Graduate School of Communication
Branding the employer through social media:
An explorative study on the effects of employer branding and social media
favorability on organizational attractiveness
Master Thesis by
Yasmin Reeb
6052029
Supervised by
G.L.A. van der Meer
3
rdof February 2017
Abstract
Recruiting the most talented employees is a top priority for organizations. One of today’s most popular approaches in recruitment is employer branding, in which organizations are trying to differentiate themselves from competitors and identify themselves as ‘a great place to work’. Nowadays, the use of social media is becoming increasingly more common. Despite the rise of social media, however, little is known about how social media affect applicant’s attraction to an organization. In the current paper, the employer branding approach is combined with social media in an experimental survey in order to examine the effects on organizational attractiveness. It is argued that social media favorability will moderate the effects of employer branding on organizational attractiveness. Also, the intervening effects of person-organization fit and attitude towards the vacancy will be examined. Findings indicate that employer branding does indeed increases organizational attractiveness and that social media favorability has an interacting effect. However, this interaction is only present when no employer branding is applied, implying the importance of leveraging social media strategically.
Keywords: employer branding, social media favorability, organizational attractiveness, person-organization fit, attitude towards the vacancy
Branding the Employer with social media : An explorative study on the effects of employer
branding and social media favorability on organizational attractiveness
Due to the shift from the industrial age to an age of information, human capital is seen
as the main source for gaining competitive advantage (Alniacik & Alniacik, 2012). Hence,
recruiting the most talented candidates is for organizations a top priority. Over the last decade
or so, one approach in recruitment has gained much attention from academics, as well as
practitioners: employer branding. The idea behind the concept is that, in order to enhance
organizational performance and gain the most talented candidates, an organization has to
offer high quality employment and specific benefits to applicants, in a way that the
organization is seen as ‘a great place to work’(Dabirian, Kietzmann & Diba, 2016).
For a number of years, organizations have been posting vacancies online and
websites, such as monsterboard.nl and indeed.nl, seem to be the main source for finding
employment (Nikolaou, 2014). Online recruitment provides advantages to enhance
organizational recruitment practices, as it is more efficient, cheaper and organizations can
reach a wider audience. More recently, with the rise of social media, the platform for
recruiting employees has expanded even more. Whereas traditional recruitment websites are
being used for actively recruiting candidates (e.g. posting available vacancies), social media
should be treated differently. Instead of using it as just another channel for recruitment, its
interactive nature is perfect for contextualizing and personalizing communication at an
individual level (Dutta, 2014). The power of social media in a recruitment context lays in its
passiveness; instead of actively searching for candidates, organizations should leverage social
media strategically in order to create opportunities to deepen connections with target users
and build affinity with the organization (Powers et al., 2012).
The aim of this paper is to examine the effects of employer branding on
function as an enhancer of the effects of employer branding on applicant’s attraction to the
organization. How the image of the organization is perceived plays an important role in the
minds of potential applicants, and being able to create a favorable image will help an
organization in attracting more qualified applicants (Cable and Turban, 2003). Social media
have the advantage of engaging consumers and generating online word-of-mouth (Gensler,
Völckner, Liu-Thompkins & Wiertz, 2013). In a recruitment context, it offers opportunities
for organizations to express their identity, culture and help to create awareness, which will
help in building a favorable image in the minds of potential applicants and attract a larger
pool of talented candidates (Dabirian et al., 2016). Therefore, it should be the perfect
instrument for enhancing employer branding. Although offering more opportunities in terms
of interaction and approaching candidates, organizations are losing a sense of control, as visitors have influence over the content of organization’s social media. As such,
organizations should leverage their social media strategies carefully in order to preserve their
control over their content.
Applicants, on the other hand, are gaining a certain amount of control in terms of
gathering information and interaction with the organization. Whereas applicants previously
just could gather ‘formal’ information on corporate websites, social media offer applicants opportunities to gather ‘informal’ information about the organization and gain a sense of the
organizational culture (Ladkin & Buhalis, 2016).
Prior research has shown that job seekers use available job advertisements for
gathering information on potential employers. Content of these advertisements can affect
jobseekers’ attitudes towards an organization (Barber & Roehling, 1993) and results of prior
research indicate that applying employer branding elements into vacancies positively affects applicant’s attraction to the organization (Elving, Westhoff, Meeusen & Schoonderbeek,
other characteristics such as pictures, color and print font, may affect job seekers’ attitudes
(Cober, Brown, Keeping & Levy, 2004; Dineen, Ling & DelVecchio, 2007). Therefore, in
this study, it is argued that an individual’s attitude toward a vacancy and their perceived fit
are crucial factors for determining their degree of attraction to the organization.
Backhaus and Tikoo (2004) address the fact that employer branding as a concept has
gained much attention by practitioners, but little in the academic literature. Although this has
changed in the last decade or so and many scholars have tried to lay a theoretical foundation
for the concept, empirical evidence is scarce and much of the literature is based on
conceptualizing employer branding and developing frameworks. However, as employer
branding is seen as an instrument to differentiate an organization from competitors (Backhaus
& Tikoo, 2004), gaining insights in how employer branding can contribute to the attraction of
the best candidates will give organizations a distinct edge in the labor market.
Although prior research examined whether several cues on recruitment websites affect
outcomes such as organizational attractiveness (Gregory, Meade & Thompson, 2013) and
whether social media use in organizations has any influence (Sivertzen, Nilsen & Olafsen,
2013), no known research has examined whether social media passively can affect applicant
outcome variables. Due to the increasing popularity of social media in recruitment (Nikolaou,
2014; Ladkin & Buhalis, 2016), effects of social media on recruitment-related outcome
variables will be examined.
From a practical perspective, getting better insight in recruitment through social
media can help human resource managers in determining their long-term strategies, as they
offer new opportunities for gaining and retaining employees. In this paper it is argued that
social media, due to its passive, informal and interactive character, are the perfect instrument
for enhancing employer branding. Especially social media that do not have a professional,
sense of organizational culture, which can result in a strong employer brand.
In this study, it is expected that employer branding will increase organizational
attractiveness and that social media will enhance this effect. Also, the intervening role of
person-organization fit and attitude towards the vacancy will be examined. The question
leading this research will therefore be:
RQ: To what extent do employer branding and social media favorability affect
employer attractiveness and to what extent is this relation affected by person-organization fit and attitude towards the vacancy?
