The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/1756-669X.htm

Factors
Factors influencing influencing
employer branding employer
branding
Investigations of student perceptions
outside metropolitan regions 149
Ines Brusch
Received 26 September 2017
Chair of Marketing and Innovation Management, Revised 26 September 2017
Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus–Senftenberg, Cottbus, Germany Accepted 6 October 2017

Michael Brusch
Department of Business Administration, Marketing and Corporate Planning,
Anhalt University of Applied Sciences, Köthen, Germany, and
Therese Kozlowski
Chair of Marketing and Innovation Management,
Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus–Senftenberg, Cottbus, Germany

Abstract
Purpose – Companies have to consider people as one of the most important resources. Especially, the
combination of demanding work and academic workers requires activities with regard to employer branding.
An employer brand is an intangible asset that allows companies to look for motivated and capable employees
(Hillebrandt, 2013). Consequently, the concept of employer branding can be used (Brickson, 2005; Heilmann
et al., 2013). The purpose of this paper is to supplement the first empirical investigations with students as new
employees (e.g. Daniel et al., 2015) by the perceptions of potential employees in less powerful, i.e. more rural,
regions.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper summarizes existing findings and enhances two
empirical investigations of 431 students of a technical university in a medium-sized city and 211 students of a
university of applied sciences in a rural region in Germany. The data collection and analysis will focus on
different methodical alternatives of identifying important drivers and dimensions of employer branding, as
well as identifying different groups of potential employees and gender differences.
Findings – The paper highlights the need of the underrepresented but successful consideration of group
specific analyses and following strategies in case of employer branding. The existing approaches of the
establishment of an employer branding concepts can be improved through more suitable strategy elements
when the addressees are better known.
Originality/value – The findings allow new insights, especially to smaller regions and companies and the
awareness of group-specific analyses in general and in case of the development of an employer branding
concept.
Keywords Employer branding, Companies, Potential employees, Rural regions
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
International Journal of Quality
People have to be considered as one of the most important resources for a company and the and Service Sciences
linked employer brand is an intangible asset (Hillebrandt, 2013). For one thing, well-trained Vol. 10 No. 2, 2018
pp. 149-162
graduates are looking for companies that embody certain characteristics and fit their needs © Emerald Publishing Limited
1756-669X
at the best possible rate. Otherwise, companies are looking for motivated and capable DOI 10.1108/IJQSS-09-2017-0085
IJQSS employees, which allow the company to achieve good performances, to generate and
10,2 distribute a positive image of the labor market and to retain more loyal employees to the
company. In this context, companies have the need to differentiate themselves clearly from
other companies and to produce a higher perceived employer attractiveness. Therefore, a
sophisticated and individual employer branding concept can be used. The concept of
employer branding was introduced in the mid-1990s (Ambler and Barrow, 1996). With the
150 start of the twenty-first century and in times of the political, economical and social changes,
the importance of this concept has more and more increased. The development of an
employer brand starts even before the work of the personnel department begins and does
not end at a specific point. All departments of a company have to work together for an
effective employer branding (Heilmann et al., 2013). Employer branding is a possibility to
identify and minimize deficits between the employer’s self-image and the public image. The
biggest challenge is to create a uniform, harmonious employer brand and to communicate
this effectively. This explains that the development of an employer brand is not the task of a
single department, but rather of the entire company. Employers play a central and
significant role in this process (Brickson, 2005).
In this paper, the concept of employer branding is analyzed from a point of view of
students as future employees. In big cities and/or metropolitan regions, many well-trained
professionals are available to the companies. On the other side, a large number of well-
known companies are available to young professionals. But even in smaller or medium-sized
cities in more rural regions, graduates are sought on the labor market. These regions and
especially the present companies also want to be considered as potential employers and
often seek well-trained graduates. However, a strong opponent, in terms of metropolitan
regions and/or big cities, awaits them. This paper identifies and provides clues about the
desires of people who want to work outside metropolitan regions. Especially, two questions
will be analyzed. First, are there different groups of potential employees with different
preferences or is one majority to be considered? Second, what are the perceptions of potential
academic employees outside metropolitan regions, i.e. in more rural regions with one small-
or medium-sized city as regional center and without are large number of alternative
employers and job positions?
In the following, the paper gives an overview of employer branding and employer
attractiveness, including different definitions and an overview of previous studies.
Afterwards, the demographic change and the skill shortages in Germany are shortly
descripted. The two conducted investigations, based on the theoretical findings, analyze the
importance of company characteristics and attractiveness characteristics to students.
Finally, a conclusion is given.

