Employee value proposition: Which factors matter? A Swiss case study on motivational factors
-
Author(s)Xavier BronletLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7071-3096
,
Jessica Basile
,
Roberta Basile
,
Nicola Ferla
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.22(1).2024.24
-
Article InfoVolume 22 2024, Issue #1, pp. 279-294
- Cited by
- 819 Views
-
277 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Companies are developing strategies to attract and retain talented workforce in an always more effervescent labor market. The ones that relate to attracting talents are usually referred to as employer branding, and the ones related to retaining talents are usually referred to as employee value propositions. This study aims to investigate the motivational factors in the employee value proposition model and suggest an extension of the common models. A questionnaire was elaborated to check the validity of the hypothetical model. The sample includes a large Swiss financial institution that decided to remain anonymous. 517 employees have provided valid observations; the multivariate analysis conducted under the lenses of structural equation modeling confirms the validity of the hypothetical model. In particular, the study illustrates that extrinsic (salary, benefits, career) and intrinsic (work environment, work purpose, and job strain) motivational factors must be considered in the employee value proposition model. The intrinsic motivational factors contribute slightly more than the extrinsic motivational factors; the salary factor contributes the most among the extrinsic motivation variables, and the working environment factor contributes the most among the intrinsic motivation variables. The elaborated model has practical application for corporations who want to govern their employee value proposition and align their employer branding identity. It extends the theoretical foundations to support further research in this domain.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M10, M51
-
References79
-
Tables9
-
Figures1
-
- Figure 1. Factor loadings
-
- Table 1. Factor analysis results
- Table 2. Construct reliability and validity values
- Table 3. HTMT values
- Table 4. Fornell-Lacker criterion
- Table 5. Total effects
- Table 6. Contribution of items on employee value proposition
- Table 7. Total item weight
- Table 8. Meaningful factors in the employee value proposition
- Table A1. Item description
-
- Aggarwal-Gupta, M., Vohra, N., & Bhatnagar, D. (2010). Perceived organizational support and organizational commitment: The mediational influence of psychological well-being. Journal of Business and Management, 16(2), 105-124.
- Ahn, J.-Y., & Chaoyu, W. (2019). Job stress and turnover intention revisited: Evidence from Korean firms. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 17(4), 52-61.
- Aloo, V., & Moronge, D. (2014). The effects of employee value proposition on performance of commercial banks in Kenya. European Journal of Business Management, 2(1), 141-161.
- Ambler, T., & Barrow, S. (1996). The employer brand. Journal of Brand Management, 4(3), 185-206.
- Angelici, M., & Profeta, P. (2023). Smart working: Work flexibility without constraints. Management Science.
- Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16(3), 397-438.
- Avallone, F., & Bonaretti, M. (2003). Benessere organizzativo: Per migliorare la qualità del lavoro nelle amministrazioni pubbliche [Organizational well-being: To improve the quality of work in public administration]. Rubbettino Editore. (In Italian).
- Aziz, M., Adnan, A., Afthanorhan, A., Foziah, H., Ishak, S.-w., & Rashid, N. (2019). The influence of employer value proposition in talent demand towards talent shortage in the Malaysian Islamic banking institutions: A SEM approach. Management Science Letters, 9, 843-850.
- Backhaus, K. (2016). Employer branding revisited. Organization Management Journal, 13(4), 193-201.
- Backhaus, K., & Tikoo, S. (2004). Conceptualizing and researching employer branding. Career Development International, 9(5), 501-517.
- Barrow, S., & Mosley, R. (2005). The employer brand: Bringing the best management to people at work (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
- Beaujean, A. A. (2019). Factor analysis using R. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 18(1).
- Bejtkovský, J., & Copca, N. (2020). The employer branding creation and HR marketing in selected healthcare service providers. Management & Marketing, 15(1), 95-108.
- Bell, E., Bryman, A., & Harley, B. (2019). Business research methods (5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Bilan, Y., Mishchuk, H., Mishchuk, V., & Samoliuk, N. (2022). Employer brand: Key values influencing the intention to join a company. Management & Marketing, 17(1), 61-72.
- Billinger, S., & Workiewicz, M. (2019). Fading hierarchies and the emergence of new forms of organization. Journal of Organization Design, 8(1), 17.
- Blokdyk, G. (2021). Employer branding: A complete guide – 2021 edition. The Art of Service – Employer Branding Publishing.
- Bronlet, X. (2022). Systemic agility: A gauge to measure companies’ adaptation to their volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous environment. Journal of Business and Economics, 13(2), 70-8.
