Search results

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.

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.

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.

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.

Current trends such as a steadfast movement toward globalization, increased connectivity and use of networks in business relationships, rapidly changing technology, increased pressure for economic profitability, and economic concern create an environment where a focus on global team effectiveness is imperative. This study provides greater clarity on the workings of global hybrid team effectiveness including an examination of accelerators and decelerators. It also proposes a new model of Global Working behaviors to be applied systematically to all McKinsey 7-S areas – Strategy, Structure, Systems, Shared Values, Style, Skills, and Staff – in order to accelerate global hybrid team effectiveness.

This study aims to investigate how organisations can discourage covering up and instead encourage learning from errors through a supportive learning from error climate. In explaining professionals’ learning from error behaviour, this study distinguishes between espoused (verbally expressed) and enacted (behaviourally expressed) values with respect to learning from errors.

As part of mandatory training sessions, 150 early-career auditors completed an online questionnaire measuring error orientation and help-seeking behavior after making an error as attitude- and behavior-based measures, next to measuring perceived organizational learning from error climate. Multiple mediation analysis is used to explore direct and indirect effects.

Covering up errors was negatively and learning from errors positively related to an organisation’s learning from error climate. For covering up, this relationship is an indirect one – espoused and enacted values need to match. For learning from errors, this relationship is direct: espoused values positively relate to learning behaviour after errors.

By designing a supportive learning from error climate in which members at all hierarchical levels role-model learning from errors behaviour, organisations can actively discourage covering up and encourage learning from errors.

This study applies the theory of espoused versus enacted values to learning from error using a triangulation of measures in an understudied research setting: auditing.