptive Statistics of Intrinsic Work Values.
Work value M SD Max
Found in % of Advertisements Opportunity to learn 1.26 1.63 9 57.14 Interesting work 1.13 .69 4 86.0 Responsibility .99 1.09 5 57.71 Autonomy .57 .79 4 42.29
Making important contributions .53 .40 5 37.43
Exiting work environment .49 .68 4 27.71
Applying knowledge / abilities .39 .73 4 28.29
Challenging work .32 .56 3 41.14
Creativity .21 .54 4 15.71
Table 4
Descriptive Statistics of Extrinsic Work Values.
Work Value M SD Max
Found in % of Advertisements
Job benefits 1.89 2.34 10 62.0
Payment .94 1.00 6 60.0
Good atmosphere .57 .73 3 44.57
Status the job gives you .51 .60 2 46.0
Social contacts .49 .73 4 37.43
Opportunities for promotion .34 .70 5 25.14
Job security .28 .55 2 22.57
Work-life balance .21 .58 5 15.14
Note. N = 350.
Work Values in Job Advertisements in Different Sectors
T-tests were conducted to calculate whether the use of intrinsic and extrinsic work values
differed for public and private organizations and for non-profit and profit organizations. A t-test for independent samples showed that job advertisements from public organizations contain more intrinsic values (N = 94, M = 7.77, SD = 3.50) than job advertisements from private organizations (N = 256, M = 5.22, SD = 2.84), t (144.37) = 6.33, p < .001, 95% CI [1.75, 3.34]. The difference between these groups is significant. However, a t-test showed that job advertisements form public organizations also contain significantly more extrinsic values (N = 94, M = 8.45, SD = 4.63) than job advertisements from private organizations (N = 256,
M = 4.06, SD = 3.35), t (130.44) = 8.41, p < .001, 95% CI [3.35, 5.42].
When the analyses are not conducted for all work values present in the job
advertisements but for unique work values present in the job advertisements, similar results are found. Job advertisements from public organizations contain significantly more unique intrinsic values (N = 94, M = 4.86, SD = 1.78) than job advertisements form private
organizations (N = 256, M = 3.59, SD = 1.55), t (348) = 6.51, p < .001, 95% CI [.88, 1.65]. Public organization job advertisements also contain more unique extrinsic values (N = 94, M = 3.98, SD = 2.12) than private organization job advertisements (N = 256, M = 2.82, SD = 1.75), t (348) = 5.19, p < .001, 95% CI [.72, 1.60]. This difference is also significant. This
means that hypothesis 1a is confirmed and hypothesis 1b is rejected, both when all counted values are analysed and when the appearance of unique values is analysed.
To test the differences between non-profit and profit organizations, more independent sample t-tests were conducted. Significant differences were found. Job advertisements from non-profit organizations contain more intrinsic values (N = 106, M = 7.37, SD = 3.48) than job advertisements from profit organizations (N = 244, M = 5.27, SD = 2.90), t (171.53) = 5.45, p < .001, 95% CI [1.34, 2.86]. Job advertisements from non-profit organizations also contain more extrinsic values (N = 106, M = 7.80, SD = 4.78) than job advertisements from profit organizations (N = 244, M = 4.13, SD = 3.38), t (152.37) = 7.17, p < .001, 95% CI [2.66, 4.69]. These results confirm hypothesis 2a and reject hypothesis 2b. For these groups, t-tests were also conducted with unique work values. Here, significant differences were found too. Job advertisements from non-profit organizations contain more unique intrinsic values (N = 106, M = 4.75, SD = 1.74) than job advertisements from profit organizations (N = 244, M = 3.58, SD = 1.57), t (348) = 6.15, p < .001, 95% CI [.79, 1.54]. They also contain more unique extrinsic values (N = 106, M = 3.78, SD = 2.14) than job advertisements from profit
organizations (N = 244, M = 2.84, SD = 1.75), t (348) = 4.30, p < .001, 95% CI [.51, 1.37]. So, hypothesis 2a is confirmed and hypothesis 2b is not.