2. Employer branding and employer attractiveness

2.1 Background and definition
Personnel marketing, as part of the human resources management (HRM), includes all
activities of the employer trying to recruit new employees, to motivate current employees for
their present tasks within the company and to achieve a high satisfaction (Cable and
Graham, 2000). Therefore, personnel marketing can organize and use fair compensations or
the instruments of personnel communication (Gatewood et al., 1993). Personnel marketing is
strongly orientated to the procurement market and primarily concentrated to the
recruitment of employees. Nowadays, to recruit new and promising talents, a strategic
approach is mandatory (Hillebrandt, 2013). The management have to understand the
dynamics of human resource policy within the company because of the increased
competition in the global market. Therefore, system dynamics modeling can explore the
impact of different human resource policies and determine the key influencing parameters Factors
(Hafeez and Aburawi, 2013). influencing
In this context, the phrase “War for Talents” is often used. Induced by the demographic,
social and economic changes, the resource of young professionals has declined. As a
employer
consequence, companies are confronted with new challenges to attract and retain highly branding
qualified executives and professionals (Michaels et al., 2001; Chambers et al., 1998).
Employer branding has the purpose to create a corporate brand and identity, which
differentiates itself from other market participants (Erdem et al., 2006; Brakus et al., 2009). In 151
addition, this concept represents all methods to attract, connect, develop and retain
professionals to the company (Hillebrandt, 2013), while personnel marketing forms the
necessary basis for the implementation of marketing activities within the employer
branding (Bowen and Ostroff, 2004). The creation of an employer brand already starts
before the work of the personnel department begins and does not end at a specific point. All
departments of a company should work together for an effective employer branding
(Heilmann et al., 2013). The employer itself plays a significant and formative role in this
process (Brickson, 2005). In contrast to personnel marketing, employer branding works
more comprehensive and has a sustainable influence to the corporate culture. A successfully
implemented employer branding concept not only recruits talents to the company but also
increases the satisfaction of current employees (Berthon et al., 2005; Hillebrandt, 2013).
Moreover, a strong employer brand enables a differentiation from the competitors in the
market, increases the productivity and generates a sustained corporate success (Ambler and
Barrow, 1996; Yoo et al., 2000; Schlager et al., 2011).
The term employer brand was introduced in 1996 by Tim Ambler and Simon Barrow at
the London Business School. They describe the positive application of management
principles to develop an employer brand and the effect of relationships to employees and the
satisfaction of employees needs through an intensive branding (Ambler and Barrow, 1996).
Ambler and Barrow provided both the impulse and the name of a new field of research.
Since then, several definitions of employer branding were developed. Table I shows some
examples.
A conceptual framework to understand employer branding was developed by Backhaus
and Tikoo (2004). Here, employer branding creates two important assets: employer brand
associations and employer brand loyalty. If a company is able to increase the employer
brand loyalty, the employee productivity is affected positively. In this context, employer
brand associations are determinants of the employer image. A high esteem employer image
leads to a high employer attractiveness (Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004). Berthon et al. (2005)

Source Definition

Ambler and Barrow “. . . the package of functional, economic, and psychological benefits provided by
(1996), p. 187 employment, and identified with the employing company”
Ewing et al. (2002), p. 12 “Employment branding is therefore concerned with building an image in the
minds of the potential labor market that the company, above all others, is a ‘great
place to work’”
Backhaus and Tikoo “. . . we define employer branding as the process of building an identifiable and
(2004), p. 502 unique employer identity, and the employer brand as a concept of the firm that
differentiates it from its competitors. We examine employer branding at the
organization-wide level” Table I.
Johnson and Roberts “Attracting and keeping the best is what an employer brand is all about” Definitions of
(2006), p. 38 employer branding
IJQSS describe employer attractiveness as “the envisioned benefits that a potential employee sees
10,2 in working for a specific organisation”. This points out that the employer attractiveness
plays an important role in the decision process of the employer.
Particularly in the early stages of the recruitment process, it is difficult for a student, i.e.
for people with less personal experience, to imagine how to be an employee within the
company. In such cases candidates interpret the activities and instruments of a company, e.g.
152 printed advertising, news and experiences of friends, quite individually (Gatewood et al.,
1993). For example, less interesting prepared advertising material can be seen as a signal that
a company does not invest much in human capital. This can lead to a low level of
attractiveness. Accordingly, companies attempt a variety of ways to send the right and
positive signals to students and represent themselves as an attractive employer. They try to
attract students through recruiting materials, information events, exhibitions, interviews or
participations at university activities. Also, the building of relationships to lecturers and
professors is used to create a better attitude to the company. These impressions will be
perceived from the students (Turban, 2001).

