Building a Global Employer Brand by EDHECBusinessSchool

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

Building a Global Employer Brand INSIGHTS FROM THE WORLD’S MOST ATTRACTIVE EMPLOYER SURVEY 2014

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

For many firms that span the globe, multiple markets, or even just several regions within a country, attracting the unique workforces at each company location can be a major determinant of their growth. TO SUCCEED AT THIS, ORGANIZATIONS NEED TO BE STRATEGIC AND INTENTIONAL IN APPROACHING GLOBAL DIVERSITY. WHAT MAKES EMPLOYERS ATTRACTIVE TO PROSPECTIVE TALENT IN A FOREIGN MARKET? TO WHAT EXTENT DO GLOBAL ORGANIZATIONS NEED TO “LOCALIZE” THEIR EMPLOYER BRANDS? WHERE CAN FIRMS FIND OPPORTUNITIES TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF SIMILARITIES, AND WHEN IS IT CRUCIAL FOR THEM TO DIFFERENTIATE?

HOME INTRODUCTION SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

THIS IS WHERE DATA-DRIVEN EMPLOYER BRANDING COMES IN. Universum surveyed students about career motivations and workplace preferences in more than 30 countries in 2014, including the 12 countries with the largest gross domestic products (GDPs). Based on these data and our own expertise, we are helping employers attract their target talent and evolve with a diverse world. This paper looks beyond the World’s Most Attractive Employer rankings and examines the broader preferences stated by the survey respondents in the “G12” countries — which aspects of employers and jobs they find the most appealing, which they do not find particularly important or attractive, and how they most commonly learn about employers and jobs. Since the data represent students from across the world, particular attention is paid to differences and similarities across countries.

OUR ANALYSIS OF THE DATA LED US TO FOUR KEY CONCLUSIONS: 1. The preferences of students in

3. The firms that will attract the best

Western countries tend to be

talent in the coming years will

relatively similar to each other,

be learning organizations, where

while the preferences of students in

professional development, training,

Asia and Russia tend to vary more

and mentoring are “baked in” to the

widely. Accordingly, firms seeking to

company’s culture.

attract talent across the globe need to customize their employer value

4. Students world-wide have come

propositions more heavily in Asia

to expect creative, dynamic work

and Russia.

environments where ideas are traded freely amongst colleagues.

2. The means by which students

Firms that have these environments

learn about potential employers

— not “look alike” dynamism, but

vary widely by market. Social

the real thing — clearly have an

media has “taken off” in some

advantage in attracting talent.

countries, but not others, and

Those that don’t will need to either

students use in-person channels

adapt their cultures, or make the

such as informational interviews

case for why prospective recruits

to greater or lesser degrees across

should choose them despite not

countries. Just as knowing how

possessing this core attractor.

preferences vary can help employers tailor their messages, knowing how channel usage varies can help determine a strategy for delivering those messages.

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

Similarities and differences in student preferences across markets

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

The Universum Student Survey asks students to state their preferences for employer attributes via a two-level framework. At the highest level are four key drivers of employer attractiveness: the employer’s Reputation & Image, its Job Characteristics, its People & Culture, and finally its Remuneration & Advancement Opportunities.

We ask survey respondents to divide 100 points among these four drivers. This gives us a view of the overall importance of each driver. FIGURE 1 shows the average importance allocated to each driver by business students in each of the G12 countries, with a global average that’s weighted by the GDPs of the respective countries. FIGURE 2 displays the equivalent data for engineering students.