- Carnevale, J. B., & Hatak, I. (2020). Employee adjustment and well-being in the era of COVID-19: Implications for human resource management. Journal of Business Research, 116, 183-187.
- Cheung, G., Cooper-Thomas, H., Lau, R., & Wang, L. (2023). Reporting reliability, convergent and discriminant validity with structural equation modeling: A review and best-practice recommendations. Asia Pacific Journal of Management.
- Christensen, C. M. (2006). The ongoing process of building a theory of disruption. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(1), 39-55.
- Chungkham, H. S., Ingre, M., Karasek, R., Westerlund, H., & Theorell, T. (2013). Factor structure and longitudinal measurement invariance of the demand control support model: An evidence from the Swedish Longitudinal Occupational Survey of Health (SLOSH). PLoS One, 8(8), e70541.
- Cohen, S. G., Chang, L., & Ledfonrd, G. (1997). A hierarchical construct of self-management leadership and its relationship to qualitty of work life and perceived work group effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 50(2), 275-308.
- Danna, K., & Griffin, R. W. (1999). Health and well-being in the workplace: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Management, 25(3), 357-384.
- Edwards, M. R. (2010). An integrative review of employer branding and OB theory. Personnel Review, 39(1), 5-23.
- Fana, M., Milasi, S., Napierata, J., Fernàndez-Macilìas, E., & Vàzquez, I. G. (2020). Telework, work organisation and job quality during the COVID-19 crisis: A qualitative study. European Commision.
- Farkhondeh, M., & Müller, B. (2021). Holacracy: A new way of organizing? Mrev Management Revue, 32(4), 302-317.
- Ghosh, D., Sekiguchi, T., & Fujimoto, Y. (2020). Psychological detachment: A creativity perspective on the link between intrinsic motivation and employee engagement. Personnel Review, 49(9), 1789-1804.
- Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
- Hongal, P., & Kinange, U. (2020). A study on talent management and its impact on organization performance – An empirical review. International Journal of Engineering and Management Research, 10(1), 64-71.
- Information Resources Management Association. (2017). Organizational culture and behavior: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications. Business Science Reference.
- Islam, K., Bari, M., Al-Kharusi, S., Bhuiyan, A., & E-Alam, M. (2023). Impact of transformational leadership, human capital, and job satisfaction on organizational performance in the manufacturing industry. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 21(3), 382-392.
- Kalati, G. (2019, March 27). Ask these 10 questions to define your employee value proposition. Medium.
- Karasek, R., Brisson, C., Kawakami, N., Houtman, I., Bongers, P., & Amick, B. (1998). The job content questionnaire (JCQ): An instrument for internationally comparative assessments of psychosocial job characteristics. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3(4), 322-355.
- Kim, M., & Beehr, T. A. (2018). Challenge and hindrance demands lead to employees health and behaviours through intrinsic motivation. Stress and Health, 34(3), 367-378.
- Kopina, D. (2019). Reinventing organizations: Model of self-organized processo organization (SOPO). Organizacija, 52(2), 127-141.
- Kukreja, J. (2019). The next generation leadership in a VUCA world. International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development, 3(6), 37-47.
- Kurki, S., & Wilenius, M. (2016). Trust makes this organisation unique. European Journal of Futures Research, 4(1), 23.
- Kwakman, K. (2001). Work stress and work-based learning in secondary education: Testing the Karasek model. Human Resource Development International, 4(4), 487-501.
- Laloux, F. (2015). Reinventing organizations: A guide to creating organizations inspired by the next stage of human consciousness. Nelson Parker.
- Landry, B., Mahesh, S., & Hartman, S. (2005). The changing nature of work in the age of e-business. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 18(2), 132-144.
- Leys, C., Klein, O., Dominicy, Y., & Ley, C. (2018). Detecting multivariate outliers: Use a robust variant of the Malhalanobis distance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 74, 150-156.
- Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2022). SOLOMON: A method for splitting a sample into equivalent subsamples in factor analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 54, 2665-2677.
- Maino, F., & Razetti, F. (2020). Organizzazioni solidali ai tempi del Covid-19. Iniziative di welfare aziendale, smart working e responsabilità sociale avviate nella “fase 1”: Rischi e opportunità [Supportive organizations in the time of Covid-19. Corporate welfare, smart working and social responsibility initiatives launched in “phase 1”: Risks and opportunities]. Percorso di Secondo Welfare. (In Italian).
- Malaska, P. (2001). A futures research outline of post-modern idea of progress. Futures, 33(3-4), 225-243.
