Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jerry Albright on December 17, 2009 at 4:39pm

I agree. Which is too bad. I'm looking for some debate on the subject.

You nailed it from the beginning - Employment Branding? Ha!

Couldn't you have made this a bit more controversial?

#nosuchthing

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dan Nuroo on December 17, 2009 at 6:20pm

Happy to engage. :)

It's almost like an attempt of mixing reality with Marketing hype. There has to be some type of synergy or it is a wasted effort. If you sell a vision about a company and the company doesn't deliver then you lose. People will leave. It sucks to be a recruiter when your person leaves early. An employment brand is built around people's experiences with the company not what marketing and Recruitment say. Although i'd hope that the message would be at least to close.

Let's not make it like empty political promises! We had a famous one here in Australia a few decades ago "No children will live n poverty by 1990!" didn't happen unfortunately. It was ambitious and sounded great, but not really achieveable. ie "Your career will skyrocket at company X. You'l get 8 weeks leave a year and keys to the executive bathroom within 6 months" If there isn't an executive bathroom, there's not hope and you'l have employee disengagement, and then attrition will happen.

When we do the review of someone after their initial 6 months I always ask "has your expereince so far matched your expecations coming in? Did we give you a realistic impression? Or did we over promise?"

That s like you cannot really forsee how a person is going to fit in and deliver within your company until they get there... You can't really tell about a company until you get there...

Just to get biblical on you all.. it is that time of year after all. "Employment branding is in the eye of the beholder" :) I rambled I know.. the coffee is just starting to kick in

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Meagan Leddick on December 18, 2009 at 11:57am

@ Dan excellent points even before the coffee kicked in...employment branding to me is a loaded term...that syngergy you spoke of has to come from the top down and circle back around...If its trully a great place to work that news wont be kept secret (and doesn't require a recruiter to "sell the greatness")...because everyone who loves their job promotes the fact! And it works the other way as well...if your a burn 'em and churn 'em company that wont stay secret for long either. As a recruiter though its your job to pick up on the little ques candidates leak out during the interview process to make they are trully going to survive and thrive and contribute to the continue positive employer branding...that said your right, no crystal ball, sometimes people just leave:( okay so now i'm babling...great post Ryanne!

Dan Nuroo said:

Happy to engage. :)

It's almost like an attempt of mixing reality with Marketing hype. There has to be some type of synergy or it is a wasted effort. If you sell a vision about a company and the company doesn't deliver then you lose. People will leave. It sucks to be a recruiter when your person leaves early. An employment brand is built around people's experiences with the company not what marketing and Recruitment say. Although i'd hope that the message would be at least to close.

Let's not make it like empty political promises! We had a famous one here in Australia a few decades ago "No children will live n poverty by 1990!" didn't happen unfortunately. It was ambitious and sounded great, but not really achieveable. ie "Your career will skyrocket at company X. You'l get 8 weeks leave a year and keys to the executive bathroom within 6 months" If there isn't an executive bathroom, there's not hope and you'l have employee disengagement, and then attrition will happen.

When we do the review of someone after their initial 6 months I always ask "has your expereince so far matched your expecations coming in? Did we give you a realistic impression? Or did we over promise?"

That s like you cannot really forsee how a person is going to fit in and deliver within your company until they get there... You can't really tell about a company until you get there...

Just to get biblical on you all.. it is that time of year after all. "Employment branding is in the eye of the beholder" :) I rambled I know.. the coffee is just starting to kick in

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Andy Young on December 18, 2009 at 12:02pm

I'm new to the blogging circuit so still a little more willing to comment than some perhaps. (I don't even have an Iphone yet - how outrageous!)
My view for what it's worth is that whilst I agree in general, unless as professionals we are having the uncomfortable conversations with our clients about where they are going right and wrong on employer branding (genuine versus "positioning") then we have no right to get shirty about this situation. There are very few employers out there who genuinely engage their clients on this subject as far as I see.
We have to be brave and do this - even (shock horror!) if it means losing the brief, because who wants to place a candidate into a business where they don't fit? Not me. Where is the long term relationship in that? If it is simply a "ploy" and filling a role then that is not or never has been for me! Lets educate our clients and they'll get value from us.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keith Robinson on December 18, 2009 at 1:40pm

Hi Rayanne,

Keith Robinson you are write when you comment that this topic along with" Job Boards are dead" seems to be the debate of the moment and having run a debate on the topic (which Maren Hogan quit rightly point out was way tolong BUT have a listen to it at http://www.jobsiteadvisor.com/) plus see my response to a debate BillBoorman started at his blog http://ow.ly/MybO.