2.2 Past and present research

To create a holistic picture of employer branding, several studies and research findings will
be summarized in the following and can be seen as an overview in Table II.
Within the past years, a variety of studies on the topics of employer attractiveness and
business attractiveness have been published. Many studies address the issue of important
employer properties and employees’ exceptions regarding the working life. Only a few studies
specifically focus on the effects and requirements of employer branding. Under time effects it
can be identified that studies which investigate the influence of employer attractiveness are
increasing since 2000 and about the concept of employer branding since 2009.

3. Demographic change and skills shortages in Germany

Because of a decreasing birth rate in Germany since the mid-1960s, the same negative trend
can be identified – with a corresponding time delay – for the labor market. This
demographic change will lead to new challenges and present threats, as well as
opportunities (Höhn et al., 2008; Dittrich et al., 2011). So far, the decline could be
compensated by immigration and by rising participation rates of women and older people
(Brusch and Büsch, 2013). Hence, the labor supply is increased in recent years rather than
declined. For comparison, 37.9 million people were employed in Germany in 2008, compared
with 40.2 million in 2016 (Eurostat, 2017a).
Nevertheless, there is a recurrent employment shortage in certain areas in the German
economy, for example, in the engineering sciences. Students of this field had a lot of problems to
find an employment after the rescission in the years 1993 and 1994. Large companies imposed to
hire freezes and graduates had problems to find a new employment. As a result, the number of
students decreased in these study courses. In 2000, the decrease reached a climax with only
511,000 registered students (Eurostat, 2017b). The effects are still relevant. In the relevant age
group – people who are now between 35 and 49 years of age – the number of engineers is
relatively low (Brenke, 2012). Because of the complaints about the shortage of engineers in recent
years a change took place, and young people have increasingly decided to enlist in studies of
engineering sciences. In 2015, more than 861,000 students were registered in such study courses
(Eurostat, 2017c). If this trend continues, a surplus of engineers may be expected in the future.
This exchange of shortage and oversupply of certain professionals are a well-known
phenomenon, which is not easy to overcome. Possible market reactions are salary increases and
improved working conditions, thereby the jobs in shortage areas become more attractive.
Source Topic Data base
Factors
influencing
Turban (2001) Influence of familiarity to attraction of a firm and the 755 university students, employer
perceptions of organizational attributes 354 university personnel
Berthon et al. (2005) 25 components of employer attractiveness from the 683 university students branding
perspective of potential employees
Knox and Freeman Aspects of the employer brand image among 862 university students of
(2006) potential recruits and recruiters during the 22 universities and 593 153
recruitment process recruiters
Davies (2008) Corporate brand personality to measure employer 527 commercial managers
brand associations of 16 organizations
Tüzüner and Yüksel 28 components of employer attractiveness from the 475 university students
(2009) perspective of potential employees
Martensen and Employer perceptions of competencies of MSc 250 Danish employers
Grønholdt (2009) graduates and the importance of individual
competencies
Arachchige and Components of employer attractiveness from the 221 university students
Robertson (2011) perspective of potential employees
Ritz and Waldner Influence of intrinsically and extrinsically 122 university students
(2011) motivations to the perceived employer attractiveness
of public organizations
Schlager et al. (2011) Relationship between the perceived employer brand 2,189 employees of an
and service branding insurance company
Influence of particular drivers for employee attitudes
Sokro (2012) Influence of employer branding to attraction and 87 employees of banking
retention of employees sector
Sivertzen et al. (2013) Influence of five dimensions of employer branding 184 engineering students
and the usage of social media to a good corporate
reputation
Rampl and Kenning Effect of brand personality traits to employer brand 310 university students
(2014) affect and employer brand trust
Influence of brand affect and employer brand trust to
employer brand attractiveness
Carpentier et al. Effects of social media on employer brand and 212 nursing students
(2017) attractiveness Table II.
Selected studies of
Source: Adopted from Daniel et al. (2015) employer branding

However, it has to be stated that in a few years, the demographic change will increasingly
affect the labor market. Today, 67 per cent of the German population are in their working
age. In 2080, there will be only 57 per cent (Eurostat, 2017d). Particularly in the so-called
MINT professions (mathematics, information technology, natural science and technology),
shortages are still expected. Related companies should develop long-term strategies to
secure the professionals and use a holistic employer branding to present the company in the
best possible way.
The following investigations analyze the importance of company and attractiveness
characteristics of students and differences between students who could imagine to stay in
more rural regions and students who look for an employment in other regions.