Literature review
Employer branding
Finding its history in marketing branding literature, the core of employer branding is
to approach the organization as a brand. Edwards (2009) argues that a brand is a mixture of
tangible and intangible attributes that symbolize a trademark, which creates value and
influence. The idea is that the brand equity concept (Keller, 1993) can be approached from a
human resource perspective. Whereas customer-based brand equity is concerned with the
beliefs held by customers about a product’s brand and with how a product is represented to
consumers, the branding targets of the employer brand are current and potential employees
(Edwards, 2009). Cable and Turban (2001) suggest that jobseekers confront similar issues as
consumers when evaluating a brand as a potential employer. The formation of specific beliefs
about a brand will provide jobseekers with a basis for deciding whether to pursue or accept an
employment offer. Such beliefs, similar to a product brand image, are called the employer
brand image (Collins & Stevens, 2002). Although technically speaking the employer brand is
merely an identifier, such as a name or a logo, Theurer, Tumasjan, Welpe and Lievens (2016)
stored and summarized under the term ‘employer brand’.
One of the first definitions of the employer brand refers to it as “the package of
functional, economic and psychological benefits provided by employment, and identified
with the employing company” (Ambler & Barrow, 1996, p.187). According to the authors,
employer branding is considered with building an image that the organization is ‘a great place to work’. Key to the employer brand is that it has to express the organizational identity
(Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004). Backhaus and Tikoo (2004) define employer branding as “the
process of building an identifiable and unique employer identity and the employer brand as a concept of the firm that differentiates itself from its competitors” (p. 502). They argue that
organizations should differentiate themselves from competitors with unique characteristics
and aspects of employment they offer in order to gain a unique employment experience. While Ambler and Barrow’s (1996) definition emphasizes rewards and experiences provided
by an organization, this definition emphasizes the management of the organization’s image in
order to give the employment brand some additional substance.
Backhaus and Tikoo’s (2004) definition also emphasizes the differentiation of
competitor organizations. Organizations can differentiate themselves by functional and
economic benefits, but they also differ in the provision of intrinsic and symbolic rewards (van
Hoye & Saks, 2011). Prior research has indicated that differentiation based on symbolic
image dimensions (e.g. prestige, sincerity, competence) is more successful than
differentiation based on instrumental dimensions (van Hoye, Bas, Cromheecke & Lievens,
2013). These symbolic image dimensions are similar to organizational personality
perceptions and describe the organization with subjective, abstract and intangible traits,
which express the corporate identity (Slaughter, Zickar, Highhouse & Mohr, 2004). As they
enable jobseekers to enhance their self-image and estimate their fit with the organization,
(van Hoye et al., 2013).
Edwards (2009) argues that the identification of elements of the character of the
organization itself is the central element to employer branding. A brand has to be noticeable,
relevant, resonant and unique (Moroko & Uncles, 2008) and without identifying the key
values of the organization and the underlying principles guiding it, one will not be able to
create a strong employer brand. Employer branding in this paper, will therefore be seen as an
approach whereby an organization tries to build a favorable employer image in the minds of
(potential) employees and tries to differentiates itself as an attractive place for employment,
whereby the emphasis is on unique characteristics of the organizational identity.
Employer branding and organizational attractiveness
In order to gain competitive advantage, organizations should have high-quality
employees. Attracting the most talented candidates is therefore essential. Organizational
attractiveness is defined as “an attitude or expressed general positive affect toward an
organization and towards viewing the organization as a desirable entity in which to initiate some relationship” (Aiman-Smith, Bauer & Cable, 2001, p. 221). In a recruitment context, it
refers to the extent to which job seekers view an organization as a desirable and positive
place to work (Erhart & Ziegert, 2005). One element that returns in various employer
branding definitions is the emphasis on the unique aspects of the organization that benefits employment of the organization. These attributes are crucial for applicants’ attraction to the
organization, which in turn affects their decisions whether to apply or not (Rynes, Bretz &
Gerhart, 1991). The attractiveness of an organization is concerned with how an organization,
and in particular certain characteristics of an organization, is perceived. Employer branding is
concerned with expressing unique characteristics of the organization (Backhaus & Tikoo,
2004). Accordingly, applicants will be more attracted to organizations that apply employer
Berthon, Ewing and Hah (2005) developed scale consisting of 25 items to determine which factors are relevant for jobseekers’ decision to apply for a job. These items can be
divided into five value dimensions: social, development, application, interest and economic.
The authors argue that organizations should integrate these factors into their employer brand
in order to compete globally in attracting employees. Further research, consistent with prior
findings, has shown that jobseekers attribute the highest importance to the ‘social value’
(Alniacik & Alniacik, 2012), indicating that symbolic traits are indeed more decisive than
tangible traits (van Hoye et al., 2013). Drawing further on this scale, Elving et al. (2013)
conducted an experiment an applied the dimensions of Berthon et al. (2005) in job vacancies.
Their results show that organizations which applied these employer branding elements in
their job vacancies were perceived as more attractive than organization that did not apply
these elements.
As symbolic characteristics are more predictive of organizational attractiveness (van
Hoye et al., 2013), the focus in this paper will be on the incorporation of symbolic
characteristics of the organization, such as prestige, sincerity and competence. Also, the five
distinguished value dimensions of employer branding by Berthon et al (2005) will be adapted
(e.g. social, economic, application, development and interest). With the expectation that
applying employer branding characteristics in vacancies will enhance applicants’ attraction to
the organization, the following hypothesis will be tested:
H1: Job vacancies with employer branding elements will lead to a stronger degree of
organizational attractiveness than job vacancies without employer branding elements.
Social media and recruitment
Job search appears to be one of the reasons people engage in social networking sites (Stopfer & Gosling, 2013) and social media can have a great impact on the an organization’s image. In employer branding campaigns, social media can be used to build a reputation,
which in turn is related to applicants’ intentions to pursuit a job (Sivertzen et al., 2013). Sivertzen et al. (2013) argue that if social media have the power of building an employer’s image, they are also able to ruin it. Prior research addresses the importance of social media in creating word-of-mouth, which enhances reputation (Van Hoye & Lievens, 2007). In a jobseekers context, word-of-mouth refers to interpersonal communication about an organization as an employer, independent of the organization’s recruitment activities (van Hoye & Lievens, 2005).
