Critical Report: How to become an employer of choice: transforming employer brand associations into employer first-choice brands
Introduction
The employers of choice are those employers or applicants who considered being more competent and they devotedly want to work for the organization. The visions and motivation of those employees affected positively on organizations. The employer of choice first focused on the organization’s growth and betterment, and after that, he put his benefits. The consumer’s favorite brand and the consumer’s first choice brand (FCB) provided some beneficial and favorable outcomes. The employer of choice and FCBc provokes the consumers to stay with the organization or company even in hard times. The FCBc or employers could be attracting consumers towards less attractive brands (Rampl, 2014).
The employer of choice or FCBc is most often chosen by the consumers because the consideration of brands could be making an effective opportunity. The research study helped to evaluate and find out the factors that are more relevant and involve in preparing the FCBc. The FCBc becoming an FCBe is more commentating as compared to simply being an attractive employer because it could offer the desirable attraction about the brand or applicant. These studies focused on revealing the research gaps about factors those were relevant to the becoming FBCe (Tomas & Hult, 2011).
According to the author, the organization adopts a competent employer in any particular situation. The HRD department makes sure to assess the accountability and competency of the employees. The employer of choice considers being the person who accurately handles the particular situation and maintaining the whole structure of any organization. The employer of choice some time considers as the God gifted quality, but sometimes the organizations trained or prepare those competent employees by their selves. The FBCe throws a very strong impact on the organizational outcomes (Machleit & Eroglu, 2000).
The job attributes in present era becoming the self-accuracy. Many people have no sense of competency and devotion, but the FCBe have a great vision of devotion. Their priority is to attract consumers in a very positive way. There should be some physical activities and relevant consumers’ interactions. The FBCe communicates with the consumers and then find out the benefits in the organization for the consumers and HRD department both (Grover & Srinivasan, 1992).
Critique
The main body of research study helped to evaluate gist of the research work because the factors such as location, salary, work culture, reputation, advancement, the work culture, and the work content considered to be the base of FCBs there were two dependent variables in the study that was FCB and the other one was Emotions.
Hypothesis
There are two hypotheses of the study.
The hypothesis is designed to evaluate the predictions about the consumers’ emotions about brands and its effects on the consumer first choice brands. If consumers like the brand so what are the impacts of this emotion on consumer choice. They rather like to associate with their brand for the sake of emotion, or they consider it the first-choice brand. After the data analysis will be answered. There would be more effective techniques that will help to evaluate the work of FCBe.
This hypothesis shows the predictions about brand associations and the employer’s first choice. Because helped to evaluate the organizational culture and consumer’s mentality and consider ability about the first-choice brands (Rampl, 2014).
Research Question
There are two research questions in the study.
This research question indicated that the relevant investigation is the most important feature to evaluate the workability of an employer of choice. The two dependent variables of the study such as FCBe and Emotions considered the very strong and impactful variables of the study. The employer of choice and FCBc provokes the consumers to stay with the organization or company even in hard times. The technique helps to provide better outcomes for the organization. This research work was the first that shed light on the FCB associations and emotions of the employee’s behavior. The sharing of personal experiences in the data collection was another positive step to evaluate the FCBe in a better way (Rampl, 2014).
The association of brands and its consideration about emotions are a most important thing that evaluates the structure and affects the predictability of the emotional attachment or association with the brand. The employer of choice considers being the person who accurately handles the particular situation and maintaining the whole structure of any organization. The researcher prepared the six sets of categories; those were reputation, opportunities, salary, work culture, location, and content. Also, some participants shared their own experiences about the respective employer brand. The researcher evaluates the structure of FCBe. The FCBc becoming an FCBe is more commentating as compared to simply being an attractive employer because it could offer the desirable attraction about the brand or applicant (Tomas & Hult, 2011).
Methodology
The researcher conducted the mixed method research design, so the paradigm of the study was pragmatism. The research study based on qualitative pre-study, it was conducted by 27 students of a different university. The qualitative part of the study based on the telephonic interviews. In this interview, the students asked by the researcher about their best choice of the FCBc. The main purpose of performing the exploratory qualitative study was to address the researcher prepared the six sets of categories; those were reputation, opportunities, salary, work culture, location, and content. Also, some participants shared their own experiences about the respective employer brand. There were a lot of different practical implications that associated with the FCBe. That provided a proper base and a strong significance to the study. This qualitative study provided the base for the quantitative part of the study. The main study was considered to be the quantitative survey study. To evaluate the Q2 and for the sake of testing hypothesis H1 and H2 the researcher prepared this section of the study. The dependent variable of the study was considered to be the FCBe and to measure it a between-subject design was used. The questionnaire was divided into some portions. In the beginning portion of the instrumentation, respondents asked to mention their own consulting agency FCBe, and share their own experiences about the relevant factors. In the second group, respondents were asked about their consulting agency employer brand that was not FCBe. The Emotions were considered as the model of the employer ‘s choice. The personal experiences of the respondents could provide a dynamic world to the research study because when the respondents shared their work experiences with FBCe, the study considered being more authentic and more applicable. There were some assignments done by the respondent groups. Every item in the quantitative study is based on the pre-study results because the quantitative study question was associated with the qualitative part of the study. The three-item scale was developed to erasure the appropriateness of the study (Rampl, 2014).