4. Empirical investigations
To evaluate the attractiveness of employers in small- and medium-sized cites in more rural
characterized regions, two online surveys were conducted. The questionnaire contains four
parts:
IJQSS (1) general information on housing and job seeking;
10,2 (2) information on important company characteristics and attractiveness;
(3) information on previous jobs; and
(4) general demographics.

The first survey was conducted from December 2014 to January 2015 in Cottbus, Germany,
154 a medium-sized city with approximately 100,000 inhabitants and 9,500 students. The survey
was completed by 431 students. The majority of participants studied at a technical
university.
The second survey was conducted from June to July 2017 in the region Anhalt-Bitterfeld,
a region with approximately 165,000 inhabitants and 8,000 students. This survey was
completed by 211 students. The majority of the participants studied at a university of
applied sciences. The description of both the samples is shown in Table III.
Both the surveys show nearly the same mean age (25.24 years in Survey 1 vs 26.39 years in
Survey 2) and the same distribution w.r.t. gender. The majority of the students are registered in
bachelor’s and master’s programs. The possibility to select diploma as target degree has been
abolished for some time now; consequently, the number of such students is quite low.
Most of the participants of both the surveys inform themselves at least monthly about
the current labor market situation (65.2 per cent in Survey 1 vs 71.6 per cent in Survey 2).
Therefore, they mostly use online job portals and homepages of companies. Also, public
tenders, internships and job fairs are often used as information sources.
For the verification of which company’s characteristics are especially important for students
of a more rural region, they were asked to rate a variety of several characteristics. The
evaluation was made on a five-point Likert scale (with 1 = “unimportant” to 5 = “very
important”). The items were developed on the basis of the works of Stritzke (2010) and Böttger
(2011). For the purpose of reducing the number of items, a factor analysis of the data from
Survey 1 (principal components analysis with varimax rotation) was performed. Using this
multivariate analysis method, four central characteristics, so-called factors, could be identified.
These factors can be entitled as “environmental and social awareness”, “progressiveness”,
“trust” and “tradition”. All these four factors explain in total 61.3 per cent of the variance in the
data. Table IV gives an overview about the structure and the factor loadings of each factor.
Table V shows the mean values from the items of both the surveys. It becomes obvious
that the factor “trust” is most important. Men and women rate this factor as very important.
With regard to the importance, this factor is followed by “environmental and social
awareness” and “progressiveness”. The factor “tradition” is both the times rather

Survey 1 Survey 2
(mean age: 25.24 years) (mean age: 26.39 years)
Characteristic No. Percentage No. Percentage

Gender
Male 237 55.0 119 56.4
Female 194 45.0 92 43.6
Target degree
Table III. Bachelor 217 50.3 135 64.0
Descriptive Master 174 40.4 60 28.4
characteristics of the Diploma 21 4.9 13 6.2
data sample Other 19 4.4 3 1.4
 Factor loadings
Factors
Characteristic Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 influencing
employer
Environmental and social awareness
Sustainable 0.853 branding
Environmentally friendly 0.831
Social 0.642
Family friendly 0.636 155
Progressiveness
Dynamic 0.735
Innovative 0.734
International 0.665
Modern 0.631
Trust
Reliable 0.816
Serious 0.718
Honest 0.700 Table IV.
Tradition Explorative factor
Well-known 0.741 analysis of company
Authoritarian 0.712 characteristics of
Established 0.698 survey no. 1

Mean Survey 1 Mean Survey 2

Characteristic Total Male Female Total Male Female

Environ-mental and social awareness

Sustainable 3.80 3.73 3.89 3.95 3.75 4.21
Environmentally friendly 3.52 3.40 3.68 3.74 3.63 3.89
Social 3.99 3.84 4.16 4.23 4.09 4.41
Family friendly 3.68 3.47 3.94 4.14 4.01 4.32
Progressive-ness
Dynamic 3.46 3.45 3.48 3.70 3.58 3.84
Innovative 3.61 3.64 3.58 3.99 3.91 4.10
International 3.08 3.06 3.10 3.12 2.98 3.30
Modern 3.57 3.65 3.46 3.84 3.86 3.83
Trust
Reliable 4.42 4.36 4.48 4.41 4.34 4.51
Serious 4.38 4.32 4.44 4.32 4.26 4.39
Honest 4.45 4.41 4.49 4.27 4.24 4.30
Tradition Table V.
Well-known 2.68 2.57 2.80 3.29 3.24 3.36 Importance of
Authoritarian 2.37 2.37 2.36 3.02 3.03 3.00 company
Established 3.39 3.27 3.53 3.79 3.57 4.08 characteristics