How an organization is perceived in the media refers to media favorability. Deephouse (2000), translating the idea of organizational reputation to a media context, defines the concept as “the overall evaluation of a firm presented in the media resulting from the stream of media stories about the firm.” The author makes the distinction between focal the distinction between focal media favorability and the peripheral favorability, with the first referring to the overall evaluation of a firm presented in media stories, and the latter referring to the overall evaluated tone of the stories. Their result indicate that focal favorability
enhances a firm’s public esteem for people with more knowledge of the firms’ attributes and that peripheral favorability enhances their public esteem for the ones without any knowledge. People form their opinions based on media favorability, assuming that the content in media is representative of more general content (Gunther, 1998) and that this also influences the opinions of others, leading eventually to change in behavior (Gunther & Storey, 2003). In this paper, it is argued that social media have a similar function as traditional media. However, compared to traditional media, social media offer organizations
opportunities to exercise more control over their favorability and by leveraging their social media strategically, organizations have a certain level of control over their online visibility. Although the number of likes and visitors posts can never be controlled, organizations have more power than with traditional media favorability, where controlling the amount of positive
or negative media stories is much more challenging.
It is argued that by observing Facebook pages and unconsciously observing cues, such as the number of likes, how actively an organization responds to visitors’ posts and the
overall activity on a page, people form an evaluation of that organization, affecting their overall opinion. Naturally, the more favorable they perceive an organization, the more positive their attitudes towards this organization will be. Therefore, with the prediction that ‘social media favorability’ will enhance applicant’s attraction to an organization, the following hypothesis will be tested:
H2: Organizations with a high level of social media favorability will lead to a stronger degree of organizational attractiveness than organizations with a low level of social media favorability.
Employer branding and social media favorability
According to the Elaboration Likelihood model of persuasion, individuals can process
information either through a central route or a peripheral route (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986).
When a message is processed through the central route, recipients closely evaluate the value
and meaning of a message and recipients have a high elaboration of message content.
However, many times an individual lacks the motivation or the ability to elaborate the
message content. Information processing than happens through the peripheral route and
instead of basing their evaluations on message content, recipients form their attitudes based
on positive and negative cues. Accordingly, positive cues will result in more favorable
attitudes (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) and cues such as message length or color are more
influential (Chow & Chapman, 2013).
In a traditional media favorability context, peripheral favorability, the overall tone of
the message, enhances a firm’s public esteem for people without knowledge of the firm.
and use. Its power lays in its passivity, making it perfect for peripheral persuasion (Dutta,
2014). In the academic literature, there is a lack of evidence on the use of social media in
employer branding campaigns (Davison et al, 2011). One of the few empirical studies on
social media use in combination with employer branding, indicates that social media can be a
useful tool for employer branding campaigns, as it can be helpful in building a good
reputation (Sivertzen et al, 2013). As social media offer opportunities to enhance brand
awareness (Hoffman & Fodor, 2010), they should also be able to enhance employer brand
awareness. Therefore, it is argued that social media favorability, due to its passivity, will
enhance the effects of employer branding on organizational attractiveness. The following
hypothesis will be tested:
H3: The effect of employer branding on organizational attractiveness will be stronger when there is a high degree of social media favorability.
Person-organization fit
Scholars’ interest in organizational attractiveness is due to the assumption that these
responses can be generalized to actual organizational choice (Highhouse, Lievens & Sinar,
2003). In a meta-analysis, Chapman, Uggerslev, Carroll, Piasentin and Jones (2005) found that one of the strongest predictors of an applicant’s attraction to an organization is an
individual’s perceived fit. Person-organization fit (P-O fit) is defined as “the compatibility
between people and organizations that occurs when (a) there is a similarity or match of some
attribute and /or (b) one entity provides what the other wants or needs” (Kristof, 1996, p. 4). An individual’s judgments of his or hers compatibility with an organization can be based on a
variety of traits, shared values or goals and prior findings indicate that P-O fit is not just
associated with organizational attractiveness, but also outcome variables such as job
satisfaction and organizational commitment (Kristof-brown, Zimmerman & Johnson, 2005).
enough information about an organizations to form their attitudes and therefore use available
information as signals of unobservable elements. As such, when viewing recruitment
websites, jobseekers are especially concerned with gaining information on the organization
and the job, which they use to determine their fit with the organization (Williamson, Lepak,
King, 2003). Besides content, they use other cues such a pictures or employee testimonials to
estimate their overall fit (Dineen et al., 2007; Gregory et al., 2013). Objective characteristics
help applicants to build mental schemas of what it would be like to work at an organization
and the more positive this schema, the more likely applicants will pursue that job (Gregory et
al, 2013). Results of Elving et al. (2013) indicate that potential employees can realize a better
estimate fit between them and the organization when employer branding elements are applied in job advertisements, which in turn enhances the jobseeker’s attraction to the organization.
These findings, consistent with prior results, indicate that job seekers compare the image of
the organization with their own needs, personality and values (Backhaus and Tickoo, 2004).
The more consistent these elements are with their own, the more attracted they will be to the
organization. Accordingly, as employer branding emphasizes unique characteristics, the
better applicants can estimate their fit with the organization. Based on these findings and with
the knowledge that P-O fit is one of the most important predictors of organizational
attractiveness (Chapman et al. 2005), it is predicted that employer branding will increase
perceived P-O fit and that this will lead to a stronger degree of organizational attractiveness.
The following hypotheses will be tested:
H4: Job vacancies with employer branding elements will enhance person-organization fit.
H5: P-O fit will positively mediate the relation between employer branding and organizational attractiveness
Attitude towards the ad
Prior consumer brand research has indicated that an individual’s perception of a brand’s advertisement is crucial for its eventual brand choice (Gardner, 1985). Attitude
towards the advertisement is an important mediator of consumers’ choice behavior (Shimp,
1981). The rationale behind this is that the evaluation of an advertisement a sufficient basis is
for a trial purchase of the advertised brand and eventually will lead to purchase intentions.
These findings are consistent with the theory of reasoned action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977)
and indicate that purchase behavior for a great deal is influenced by attitudes. Accordingly,
how a potential applicant evaluates an advertisement will have consequences for their overall
attitudes towards the organization as an employer.
Boulding, Lee & Staelin (1994) argue that organizations have direct control of
advertising and as such, advertisements can be crafted in order to create desirable brand
attribute associations in consumer minds, which in turn generate positive attitudes towards
the brand. Therefore, organizations should be able to do the same with job advertisements.
Prior research on attitudes towards job advertisement (in the form of vacancies) shows that
advertising affects specific beliefs and general attitudes towards an organization (Barber &
Roehling, 1993). However, whether this affects the relation between employer branding and
organizational attractiveness has not been examined yet. Following the same reasoning as for
consumer brands, the expectation is that attitudes towards the vacancies will be determining for the applicant’s attraction to an organization, which, based on the theory of reasoned
action, should affect applicant’s behavioral intentions. Accordingly, when attitudes towards
an advertisement are negative, an applicant would most likely not be attracted to the
organization and would not apply. Therefore, the following hypothesis will be tested (see
H6: Attitude towards the vacancy will positively mediate the relation between employer branding and organizational attractiveness
Figure 1: Conceptual model.