Students in developing countries place higher emphasis on Remuneration & Advancement Across the G12 countries, respondents in both business and engineering allocated the most importance to Remuneration & Advancement. The global averages are skewed, however, by the high importance placed on this driver by students in China, Japan, India,

and Russia. Looking at the data for business students, for example, Remuneration & Advancement is less important to respondents in the USA and Australia than the People & Culture of the organization, and it’s less important to Italian, French, and British respondents than the Job Characteristics. Similarly, engineering students in seven of the 12 markets placed more importance on the Job Characteristics, with only the Asian, Russian, and Brazilian students finding Remuneration the most important. This pattern becomes clearer when comparing the level of importance placed by respondents on Remuneration & Advancement with the per-capita GDPs of the countries. FIGURE 3 shows the relationship for the business respondents, and FIGURE 4 shows the relationship for the engineering respondents. While there are

outliers on the plots, the general relationship is that students in still-developing nations are more focused on this driver than those in developed nations. (The slopes of the regression lines on the graphs are statistically significant at the 10% level.) Firms that attempt to attract talent globally, then, should differentiate their employer value propositions in developing markets, placing higher emphasis on career advancement opportunities and the pecuniary benefits of working for them.

To be paid in yen or rupees: differences in what types of remuneration are preferred To what degree, though, should this tailoring be localized to individual markets? For example, do the types of Remuneration & Advancement Opportunities that appeal to the

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

typical Indian engineering student also appeal to her Chinese counterpart? To answer that question, we look to the second level of Universum’s employer attractiveness framework. This consists of ten attributes within each of the four drivers, for a total of 40 attributes. (See Appendix A for a full listing of the 40 attributes.) Within each driver, we ask survey respondents to choose three attributes that they consider most important. We then weight the percentage of respondents choosing each attribute as important by the overall importance assigned to the umbrella driver in the previouslydescribed 100 points exercise. The results give us a fine-grained understanding of which aspects of Remuneration & Advancement Opportunities are most important to students. TABLE 1 shows the

results from business respondents in the four non-Western countries we examined. (The results for engineering respondents, not shown here, were similar.) Notably, “high future earnings” was among the top preferences across all the markets, except China, where it was subordinate to the base salary and three “softer” career advancement aspects. Indian students prioritize “high future earnings” together with “rapid promotion” and “leadership opportunities.” Russian students, by contrast, are far more concerned with financial benefits like base and future earnings, as well as opportunities to earn a “performance-related bonus.” What seems like a great opportunity to a management trainee in Mumbai may be perceived as insufficiently lucrative in Moscow.

For some organizations, it will make the most sense to simply tweak which aspects of the employer value proposition are emphasized in each market. For instance, a global organization’s recruiters might prepare to talk more about the resume-building aspects of their rotational programs in India and Japan, and more about base compensation in Russia and China. In other cases, however, it may be necessary to adapt to local preferences by altering recruiting programs, or even re-structuring the way employees in a market are compensated. For example, firms that don’t have rotational programs are probably at a disadvantage in India, and may consider creating one just for that market. Likewise, bonuses specifically for the Russian market may help a firm become competitive there.

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

Looking beyond remuneration: a general metric for the required degree of localization of an employer brand These differences and similarities in student preferences go beyond financial and career advancement opportunities, of course. Looking across all 40 attributes, it is possible to compare the importance placed on each attribute by survey respondents in one country with that of their counterparts in another country. For example, each point on FIGURE 5 corresponds to one of the 40 attributes; the horizontal axis indicates the importance placed on them by business respondents in Australia, while the vertical axis indicates the importance to their Canadian counterparts. Not

surprisingly, given their shared cultural heritage and level of economic development, these students have a lot in common — they agree about what’s important, as evidenced by the linear relationship. By comparison, FIGURE 6 shows the equivalent, but much looser, relationship for attribute importance between Australian and Japanese business students. Across the G12 countries, there are 66 two-way pairings of countries. While making visual comparisons of 66 scatter plots would be cumbersome and overwhelming, we can boil each of those relationships down to a single metric. The square of the Pearson correlation coefficient (R-squared) for each country pair can be interpreted as how much of the variation in

importance across the 40 attributes in Country A can be explained by their importance in Country B. This does not offer any insight into how the preferences differ, but it does give an at-a-glance metric of the extent of the differences and the relative amount of brand localization required to resolve them. gives the R-squared metrics for each of the 66 pairs across the G12, based on the responses from business respondents. A simple way to approach the table is to think that, if an employer value proposition is 100% optimized for Australia, then it is probably around 80% optimized for Canada, but only 20% of the way there in Japan. TABLE 2

In general, the table shows that the United Kingdom, USA, Canada, and Australia share a great deal in

common. Germany, France, and Italy have a middling degree of commonality with each other, and in many cases share more in common with the United Kingdom or its former colonies than they do with each other. The Asian countries and Russia, however, tend to share very little in common with the Western nations, and not a great deal in common with each other. Understanding differences in students’ preferences across markets, then, can help employers tailor their messaging and make them more attractive globally. Localizing the employer value proposition, however, is only half of the story. Firms also need to localize the channels they use to communicate.

