HRD practices and talent management in the companies with the employer brand

Abstract

Purpose -The employer brand could be a key factor of competitiveness for a company in a contemporary labour market. The purpose of this paper is to identify the features of human resource development (HRD) practices and talent management in companies with employer brand (CEBs). Design/methodology/approach -The authors examined three economic indicators (turnover rate, average share of HR costs in total costs of company, proportion between the annual HR training budget and annual labour compensation funds). An employee survey was conducted to study the HRD system in the CEBs and in companies without the employer brand (CWEBs). Also, the survey was conducted among applicants (potential workers) about their job preferences and identified that employer brand could be a strong factor for attracting talent to the company. Findings -The results show considerable differences in terms of economic indicators, HRD practices and talent management in the CEBs in comparison with CWEBs. The potential advantages of employer brand for a company were identified. The results of the study strongly supported that the CEBs gained a number of economic advantages due to lower rates of staff turnover and higher rates of HR investments in training and development activities of employees. Also, the authors found out that in the CEBs internal recruitment practices, internal training programs and highly efficient incentive activities were widespread and employees were actively involved in the decision-making and management processes. Originality/value -This paper is the first large-scale study in Russia that examines the relationship between the HRD system and employer brand and enables companies to modify their HRD policies and practices in order to become attractive employers in an era of the so-called "war for talents".

The Importance of Compensation and Benefits on University Students’ Perceptions of Organizations as Potential Employers

“…Potential employees who do not have sufficient information or when the information is inconsistent or incorrect about a potential company, often perceive a higher risk associated with making a decision about that company (Wilden, Gudergan & Ling 2010). Kucherov & Zavyalova (2012) identified a typology which divided employer branding attributes into 4 categories. These included (1) economic attributes such as salary, rewards, work schedules and workplace stability (2) psychological attributes such as strong corporate culture, positive interpersonal relations in the company, team building etc (3) functional attributes such as content of work, training, career growth etc and (4) organizational attributes such as leadership in market segment, international scope, company history, consumer reputation, and reputation of top management.…”

Human Resource Management at Russian Companies — Leaders of the Global Economy

“…Some of the questions were supposed to be answered using the Likert scale [Allen, Seaman, 2007], others included the "Other" option with the opportunity to provide a detailed open answer. The questionnaire has been used in previous human resources management surveys of international [Ardichvili et al, 2012;Zavyalova et al, 2011] and Russian "best employer" companies [Kucherov, Zavyalova, 2012], and has proven its reliability. The main sample is comprised of the largest Russian public companies on the 2014 Forbes Global 2000 list [Forbes, 2014].…”

Global Work Arrangements in the Virtual Enterprise – Some Lessons from Automattic

“…Evidence suggests that multinationals that are large use standardized products or services, have a global human resources policy, and operate in the low-tech/low-cost sectors are more likely to use talent development programs for high potentials (McDonnell, Lamare, Gunnigle, and Lavelle, 2010). Results also suggest that companies with good human resource reputations have good talent development processes (Kucherov and Zavyalova, 2012) and for multinational, developing local talent is also an important issue (Eddy, Hall and Robinson, 2006;Petison and Johri, 2007). …”