Method
To test the effects of employer branding and the interaction of social media
favorability on the outcome variable organizational attractiveness, an online survey with
experimental design was conducted. Also, the intervening effects of P-O fit and attitude
towards the vacancy were examined. The hypotheses were tested in a 2 (with employer
branding vs. without employer branding) × 2 (with social media favorability vs. without
social media favorability) between-subjects factorial design, resulting in four conditions.
Participants
Participants were recruited through Facebook and e-mail, using a convenience
sample. A total of 187 people participated, of which 36 were left out of the analysis. Reasons
for exclusion were not finishing the survey or participants indicating that the stimuli were not Employer Branding (H1) Social Media Favorability (H2/H3) Organizational Attractiveness P-O Fit (H4/H5) Attitude towards the Vacancy (H6)
readable. The total sample size which provided valid data is composed of 151 participants, of
which 25.2% was male (n = 38) and 74.8% was female (n = 113). The mean age of the
participants was 25.61 (SD = 4.71) and only 3.3% of the participants did not have a Facebook
account (n = 5). Of the participants who did have a Facebook account, 66.9% (n = 101)
indicated they used it multiple times a day. Table 1 shows an overview of the number of
participants per condition.
Table 1.
Number of participants per condition With employer branding
Without employer
branding Total
With social media
favorability 30 42 72
Without social
media favorability 36 43 79
Total 66 85 151
Procedure
Participants were randomly assigned to one Facebook page and one vacancy. In the
beginning of the survey, participants received a small briefing of the objective of the study
and a factsheet was presented to inform them about the conditions to participate in the survey.
In order to continue, participants had to agree and understand the informed consent.
Participants were randomly exposed to a Facebook page of a fictitious organization, either
with social media favorability or without. The page with a lot of favorable elements was
characterized by significantly more likes, recent posts, visitor comments and content than the
page without favorability.
The organization chosen for the study was called MT Group, an international
consumer good organization. As participants were collected through Facebook and personal
traineeship on entry level position. To prevent study direction from affecting their evaluations
of the vacancy or the organization, it was clearly expressed in the vacancy that there were
opportunities in various branches and that study direction did not matter. Also, to prevent
education level or past work experience to affect their responses, participants were asked to
imagine that they were qualified for the position and in search for a job. After being exposed
to the Facebook page, participants were asked to indicate whether the page was readable or
not and then randomly assigned to either the vacancy with employer branding elements or the
vacancy without these elements. The vacancy was of the same fictitious organization as the
Facebook page. The employer branding elements were based on Backhaus and Tikoo (2004),
Moroko and Uncles (2008) and Berthon et al. (2005), who gave characteristics of strong,
employer brands, such as clear mission, vision and values of the organization (e.g. “we believe that it is our mission” and “looking for talented people who share our values”) and
dimensions such as application, economic, development, interest and social value. For a full
overview of the stimuli, see appendix A. After being exposed to the stimuli, the questions that
followed concerned measurements of the outcome variables organizational attractiveness,
intentions to apply, attitude towards the vacancy and person-organization fit. At the end of
the survey, demographic questions were included. Finally, participants were thanked for their
participation and debriefed.
Pretest
Before the survey was distributed, a pretest was conducted to check whether the
stimuli for the independent variables differed enough on the level of employer branding and
social media favorability. A total of N = 19 respondents were approached to participate in the
pretest. After checking the sample and removing the missing variables, a total sample size of
18 participants was left for the pretest, of which 27.8% was male (n = 5) and 72.2% female (n
50% was exposed to the Facebook page with social media favorability (n = 9), 50% to the
page without social media favorability, 55.6% of the participants were exposed to the
vacancy with employer branding(n = 10) and 44.4% to the vacancy without (n = 8).
Employer Branding. To measure the degree of employer branding, the
characteristics of successful employer brands, defined by Moroko and Uncles (2008) and
Backhaus and Tickoo (2004) were used. On a 7-point Likertscale, varying from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”, respondents were asked to what extent they agreed with
statements such as “The identity of the organization is expressed” and “There is sufficient
information about the company’s values”. A full overview of the items used to measure
employer branding in the pretest can be found in Appendix C. After conducting a principle component factor analysis, all 9 items loaded on one component, (eigenvalue = 7.39),
explaining 82.16% of the variance. The scale also proved reliable as indicated by a Cronbach’s Alpha of .97 (M = 4.28, SD = 1.30)
After conducting an independent sample t-test, respondents who saw the vacancy with
employer branding scored significantly higher (M = 5.74, SD = 0.64) than respondents who
saw the vacancy without employer branding (M = 5.74, SD = .87), t (16) = 5.90, p < .001, CI
[1.34, 2.85], d = 2.75.
Social media favorability. To measure whether the Facebook pages of the fictitious
organization were perceived as favorable and the other page as less favorable, participants
were asked to what extent they agreed or disagreed with statements such as “I think this company has a good presence on Facebook” and “I think there are a lot of recent posts of this
company.” A total of seven items was used to measure social media favorability (all items
can be found in Appendix C) and after conducting a principle component factor analysis, the item “I would like this page on Facebook” was deleted in order to create a reliable scale (α =
whether the stimuli differed enough, an independent sample t-test was conducted. It appeared
that participants who saw the organization with social media favorability evaluated it
significantly more favorable (M = 5.94, SD = .41) than participants who saw the organization
without favorability (M = 3.11, SD = 1.10), t (10) = 7.28, p < .001, CI [1.97, 3.70], d = 3.41.
Measurements
After being exposed to the Facebook page and the vacancy, participants were asked to
fill out a questionnaire about their attitudes towards the vacancy, their attraction to the
organization, their fit with the organization and their intentions to pursuit. For every variable,
participants were asked to indicate on a 7-point Likert scale (anchored 1 = “strongly disagree” and 7 = “strongly agree”) to what extent they agreed with each of the statements.
For a full overview of the items and the questionnaire see Appendix B.
Organizational attractiveness. The measurements for organizational attractiveness were based on a scale developed by Highhouse et al., (2003), consisting of five items. The item “I would not be interested in this company, except as a last resort” had to be recoded, as
it was reversed. After conducting a principal component factor analysis, all items loaded on
one component, with an eigenvalue above 1 (eigenvalue = 3.54), explaining 70.85% of the variance. The scale proved to be reliable (α = .88) and therefore all items were combined into
a single variable (M = 4.89, SD = 0.98).