So without repeating all that I have written and apologies to my "pal" Mr Albright but the Employer Brand is a live and well, it is real and is even more important today than ever before.

It is and must not be owned by Recruitment or Recruiter or in my opinion HR to use by usual quote " It is the DNA of a company" it is not a message (that might be part of a future strategy but is not The Strategy".

As Janet Davies said on my show "it's about the feel good factor" "it's not the hype" Sue Redden says "it's not the badging" "you don't buy Employer Branding by the yard".

I find that the EB is very challenging for 3rd party recruiters because and sorry to be rude but they deal in "Human Widgets". The candidate = a fee. I find that In-House recruiters use the EB to help them develop the organisationsEmployer Value Proposition and the the message.

So agree with Maren.

Sorry for the rant but as show says The Employment Brand is and requires board level buy in and HR are or should be part of that board". But a great final quote from Janet Davies " it must not become HR itus" or as Sue Redden says "flavour of the month".

To deny the Employer Brand denies the DNA of an organisation.

An old Brit.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jerry Albright on December 18, 2009 at 2:05pm

Respectfully Keith and Maren - my opinion is not that EB is not something 3rd party recruiters need to be concerned with. It is more pointed:

There is no such thing.

Let me put it this way. - - - As I drive down the highway and see any of a number of companies - both large and small - products I know and many I've never heard of - never (at any time) have I become or made aware of their "employment brand". It just does not exist.

And I'm "out here". In the field. All over the internet. I read newspapers. Magazines. I'm talking to employees. Talking to companies. My brain filters a constant stream of employer/employee/job data. It's nonstop.

At a conscious level I am not aware of any Employment Brand - except maybe Starbucks - but only because they say they have one so I've kind of bought into the idea - though I still couldn't tell you what it is.......

EB - #nosuchthing

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keith Robinson on December 18, 2009 at 4:33pm

My apologies Maren Hogan for the "mis quote" but it was to long to sit and watch through.

But agree with your comments.

Keith

Maren Hogan said:

"I've never experienced it so it must not exist". The question is not does your employer brand go on a billboard that Jerry Albright can see from the highway? The question is "Does it exist?"

If you were looking for a job and you went home and typed in the name of one of those companies in the hope that there was a position available (for any number of reasons: you need a job, it's close to your house, you like their logo, there was a 'Vette in the parking lot) and you found no way to apply, no benefits page, a google search on how sucky it was to work there, etc and so forth, all of those things would affect your decision.

It is marketing and HR's JOB to make sure that the first impression made "reaching out" and during the application and interview process are ones that align with the brand that company is trying to project, which should (again) be carefully thought out and implemented beforehand.

Employer branding attempts to answer the question "What is it like to work here?" and provide an attractive, truthful answer. That starts from within, it is important and it does exist.

Also Keith I did not say it was way too long. I said you would likely not see a video that long in the States. I watched the whole thing and part of the next one.

Jerry Albright said:

Respectfully Keith and Maren - my opinion is not that EB is not something 3rd party recruiters need to be concerned with. It is more pointed:
There is no such thing.
Let me put it this way. - - - As I drive down the highway and see any of a number of companies - both large and small - products I know and many I've never heard of - never (at any time) have I become or made aware of their "employment brand". It just does not exist.

And I'm "out here". In the field. All over the internet. I read newspapers. Magazines. I'm talking to employees. Talking to companies. My brain filters a constant stream of employer/employee/job data. It's nonstop.

At a conscious level I am not aware of any Employment Brand - except maybe Starbucks - but only because they say they have one so I've kind of bought into the idea - though I still couldn't tell you what it is.......