unimportant and plays a minor role in the search for the right company. The gender-specific
values indicate that female students attach more importance to “environmental and social
awareness” than male students. In times of a high relevance of combining both family and
career, this result is not surprising. Generally, female students rate almost all characteristics
as more important than male students.
IJQSS It is interesting to note that both the surveys show nearly the same results. The only
10,2 difference is that participants of Survey 2 evaluate nearly all factors higher (with the
exception of the factor “trust”) than the participants of Survey 1.
For companies located in less populated regions, the question arises which kind of
students could imagine to stay and to look for an employment in this region. It is also
relevant to such companies to know which characteristics and attractiveness attributes are
156 important to these potential employees, i.e. students. If companies would have this
information, they would be able to focus on these characteristics and attributes and recruit
promising young talents.
In the first survey, 58.5 per cent of the respondents mentioned that they could imagine to
look for an employment in the region, 29 per cent could not imagine to look for an employment
in the region and 12.5 per cent are undecided. If people are born in the region, the majority (81.6
per cent) can imagine to look for an employment. However, it is even particularly pleasant that
a noticeable amount of respondents (50.5 per cent) who were not born in the region or the
surrounding area can also imagine to look for an employment in this region.
A similar pattern was observed in the second survey. In total, 55.8 per cent could imagine
to look for an employment in the region and 31.2 per cent could not imagine to look for an
employment in the region. In this questionnaire, over 47.7 per cent of the people who are not
born in the surrounding area can imagine to look for an employment in the region.
The results of Table VI help to answer the questions such as how an employer is able to
enhance its attractiveness to recruit competent, motivated employees and which company
characteristics are important to students who will stay in a more rural region. Therefore, the
table includes an overview about differences between students who could imagine to look
for an employment in the region and students who could not, as well as information about
the statistical significance based on values of the Mann–Whitney Test. When analyzing
Survey 1, the differences can be found at the factors “environmental and social awareness”
and “progressiveness”. Students who could imagine to look for an employment in the region,
rate the factor “environmental and social awareness” significantly higher than those who
could not, and these, in turn, rate the factor “progressiveness” significantly higher.
In Survey 2, only the items “dynamic” and “innovative” of the factor “progressiveness”
show significant differences between students who could and who could not imagine to look
for an employment in the regions. The other factors do not show any significant difference
between the two groups.
Regarding this question in relation to the attractiveness characteristics, the most
important item over all participants and surveys is the item “security of employment”. The
results are shown in Table VII. Significant differences between students who could and who
could not imagine to look for an employment in the region are in Survey 1: “To take on
management duties”, “career opportunities”, “corporate identity” and “action and decision
leeway’s”. Three of these four items are career-orientated items. This confirms the
assumption that student who could not imagine to look for an employment in the region are
more career-orientated. These students seem to be more flexible regarding the location of
their employer. In addition, less large companies are located in the rural region, so it is
possible that students assume that there are fewer career opportunities.
Furthermore, Table VII shows that the participants of Survey 2 rate the attractiveness
characteristics in general higher than the participants of Survey 1. Exceptions are the items
“interesting work content”, “pleasant working environment”, “expertise in all management
levels” and “team spirit”. Significant differences between students who could and who could
not imagine to look for an employment in the region are in Survey 2: “interesting work
content” and “training offerings”.
 Survey 1 Survey 2
Could you imagine to look for an employment in Could you imagine to look for an employment
the region? in the region?
Significance of Mean Mean Significance of
Characteristic Mean “Yes” Mean “No” Mann–Whitney test “Yes” “No” Mann–Whitney test

Company Characteristics
Environmental and social awareness
Sustainable 3.89 3.59 0.015 3.84 4.13 0.061
Environmentally friendly 3.56 3.39 0.115 3.66 3.89 0.219
Social 4.04 3.85 0.039 4.09 4.34 0.050
Family friendly 3.79 3.39 0.000 4.14 4.30 0.401
Progressiveness
Dynamic 3.35 3.62 0.005 3.58 3.93 0.016
Innovative 3.50 3.75 0.024 3.89 4.26 0.009
International 2.90 3.38 0.000 3.05 3.33 0.105
Modern 3.44 3.78 0.001 3.77 4.00 0.101
Trust
Reliable 4.42 4.40 0.586 4.35 4.41 0.867
Serious 4.41 4.32 0.159 4.23 4.34 0.523
Honest 4.46 4.41 0.771 4.23 4.15 0.386
Tradition
Well-known 2.56 2.84 0.033 3.28 3.62 0.107
Authoritarian 2.38 2.31 0.548 3.05 3.255 0.319
Established 3.32 3.50 0.109 3.76 4.00 0.075