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

FIGURE 1 OVERALL IMPORTANCE OF EMPLOYER ATTRIBUTE CATEGORIES Business undergraduates, G12 countries, 2014 RETURN

Australia

25.7%

21.6%

Brazil

25.0%

22.5%

Canada

India Italy Japan Russia UK US 0%

20%

Employer reputation & image Job characteristics People & culture Remuneration & Advancement Opportunities

26.5%

26.6% 40%

THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY

25.5%

24.8%

25.1%

21.8%

GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS

32.5%

22.6% 26.1%

23.6%

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS

30.5%

23.1%

24.8%

20.0%

27.1%

26.6%

26.1%

25.2%

21.2%

INTRODUCTION

30.3%

21.8%

26.9%

20.4%

27.0%

28.4%

25.3%

24.9%

23.1%

HOME

26.8%

26.0%

27.6%

18.8%

26.2%

29.8%

23.8%

27.5%

19.8%

Germany

26.4%

24.2%

22.2%

France

25.5%

21.0%

China

26.5%

60%

80%

100%

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

FIGURE 2 OVERALL IMPORTANCE OF EMPLOYER ATTRIBUTE CATEGORIES Engineering and IT undergraduates, G12 countries, 2014 RETURN

Australia

28.6%

21.0%

Brazil

26.3%

22.1%

Canada

27.9%

20.5%

China France

18.8%

28.1%

Germany

18.4%

28.3%

Italy

20.4%

27.1%

Japan

21.0%

26.3%

Russia UK US 0%

20%

Employer reputation & image Job characteristics People & culture Remuneration & Advancement Opportunities

25.4%

26.2%

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS

29.9% 25.8%

25.1%

28.1%

22.8%

29.0%

THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY

29.5% 33.2% 24.8%

24.8%

26.5%

25.4% 40%

GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS

26.6%

22.3%

27.4%

20.8%

INTRODUCTION

23.1%

26.8%

23.6%

27.0%

25.9%

24.6%

19.8%

HOME

24.6%

27.4%

25.4%

22.9%

23.5%

23.4%

24.4%

22.3%

India

27.0%

60%

80%

100%

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

FIGURE 3

34%

HOME

GDP PER CAPITA VS. % IMPORTANCE ON REMUNERATION & ADVANCEMENT

RETURN

% IMPORTANCE ALLOCATED TO REMUNERATION & ADVANCEMENT

Business students

INTRODUCTION

RUSSIA 32%

INDIA

30%

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS

JAPAN CHINA

GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS

GERMANY

28%

CANADA

BRAZIL

ITALY

FRANCE AUSTRALIA

26%

THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY

24%

22%

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000 GDP IN 2013 (PER CAPITA)

$40,000

$50,000%

$60,000

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

FIGURE 4

34%

HOME

GDP PER CAPITA VS. % IMPORTANCE ON REMUNERATION & ADVANCEMENT

RETURN

% IMPORTANCE ALLOCATED TO REMUNERATION & ADVANCEMENT

Engineering students

RUSSIA

INTRODUCTION

32%

30%

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS

CHINA

JAPAN GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS

INDIA GERMANY

28%

BRAZIL

ITALY

26%

CANADA

THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY

FRANCE UK

24%

AUSTRALIA

22%

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000 GDP IN 2013 (PER CAPITA)