Sampling Techniques
As mentioned above the study was based on the mixed method research design, so in the qualitative part of study 27 university students were chosen as the sample size. For the qualitative study, the researcher shared a link to different university students. This link was designed for survey research. Students who might be interested in working in the consulting industry joined the study and also shared the link to other students (Grover & Srinivasan, 1992). The research mentioned clearly in the questionnaire; there were no salaries or payments for working in the consultancy. Almost 927 respondents started the survey, and almost 35.50% completed the survey, those were 329 in numbers.
Data Collection
In the research study, the data were collected in two different ways because the study was a mixed method. To collect the qualitative data, the researcher conducted the telephonic interviews of 27 university students. The interview was about consulting or FCBe. In the second step of the study, researchers took the qualitative method as mentioned so; a link was designed by the researcher in which he prepared the questionnaires. Almost 927 respondents started to fill out the questionnaire, but at the end just 329 respondents completed it.
Data Analysis
To evaluate the qualitative study with the help of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) that’s used to measure the path coefficients between the endogenous and exogenous variables by Appling AMOS18. In first measurement the data was set as follows: ϰ=1008.19, p ≤. 001, ϰ/df=2.83, and the comparative fit index was (CFI) =.94, (TLI) was =. 94, the approximate root means the square error of approximation. In the analyses, three items were reminded in the collection of data, and those were the ϰ = 279.71, p ≤ .001 and the ϰ/df =1.88. So, considerably the TLI = .98 as well as CFI was .98, sop both were equal. All the AVE scorings were greater than the corresponding squared of correlations. The Bayesian approach is considered to be suitable for the data analyses because the model’s fitting relies on the MCMC.
Results
All the six factors were analyzed in two different dependent Variable (DV) models, the first one DV was FCB, and the other one was Emotions. So the factor salary had the .06 in FCB and .03 in Emotions. The second factor was advancement, so its FCB was -.02 and the Emotion was -.05. In the location, the FCB model had -.02, and in Emotion, the value was -02. The reputation models the FCB .10, and the Emotion was .05. Factor work content had the FCB of .28, and the emotion was .27. In the factor of work culture, the FCB was .30, and the emotion was .65. The brand emotions of the employers were associated with the employer content work: (β = .27) and the working culture (β = .65). The location, salary, reputation advancement opportunities didn’t identify as the significant antecedents. The approximate results revealed that the respondents who had their personal experiences with their FCB (workshop, internship, and other work experiences) had the significantly stronger and positive employer brand emotions than the respondents who had no such experiences.
- Respondents with experiences: (M = 4.67, SD = 1.76)
- Respondents without any experiences: (M = 4.08; SD = 1.74), t (308) = -2.96l, p ≤ .01.
Conclusion
There were two main objectives of the study. The first objective of the study was to identify the Employer Brand Association that was relevant or associated to the being an FCBe. The second objective of the study was thrown light on the role of emotions in the transferring different employer brand that associated in the FCBe. The basic study was revealed that work culture and work content were being identified as only significant employer brand association that related to the FCBe the results indicated the greatest impact employer brand. The results also showed that the employer brand was more significantly effective than the evaluative structure of the FCBe. The study was empirically as well as theoretically implicated. There were many practical implications that associated with the FCBe. The culture perceptions and practical implications were the main focus and specifically focused on the research study. The Emotions were considered as the model of the employer‘s choice. The personal experiences of the respondents could provide a dynamic worth to the research study because when the respondents shared their work experiences with FCBe, the study considered being more authentic and more applicable in the HRD settings. The study also showed the sense of flexibility in the results because the results showed that the organizations and the HRD department should develop the job rotation plans if the work tasks could be not changeable because it also impacts positively and quickly in the interest of employees. If an organization, there were negative work culture exists, the HRD heads should communicate with the employees and these employees should be the interview and share their perception about the change in an organizational environment. This study considered to be the first that shed light on the FCB associations and emotions of the employee’s behavior. The sharing of personal experiences in the data collection was another positive step to evaluate the FCBe in a better way.
References
Grover, R., & Srinivasan, V. (1992). Evaluating the Multiple Effects of Retail Promotions on Brand Loyal and Brand Switching Segments. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(1), 76-89.
Machleit, K. A., & Eroglu, S. A. (2000). Describing and Measuring Emotional Response to Shopping Experience. Journal of Business Research, 49(2), 101-111.
Rampl, L. V. (2014). How to become an employer of choice: transforming employer brand associations into employer first-choice brands. European Journal of Marketing, 30(13/14), 1486–1504.
Tomas, G., & Hult, M. (2011). Toward a theory of the boundary-spanning marketing organization and insights from 31 organization theories. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(4), 509-536.