0
characteristics
Importance of
Table VI.
influencing

company
157
branding
employer
Factors
0
10,2

158
IJQSS

Table VII.

attractiveness
Importance of

characteristics
Survey 1 Survey 2
Could you imagine to look for an Could you imagine to look for an
employment in the region? Significance of employment in the region? Significance of
Characteristic Mean “Yes” Mean “No” Mann–Whitney test Mean “Yes” Mean “No” Mann–Whitney test

Attractiveness Characteristics
Security of employment 4.53 4.50 0.625 4.67 4.56 0.083
Career opportunities 4.13 4.36 0.003 4.30 4.55 0.132
Strong corporate management 3.65 3.85 0.050 3.92 4.11 0.326
Salary 4.16 4.24 0.194 4.43 4.42 0.476
Commitment to the environment and society 3.54 3.40 0.219 3.72 3.97 0.111
Interesting work content 4.39 4.53 0.119 4.10 4.45 0.005
Pleasant working environment 4.48 4.57 0.296 4.32 4.40 0.546
Flexible work content 3.80 3.97 0.109 4.12 4.39 0.067
Training offerings 4.02 4.17 0.071 4.06 4.34 0.034
Product quality/service quality 3.89 3.89 0.866 3.81 4.08 0.082
Easily accessible location 3.83 3.85 0.877 4.09 4.29 0.183
Financial Security of the company 4.02 4.14 0.247 4.29 4.41 0.488
Diversity management 3.14 3.29 0.117 3.47 3.68 0.183
Work-life balance 4.13 4.25 0.140 – – –
Expertise in all management levels 4.14 4.22 0.403 3.86 4.05 0.168
Team spirit 4.28 4.41 0.129 4.23 4.23 0.934
Low competitive pressure 3.20 3.28 0.370 3.82 3.94 0.401
Corporate Identity 3.06 3.31 0.007 3.47 3.69 0.159
Action and decision leeway’s 3.86 4.04 0.034 3.96 4.15 0.246
To take on management duties 3.67 4.01 0.001 3.85 3.79 0.584
Social integration 3.76 3.86 0.339 3.84 4.05 0.291
Survey 1 shows that the differences between students who could imagine to look for an Factors
employment in the region and students who could not are especially at the factors influencing
“environmental and social awareness” and “progressiveness”. To analyze these findings in
more detail, Survey 2 was extended by some questions. Table VIII shows that only the fact
employer
“independency in partnership” in the area “environmental and social awareness” leads to branding
differences. Students who could not imagine to look for an employment in the region put
significantly more emphasis on “independency in partnership”. It seems that these students
are rather freedom-loving and maybe do not live in a permanent relationship. These
159
students can be regarded as more flexible. In the field of “progressiveness”, they attach
significantly more importance to “professional recognition” and “to pursue personal career
goals”. This shows that a professional fulfillment is very important to them.
Furthermore, some questions deal with the topics of family roles and the influence of
children. Table IX gives an overview about the answers in relation to the question “Could
you imagine to look for an employment in the region?”. Traditional gender roles are only

Could you imagine to look for an employment

in the region? Significance of
Item Mean “Yes” Mean “No” Mann–Whitney test

How do you rate the importance of the following factors?

Work-life balance 4.34 4.59 0.188
Independency in partnership 3.96 4.46 0.000
Time for partnership 4.22 4.25 0.652
Compatibility of family and career 4.30 4.30 0.416
Self-esteem 4.26 4.56 0.051 Table VIII.
Professional recognition 4.07 4.56 0.001 Additional items to
Management position in the future 3.67 3.72 0.875 analyze the factors
Foreign deployment 2.89 3.18 0.141 “environmental
To pursue personal career goals 3.96 4.33 0.019 and social
How important is a service where the employer supports your partner in his career? awareness” and
3.49 3.77 0.101 “progressiveness”

Could you imagine to look for an

employment in the region? Significance of Pearson Chi
Item Yes No Quadrat (or Fischer)

The gender distribution of traditional marriages corresponds to my later ideas

Yes 31 11 0.253
No 72 47
If you live in a partnership. Does your partner have an academic degree?
Yes 55 21 0.065
No 46 36
Are you familiar with the concept of Dual Career Couples?
Yes 18 7 0.500
No 92 54
Would you accept a possible restriction in the finance and career if you get children? Table IX.
Yes 69 22 0.001 Influence of family
No 42 39 roles and children
IJQSS pursued from a few part of the participants. Although many participants live in partnership
10,2 with academic partners, the term “Dual Career Couples” is not known.
The first survey suggested that persons with a family background tend to remain in the
region and also forgo the possibility of career opportunities. This presumption could be
confirmed. The question “Would you accept a possible restriction in the finance and career if
you get children?” leads a significant difference between students who could imagine to look
160 for an employment in the region and students who could not. The majority of students of the
first group (students who could imagine to look for an employment in the region) would
accept some restrictions in finance and career if they get children. In contrast, the majority of
the second group (students who could not imagine to look for an employment in the region)
would not accept any restrictions.