$40,000

$50,000%

$60,000

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

TABLE 1 WEIGHTED PERCENTAGE OF BUSINESS RESPONDENTS SELECTING REMUNERATION & ADVANCEMENT ASPECTS AS IMPORTANT TO THEM, SELECT COUNTRIES, 2014 RETURN

CHINA

INDIA

JAPAN

RUSSIA

G12 AVERAGE*

High future earnings

39.6%

44.4%

45.5%

68.4%

47.2%

Good reference for future career

47.8

36.0

41.6

29.1

41.2

Leadership opportunities

33.6

48.3

39.5

34.8

41.0

Clear path for advancement

40.1

32.4

36.8

38.0

39.8

Competitive base salary

47.0

36.0

31.7

52.0

39.7

Competitive benefits

39.4

36.6

34.9

32.7

30.0

Sponsorship of future education

31.9

27.9

33.3

29.4

27.2

Rapid promotion

26.0

44.4

38.8

39.7

24.4

Performance-related bonus

28.1

37.0

35.9

40.7

24.3

Overtime pay/compensation

23.9

25.5

31.8

22.2

18.7

*G12 averages include eight Western countries not shown on table. Averages are weighted by the GDPs of the individual countries.

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

FIGURE 5

60.0

HOME

IMPORTANCE PLACED BY BUSINESS STUDENTS ON 40 EMPLOYER ATTRIBUTES

INTRODUCTION 50.0

RETURN

IMPORTANCE IN CANADA

Australia and Canada

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS

40.0

GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS

30.0

THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY

20.0

10.0

20.0

30.0 IMPORTANCE IN AUSTRALIA

Employer reputation & image Job characteristics People & culture Remuneration & Advancement

40.0

50.0

60.0

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

FIGURE 6

60.0

HOME

IMPORTANCE PLACED BY BUSINESS STUDENTS ON 40 EMPLOYER ATTRIBUTES

INTRODUCTION 50.0

RETURN

IMPORTANCE IN JAPAN

Australia and Japan

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS

40.0

GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS

30.0

THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY

20.0

10.0

20.0

30.0 IMPORTANCE IN AUSTRALIA

Employer reputation & image Job characteristics People & culture Remuneration & Advancement

40.0

50.0

60.0

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

TABLE 2 RELATIVE EXTENT TO WHICH BUSINESS STUDENTS SHARE PREFERENCES ACROSS G12 MARKETS (R-SQUARED METRICS) RETURN

AUST AUST

BRAZIL

CANADA

CHINA

FRANCE

GERMANY

INDIA

ITALY

JAPAN

RUSSIA

100%

HOME INTRODUCTION

BRAZIL

57%

100%

CANADA

80%

49%

100%

CHINA

25%

40%

43%

100%

FRANCE

49%

26%

62%

31%

100%

GERMANY

55%

29%

70%

40%

63%

100%

INDIA

28%

32%

38%

46%

30%

24%

100%

ITALY

59%

63%

61%

35%

49%

47%

22%

100%

JAPAN

20%

25%

41%

47%

28%

40%

49%

34%

100%

RUSSIA

25%

24%

42%

39%

24%

39%

47%

29%

43%

100%

74%

57%

84%

37%

71%

58%

34%

67%

28%

35%

100%

77%

49%

92%

36%

49%

62%

28%

59%

33%

79%

100%

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

Getting the word out: communication channel usage across markets

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

In addition to asking respondents to the Universum Student Survey about their preferences, we also ask which communication channels they use to look for information about employers.

Across the G12 markets, the average student uses between seven and eight channels for this purpose, with the average engineer using slightly fewer sources of information than the average business student (see FIGURE 7). Notably, Chinese students tend to get their information from fewer channels than the G12 average — the typical Chinese business student employs only 4.7 channels, while the average Chinese engineering student uses 5.6. In fact, they are less likely than their peers in other countries to use any of the 27 channels we ask about on the survey. They are especially less likely than students in other markets to use employer websites or social media, two of the most common channels globally. (See TABLE 3 for the percentages of business respondents in each country using the specific channels discussed here.)