Work Values in Job Advertisements for Different Levels of Experience
T-tests were again conducted to find out whether there is a difference in the use of work
values in job advertisements for staff and management functions. The results from the t-test show that job advertisements for staff functions contain significantly less intrinsic values (N = 277, M = 5.66, SD = 3.23) than job advertisements for management functions (N = 73, M = 6.81, SD = 3.11), t (348) = -2.72, p = .007, 95% CI [-1.97, -.32]. For extrinsic values, there is no difference between staff functions (N = 277, M = 5.29, SD = 4.25) and management functions (N = 73, M = 5.05, SD = 4.04), t (348) = .42, p = .67, 95% CI [-.86, 1.32]. So, job advertisements for management functions contain more intrinsic values than job
advertisements for staff functions. For extrinsic values, no differences exist. When the difference in unique work values in job advertisements between staff and management functions is tested, no significant results are found. The difference for unique intrinsic values is nearly significant, t (348) = -1.76, p = 0.079, 95% CI [-.84, .05], with a mean of 3.85 (N = 277, SD = 1.74) for staff functions and a mean of 4.25 (N = 73, SD = 1.58) for management functions. The difference for unique extrinsic values between staff functions (N = 277, M = 3.19, SD = 1.97) and management functions (N = 73, M = 2.90, SD = 1.74) is not significant, t
(348) = 1.12, p = .263, 95% CI [-.21, .78]. This means that only when looking at all work values present in the job advertisements, a difference in the use of intrinsic values exist. Job advertisements for management functions contain more intrinsic values than job
advertisements for staff functions. This difference is not found when looking at unique intrinsic values, although that difference is almost significant. For extrinsic values, no
differences were found between staff and management functions. Therefore, hypothesis 3a is confirmed only when looking at all values present in the job advertisements. Hypothesis 3b is not confirmed.
Linear regression analyses were conducted to find out whether years of experience asked in a job advertisement influenced the values used in the advertisement (N = 262). Regression analyses show that when the years of experience asked increase, the use of intrinsic values increases as well. This goes for all used values, F (1,260) = 21.38, p < .001,
R2 = .08, b = .44, 95% CI [.25, .63] and unique used values, F (1,260) = 6.78, p = .01, R2 =
.03, b = .33, 95% CI [.08, .58]. We see that although the correlation is significant, only a small part of the variance in used values is explained by the years of experience asked in the job advertisement (respectively 8% and 3%). When one more year of experience is asked, .44 more intrinsic values are used in the job advertisement, and .33 more unique intrinsic values are used. Hypothesis 4a is therefore confirmed. Regression analyses show the same picture for extrinsic values. When years of experience asked increase, the use of extrinsic values
increases as well. Again, this goes for both all used values, F (1,260) = 29.35, p < .001, R2 =
.10, b = .26, 95% CI [.17, .36] and unique used values F (1,260) = 8.29, p = .004, R2 = .03, b
= .17, 95% CI [.05, .28]. We see again that the variance explained by the years of experience asked is small, respectively 10% and 3%. When one more year of experience is asked, the use of extrinsic values increases with .26 and the use of unique extrinsic values increases with .17. So, hypothesis 4b is rejected.
Conclusion and Discussion
Conclusion
From the results found in this study, it can be concluded that Dutch organizations partially adjust their job advertisements to their targeted employees. That is, more intrinsic values are used in job advertisements for an intrinsically motivated public, but also more extrinsic values
are used in these job advertisements. Another point this study shows, is that work values overall appear a lot in job advertisements. On average work values were mentioned eleven times per job advertisement. This shows that organizations do try to paint a (positive) picture of their organization and the job they offer. This is an important starting point, because when no information or too little information is given about an organization or a job, job seekers cannot form an opinion about the job and the organization (Powell, 1984).