5. Conclusion
This paper analyzes important characteristics of companies regarding gender, the wish to
work in a more rural region and the influence of family background. Therefore, two similar
surveys were conducted in different regions. In general, four factors of company
characteristics could be identified within Survey 1. These factors are “environmental and
social awareness”, “progressiveness”, “trust” and “tradition”. The factor with highest
importance was “trust”. In both the surveys, women and men rate this factor as very
important.
Furthermore, the paper provides an overview about differences between two groups of
students in both the surveys: students who could imagine to look for an employment in a
more rural region and students who could not. In Survey 1, students who want to look for an
employment in the region rate the factor “environmental and social awareness” significantly
higher than the other students and these, in turn, rate the factor “progressiveness”
significantly higher. In terms of attractiveness characteristics, there are significant
differences in the items “career opportunities” and “to take on management duties” in
Survey 1. In Survey 2, significant differences were found in the facts “interesting work
content” and “training offerings”. Students who do not want to look for an employment in
the region are more career-orientated. Students who want to look for an employment in the
region mostly forego to finance and career opportunities if they get children.
Following this, companies in more rural regions should ensure that potential employees
often take value to social components and security of the employment. A company should
focus on these factors to create and to communicate a unique selling point for potential
employees. Also helpful is the offering of internships and of trainings. As a result, young people
would pay more attention to a company and get to know its strengths in a personal way.