Attitude towards the vacancy. In order to measure attitude towards the vacancy, Biel and Bridgewater’s (1990) scale for measuring attitudes towards advertisements was used
and adapted to vacancies instead of advertisements. The item “the vacancy is irritating” had
to be reversed. All items loaded on one component, (eigenvalue = 4.01), explaining 80.2% of the variance. However, although reversed, the item “the vacancy is irritating” had to be
deleted in order to get a reliable scale, resulting in a 4-item scale, which was combined in one variable (α = .93, M = 4.80, SD = 1.29).
Person-Organization fit. To measure P-O fit, a three-item scale adapted from Cable
and DeRue (2002) was used. An example of a statement is “the organization’s values and culture provide a good fit with the things that I value in life.” After conducting a principle
component factor analysis, all items loaded on one component (eigenvalue = 2.69), explaining 89.71% of the variance. The scale prove to be very reliable (α = .94) and
therefore, the three items were combined into a new, single variable. (M = 4.09, SD = 1.10).
Data analyses
Before testing the hypotheses, the data were checked on assumptions of normality,
linearity and errors. Pearson’s correlations were conducted with the control variables age and
gender on the main variables organizational attractiveness, P-O fit and attitude towards the vacancy, which can be found in table 2. While age did not correlate significantly with the
outcome variables, gender seemed to have significant correlations with organizational
attractiveness and therefore taken into the analyses as a covariate. To test the hypotheses an
ANCOVA and regression analyses were used. To test the mediation of attitude towards the
vacancy and P-O fit, a multiple regression analysis with the procedure of Baron and Kenny
(1986) was used.
Randomization
A randomization check was conducted to check whether demographic characteristics
were equally distributed over the conditions. For gender, a Chi-square test was carried out.
Out of the 79 participants in the SMF condition, 58 (59.1%) was female. This percentage is
not significantly different from the 72 participants in the non-SMF condition, of whom 55
(53.9%) was female, χ² (1) = 0.18, p = .674. In the employer branding condition, out of the 85
participants, 60 (63.6%) were female, which was also not significant different from the 66
participants in the non-employer branding condition, of whom were 53 (49.4%) female, χ² (1)
an independent sample t-test was used. The t-test indicated that variances were assumed to be
equal, F (1, 148) = 0.60, p = .439 and the mean age in the SMF condition (M = 25.41, SD =
5.16) was not significantly different from the mean age in the non-SMF condition (M =
25.83, SD = 4.18), t (148) = -0.55, p = .584. In the employer branding condition, the
variances were not assumed to be equal, but the mean age in the EB condition (M = 25.72,
SD = 3.21) was not significantly different from the mean age in the non-EB condition (M =
25.48, SD = 6.16), t (90) = 0.29, p = .775. Overall, the variance of the demographic
characteristics was distributed evenly over the conditions.
Table 2.
Pearson’s correlation for main variables
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
1. Organizational attractiveness
2. P-O Fit .680**
3. Attitude towards the vacancy
.728** .655**
4. Gender .278** .138 .152
5. Age -.020 .039 -.032 -.061
6. Social media favorability .152 .103 -.111 -.034 -.045
7. Employer branding .156 .267** .426** -.111 -.025 -.039 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level
Results
Organizational attractiveness
H1 stated that employer branding in vacancies would lead to a higher degree of
organizational attractiveness than vacancies without employer branding. In H2 it was
predicted that organizations with a high level of social media favorability would score higher
favorability. H3 stated that social media would positively moderate the relation between
employer branding and organizational attractiveness. To test these hypotheses, a two-way
ANCOVA was carried out, using organizational attractiveness as the dependent variable,
social media favorability and employer branding as the independent variables and gender as
covariate. Participants who were exposed to the employer branding vacancy evaluated the organization as more attractive (M = 5.02, SD = 0.94) than subjects who were exposed to the vacancy without employer branding (M = 4.71, SD = 1.02). The effect for employer branding on organizational attractiveness was small, but significant, F (1,146) = 7.39, p = .007, eta² = 0.05. Hypothesis 1 can therefore be confirmed.
Participants who were exposed to the organization with social media favorability evaluated the organization as more positive (M = 5.03, SD = 1.02) than the ones that saw the organization without social media favorability (M = 4.73, SD = 1.09). The effect of social media favorability on organizational attractiveness was small, but significant, F (1, 146) = 6.42, p = .012, eta² = 0.04, and therefore, hypothesis 2 can be confirmed.
There appears to be an interaction effect between employer branding and social media favorability, F (1, 146) = 5.49, p = .020, eta² = 0.04. A post-hoc test indicated that this
interaction effect only appears when there was no employer branding applied in job
vacancies. Participants who were exposed to the vacancy without employer branding and to
the Facebook page with a social media favorability (M = 5.04, SD = 0.72) scored
significantly higher than participants that were exposed to the Facebook page without social
media favorability (M = 4.31, SD = 1.19) (Mdifference = 0.73, p = .001). There was no
significant difference between the participants who were exposed to the vacancy with
employer branding and the organization with social media favorability (M = 5.01, SD = 0.96)
and the ones who were exposed to the organization without social media favorability (M =
Person Organization Fit
In H4 it was expected that employer branding would lead to a stronger degree of P-O
fit and H5 predicted that P-O Fit would mediate the relation between employer branding and
organizational attractiveness. The procedure of Baron and Kenny (1986) was followed in
order to test this mediation. First, a series of regression analyses was conducted, in order to
determine the independent effects. The predictor employer branding (dummy) was marginal
significantly related to the outcome variable organizational attractiveness (R² = 0.02, F (1,
149) = 3.74, p = .055) and significantly related to the mediator P-O fit, R² = 0.07, F (1, 149) =
11.42, p = .001, b* = 0.27, t = 3.38, p = .001. Hypothesis 4 can therefore be confirmed.