- Malone, T. (2005). The future of work. In C. Sørensen, Y. Yoo, K. Lyytinen, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Designing Ubiquitous Information Environments: Socio-Technical Issues and Challenges (pp. 17-20). Boston, MA: Springer.
- Manupriya, B., & Shweta, D. (2016). Employer brand building for effective talent management. International Journal of Applied Sciences and Mmanagement, 2(1), 183-191.
- Moroko, L., & Uncles, M. D. (2008). Characteristics of successful employer brands. Journal of Brand Management, 16, 160-175.
- Mwangi, C. I. (2022). Career development and employee value proposition people management future. IntechOpen.
- Nestle. (2022, May 24). Upskilling, career growth and job security among top expectations of young workers, new survey finds.
- NielsenIQ. (2022). Global Youth survey report. Prepared for Global Alliance for YOUth.
- Oades, L. G., Steger, M. F., Delle Fave, A., & Passmore, J. (2017). The Wiley Backwell handbook of the psychology of positivity and strenghts-based approaches at work. John Wiley & Sons.
- Otu, A., Charles, C. H., & Yaya, S. (2020). Mental health and psuchosocial well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: The invisible elephant in the room. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 14, 38.
- Parameswaran, H. (2020). A multifactorial approach to examine employee value proposition (EVP) in organizations: A unique strategic paradigm in human resource development. The American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 03(05), 53-61.
- Parreira, J. (2007). An analysis of an employee value proposition. North-West University.
- Pattnaik, S. K., & Misra, R. K. (2016). Employer value proposition: A conceptual framework and scale development for Indian information technology professionals. International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals (IJHCITP), 7(4), 15-32.
- Piedmont, R. L. (2014). Eigenvalues. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Ragazzoni, P., Tangolo, D., & Zotti, A. M. (2004). Stress occupazionale e valorizzazione delle risorse umane in azienda sanitaria: Dalla valutazione al processo di cambiamento [Occupational stress and human resource enhancement in health care enterprise: From assessment to change process]. Giornale Italiano Di Medicina Del Lavoro Ed Ergonomia, 26, 119-126. (In Italian).
- Randstad. (2022). Employer brand research 2022. Global report.
- Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2022). SmartPLS 4.
- Ritzqi, A., & Kustini, K. (2021). Employer branding and employee value proposition: The key success of startup companies in attracting potential employee candidates. Annals of Human Resource Management Research (AHRMR), 1(2), 113-125.
- Robertson, B. J. (2015). Holacracy: The new management system for a rapidly changing world. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
- Ruch, W., Gander, F., Platt, T., & Hofmann, J. (2018). Team roles: Their relationships to character strengths and job satisfaction. Journal of Positive Psychology, 13(2), 190-199.
- Rzemieniak, M., & Wawer, M. (2021). Employer branding in the context of the company’s sustainable development strategy from the perspective of gender diversity of Generation Z. Sustainability, 13(2), 828.
- Sammer, J. (2022). Finding an effective employee value proposition: Know what employees want and value, and review your offerings regularly. SHRM.
- Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2017). Partial least squares structural equation modeling. In C. Homburg, M. Klarmann, & A. Vomberg (Eds.), Handbook of Market Research. Springer.
- Sequeira, A. S. (2019). Leadership in a VUCA organizational context: Are we ready for a paradigm change? European Conference on Management, Leadership & Governance. Kidmore End.
- Shamaileh, N., Alhamad, A., Al-Qudah, M., Mohammad, A., Al-hahalmeh, M., Al-Azzam, M., & Alshurideh, M. (2022). The effect of e-HRM on organizational performance and talent management: A strategic evolution perspective. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 6(4), 1043-1048.
- Sharma, R., & Prasad, A. (2018). Employer brand and its unexplored impact on intent to join. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 26(3), 536-566.
- Spillecke, D. (2019). Reiventing the organization for faster growth. McKinsey Insights.
- Staniec, I., & Kalińska-Kula, M. (2021). Internal employer branding as a way to improve employee engagement. Problems and Perspectived in Management, 19(3), 33-45.
- Stocchi, M., Giobbe, T., Boscolo, P., Di Giampaolo, P., & Di Giampaolo, L. (2010). Lo sviluppo del benessere organizzativo: La formazione organizzativa come leva strategica per il cambiamento [The development of organizational well-being: Organizational training as a strategic lever for change]. Giornale Italiano di Medicina del Lavoro ed Ergonomia, 32(4), 415-418. (In Italian).
- TalentLyft. (n.d.). Sample of employee value proposition survey questions.
- Terry, D. (2023, May 22). Getting the science right: Talent acquisition straegies in life sciences. BioSpectrum.