This “communications gap” in China stems from a combination of factors. Relatively low access the internet and social media, coupled with a still-nascent understanding of employer branding strategies and recruiting tactics on the part of both students and employers, have left students less likely to learn about employers online. In the meantime, the sheer size of the country makes it difficult for employers to fill this gap through in-person communications such as on-campus presentations. (Russia appears to be a similar in both regards, though the effect is less pronounced.) On the other end of the spectrum, Indian students learn about employers through almost twice as many channels as their G12 peers —13.2 for business students, and 12.9 for engineers. They are twice as likely to report having conducted an informational interview, and

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

almost twice as likely to say they attended an employer presentation. However, it is not just in-person channels they use more. They are more likely to use online means as well.

Dialog expected: social media usage to learn about employers Indian students are highly active on social media: a greater proportion of them than the respondents in any other G12 nation tell us that they’ve used “social networks / communities” or “professional networks / communities” to learn about employers. Other countries that appear to be leading the way on adoption of social media for recruiting include Australia, Canada, and Brazil. By contrast, France, Japan, and China have relatively low adoption levels.

Building an effective recruiting presence on social media requires a great deal of persistence and active engagement. Students expect these channels to be used for dialogs with employers, not as alternative ways of reading content that’s already on the employers’ web sites. Understanding which target markets have high adoption rates can help firms make sound decisions about where to concentrate their resources, allowing them to build presences that will reach, and resonate with, a wide range of potential recruits.

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

FIGURE 7 AVERAGE NUMBER OF COMMUNICATION CHANNELS USED TO LEARN ABOUT EMPLOYERS G12 markets, 2013 RETURN

Australia

HOME INTRODUCTION

Brazil

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS

Canada China France

GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS

Germany India

THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY

Italy Japan

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY

Russia UK

A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION

US 0.0

2.0

Business Engineering

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

TABLE 3 PERCENTAGE OF BUSINESS RESPONDENTS USING SELECTED COMMUNICATION CHANNELS TO LEARN ABOUT EMPLOYERS, G12 MARKETS, 2014. RETURN

EMPLOYER WEBSITES

CAREER FAIRS

SOCIAL NETWORKS/ COMMUNITIES

EMPLOYER PRESENTATIONS ON CAMPUS

PROFESSIONAL NETWORKS/ COMMUNITIES

JOB BOARDS

CAREER GUIDANCE WEBSITES

INFORMATIONAL INTERVIEWS

LIVE WEBINARS WITH EMPLOYERS

AUSTRALIA

60%

40%

54%

26%

37%

35%

15%

BRAZIL

40%

21%

49%

26%

35%

21%

33%

16%

10%

CANADA

65%

56%

47%

37%

46%

32%

33%

10%

CHINA

24%

34%

17%

29%

15%

28%

20%

17%

FRANCE

78%

42%

36%

38%

39%

41%

25%

11%

GERMANY

67%

49%

44%

34%

44%

52%

44%

19%

INDIA

69%

54%

55%

61%

55%

47%

53%

45%

38%

ITALY

55%

27%

43%

26%

25%

35%

36%

16%

JAPAN

67%

31%

24%

34%

20%

17%

27%

14%

16%

RUSSIA

45%

28%

40%

27%

32%

20%

22%

17%

67%

55%

49%

37%

31%

44%

17%

10%

63%

60%

48%

45%

43%

34%

23%

G12 AVERAGE*

*G12 average is GDP-weighted average of the 12 countries shown.

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

The learning organization: satisfying recruits’ desire to develop professionally

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

Up until this point, we’ve focused on differences that require firms to localize their employer brands and their recruitment communications. But how are students’ preferences similar across markets? Can there be such a thing as a globally appealing employer value proposition?

Regardless of their location, field of study, or preferred industry, students consistently tell us that they want to continue learning after graduation. They want to join organizations that will train them, foster their professional development, and set them on a path along which they can grow their careers. “Professional training and development,” “leadership opportunities,” and “leaders who support my development” are among the most preferred attributes across the G12 markets (see TABLE 4). While these attributes have long been among students’ favorites, they have gained even more importance over the last three years (see FIGURE 8 ). Employers that can credibly offer training, mentoring, and professional development as part of the core experience for their entry-level employees will have a

strong advantage in attracting the next generation of talent.