Additionally, P-O fit was significantly related to the outcome variable organizational
attractiveness (R² = 0.46, F (1, 149) = 128.04, p < .001). To test for mediation, a multiple
regression analysis was conducted, entering employer branding and P-O fit as the predictors
and organizational attractiveness as the dependent. The overall model was significant, R² =
0.46, F (1, 149) = 63.76, p < .001. The relation between P-O fit and organizational
attractiveness remained significant, while controlling for employer branding, b* = 0.69, t =
10.99, p < .001, 95% CI [0.50, 0.72]. Most importantly, the relation between employer
branding and organizational attractiveness was no longer significant (b* = 0.03, t = 0.43, p =
.669), compared to the direct relation, b* = 0.16, t = 1.93, p = .055, 95% CI [-0.01, 0.63]. This indicates a full mediation of P-O fit (Sobel’s Z = 3.23, p = .001) and therefore, hypothesis 5 can be confirmed. The mediation can be found in figure 2.
b* = 0.69
Figure 2: Standardized path coefficients for the mediation of P-O fit
Attitude towards the vacancy
H6 predicted that the relation between employer branding and organizational
attractiveness would be positively mediated by attitude towards the vacancy. To test this
hypothesis, multiple regression analysis with the mediation procedure of Baron and Kenny
(1986) was conducted. First, a series of regression analyses was conducted, in order to
determine the independent effects. The predictor variable employer branding (dummy) was
significantly related to the proposed mediator attitude towards the vacancy ( R² = 0.18, F (1,
149) = 32.99, p < .001) and marginal significantly related to the outcome variable
organizational attractiveness (R² = 0.02, F (1, 149) = 3.74, p = .055). Additionally, attitude
towards the vacancy was significantly related to organizational attractiveness ( R² = 0.53, F
(1, 149) = 167.96, p < .001). To test for mediation, a multiple regression analysis was
conducted, entering employer branding and attitude towards the vacancy as predictor
variables and organizational attractiveness as the outcome variable. The overall model was
significant, R² = 0.56, F (1, 149) = 93.68, p < .001. The relation between attitude towards the
vacancy and organizational attractiveness remained significant, while controlling for
employer branding, b* = 0.81, t = 13.38, p < .001, 95% CI [0.52, 0.71]. Most importantly, the
relation between employer branding and organizational attractiveness was weaker in this
Employer branding Organizational Attractiveness P-O Fit b* = 0.27 b* = 0.03
analysis (b* = -0.19, t = -3.11, p = .002, 95% CI [-0.61, -0.14]) compared to the direct
relation (b* = 0.16, t = 1.93, p = .055, 95% CI [-0.01, 0.63]), indicating a partial mediation (Sobel’s Z = 5.18, p < .001) (See figure 3). Strangely, the indirect effect appeared to be negative, probably due to an extremely high correlation between attitude towards the vacancy and organizational attractiveness.
Figure 3: standardized path coefficients for the mediation of attitude towards the vacancy
Discussion
The aim of this study was to examine to what extent organizational attractiveness was
affected by employer branding in job vacancies and to what extent this relation interacted
with social media favorability. Also, the intervening roles of P-O fit and attitude towards the
vacancy were examined.
Based on the literature, it was expected that employer branding would increase applicant’s attraction to the organization and that social media, due to its passivity, would
enhance the effects of employer branding. As predicted, applying employer branding
characteristics in the vacancy did indeed increase organizational attractiveness. Although
there was a small difference, participants who were exposed to the vacancy with employer
branding elements perceived the organization as more attractive than the participants who Employer branding Organizational Attractivenes s Attitude towards the Vacancy b* = 0.43 b* = 0.81 b* = -0.19
were exposed to the vacancy without employer branding. Social media favorability, as
expected, increased organizational attractiveness as well. Also, it interacted with employer
branding, such that the effect of employer branding on organizational attractiveness was
stronger when an organization has a high level of social media favorability. Interestingly, this
effect only appeared when there was no employer branding applied in the vacancy.
It was expected that P-O fit and attitude towards the vacancy would mediate the
effects of employer branding on organizational attractiveness. As predicted, P-O fit appeared
to mediate the relation between employer branding and organizational attractiveness.
Consistent with prior findings (Chapman et al., 2005), the results of this study indicate that
P-O fit is indeed associated with attraction to the organization. As the stimuli with employer
branding elements clearly emphasized the mission, vision and values of the organization,
participants could better estimate their overall fit. Examining the intervening effects of
attitude towards the vacancy however, resulted in a negative effect on organizational
attractiveness. This is probably due to the extremely high correlation between attitude
towards the vacancy and organizational attractiveness or the similarity of the measurements
of the variables. Although behind the scope of this article, looking into this effect might be
interesting.
Limitations
The results of this study provide further insight into the relation between employer
branding and social media. However, generalizing these results should happen with caution.
First of all, as the majority of the respondents were students instead of actual job seekers,
results of this study are hard to generalize into the entire recruitment context. This younger
generation is known for its social media use, and thus, are more likely to be familiar with
Facebook and know how many likes or posts make an organization more favorable than
generation, such as graduate recruitment, future research should prove whether these results
can be generalized in other contexts as well.
As the formation of a favorable image in the minds of potential applicants is
concerned with specific beliefs about a brand that an individual established over time (Collins & Stevens, 2002), the use of a fictitious organization might not be the most appropriate measurement for one’s perceptions and beliefs about an organization and could have affected participant’s perceived fit and attraction to the organization. Future research should focus on employer branding in a real life setting, comparing real organizations with a strong employer brand and a strong social media presence to organizations that lack those features.
Consistent with prior findings (Elving et al., 2013), employer branding elements in
job vacancies did predict organizational attractiveness. However, the difference between the
participants who were exposed to the vacancy with employer branding elements and the ones
who were exposed to the vacancy without, was very small. Although previous research
distinguished certain dimensions of employer branding(e.g. social value, application,
economic) which should increase employer attractiveness when applied (Berthon et al.,
2005), it could be that the elements were not well incorporated into the stimuli, despite
pretesting the material. Again, this proves how abstract employer branding is as a concept.
Especially since every individual is attracted to different attractive aspects of employment
differ per individual, it is hard to determine which aspects would be best to apply. Future
research in employer branding should therefore focus on developing a set of items and trying
to make the concept more measurable and adaptable.
Social media as an instrument for enhancing employer branding
As social media favorability just seemed to have an effect when there was no
employer branding applied, this could indicate that, when organizations do not incorporate
strategies. Applying both employer branding and social media favorability did not seem to
make any difference. These results are especially useful for organizations that lack the
resources to maintain both strategies.
The assumption was that, as social media is able to create brand awareness (Hoffman
& Fodor, 2010), it should also be able to create employer brand awareness, making it the
perfect tool for enhancing employer branding. Also, it was argued that social media
favorability would have a similar function as traditional media favorability (Deephouse,
2000), whereby opinions are based on how the organization is represented in the media. The
results of this study could indicate that, when there is not enough information on the
organization in the vacancy, participants use cues on the Facebook page as indicators to form
their opinions on. As the stimuli with social media favorability had significantly more activity
on the page, it could be that participants indicated this as an organization with a favorable
reputation, underscoring the importance of an organization’s representation on social media.