References
Ambler, T. and Barrow, S. (1996), “The employer brand”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 4 No. 3,
pp. 185-206.
Arachchige, B.J.H. and Robertson, A. (2011), “Business student perceptions of a preferred employer: a
study identifying determinants of employer branding”, The IUP Journal of Brand Management,
Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 25-46.
Backhaus, K. and Tikoo, S. (2004), “Conceptualizing and researching employer branding”, Career
Development International, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 501-517.
Berthon, P., Ewing, M. and Hah, L.L. (2005), “Captivating company: dimensions of attractiveness in
employer branding”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 151-172.
Böttger, E. (2011), Employer Branding: verhaltenstheoretische Analysen Als Grundlage Für Die Factors
Identitätsorientierte Führung Von Arbeitgebermarken, Springer, Wiesbaden.
influencing
Bowen, D.E. and Ostroff, C. (2004), “Understanding HRM–firm performance linkages: the role of the
strength of the HRM system”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 203-221.
employer
Brakus, J.J., Schmitt, B.H. and Zarantonello, L. (2009), “Brand experience: what is it? How is it
branding
measured? Does it affect loyalty?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 73 No. 3, pp. 52-68.
Brenke, K. (2012), “Engineers in Germany: no shortage in sight”, DIW Economic Bulletin, Vol. 2 No. 5, 161
pp. 3-8.
Brickson, S.L. (2005), “Organizational identity orientation: forging a link between organizational
identity and organizations’ relations with stakeholders”, Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 576-609.
Brusch, M. and Büsch, V. (2013), “Desire to continue working and job-related factors of older workers in
Germany”, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 24 Nos 7/8, pp. 970-979.
Cable, D.M. and Graham, M.E. (2000), “The determinants of job seekers’ reputation perceptions”,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 21 No. 8, pp. 929-947.
Carpentier, M., Van Hoye, G., Stockman, S., Schollaert, E., Van Theemsche, B. and Jacobs, G. (2017),
“Recruiting nurses through social media: effects on employer brand and attractiveness”, Journal
of Advanced Nursing, First published online, available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/
10.1111/jan.13336/full (accessed 19 September 2017).
Chambers, E.G., Foulon, M., Handfield-Jones, H., Hankin, S.M. and Michaels, E.G. (1998), “The war for
talent”, McKinsey Quarterly, pp. 44-57.
Daniel, I., Brusch, M., Große, K. and Kozlowski, T. (2015), “Employer branding as important issue in
attracting new academic employees – an assessment from a student’s point of view”,
Proceedings of the 18th QMOD Conference on Quality and Service Sciences, Seoul.
Davies, G. (2008), “Employer branding and its influence on managers”, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 42 Nos 5/6, pp. 667-681.
Dittrich, D.A., Büsch, V. and Micheel, F. (2011), “Working beyond retirement age in Germany: the
employee’s perspective”, in Ennals, R. and Salomon, R.H. (Eds), Older Workers in a Sustainable
Society, Lang, Frankfurt am Main, pp. 189-202.
Erdem, T., Swait, J. and Valenzuela, A. (2006), “Brands as signals: a cross-country validation study”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 34-49.
Eurostat (2017a), “Employment and activity by sex and age – annual data”, available at: http://appsso.
eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=lfsi_emp_a&lang=en (accessed 19 September 2017).
Eurostat (2017b), “Tertiary students (ISCED 5-6) by field of education and sex”, available at: http://appsso.
eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=educ_enrl5&lang=en (accessed 19 September 2017).
Eurostat (2017c), “Students enrolled in tertiary education by education level, programme orientation,
sex and field of education”, available at: http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?
dataset=educ_uoe_enrt03&lang=en (accessed 19 September 2017).
Eurostat (2017d), “Population on 1st January by age, sex and type of projection”, available at: http://
appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=proj_15npms&lang=en (accessed 19 September
2017).
Ewing, M., Pitt, L., Bussy, N. and Berthon, P. (2002), “Employment branding in the knowledge
economy”, International Journal of Advertising: The Quarterly Review of Marketing
Communications, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 3-22.
Gatewood, R.D., Gowan, M.A. and Lautenschlager, G.J. (1993), “Corporate image, recruitment image
and initial job choice decisions”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 414-427.
Hafeez, K. and Aburawi, I. (2013), “Planning human resource requirements to meet target customer
service levels”, International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 230-252.
IJQSS Heilmann, P., Saarenketo, S. and Liikkanen, K. (2013), “Employer branding in power industry”,
International Journal of Energy Sector Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 283-302.
10,2
Hillebrandt, I. (2013), Dimensions of Employer Brands, University Bamberg, Bamberg.
Höhn, C., Mai, R. and Micheel, F. (2008), “Demographic change in Germany”, in Hamm, I., Seitz, H. and
Werding, M. (Eds), Demographic Change in Germany, Springer, Berlin, pp. 9-33.
Johnson, M. and Roberts, P. (2006), “Rules of attraction”, Marketing Health Services, Vol. 26 No. 1,
162 pp. 38-40.
Knox, S. and Freeman, C. (2006), “Measuring and managing employer Brand image in the service
industry”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 22 Nos 7/8, pp. 695-716.
Martensen, A. and Grønholdt, L. (2009), “Quality in higher education: linking graduates’ competencies and
employers’ needs”, International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 67-77.
Michaels, E., Handfield-Jones, H. and Axelrod, B. (2001), The War for Talent, Harvard Business School
Press, Boston, MA.
Rampl, L.V. and Kenning, P. (2014), “Employer brand trust and affect: linking brand personality to
employer brand attractiveness”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 48 Nos 1/2, pp. 218-236.
Ritz, A. and Waldner, C. (2011), “Competing for future leaders: a study of attractiveness of public sector
organizations to potential job applicants”, Review of Public Personnel Administration, Vol. 31
No. 3, pp. 291-316.
Schlager, T., Bodderas, M., Maas, P. and Cachelin, J.L. (2011), “The influence of the employer brand on
employee attitudes relevant for service branding: an empirical investigation”, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 497-508.
Sivertzen, A.-M., Nilsen, E.R. and Olafsen, A.H. (2013), “Employer branding: employer attractiveness
and the use of social media”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 473-483.
Sokro, E. (2012), “Impact of employer branding on employee attraction and retention”, European
Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 4 No. 18, pp. 164-173.
Stritzke, C. (2010), Marktorientiertes Personalmanagement Durch Employer Branding, Springer,
Wiesbaden.
Turban, D.B. (2001), “Organizational attractiveness as an employer on college campuses: an examination
of the applicant population”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 293-312.
Tüzüner, V.L. and Yüksel, C.A. (2009), “Segmenting potential employees according to firms’ employer
attractivness dimensions in the employer branding concept”, Journal of Academic Research in
Economics, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 46-61.
Yoo, B., Donthu, N. and Lee, S. (2000), “An examination of selected marketing mix elements and brand
equity”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 195-211.

Further reading
Eurostat (2014), “Tertiary students (ISCED 5-6) by field of education and sex”, available at: http://ec.
europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-datasets/-/educ_enrl5 (accessed 19 September 2017).

Corresponding author
Michael Brusch can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]