EB - #nosuchthing

Jerry Albright said:

Respectfully Keith and Maren - my opinion is not that EB is not something 3rd party recruiters need to be concerned with. It is more pointed:

There is no such thing.

Let me put it this way. - - - As I drive down the highway and see any of a number of companies - both large and small - products I know and many I've never heard of - never (at any time) have I become or made aware of their "employment brand". It just does not exist.

And I'm "out here". In the field. All over the internet. I read newspapers. Magazines. I'm talking to employees. Talking to companies. My brain filters a constant stream of employer/employee/job data. It's nonstop.

At a conscious level I am not aware of any Employment Brand - except maybe Starbucks - but only because they say they have one so I've kind of bought into the idea - though I still couldn't tell you what it is.......

EB - #nosuchthing

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Kippen on December 19, 2009 at 3:51am

I work in the space. And my company, Evviva Brands, is a consultancy whose core product is employer brand development and strategy. So I'll be the first to admit my bias. But here are three reasons I believe it's a mistake to write off employer branding as a fad or a joke:

1. From a brand standpoint, the distinction between "the company brand" and "the employer brand" is a misnomer. There's one master brand--call it the company brand, whatever, it doesn't matter. The employer brand is simply an extension of that brand into the employment space. I agree with Maren: "Company culture is the fulfillment of the employer brand." So where, to use Jerry's example, we may think of Starbucks as a place to get good coffee--the company brand--the role of the employer "brand" is to extend our perception of Starbucks from a place you get coffee to a place where someone like you might enjoy working. Same brand, but the extension means instead of a focus on the differentiating product elements that brings you in for a "coffee transaction," like a good place to fire up your laptop, the focus is on the differentiating elements of the employment offer--like benefits at 20 hours and a pound of coffee every week.

2. Employer brand and employer branding are different. The brand--or brand extension--is a clear, relevant, resonant, differentiating and energetic statement of shared value. It's the unique give and the get that underlies the employment experience. It's the articulation of what makes a place like this right for a person like you. Rayanne, you confuse this with branding. And I agree, it's confusing. Moreover, that confusion is completely unnecessary. It's a byproduct of the fact that in recruitment advertising, most employer brand work is done by the same recruitment ad agencies that develop the creative. And sometimes, what's passed off as an "employer brand" is nothing more than a creative brief. But there really is a difference. The Nike brand is "everyone's an athlete." We may not know that, but so long as Nike does, and so long as they maintain their respect for the athlete within all of us as core to their business strategy, it doesn't matter. The point of the brand--or the employer brand--is to keep the company attuned to delivering on the key business differentiators they need to win. Employer branding the way you describe it is more like recruitment advertising. And as Jerry says, that's often not memorable. But Jerry, be fair: that's also a function of budget. Let's face it: if they threw as much money at, say, the Coca Cola employer brand as they throw at the master brand, we'd all know it, wouldn't we? Then again, what would be the point? Coca Cola only employs tens of thousands of employees--and that's if you throw bottling in. But they market product to billions. So they're putting their money where they need the transactions to happen. Want examples of strong employer brands? Consider the armed forces. Wal Mart. Even Google.

3. The employer brand doesn't exist because we say it does: we simply name what exists already. If you're prepared to accept that a company can differentiate itself in the marketplace, you must accept that differentiation can also exist in the workplace. (Microsoft and Google are different. And they're different places to work.) Developing an employer brand is just the process of (1) documenting those differences; (2) determining which of them are important (they drive productivity in ways that drives the business, they make people decide to work here or stay here, they inspire people to shop here, etc.); (3) determining which of these are ownable by the business (as opposed to intrinsic to the employee; (4) distilling this all down to brand elements. Of these steps, the only voodoo is in the last step. Everything else is research. And while we might not agree that this or that phrase is the best expression of "what it means to work here," it's pointless to argue that the experience we're "naming"--the unique, business-driving elements of the experience of working here--aren't real. As Shakespeare's Juliet observed:

What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title.