For organizations, it is therefore of great importance to leverage their social media
strategically, as jobseekers might base their opinions of an organization on cues like these
when there is a lack of available information.
This study is as far as known the first to examine social media as a passive enhancer
of employer branding. Whereas employer branding emerged from combining the brand
equity approach from a marketing perspective with a human resource perspective, this study
goes a step further by incorporating social media favorability and attitude towards the
vacancy into a recruitment context. Despite limitations, this study does provide a better
understanding of social media use in recruitment and , although carefully, it can be concluded
that social media have the possibilities to be a useful instrument for enhancing employer
References
Aiman-Smith, L., Bauer, T. N., & Cable, D. M. (2001). Are you attracted? Do you intend to pursue? A recruiting policy-capturing study. Journal of Business and
psychology, 16(2), 219-237. doi: 10.1023/A:1011157116322
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological bulletin, 84(5), 888. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.84.5.888
Alniacik, U., Alniacik, E., & Genc, N. (2011). How corporate social responsibility
information influences stakeholders' intentions. Corporate social responsibility and
environmental management, 18(4), 234-245. doi: 10.1002/csr.245
Ambler, T., & Barrow, S. (1996). The employer brand. Journal of brand management, 4(3), 185-206. doi:10.1057/bm.1996.42
Backhaus, K., & Tikoo, S. (2004). Conceptualizing and researching employer branding. Career development international, 9(5), 501-517. doi:
10.1108/13620430410550754
Barber, A. E., & Roehling, M. V. (1993). Job postings and the decision to interview: A verbal protocol analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(5), 845. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.78.5.845
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal
of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173. Retrieved from
Berthon, P., Ewing, M., & Hah, L. L. (2005). Captivating company: dimensions of
attractiveness in employer branding. International journal of advertising, 24(2), 151-172. doi: 10.1080/02650487.2005.11072912
Biel, A. L., & Bridgwater, C. A. (1990). Attributes of likable television commercials. Journal
of advertising research, 30(3), 38-44.
Boulding, W., Lee, E., & Staelin, R. (1994). Mastering the mix: Do advertising, promotion, and sales force activities lead to differentiation?. Journal of marketing research, 159-172. doi: 10.2307/3152191
Cable, D. M., & Turban, D. B. (2001). Establishing the dimensions, sources, and value of job seekers’ employer knowledge during recruitment. Research in personnel and human
resources management, 20, 115-164. Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.720.8206&rep=rep1&type= pdf
Cable, D. M., & Turban, D. B. (2003). The value of organizational reputation in the recruitment context: A brand‐equity perspective. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 33(11), 2244-2266. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01883.x
Chapman, D. S., Uggerslev, K. L., Carroll, S. A., Piasentin, K. A., & Jones, D. A. (2005). Applicant attraction to organizations and job choice: a meta-analytic review of the correlates of recruiting outcomes. Journal of applied psychology, 90(5), 928. doi:
10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.928
Chow, S., & Chapman, D. (2013). Gamifying the employee recruitment process.
In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Gameful Design, Research,
Cober, R. T., Brown, D. J., Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E. (2004). Recruitment on the Net: How do organizational Web site characteristics influence. Journal of
Management, 30(5), 623-646. doi:10.1016/j.jm.2004.03.001
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. doi:
10.1037/0021-9010.87.6.1121
Dabirian, A., Kietzmann, J., & Diba, H. (2016). A great place to work!? Understanding crowdsourced employer branding. Business Horizons.
doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2016.11.005
Deephouse, D. L. (2000). Media reputation as a strategic resource: An integration of mass communication and resource-based theories. Journal of management, 26(6), 1091-1112. doi: 10.1177/014920630002600602
Dineen, B. R., Ling, J., Ash, S. R., & DelVecchio, D. (2007). Aesthetic properties and message customization: navigating the dark side of web recruitment. Journal of
applied psychology, 92(2), 356. doi 10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.356
Dutta, D. (2014). Tweet Your Tune—Social Media, the New Pied Piper in Talent Acquisition. Vikalpa, 39(3), 93-104. Retrieved from
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0256090920140307 Edwards, M. R. (2009). An integrative review of employer branding and OB
theory. Personnel review, 39(1), 5-23. doi: 10.1108/00483481011012809
Elving, W. J., Westhoff, J. J., Meeusen, K., & Schoonderbeek, J. W. (2013). The war for talent: The relevance of employer branding in job advertisements for becoming an
employer of choice. Journal of Brand Management, 20(5), 355-373. doi:10.1057/bm.2012.21
Ehrhart, K. H., & Ziegert, J. C. (2005). Why are individuals attracted to organizations?. Journal of management, 31(6), 901-919. doi:
10.1177/0149206305279759
Gardner, M. P. (1985). Mood states and consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of
consumer research, 12(3), 281-300. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/254374
Gensler, S., Völckner, F., Liu-Thompkins, Y., & Wiertz, C. (2013). Managing brands in the social media environment. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27(4), 242-256. doi: 10.1016/j.intmar.2013.09.004
Gregory, C. K., Meade, A. W., & Thompson, L. F. (2013). Understanding internet
recruitment via signaling theory and the elaboration likelihood model. Computers in
Human Behavior, 29(5), 1949-1959. doi: /10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.013
Gunther, A. C. (1998). The persuasive press inference: Effects of mass media on perceived public opinion. Communication Research, 25(5), 486-504. Retrieved from
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/009365098025005002
Gunther, A. C., & Storey, J. D. (2003). The influence of presumed influence. Journal of
Communication, 53(2), 199-215. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2003.tb02586.x
Highhouse, S., Lievens, F., & Sinar, E. F. (2003). Measuring attraction to
organizations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(6), 986-1001. doi:
Hoffman, D. L., & Fodor, M. (2010). Can you measure the ROI of your social media marketing?. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52(1), 41. Retrieved from
http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/can-you-measure-the-roi-of-your-social-media-marketing/
Van Hoye, G., Bas, T., Cromheecke, S., & Lievens, F. (2013). The instrumental and symbolic dimensions of organisations' image as an employer: A large‐scale field study on employer branding in Turkey. Applied Psychology, 62(4), 543-557. doi:
10.1111/j.1464-0597.2012.00495.x
Van Hoye, G., & Lievens, F. (2005). Recruitment‐Related Information Sources and Organizational Attractiveness: Can Something Be Done About Negative
Publicity?. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13(3), 179-187. doi:
10.1111/j.1468-2389.2005.00313.x
Van Hoye, G., & Lievens, F. (2007). Social Influences on Organizational Attractiveness: Investigating If and When Word of Mouth Matters1. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 37(9), 2024-2047. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00249.x
