Employer Branding Trends from Employer Branding Insights 2011 

This is a follow-up to blog post “Talent investments have a clear impact on both company revenue and recruitment costs”. The data featured comes from Universum’s Employer Branding Insights 2011 report. During December 2010 to January 2011, Universum interviewed 632 global employers in Europe, the Americas and Asia. The majority of respondents were at manager/director level in HR, recruitment, or employer branding functions. Based on the data gathered, it was possible to identify clear trends. 

Trend no. 3 – Top performers are leaving either for greater challenge and opportunity or money 

• Nearly 2/3 of employers highlight the new challenge or opportunity offered by another company as the main reason they lose top performers, while 43% consider money as a reason. 

Click on chart to see full size. Question: What are the reasons your top performers leave your organisation?

Implication: there is a higher demand for top talent in the recruitment market and they are more likely to be headhunted in comparison to regular employees. Employers thus need to carefully evaluate what drives and satisfies their best employees and keep them moving and progressing internally. Universum has witnessed a positive sign that companies are increasingly trying to hire based on a cultural match and be more transparent about their culture in the recruitment process. Consequently, an environment of belonging is created and mitigates – although not eliminates – the tendency of top talent to look outside the organization for a better fit. In conclusion, top talent will always be on the lookout, but a focus on personal fit and offering new personal growth opportunities are essential to do’s.

Employer Branding Trends from Employer Branding Insights 2011      

This is a follow-up to blog post “Talent investments have a clear impact on both company revenue and recruitment costs”. The data featured comes from Universum’s Employer Branding Insights 2011 report. During December 2010 to January 2011, Universum interviewed 632 global employers in Europe, the Americas and Asia. The majority of respondents were at manager/director level in HR, recruitment, or employer branding functions. Based on the data gathered, it was possible to identify clear trends.     

 Trend no. 2 — There is a disconnect between talent strategy investments and key performance indicators such as a reduced cost-per-hire.     

 • While a strong majority of employers (82%) invest in talent attraction activities, only 27% think their talent strategy has brought down cost-per-hire whereas 42% are unsure.     

 • However, employers who identify employer branding as a long-term strategic process are nearly twice as likely to report a reduced cost-per-hire compared to employers who approach employer branding based on short term needs. 

1. Investments in Talent Attraction

Does your company invest in talent attraction, i.e. activities that exclude direct recruitment but include branding and communications about your company as an employer?

 2. Results of investments

Have you reduced your recruitment cost-per-hire as a result of your talent attraction strategy?

3.  Results of investments – short vs. long-term

Have you reduced your recruitment cost-per-hire as a result of your talent attraction strategy? The graph indicates the percentage of respondents that answered yes.

 Implication: companies need to think more about connecting their talent strategy to relevant cost/performance indicators. The correlation between brand awareness (a company’s rank in the recruitment market) and positions filled, provided efficient recruitment procedures are in place, should be the key measurement for employer brand
activities. The number of positions filled divided by the total number of positions is the metric we recommend.

Employer Branding Trends from Employer Branding Insights 2011

Universum will share in a number of upcoming blog posts, findings from its Employer Branding Insights 2011 report. During December 2010 to January 2011, Universum interviewed 632 global employers in Europe, the Americas and Asia. The majority of respondents were at manager/director level in HR, recruitment, or employer branding functions. Based on the data gathered, it was possible to identify a number of clear trends.

Trend no. 1:  Talent investments have a clear impact on both company revenue and recruitment costs

 • 51% of employers believe that not having the right people had some effect on their company losing business.

• 60% of employers agree that cutting talent attraction budgets will yield higher recruitment costs.

Click on charts to see them in full size. Talent investments have a clear impact on both company revenue and recruitment costs

Implication: as human capital becomes a greater component of corporate assets, investments in talent attraction will give companies the ability to deliver on market expectations. Failing to secure human capital will lead to a loss of business.

It practices personality targeting and is perceived a best company to work for – a case study to learn for all employer brand practitioners.

The best practice: spend time to forge a strong corporate culture and it’ll render rewards; employees will deliver excellent customer service that’ll produce more profit. The case study for employer branding and HR professionals is £1.2bn worth Zappos.

The answer to their achievements is the focus to hire the perfect match. As reported by FT, Zappos has an unusual recruitment process involving two interviews – “one to assess fit with the job and another to assess cultural fit with the company”. It’s an excellent example of how to conduct personality targeting – ascertain, aside from level of skills, that an individual’s future engagement is high and he/she will stay on the job.

Moreover, one of the company’s edgy practices, which seem a little unorthodox and daring, might just eliminate the pretenders or insincere ones: Zappos tempts new recruits with $2000 to quit – a personal test to determine degree of loyalty and commitment.  Has anyone accepted the money to quit? And if so, have they’ve saved money by avoiding sloppy recruits? These are questions Zappos probably knows the answers to.

 Zappos is definitely atypical. Their two-step recruitment process is unusual, but clever. Their practice to offer $2000 to quit is tempting, but worth it. They certainly practice what they preach; their actions correspond to one of their corporate values: “create fun and a little weirdness”. Weird it is.