HOME INTRODUCTION

Notably, “sponsorship of future education” is trending in the opposite direction, with students finding it less important than they did previously. Indeed, tuition reimbursement benefits are a very low priority for students. This may indicate that, as employers become less likely to offer this benefit, students’ expectations have diminished. But it may also indicate that students expect to grow into their career roles through on-thejob training and mentoring. In certain markets — particularly France and the United Kingdom — opportunities for international travel or temporary relocation are seen as highly attractive, and part of the standard career path for would-be managers. (In India and Brazil, on the other hand, these opportunities

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

are highly desired by students, but rarely given.) Multinational organizations that want to recruit in those markets can satisfy those ambitions by setting up rotations to other offices as part of their training and development programs. The breadth of attributes related to training and development points to the fact that firms have many levers they can adjust in building a program. Organizations that want to build such programs need to decide which skills are to be taught and fostered, whether employee rotations are involved, the roles of managers and other employees

as coaches and mentors. These choices are usually made with a view toward the firm’s talent needs — which skills are needed and which positions need to be filled or retained. Those objectives are, of course, valid. What our survey data reveal, however, is that program design also affects the firm’s competitiveness in recruiting. Developing a world-class training course for analysts doesn’t just ensure that one’s analysts are well-trained; it also makes it easier to recruit them in the first place.

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

TABLE 4

PROFESSIONAL TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT

IMPORTANCE OF ATTRIBUTES RELATED TO TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT, G12 MARKETS, 2014

LEADERS WHO SUPPORT MY DEVELOPMENT

AUSTRALIA BRAZIL

RETURN

CANADA

LEADERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES

OPPORTUNITIES FOR INTL. TRAVEL/ RELOCATION

SPONSORSHIP OF FUTURE EDUCATION

HOME INTRODUCTION SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS

CHINA FRANCE GERMANY INDIA ITALY JAPAN RUSSIA UK US

Color-coding indicates that the attribute is among the most highly preferred of the 40 attributes for…

GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION

Business Engineering Both

APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

FIGURE 8

HOME

CHANGE IN IMPORTANCE OF SELECTED EMPLOYER ATTRIBUTES

Opportunities for international travel/relocation

G12 GDP-weighted averages, 2014 vs. 2012

INTRODUCTION SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS

Sponsorship of future education

(Positive numbers / to the right indicates increasing importance over time)

Leaders who will support my development

GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS

Professional training and development RETURN

Clear path for advancement

THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY

Leadership opportunities 6.0%

4.0%

Engineering Business

2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

The new work environment: expectations outstripping reality

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

Beyond the almost-universal desire for training and development, the other major commonality in students’ preferences is the desire for a new kind of workplace. The bar has been set by Google, Facebook, and other innovative firms for what we call on the Universum Student Survey “a creative and dynamic workplace.”

The pattern for these company cultures was cut in Silicon Valley, but business and engineering recruits alike now desire them, across the globe. Among engineers across the G12 markets, this is now the single most important of the 40 employer attributes. It’s their number one preference in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States, and it’s in their top ten preferences for almost every other G12 market. (The exception is Russia, where engineers highly value “a friendly work environment,” but place creativity and dynamism much further down their list of priorities.) To a lesser extent, business students are also keen on creative and dynamic environments — it’s the fourth-most important attribute for them across the G12 markets. Compared to engineers, however, there is much greater variation from country to country in just

how important it is. What is clear, however, is that the expectation that work environments will facilitate the exchange of ideas and rapid decision-making is not limited to students who plan to work in the technology sector. While this expectation has become widespread, however, students see lots of room for improvement on what employers actually deliver. Among the data we collect on the Universum Student Survey are respondents’ indications of whether they believe a company to have this type of work environment. Of the 72 multinational organizations included in the World’s Most Attractive Employers rankings for engineering, the average level of association with this attribute was only 55%. (The level of association is based on the percentage of engineering respondents in each of the 12 countries who said they

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

believe that a given firm has this type of work environment.) Only two of the companies were more than 70% associated with creative environments, and only 14 more were more than 60% associated. Indeed, there’s a great deal of variation by industry in how students perceive firms’ work environments. FIGURE 9 shows the range of associations by engineering respondents by industry. (As guideposts for reading the plot, the least-associated firm was a bank that was 39% associated with this trait, while the most-associated was a software firm that was 80% associated.)