Van Hoye, G., & Saks, A. M. (2011). The Instrumental‐Symbolic Framework: Organisational Image and Attractiveness of Potential Applicants and their Companions at a Job Fair. Applied Psychology, 60(2), 311-335. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2010.00437.x
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. the Journal of Marketing, 1-22. doi: 10.2307/1252054
Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person‐organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel psychology, 49(1), 1-49. doi:
Kristof‐Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: a meta-analysis of job, organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel psychology, 58(2), 281-342. doi:
10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x
Ladkin, A., & Buhalis, D. (2016). Online and social media recruitment: hospitality employer and prospective employee considerations. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 28(2), 327-345. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-05-2014-0218
Moroko, L., & Uncles, M. D. (2008). Characteristics of successful employer brands. Journal
of Brand Management, 16(3), 160-175. doi:10.1057/bm.2008.4
Nikolaou, I. (2014). Social networking web sites in job search and employee
recruitment. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 22(2), 179-189. doi:
10.1111/ijsa.12067
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Communication and persuasion (pp. 1-24). Springer New York. Retrieved from http://www.psy.ohio-state.edu/petty/documents/1986ADVANCESsPettyCacioppo.pdf Powers, T., Advincula, D., Austin, M. S., Graiko, S., & Snyder, J. (2012). Digital and social
media in the purchase decision process. Journal of advertising research, 52(4), 479-489. doi: 10.2501/JAR-52-4-479-489
Rynes, S. L., Bretz, R. D., & Gerhart, B. (1991). The importance of recruitment in job choice: A different way of looking. Personnel psychology, 44(3), 487-521. doi:
Sivertzen, A. M., Nilsen, E. R., & Olafsen, A. H. (2013). Employer branding: employer attractiveness and the use of social media. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 22(7), 473-483. doi: 10.1108/JPBM-09-2013-0393
Slaughter, J. E., Zickar, M. J., Highhouse, S., & Mohr, D. C. (2004). Personality trait
inferences about organizations: development of a measure and assessment of construct validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 85. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.85
Stopfer, J. M., & Gosling, S. D. (2013). Online social networks in the work context. The
psychology of digital media at work, 39-59. Retrieved from
https://books.google.nl/books
Theurer, C. P., Tumasjan, A., Welpe, I. M., & Lievens, F. (2016). Employer Branding: A Brand Equity‐based Literature Review and Research Agenda. International Journal of
Management Reviews. doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12121
Williamson, I. O., Lepak, D. P., & King, J. (2003). The effect of company recruitment web site orientation on individuals’ perceptions of organizational attractiveness. Journal of
Appendix A
Appendix B
Dear participant,
I would like to invite you to participate in this survey for my Master Thesis at the Graduate School of Communication, a part of the University of Amsterdam.
In this online survey, you will see a job advertisement and a Facebook page of the same
organization. It is of importance that you carefully read both, as you will be asked to answer some questions regarding them. In addition, you will be asked to answer some demographic questions. The study will take about 10 minutes.
As this research is being carried out under the responsibility of the ASCoR, University of Amsterdam, we can guarantee that your anonymity will be safeguarded, and that your personal information will not be passed on to third parties under any conditions.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you in advance for your assistance with this research, which I greatly appreciate.
Kind regards, Yasmin Reeb
Participation statement:
I agree, fully and voluntarily, to participate in this research study. I am aware that I may halt my participation in the experiment at any time. If my research results are used in scientific publications or are made public in another way, this will be done in such a way that my anonymity is completely safeguarded. My personal data will not be passed on to third parties without my express permission. If I wish to receive more information about the research, either now or in future, I can contact
Yasmin Reeb (yasmin.reeb@student.uva.nl). Should I have any complaints about this research, I can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing the ASCoR, at the following address: ASCoR secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020‐ 525 3680; ascor‐secr‐fmg@uva.nl.
I understand the text presented above, and I agree to participate in the research study.
On the next page you will see the Facebook page of MT Group, an international consumer goods organization. Please imagine that you are currently looking for a job and that you run into this. Afterwards, you will be asked to answer some questions regarding it, so please read it carefully before continuing to the next page.
On the next page you will see the Facebook page of MT Group, an international consumer goods organization. Please imagine that you are currently looking for a job and that you run into this. Afterwards, you will be asked to answer some questions regarding it, so please read it carefully before continuing to the next page.
Was this page readable? Yes
No
Q21 On the next page you will see a vacancy for the Graduate Talent Program of the same organization. While reading the text, try to imagine that you are looking for a job and see this vacancy online. Please read the text carefully as you will be asked to answer some questions about it on the next page.
Q16 The next items will be about your evaluation of the vacancy of the Graduate Talent Program of MT Group.Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements.
Strongly Disagree (1) Disagree (2) Somewhat disagree (3) Neither agree nor disagree (4) Somewhat agree (5) Agree (6) Strongly agree (7) I like the vacancy (1) I think that the vacancy is informative (2) I think the vacancy is irritating (3) I think the vacancy is convincing (4) I think the vacancy is interesting (5)
The next questions will be about both the Facebook page and the vacancy for the Graduate Talent Program of MT Group and your overall evaluations of the company. Please try to image that you’re qualified for this position and that you are looking for a job.
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements.
Strongly Disagree (1) Disagree (2) Somewhat disagree (3) Neither agree nor disagree (4) Somewhat agree (5) Agree (6) Strongly agree (7) This company would be a good place to work (1) This company is attractive to me as a place for employment (2) I would not be interested in this company except as a last resort (3) I am interested in learning more about this company (4) A job at this company is very appealing to me (5)
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements.Overall, I think that.. Strongly Disagree (1) Disagree (2) Somewhat disagree (3) Neither agree nor disagree (4) Somewhat agree (5) Agree (6) Strongly agree (7) Employees are probably proud to say they work at this company (1) This is a reputable company to work for (2) This company probably has a reputation as being an excellent employer (3) I would find this company a prestigious place to work (4) There are probably many who would like to work at this company (5) The things that I value in
life are very similar to the things that this organization values (6) My personal values match this organization’s values and culture. (7) The organization’s values and culture provide a good fit with