It’s not a good time to be a young graduate in Europe today. Despite an ageing population and baby boomers retiring, youth unemployment skyrockets – a phenomenon that seems absurd. In 17 counties across Europe, joblessness among the young is at a whopping 20.4 per cent (according to CNN). A lost generation is in the making and the outcome is a ticking bomb.

If youngsters aren’t given their first opportunity, long-term unemployment reduces their chances of ever having a successful career and a chance to earn a descent living. Why is European youth subjected to taking part-time or low-paid temping work? Baby boomers complain that the Generation Y cohort is too spoilt. An unfair comment to make, considering that the baby boomers are a generation that’s probably had it best. People in the 60s could get a job without even holding a university degree.

Compare that today. Now everyone has to have: a Masters degree, speak at least three or four languages, work experience, the right attitude and be willing to sacrifice everything to just get a job – that’s definitely not fair. No wonder why there are so many youngsters who are fed up – the demands that employers make on potential candidates are discouraging.

Looking for the superhuman employees, that can work around the clock, multitask, deliver on far from realistic goals, never complain, always be motivated, and say “of course boss, I’ll get that right to you”, with a smile on their face, is simply too much to ask; especially in a time, when neither employers or employees show lifelong loyalty.

Employers need to be more realistic with their demands, otherwise they may put off a bunch of highly capable and willing youngsters, who’ll be able to develop and grow within their organization. It’s all about giving them a reasonable opportunity to prove themselves, right?

By: Grazyna Sotta

Does being secretive make your life easier, or get you into trouble? One of the lessons we can learn from recent occurrences related to wiki leaks or the financial crisis is that transparency is a good thing. Corporate transparency makes it easier to discover flaws and correct them. Transparency is healthy.

Companies demand it from employees. We’ve heard about candidates getting their Facebook accounts reviewed during the recruitment process. About employees getting fired for opinions shared in social media. As we’ve heard of  individuals getting signed because of what they do online. As with all practices, there are pro’s and con’s, but think about some of the intrusive questions that may be asked in interviews. Legal or not, is it ethical to dissect the private sphere?

Your employer brand is always observed by the environment. Companies such as Zappos really got it and see transparency in dealing with employees, suppliers, investors and customers central to their business. Over two years ago, Zappos shed 8% cent of its workforce. The CEO, Mr Hsieh, communicated the details through e-mail to staff and on his blog on what was happening and why rather than hiding it under the vague “strategic change”. A client who believes the company is ethical, transparent and treats the employees well will be a more loyal customer who believes in the people behind the product or service they use. The closer individuals get to the core of your employer brand, the more scrutiny you will experience. With that in mind, consider the impression a candidate may have, when they’re asked for their marital status, family and age? It might not mean anything, but asking these questions might have the candidate question YOUR ethics. And share it with the people they know… which in the age of social media is just downright dangerous. At the end of the day, an employee can be terrible at researching the internet at the age of 23 and excellent at social media at 50 – based on factors such as interest or ambitions. Is having children a burden or does it make you more focused, dedicated and loyal? And is making this differentiation ethical?

And it only gets “worse”. Employees watch your every move, observe how you treat them, their colleagues, your partners and clients. They might not tell you, but they see it, take it in and process to the best of their abilities. The more you hide, the more you leave to the coffee break hush-hush and free interpretation.

And before employees start jumping with joy and feel entitled to withhold information – this works both ways. Any company is its people and the culture starts with each and every employee. As a leader, you set the groundwork and introduce it; as an employee, you see it through and implement it. By being open, you set the groundwork for a transparent team, department and organization. Continuing the vicious circle and hiding the uncomfortable truths under the rug is only a temporary solution and there’s always a chance someone will take off the lid. The choice is yours – you’ll either have a Pandora’s box or a clear conscience.

Are companies failing to motivate their best employees and reward them, or are top performers simply ready to move on? 

Two-thirds of employers believe that their top performers will leave to pursue new challenges. Understandably, this significantly affects companies–51% of employers experienced a loss of business due to lack of the right people. To make matters worse, four out of five employers said it’s difficult to attract talent. What are the implications on business and how can companies counteract the problem?

These are some of the major findings of the UNIVERSUM Employer Branding Insights 2011 survey of 630 global employers about talent attraction needs and challenges. 64% say their key employees leave to pursue new professional opportunities and 43% believe it’s for the money. This highlights the attitude of new generations to take risks, demand self-development and pursue a self-fulfilling life–the old way, a job for life, exists no longer! Due to generation Y’s mindset, companies can’t rely on people to stay in the job for their whole career; nowadays employers need to secure their talent pipeline for two, three, or even ten years ahead. The positive sign is that 82% of employers now invest in talent attraction (activities that exclude direct recruitment but include employer branding and communications) and a significant proportion believe that the solution lies in developing brand awareness and esteem. The problems and challenges are thus being addressed, a comforting sign that something is being done.

“Baby boomers, who are the most experienced working cohort, will retire this year and next. Thus, most employers will face a brain drain of competence and practical experience–are employers ready for this?”, warned Michal Kalinowski, Universum’s CEO.