Job advertisements in both the public and the non-profit sector contained more intrinsic and more extrinsic values than job advertisements in the private and profit sector. We see these results when looking at all values used in the job advertisements and when looking at the unique values used in the job advertisements. The first and second hypothesis are therefore partially confirmed, intrinsic values are indeed used more in job advertisements in the public and non-profit sector, but extrinsic values are not used less. On the contrary, they are also used more. The conclusion is therefore that job advertisements in the public and non-profit sector focus more on values overall, their job advertisements are more extensive than the job advertisements in the private and profit sector.
Slightly different conclusions can be drawn from the comparison between different levels of experience. Results show that job advertisements for management functions contain more intrinsic values than job advertisements for staff functions. This result only goes for the total amount of values used. When looking at unique values used, no difference was found. Also, no difference was found in the use of extrinsic values when looking at all values used and when looking at unique values used. This means that job advertisements for management functions are not just more extensive, they actually focus more on intrinsic values. The fact that this difference is only found when looking at all values used, shows that the same intrinsic values are used a lot in these advertisements. Since no difference was found for the extrinsic values, only hypothesis 3a is confirmed. When looking at the years of experience asked in a job advertisement, results show that with years of experience asked increasing, also the use of both intrinsic and extrinsic values in the job advertisements increases. We can state that job advertisements focussing on more experienced employees are more extensive than job advertisements focussing on less experienced employees. These results go for both all values used and unique values used in the job advertisements. Hypothesis 4a is therefore confirmed, and hypothesis 4b is rejected.
The overall conclusion that can be drawn from this study is that some organizations seem to try to attract employees with appealing job offers more than others, but they make no difference between intrinsically and extrinsically motivated candidates. The job
advertisements that contain more work values, mostly contain more intrinsic and more extrinsic values. Results from this study can be generalized to the Dutch job market.
Advertisements from a lot of companies all over the Netherlands were included in the sample, and job advertisements from different job industries were included. Therefore, the sample is representative for the Dutch job market.
Theoretical and Practical Implications
Several theoretical and practical implications can be drawn from this study. Although several scholars have stressed the importance of employer branding and have stated that companies are using these branding strategies (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004; Berthon, Ewing & Hah, 2005; Ewing, Pitt, de Bussy, & Berthon, 2002; Wilden et al., 2010), this study points out that this is not really the case for employer branding in job advertisements. These findings add a new insight to the knowledge of employer branding in job advertisements so far. Scholars have emphasized the importance of employer branding before, and have studied how to use employer branding in job advertisements. Now we have insight in the way Dutch
organizations use these insights in their job advertisements. We do see that employers use work values to attract potential employees, but they do not adjust the use of their values to their targeted potential employees. This means that employer branding in job advertisements using work values is mainly a theoretical thing, and is not used to its fullest in practice. This study shows that organizations do make an effort to attract employees by using job attributes. But it seems they do not have a targeted candidate in mind while writing the job
advertisement. So, employer branding in job advertisements is not used as cleverly by Dutch organizations as scholars thought.
Employers can learn from these findings. Organizations should focus more on their targeted candidates when publishing a job advertisement. Of course there are both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards in one job. But the values an organization focusses on in the job advertisement will filter the people who apply for the job. When you focus on both intrinsic and extrinsic values, both intrinsically and extrinsically motivated people will apply for the job, when you focus on intrinsic values alone, mostly intrinsically motivated people will apply for the job (Georgellis et al., 2011; Jäger et al., 2013). Of course, the same goes for extrinsic values. Studies have shown that people who want to work for public and non-profit
organizations are more intrinsically motivated, as are older and more experienced people. (Arnolds & Boshoff, 2002; Benz, 2005; Cherrington et al., 1979; Georgellis et al., 2011; Karl & Sutton, 1998; Rainey & Bozeman, 2000). Organizations should use more intrinsic and less
extrinsic values in these advertisements. On the other hand, people who want to work for private and profit organizations and younger and less experienced are more extrinsically motivated. In these job advertisements, organizations should focus more on extrinsic and less on intrinsic values.
