Employer attractiveness and employer branding

We therefore start with the question of what distinguishes the company as an employer today and where it is not credible enough for the desired target groups. To this end, internal perspectives, existing cultural patterns and the strategic direction are brought together. The three pillars of employer branding are a professional starting point here. However, they do not replace an up-to-date review of specific working conditions. A strong profile comes from characteristics that the company can demonstrate and develop further, not from interchangeable benefits.

Communication work then makes existing strengths and credible steps of change visible. Key figures or effects on applicants are only used if current data is available. We link employer identity, culture and strategic HR needs; there is no universal formula for skills shortages and no guaranteed number of additional applications.

Kommunikation und interne Entwicklung verbinden: Employer Brand Communication trägt die Employee Value Proposition über passende interne und externe Kanäle. Die Botschaften auf Karriereseite, Arbeitgeberprofilen und in Gesprächen müssen mit den Erfahrungen im Unternehmen übereinstimmen. Führung, Personal und Kommunikation bearbeiten Entwicklungsaufgaben gemeinsam, bevor ein Wunsch als gelebte Stärke behauptet wird.

Kriterien für die weitere Beobachtung vereinbaren: Beobachtungs- und Bewertungskriterien werden zum Auftrag passend definiert. Rückmeldungen aus den Zielgruppen und Erfahrungen bei der Umsetzung fließen in die weitere Arbeit ein. So bleibt das Arbeitgeberversprechen überprüfbar und kann angepasst werden.

Arbeitsergebnisse: Erfasste Erwartungen relevanter Mitarbeitergruppen; Mit Fokusgruppen überprüfte Employee Value Proposition; Verknüpfte Handlungsfelder für Kommunikation und interne Entwicklung; Vereinbarte Kriterien für den Review.

The approach follows your actual staffing needs and corporate strategy. Target groups, research methods and participation are agreed when the brief is clarified.

An employer brand must be based on the actual identity of the organisation. We link this view to the strategic HR question: Which people and capabilities will the company need in future, and why should these people want to work here in particular? To this end, the experiences of current employees and the expectations of potential candidates are considered separately.

A company may, for example, promise open collaboration while decisions internally depend heavily on individual people. Such a gap is not a copywriting task but a development question for leadership and the organisation. Only once it is clear which strengths are already experienced and which conditions are to be changed can a credible promise be formulated.

Communication can show concrete ways of working, development prospects and the company's stance. It should not deliver an interchangeable list of benefits. Success is checked with current data on the experience of employees and applicants, where available.

A communicated employer promise is something different from the actual experience in the company. For a robust positioning, the expectations of relevant target groups and the existing working conditions are considered first. Leadership, HR and employees can describe which characteristics of the employer can be reliably experienced in everyday work and where the external image promises something else.

This comparison leads to decisions about development and communication. An attractive text alone does not replace suitable conditions for leadership and collaboration. We therefore examine which elements of the employee experience can be shaped and which external statements can be backed up. The result is a distinctive and verifiable employer promise. Where promise and experience diverge, improving the reality of work takes priority over a new campaign.