Click here to download the full report

About Employer Branding Insights 2011
Universum surveyed close to 630 global employers, during the months of December 2010 to January 2011. The majority of respondents worked in HR, Recruitment and Employer Branding in one of the following regions: Europe, Americas and Asia.

By Grazyna Sotta

As economies and companies grow again after setbacks during the recession, talent retention, employee motivation and engagement are up on the agenda. The most basic approach calls for the carrot and stick: reward employees for desired behaviours and withdraw rewards when goals aren’t met. But is it really that simple or can we get higher engagement and motivation levels from employees by doing more?

According to an inspiring video by RSA Animate, the basic pat on the back or slap on the wrist technique works well with simple mechanical tasks. Research done by economists, sociologists or psychologists all come to the same conclusion: when rudimentary cognitive skills and conceptual creative thinking are involved, the monetary reward should be at a level that makes money a non-issue. In other words, employers should shift the employees focus from money to the tasks at hand. If money is used as a motivator for tasks that require high cognitive skills, the opposite result occurs whereby performance deteriorates.

What makes us tick beyond the recurrent pay check?
The answer is our desire to be self-directed, to improve professionally and make the world around us a better place – autonomy, mastery and purpose. Once the question of money is off the table, these three factors are what makes or breaks engagement and creativity.

An excellent example is Australian software company Atlassian that gives its developers a creative and fun day every quarter, allowing them to work with whoever, whatever and however they want. All this is done in a relaxed and amusing environment, as opposed to a sterile corporate world, and produces a positive result–solutions and new products far beyond what would normally be achieved or groundbreaking innovations. A saucy innovation bonus wouldn’t be able to entice them to these levels of creativity.

Linux, Apache and Wikipedia are excellent examples of how engagement is built on passion for something rather than monetary rewards, as mentioned in RSA’s animation. Google, a company that attracts students and professionals in Universum’s research, is known for its creative working environment and creative and dynamic spirit. The sense of purpose is also what drives so many talented people to the underpaid governmental sectors, explains the popularity of volunteer work and other oddities that the “big money equalling performance” can’t explain.

Well, great information, what do we do with this? How can WE make OUR employees want to jump out of bed to run to work? Following the advice from the video:
• Know your employees
• Give, or rather don’t restrict, autonomy
• Set realistic goals and a development plan that helps them grow and have a sense of achievement
• Engage them with a sense of purpose

Microsoft is renowned  for being a diversity employer, having an active policy to recruit LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender), minority groups, etc as a means to broaden their client group. If you think everyone is a potential client, it makes sense to recruit them too, as you’ll want to find ways to appeal to them — and your staff will help you do just that.

Although in the developed world where democracy and information have empowered people to know their rights, there are still serious diversity problems. Recently in Sweden, perceived to be a socialist and egalitarian society, a survey produced a shocking result that only 17% of employers* were keen on hiring women returning from maternity leave – isn’t that discriminatory? Also, is it a bad coincidence that professions that are predominately represented by women are also by far and large the most underpaid, e.g. nurses, teachers, air hostesses, etc?

Research shows that there is still a gender divide when it comes to pay. According to the International Women’s Day website, women earn 20 per cent less than men one year out of college and 31 per cent less 10 years later. Universum’s research shows that when comparing salary expectations between male and female graduates, women on average ask for 11 per cent less than men in annual earnings. Women are also paid worse in top positions. “A 2008 survey of CEO pay at 3,242 North American companies (…) found that female CEOs earned more in base pay, but when cash bonuses, perks and stock compensation were included, women made a median $1.7 million or 85% of what male CEOs made”.

It’s documented that the world’s largest companies are still run by men. In the Universum global top 50 rankings, there is only one company, PepsiCo, where the CEO is a woman. Only 13 out of 500 of USA’s largest publicly traded companies are lead by women, according to USA Today.

Nevertheless, there are positive signs. There are more females at university in OECD countries than men. Also, women constitute more than 50% of the American workforce, highlighting a significant shift in the cultural mindset and change in demographics. Companies like Microsoft have an active diversity recruitment policy and understand that, just like biodiversity is good for our survival, it is beneficial to keeping companies competitive. If you have a homogenous workforce today, you are definitely at a disadvantage.

* Reported in Stockholm’s Metro, 2011-01-27, pg 2

By now, it’s clear that companies target younger and younger audiences in order to build a faithful and loyal consumer or lifelong client. The fast food company McDonalds has done this cleverly with their happy meals for kids. The cigarette brand Joe Camel made an overt attempt to target a younger crowd and get them hooked on cigarettes (at a time when health concerns and government legislations, such as the public smoke ban, cut into the bottom line of the tobacco industry). Speaking from personal experience, parents nowadays receive countless offers from insurance companies, giveaways by post and the likes …all to gain customer loyalty. One insurance broker said the bank even had a plan to target babies by selling parents child insurance packages, with the ultimate objective to get the child, soon to be adult, to become a lifelong client and invest their pension with the bank–frightening? I think so! Read the rest of this entry »