Limitations and Research Suggestions
This study knows some limitations. First, relatively big differences exist between the sample sizes of sectors and functions that are compared (see table 1, page 14). The differences can easily be explained, because there are more private than public organizations, more profit than non-profit organizations and more staff functions than management functions. Still, these differences in sample size could affect the results. Because the smallest subsample was still relatively large (management function, N = 73), analyses were conducted with this unevenly distributed sample. In further research, a larger sample could be analysed, or an evenly distributed sample could be obtained. Another limitation of this study is in the used job industry ‘communication, marketing and PR’. As mentioned in the methods section of this paper, non-profit and especially public organizations rarely have a marketing or PR
department. Because the website only allowed to select on communication, marketing and PR functions together, all three were included in the sample. Consequences are that almost all job advertisements in marketing and PR come from private and profit organizations. It would be better to only select job advertisements for communication functions. A third limitation of this study is the fact that the sample contains little job advertisements where very experienced employees were recruited. The vast majority of job advertisements asked for six years of experience or less. This means we do not know what work values organizations use to attract people with a lot of experience. These vacancies are likely to be filled in different ways than through an employment website. Therefore, job advertisements should be collected in different ways to include these job advertisements in the sample.
In this study, we saw that profit organizations act the same as private organizations, and non-profit organizations act the same as public organizations. Large overlap existed between the categories. In further research it would be interesting to look at the differences between them. For example by comparing public with non-profit organizations, that is, governmental organizations versus charities and trust funds. This will be interesting to study, because scholars do treat these sectors as different sectors in their research (Benz, 2005; De Cooman et al., 2011; Georgellis et al., 2011; Karl & Sutton, 1998; Rainey & Bozeman, 2000). But in most studies, private organizations are compared with public organizations, and profit
organizations are compared with non-profit organizations. However, when Goulet and Frank (2002) examined organizational commitment in non-profit, profit and public sector
organizations, they did find differences between all three sectors. So, it would be interesting to see whether differences exist between the four sectors in employer branding and work values, or that we can see the non-profit and public sector as one, and the profit and private sector as one. Furthermore, it would be good to examine what intrinsic and extrinsic values are most important to job applicants. In this study, all values are treated equally important, but maybe job applicants place more importance on some of the values, and less importance on others. A survey could be conducted to answer this question, and help organizations even more in their employer branding.
References
Arnolds, C. A., & Boshoff, C. (2002). Compensation, esteem valence and job performance: An empirical assessment of Alderfer’s ERG theory. The international Journal of
Human Resource Management, 13(4), 697-719. doi:10.1080/09585190210125868
Askehave, I. (2010). Communicating leadership: A discourse analytical perspective on the job advertisement. Journal of Business Communication, 47(3), 313-345. doi:10.1177/ 0021943610365310
Backhaus, K., & Tikoo, S. (2004). Conceptualizing and researching employer branding.
Career Development International, 9(5), 501-517. doi:10.1108/13620430410550754.
Benz, M. (2005). Not for the profit, but for the satisfaction? Evidence on worker well-being in non-profit firms. Kyklos, 58(2), 155-176.
Berthon, P., Ewing, M. T., & Hah, L. L. (2005). Captivating company: Dimensions of attractiveness in employer branding. International Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 151-172.
Cable, D. M., Aiman-Smith, L., Mulvey, P. W., & Edwards, J. R. (2000). The sources and accuracy of job applicants’ beliefs about organizational culture. Academy of
Management Journal, 43(6), 1076-1085.
Cherrington, D. J., Condie, S. J., & England, J. L. (1979). Age and work values. Academy of
Management Journal, 22(3), 617-623.
Cennamo, L., & Gardner, D. (2008). Generational differences in work values, outcomes and person-organization values fit. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(8), 891-906. doi:10.1108/02683940810904385
Collins, C. J., & Stevens, C. K. (2002). The relationship between early recruitment-related activities and the application decisions of new labor-market entrants: A brand equity approach to recruitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(6), 1121-1133.
De Cooman, R., De Gieter, S., Pepermans, R., & Jegers, M. (2011). A cross-sector comparison of motivation-related concepts in for-profit and not-for-profit service organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(2), 296-317. doi:10.1177 /0899764009342897
Edwards, M. R. (2009). An integrative review of employer branding and OB theory.