As can be seen on the plot, most industries have a wide range of association levels. The only industry where every company is above the 55% average is heavy industry. Similarly, the only completely belowaverage industry is banking. While many companies are making strides at making their work environments more open, there are entire industries where every firm could stand to improve.

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

FIGURE 9

90%

HOME

VARIETY OF ENGINEERING STUDENTS’ APPRAISALS OF WHETHER COMPANIES HAVE “CREATIVE AND DYNAMIC WORK ENVIRONMENTS”

RETURN

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT PREFERENCES ACROSS MARKETS

75% % OF ENGINEERING STUDENTS ASSOCIATING

Bars show range from least-associated company in industry to the most-associated company

INTRODUCTION

GETTING THE WORD OUT: COMMUNICATION CHANNEL USAGE ACROSS MARKETS

60%

THE LEARNING ORGANIZATION: SATISFYING RECRUITS’ DESIRE TO DEVELOP PROFESSIONALLY

45%

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY

Automotive

Banking & Financial Services

Computers, Software, and Electronics

Consumer Goods & Retail

Energy

Heavy Industry

Pharma & Biotech

Professional Services

A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

INDUSTRY

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

A final word of caution

THE NEW WORK ENVIRONMENT: EXPECTATIONS OUTSTRIPPING REALITY A FINAL WORD OF CAUTION APPENDIX A

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

This paper was intended as an exploration of high-level trends in the data that were used to construct the World’s Most Attractive Employer rankings. We hope that these findings help inform firms’ talent attraction and retention strategies, as well as the employer branding efforts that support those strategies.

That said, as a final word of caution, these findings are solely based on broad populations of students in the 12 countries examined. Employers seeking to recruit in other countries, or even within a smaller region within one of the countries discussed, should keep in mind that student preferences and goals are often influenced by local conditions that may not be apparent at first. The first step in any employer branding effort should be to understand the market and the brand, and successful firms are cautious about assuming too much about how transferable findings are from one geography to another.

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND

Appendix A: The Universum Drivers of Employer Attractiveness

HOME

PEOPLE & CULTURE

The attributes of the employer as an organisation • Attractive/exciting products and services • Corporate Social Responsibility • Environmental sustainability • Ethical standards • Fast-growing/entrepreneurial • Financial strength • Innovation • Inspiring management • Market success • Prestige

The social environment and attributes of the workplace • A creative and dynamic work environment • A friendly work environment • Acceptance towards minorities • Enabling me to integrate personal interests in my schedule • Interaction with international clients and colleagues • Leaders who will support my development • Recognising performance (meritocracy) • Recruiting only the best talent • Respect for its people • Support for gender equality

SOFT

EMPLOYER REPUTATION & IMAGE

EXTRINSIC

INTRODUCTION

INTRINSIC JOB CHARACTERISTICS The contents and demands of the job, including the learning opportunities provided by the job • Challenging work • Client interaction • Control over my number of working hours • Flexible working conditions • High level of responsibility • Opportunities for international travel/relocation • Professional training and development • Secure employment • Team-oriented work • Variety of assignments

HARD

REMUNERATION & ADVANCEMENT OPPORTUNITIES The monetary compensation and other benefits, now and in the future • Clear path for advancement • Competitive base salary • Competitive benefits • Good reference for future career • High future earnings • Leadership opportunities • Overtime pay/compensation • Performance-related bonus • Rapid promotion • Sponsorship of future education

BUILDING A GLOBAL EMPLOYER BRAND