- Vanhala, S., & Tuomi, K. (2006). Company performance and employee well-being. Management Revue, 17(3), 241-255.
- Watkins, M. W. (2018). Exploratory factor analysis: A guide to best practice. Journal of Black Psychology, 44(3), 219-246.
- Whysall, Z., Owtram, M., & Brittain, S. (2019). The new talent management challenges of Industry 4.0. Journal of Management Development, 38(2), 118-129.
- Yang, S.-B., & Guy, M. (2011). The effectiveness of self-managed work teams in government organizations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26, 531-541.
- Yu, J., Park, J., & Hyun, S. S. (2021). Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on employees work stress, well-being, mental health, organizational citizenship behavior, and employee-customer identification. Journal of Hospitability Marketing & Management, 30(5), 529-548.
-
Internal employer branding as a way to improve employee engagement
Iwona Staniec ,
Magdalena Kalińska-Kula
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.19(3).2021.04
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 19, 2021 Issue #3 pp. 33-45 Views: 2070 Downloads: 2028 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯIn the turbulent environment of modern business, attracting and retaining valuable human resources have become one of the main means of competitive edge. The satisfaction of current employees and talent retention are essential elements of organizational success. Against this background, this study aims to examine whether the process approach to internal employer branding, including internal branding activities (IBA) and conducting intra-organizational research (CIR), allows for the improvement of the current employee involvement. The study used the method of regression analysis. In addition, a survey was used as to collect necessary data. The sample included 120 personnel, selected by a convenience sampling method. In the light of the conducted analysis, it was confirmed that CIR significantly increases the employee value proposition (EVP). Likewise, IBA directed at current employees has a significant impact on EVP shaping. In this context, assuming EVP as a measure of employee involvement, it has been shown that the adoption of a process approach to employer branding can lead to the improvement of the current employee commitment and productivity. Thus, employer branding seen as a process in line with the human resource management and corporate strategy can contribute to building a competitive advantage.
-
Linking employer branding and firm-level performance: The case of Azerbaijani firms registered on Glassdoor
Aydan Huseynova ,
Jana Matošková ,
Ales Gregar
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.20(1).2022.12
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 20, 2022 Issue #1 pp. 128-142 Views: 1338 Downloads: 857 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯIn today’s competitive labor market, firms use employer branding strategies to engage their workforce for better performance. However, the current understanding of the role of employer branding in firm-level performance in the context of developing countries is very limited. This study aims to investigate the importance of employee retention and recruitment efficiency to strengthen the relationship between employer branding and firm-level performance. Data are collected from 316 Azerbaijani firms that are tagged by the Glassdoor and reviewed by former employees. Structural equation modeling is used to test the hypotheses. The results of the study show that employer branding can enhance firm-level performance through employee retention and recruitment efficiency. However, online employee reviews on the Glassdoor do not moderate the connection between employer branding and employee retention. Current employees feel motivated to continue working with those companies which show excellent employer strategies. Furthermore, a firm’s strategy to attract the best employee pool improves firm-level performance. It is also concluded that employees working in developing countries do not concern about online reviews on their employer, and prefer to continue working despite contrary thoughts.
Acknowledgment
Author acknowledges the financial support provided by Internal Grant Agency (IGA/FaME/2019/008) of FaME through Tomas Bata University in Zlin, Czech Republic. -
Impact of digitalization on the attractiveness of employee recruitment and retention in Moroccan companies
Mohamed Habachi ,
Zakia Nouira ,
Cheklekbire Malainine ,
Omar Hajaji
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.20(3).2022.02
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 20, 2022 Issue #3 pp. 12-27 Views: 915 Downloads: 335 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThe relevant evolution of social networks and the expansion of digitalization has led to significant changes in the classical processes used by Moroccan companies in different fields such as marketing, human resources management, etc. This paper investigates the effects of digitalization on the attractiveness of Moroccan companies in terms of recruitment and safeguarding these constructs by using structural equation models according to the PLS approach. The study was carried out to touch 74 companies in different sectors. The study showed positive relationships between management support, digitalization, and recruitment performance (defined as the attractiveness of a company for recruitment and federalization of employees). The results show that the T-statistics are equal to 67.55, 6.862, and 5.941, respectively. The Q² value is 0.884 for scanning and 0.937 for performance, which means that the model is predictive in nature. The GoF is 1.388, which means that model is sufficiently large for the overall validity of the PLS model. While jobseeker behavior and competitive intensity did not affect recruitment performance because the test T-statistics is less than 1.64, the two factors have no moderating effect as the p-values are 0.228 and 0.082, respectively, exceeding the threshold of 0.05.