Personnel Review, 39(1), 5-23. doi:10.1108/00483481011012809
Ewing, M. T., Pitt, L. F., de Bussy, N. M., & Berthon, P. (2002). Employment branding in the knowledge economy. International Journal of Advertising, 21(1), 3-22.
Foster, C., Punjaisri, K., & Cheng, R. (2010). Exploring the relationship between corporate, internal and employer branding. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 19(6), 401-409. doi:10.1108/10610421011085712
George, J. M., & Jones, G. R., (2012). Understanding and managing organizational behavior. Reading, MA: Addison‐Wesley.
Georgellis, Y., Iossa, E., Tabvuma, V. (2011). Crowding out intrinsic motivation in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(3), 473-493. doi:10. 1093/jopart/muq073
Goulet, L. R., & Frank, M. L. (2002). Organizational commitment across three sectors: Public, non-profit, and profit. Public Personnel Management, 31(2), 201-210. doi: 10.1177/009102600203100206
Hall, D. T., & Nougaim, K. E. (1968). An examination of Maslow’s need hierarchy in an organizational setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 12-35. Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure
for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 77-89.
Hays. (2015). Wereldwijde krapte op de arbeidsmarkt nog steeds zorgelijk [Worldwide shortage on the labour market still alarming][Press release]. Hays, retrieved from http://www.hays.nl/ press-releases/wereldwijde-krapte-op-arbeidsmarkt-nog-steeds-zorgelijk-1478388
Jäger, S., Reggiani, T., & Schempp, P. (2012). Earning Honor or Money? Self-Selection of
Motivated Workers. Working Paper.
Judge, T. A., & Bretz, R. D. (1992). Effects of work values on job choice decisions.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(3), 261-271.
Jurgensen, C. E. (1978). Job preferences (what makes a job good or bad?). Journal of applied
psychology, 63(3), 267-276.
Karl, K. A., & Sutton, C. L. (1998). Job values in today’s workforce: A comparison of public and private sector employees. Public Personnel Management, 27(4), 515-527.
Powell, G. N. (1984). Effects of job attributes and recruiting practices on applicant decisions: A comparison. Personnel Psychology, 37, 721-732.
Rainey, H. G., & Bozeman, B. (2000). Comparing public and private organizations: Empirical research and the power of the a priori. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory, 10(2), 447-469.
Schneider, B., & Alderfer, C. P. (1973). Three studies of measures of need satisfaction in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18(4), 489-505.
Thomas, K. M., & Wise, P. G. (1999). Organizational attractiveness and individual
differences: Are diverse applicants attracted by different factors? Journal of business
and psychology, 13(3), 375-390.
Turban, D. B., Forret, M. L., & Hendrickson, C. L. (1998). Applicant attraction to firms: Influences of organization reputation, job and organizational attributes, and recruiter behaviors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52, 24-44.
Wahba, M. A., & Bridwell, L. G. (1976). Maslow reconsidered: A review of research on the need hierarchy theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 15, 212-240.
Walker, H. J., Field, H. S., Giles, W. F., & Bernerth, J. B. (2008). The interactive effects of job advertisement characteristics and applicant experience on reactions to recruitment messages. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81, 619-638. doi:10.1348/096317907X252487
Wanous, J. P., & Zwany, A. (1977). A cross-sectional test of need hierarchy theory.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 18, 78-97.
Wilden, R., Gudergan, S., & Lings, I. (2010). Employer branding: Strategic implications for staff recruitment. Journal of Marketing Management, 26(1-2), 56-73. doi:10.1080/ 02672570903577091
Appendix A. Codebook
Since Dutch job advertisements were coded for this study, a Dutch codebook was used. Here you can find both the original Dutch codebook and a translation in English.
Original codebook:
Identificatie
Variabele Beschrijving Categorieën
Codeur Naam van de codeur 1 = Floor, 2 = Ebbing
Nummer Nummer van de vacature Numeriek
Profit Profit of non-profit organisatie 0 = non-profit, 1 = profit Privaat Private of publieke organisatie 0 = publiek, 1 = privaat Functiegroep Functiegroep van de vacature 1 = marketing/communicatie,
2 = juridisch,
3 = economisch/financieel Opleiding Gevraagd opleidingsniveau 1 = geen opleiding gevraagd,
2 = VMBO, 3 = MBO, 4 = HBO, 5 = WO
Ervaring Jaren ervaring gevraagd Numeriek, 99 bij onduidelijkheid
Niveau Niveau van de functie 0 = uitvoerende functie, 1 = leidinggevende functie
Intrinsieke waarden
Variabele Beschrijving Categorieën
Interessant werk Interessante functie,
verscheidenheid aan activiteiten
Numeriek Uitdagend werk Uitdagende, spannende functie Numeriek Spannende omgeving Spannende werkomgeving Numeriek Leren Mogelijkheid om te leren,
trainingsprogramma’s
Numeriek Bijdrage Het leveren van belangrijke
bijdragen
Numeriek Kennis toepassen Mogelijkheid om kennis en kunde
toe te passen of te delen
Numeriek Verantwoordelijkheid Werknemer krijgt
verantwoordelijkheid
Numeriek Autonomie Werknemer krijgt autonomie,
zelfstandigheid
Creativiteit Creativiteit wordt gestimuleerd / gewaardeerd
Numeriek
Extrinsieke waarden
Variabele Beschrijving Categorieën
Salaris Salaris dat wordt geboden Numeriek
Secundair Secundaire arbeidsvoorwaarden Numeriek Baanzekerheid Uitzicht op vast contract Numeriek Promotie Mogelijkheden voor promotie Numeriek Status Status van de baan of de
organisatie in de buitenwereld
Numeriek Sociaal Sociale contacten, leuke collega’s Numeriek Sfeer Goede sfeer in team of organisatie Numeriek Balans Werk-privé balans, nieuwe werken Numeriek
Translated codebook:
Identification
Variable Description Categories
Coder Name of the coder 1 = Floor, 2 = Ebbing
Number Number of the job advertisement Numeric
Profit Profit or non-profit organization 0 = non-profit, 1 = profit Private Private or public organization 0 = public, 1 = private Job industry Job industry of the job
advertisement
1 = marketing,
communication, 2 = legal, 3 = economic, financial Education Level of education asked 1 = no education asked, 2 =
VMBO, 3 = MBO, 4 = HBO, 5 = WO
Experience Years of experience asked Numeric, 99 when unclear
Level Level of the position 0 = staff position,
1 = management position
Intrinsic values
Interesting work Interesting position, diversity of activities
Numeric Challenging work Challenging, exiting work Numeric Exiting environment Exiting work environment Numeric Learning Opportunity to learn, training
opportunities
Numeric Contributing Making important contributions Numeric Applying knowledge Possibility to apply or share
knowledge and abilities
Numeric Responsibility Employee receives responsibility Numeric Autonomy Employee receives autonomy,
independency
Numeric Creativity Creativity is stimulated, valued Numeric
Extrinsic values
Variable Description Categories
Payment Payment offered Numeric
Job benefits Job benefits offered Numeric
Job security Prospect of permanent position Numeric Promotion Opportunities for a promotion Numeric Status Status the job or organization gives
you
Numeric Social Social contacts, nice colleagues Numeric Atmosphere Good atmosphere in the
organization or team
Numeric Balance Work-life balance, the new way of
working
Appendix B. Inter-Coder Reliability
Variable Krippendorff’s Alpha
Profit or non-profit organization .90
Public or private organization .84
Function group 1
Education level asked 1
Years of experience asked .91
Staff or management position 1
Intrinsic values
Interesting work .89
Challenging work 1
Exiting work environment .45
Opportunity to learn .87
Making important contributions .74
Applying or sharing knowledge / abilities .88
Responsibility .99 Autonomy .93 Creativity .81 Extrinsic values Payment .99 Job benefits .99 Job security 1
Opportunities for promotion .91
Status the job gives you .84
Social contacts .90
Good atmosphere .80