Your employer brand: same sweet smell, no matter the title.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lizz on December 20, 2009 at 5:55pm

What the hell is "company branding"? Is this some new term for consumer branding?

It's starting to feel a bit like Ground Hog day here at recruiting blogs when it comes to the topic of Employer Branding. Same topic, same dialog, same folks weighing in. Jerry says it does not exist - I get that and honor the perspective - but now - we have company branding? Sure, throw a new name on it and lets start again.

If we can agree:

many recruiters encourage their candidates to create a personal brand, one that is based on values, goals, style and the real "you". Come on, does a personal brand really exist?

Companies pay a lot of money for Marketing firms to create and promote -the consumer brand: Nike: Just do it, Southwest: Fast, Fun and Friendly (and now the ever famous - bags fly free commercials), Liberty Mutual: the responsibility company, and the list of jingles goes on and on. This time of year, I must admit, my fav consumer branding campaign is getta, getta, getta Garmin or the miller lite glass chinking song (even though we all know the Budweiser Clydesdale's can put a lump in your throat) during the Holidays. But these are jingles, snippets are of company logos, tag lines and songs. they are meant to make you feel good and buy into their products and consumer goods.

Employment branding does exist Virgina - just like Santa. You may not believe, but it is there. The good ones are based on the true organizational culture. They are so crystal clear that you don't have to sign up and go to work for a company, even for 90 days, to figure out who they are, but more importantly, who they are not. This brand will attract, retain or repel an employee from the organization. I am not going to trot on and on - Ground Hog day and all. But I did write a book on the subject, Published by SHRM in September 2009. This is not self promotion, but I spent a lot of time on the research for the employment branding section - and I will end with a quote - from one of the most respected and relevant writers on Talent Management today - . Dr. John Sullivan, a widely quoted expert on HR practices stated in the article The Many Benefits of Employment Branding: I have found that the primary reason why corporate recruiting managers under appreciate and under utilize a corporate branding strategy is because they have done a poor job in making the business case for investing in their firm's employment brand. You can't make a compelling business case unless you first know the possible benefits of the branding strategy. Nuff said.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryan Estis on December 31, 2009 at 10:05am

Some great discussion. While a little tardy in arriving thought I might offer up a bit of detail on what an Employment Branding Manager does on the corporate/practitioner side. Since Nike was referenced a few times in the discussion thought they might serve as a useful example. Here is the open req.out of Taleo for their Employment Branding Manager vacancy. https://nike.taleo.net/careersection/10020/jobdetail.ftl?lang=en&am... Nike and a host of other employers with strong consumer/company brands have made the distinction and assign and designate responsibility, increasingly with an FTE to drive Employment Branding as an essential part of communication strategy for the organization.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Donna Brewington White on December 31, 2009 at 8:07pm

Well, Rayanne, I think you got your discussion. (-: I'm too brain-tired to offer much and can pretty much ditto Maren anyway. I can say that I experience the employment brand as a recruiter, both in selling the job and in trying to lure people away from companies. The stronger the employment brand, the easier it is to engage candidates for that client and the more difficult it is to lure them from a company with a strong employment brand. If you see recruiting as a form of marketing, I believe that the concept of employment brand becomes more apparent. As a 3rd-party recruiter, I can't create the employment brand, but I can help the client to identify and articulate it. I do believe every company that hires has one -- the question is how well it is identified and promoted -- and how intentionally it has been cultivated. Just as "brand" is all about identity and relationship from a marketing sense, the same is true in an employment sense. I am not focusing as much here on the relationship between employment brand and retention but recognize how key this relationship is. I must say that I am of the persuasion that retention starts with recruiting and that understanding this will become a dividing line between mediocrity and excellence in recruiting over the long run. It boils down to whether we are transactional, or long-range in our thinking, whether we are consultants and business partners or merely service providers and whether we incorporate marketing into our roles as recruiters. To say more I would need to share thoughts that are still being developed in my thinking and/or would slip into redundancy, and so will leave it at this. Wow, what great thoughts in response to this post -- even the ones I disagree with. Thanks, Rayanne.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion