Mối Quan Hệ Giữa Thương Hiệu Nhà Tuyển Dụng, Sự Gắn Kết Của Nhân Viên Và Hiệu Quả Làm Việc Của Nhân Viên.pdf

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

NGUYEN VINH LUAN

THE RELATIONSHIP AMONG EMPLOYER BRANDING,
EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND
EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE

BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION DOCTORAL DISSERTATION

Ho Chi Minh City, 2021


MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

NGUYEN VINH LUAN

THE RELATIONSHIP AMONG EMPLOYER BRANDING,
EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND
EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE

Major: Business Administration
Code: 62 34 01 02

DOCTORAL DISSERTATION

Supervisor: Professor, Nguyen Minh Ha, Ph.D
Ho Chi Minh City Open University

Ho Chi Minh City, 2021


STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

The thesis titled “The relationship among employer branding, employee
engagement and employee performance” has been submitted for the degree of
Doctor of Business Administration.
Except for the references cited in this dissertation, I hereby declare that the
whole or parts of this dissertation have not been published or used to obtain the
degree elsewhere.
No other person's work/research may be used in this thesis that is not
properly cited. This thesis has never been submitted for any degree at any other
university or training institution.
Ho Chi Minh City, …/…/ 2021

Nguyen Vinh Luan


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

"The relationship among employer branding, employee engagement
and employee performance" Doctoral Thesis has been completed at Ho Chi Minh
City Open University.
To complete this thesis, I have received guidance, enthusiastic support and
encouragement from teachers, family, colleagues, relatives and friends as follows:
I would like to express my deep gratitude to Graduate Lecturers at Ho Chi
Minh City Open University with their background knowledge provision for my
study activities. In particular, my most sincere thank is dedicated to my scientific
supervisor, Prof. Nguyen Minh Ha, Ph.D for his completely enthusiastic guidance

towards my completion.
I do appreciate my beloved Father, Mother and Family members for their
lifetime support and encouragement.
Concurrently, I would like to thank Board of Directors and employees of
DOMESCO Medical Import-Export Joint Stock Company and those of
IMEXPHARM Pharmaceutical Joint Stock Company in creating favorable
conditions towards my study period as well as my brothers and sisters at companies
and organizations with their enthusiastic assistance during my research data
collection process.
Last but not least, I would like to thank my classmates at PhD training
courses at Ho Chi Minh City Open University for their accompanying with this
thesis completion.
Ho Chi Minh City, … ./…/2021


ABSTRACT

The dissertation research on the relationship between employer
branding (comprising 10 factors: Corporate social responsibility, Promotion, WorkLife Balance Satisfaction, Education, Behavior-based family interference with
work, Travel opportunities, Time-based work interference with family, Teamwork,
Supporting, Strain-based family interference with work), employer attractiveness
(including 5 factors: social value, developmental value, application value, safety
value and economic value), employee engagement (consisting of 3 factors:
dedication, vigor and absorption) and employee performance (made up of 3 factors:
Teamwork, Innovator and Job).
The dissertation uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative
research methods (mixed method) in implementation process. Qualitative research
method is used in developing interview questionnaires through direct exchanges to
get expert opinions and group discussion related to built scale content,
supplementing the scales is complete and appropriate to Vietnamese context.

Quantitative research methods are used in the data analysis process. Quantitative
analysis steps are composed of analyzing scale reliability by Cronbach's alpha
coefficient, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), SEM structural model analysis. This
dissertation uses convenient sampling method (non-probability) with the
participants as employees working in enterprises and organizations in Vietnam, in
which the official sample size is 937 samples.
The results of testing the hypotheses in the detailed research model
are as follows: a) Employer branding has a positive impact on employer
attractiveness; b) Employer branding has a positive impact on employee
engagement; c) Employer branding has no impact on employee performance; d)
Employer attractiveness has a positive impact on employee engagement; e)


Employer attractiveness has a positive impact on employee performance; f)
Employee engagement has no impact on employee performance.
Based on hypothesis testing outcomes in the research model, the
dissertation discusses the results and proposes managerial implications to provide
managers with measures towards the improved quality of employer branding
besides employer attractiveness development so as to better employee engagement
and employee performance.


Page i

CONTENT

CONTENT ..................................................................................................................i
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................... v
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ 1

1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENTS .......................................................................... 1
1.1.1 Practical reasons ......................................................................................... 1
1.1.2 Literature review ........................................................................................ 4
1.1.3 From previous studies ................................................................................ 6
1.1.4 Problem statements .................................................................................... 9
1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................. 13
1.3 RESEARCH SCOPE AND RESEARCH PARTICIPANT ...................... 14
1.3.1 Research Scope ........................................................................................ 14
1.3.2 Research Participant ................................................................................. 14
1.3.3 Time of survey ......................................................................................... 14
1.4 NEW FINDINGS ........................................................................................... 14
1.5 STUDY SIGNIFICANCE ............................................................................. 15
1.6 THESIS STRUCTURE ................................................................................. 17
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................. 19
2.1 CONCEPTS ................................................................................................... 19
2.1.1 Employer Branding .................................................................................. 19
2.1.2 Employer Attractiveness .......................................................................... 22
2.1.3 Employee Engagement ............................................................................ 24
2.1.4 Employee Performance ............................................................................ 25
2.2 MAIN THEORIES ........................................................................................ 27
2.2.1 Social exchange theory ............................................................................ 28


Page ii

2.2.2 Person – Organization Fit Theory ............................................................ 36
2.2.3 Theory of Employer Branding ................................................................. 46
2.2.4 Theory of Employee Engagement ............................................................ 50
2.2.5 Theory of planned behavior and social cognitive theory ......................... 53
2.2.6 Reviewing previous studies ..................................................................... 58

2.2.7 The research gap ....................................................................................119
2.3 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS AND STUDY MODEL .............................120
2.3.1 Impact of employer branding on employer attractiveness .....................120
2.3.2 Impact of employer branding on employee engagement .......................129
2.3.3 Impact of employer branding on employee performance ......................133
2.3.4 Impact of employer attractiveness on employee engagement ...............136
2.3.5 Impact of employer attractiveness on employee performance ..............150
2.3.6 Impact of employee engagement on employee performance ................163
2.4 PROPOSED RESEARCH MODEL..........................................................166
SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 2 .............................................................................166
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .......................................................................169
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN ................................................................................169
3.2 SAMPLING AND DATA COLLECTION ...............................................171
3.2.1 Sampling ................................................................................................171
3.2.2 Data collection .......................................................................................172
3.3 SCALE MEASUREMENTS ......................................................................175
3.3.1 From literature ........................................................................................180
3.3.2 Opinions of the expert interviews and groups discussions ....................180
3.3.3 The complete scale .................................................................................186
3.3.4 Scale measurements ...............................................................................189
3.4 DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE .............................................................207
3.4.1 Descriptive statistics...............................................................................209
3.4.2 Internal consistency reliability ...............................................................209
3.4.3 Convergent validity ................................................................................210


Page iii

3.4.4 Discriminant Validity ......................................................................211
3.4.5 Multi-collinear assessment ..................................................................... 211

3.4.6 Path coefficients of the structure model ........................................................ 211
3.4.7 Determination coefficient (R² value) .....................................................212
3.4.8 Impact coefficient f² ...............................................................................213
3.4.9 Blindfolding and predict relevance Q² ...................................................213
SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 3 .............................................................................214
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ANALYSIS ................................................................216
4.1 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ...................................................................216
4.1.1 Demographic ..........................................................................................216
4.1.2 Scale descriptive.....................................................................................220
4.2 SCALE VALIDITY ASSESSMENT .........................................................242
4.2.1 Cronbach Alpha .....................................................................................242
4.2.2 Explore Factor Analysis (EFA)..............................................................262
4.3 MEASUREMENT MODEL VALIDITY ASSESSMENT ......................275
4.3.1 Employer Branding ................................................................................275
4.3.2 Employer Attractiveness ........................................................................279
4.3.3 Employee Engagement ..........................................................................282
4.3.4 Employee Performance ..........................................................................284
4.4 STRUCTURAL MODEL ASSESSMENT................................................287
4.4.1 Multi-collinear assessment .....................................................................287
4.4.2 Determination coefficient (R² value) .....................................................288
4.4.3 Impact coefficient f² ...............................................................................288
4.4.4 Blindfolding and predict relevance Q² ...................................................289
4.4.5 Path coefficients of the structure model & Hypothesis Testing ............290
4.5 RESULT DISCUSSION .............................................................................293
4.5.1 Discussion the results of the research Scale...........................................293
4.5.2 Discussion research model and hypothesis ............................................304


Page iv

SUMMARY CHAPTER 4 ....................................................................................321
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION & POLICY IMPLICATIONS ........................ 322
5.1 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... 322
5.2 NEW FINDINGS .........................................................................................323
5.3 MANAGERIAL POLICY IMPLICATIONS ...........................................327
5.4 LIMITATION & FUTURE RESEARCH ................................................332
5.4.1 Limitation ...............................................................................................332
5.4.2 Future research .......................................................................................333
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................335
LIST OF THE ARTICLES RELATED TO THE THESIS ..............................386
APPENDIX A: THE EXPERTS AND GROUP LIST ........................................ A-1
APPENDIX B: THE INTERVIEW PROTOCOL SAMPLE .............................. A-4
APPENDIX C: THE ORGINAL SCALE ......................................................... A-33
APPENDIX D: THE EXPERT 1 INTERVIEW RECORD .............................. A-45
APPENDIX E: THE EXPERT 2 INTERVIEW RECORD .............................. A-68
APPENDIX F: THE EXPERT 3 INTERVIEW RECORD .............................. A-89
APPENDIX G: THE EXPERT 4 INTERVIEW RECORD ............................ A-111
APPENDIX H: THE GROUP 1 INTERVIEW RECORD .............................. A-133
APPENDIX I:

THE GROUP 2 INTERVIEW RECORD .............................. A-155

APPENDIX J:THE SCALE AFTER QUANLITATVE RESEARCH .............. A-178
APPENDIX K: THE SURVEY QUESTIONAIRE......................................... A-193
APPENDIX L: THE SURVEYED COMPANY LIST ................................... A-209


Page v

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Summary of studies related to Employer Branding and Employer
Attractiveness ........................................................................................................... 63
Table 2.2 Summary of studies related to Employer Branding and Employee
Engagement .......................................................................................................77
Table 2.3 Summary of studies related to Employer Branding and Employee
Performance .......................................................................................................87
Table 2.4 Summary of studies related to Employer Attractiveness and Employee
Engagement .......................................................................................................95
Table 2.5 Summary of studies related to Employer Attractiveness and Employee
Performance .................................................................................................... 102
Table 2.6 Summary of studies related to Employee Engagement and Employee
Performance .................................................................................................... 113
Table 2.7 Summary of Hypothesis ......................................................................... 165
Table 3.1 Descriptive statistics Results .................................................................. 177
Table 3.2 Summary of expert opinions and group discussion results.................... 186
Table 3.3 Summary of qualitative method results ................................................. 188
Table 4.1 Descriptive statistics Results .................................................................. 216
Table 4.2 Cronbach Alpha of CSR ........................................................................ 242
Table 4.3 Scale validity result of CSR ................................................................... 242
Table 4.4 Cronbach Alpha of WLSA ..................................................................... 243
Table 4.5 Scale validity result of WLSA ............................................................... 243
Table 4.6 Cronbach Alpha of PRO ........................................................................ 244
Table 4.7 Scale validity result of PRO ................................................................... 244
Table 4.8 Cronbach Alpha of PRO ........................................................................ 245
Table 4.9 Scale validity result of EDU .................................................................. 245
Table 4.10 Cronbach Alpha of WLBE ................................................................... 246
Table 4.11 Scale validity result of WLBE ............................................................. 246
Table 4.12 Cronbach Alpha of TRA ...................................................................... 247

Page vi

Table 4.13 Scale validity result of TRA ................................................................ 247
Table 4.14 Cronbach Alpha of WLTI .................................................................... 248
Table 4.15 Scale validity result of WLTI ............................................................... 248
Table 4.16 Cronbach Alpha of GRO ..................................................................... 249
Table 4.17 Scale validity result of GRO ................................................................ 249
Table 4.18 Cronbach Alpha of SUP ....................................................................... 250
Table 4.19 Scale validity result of SUP ................................................................. 250
Table 4.20 Cronbach Alpha of WLST ................................................................... 251
Table 4.21 Scale validity result of WLST .............................................................. 251
Table 4.22 Cronbach Alpha of SOC ...................................................................... 252
Table 4.23 Scale validity result of SOC ................................................................. 252
Table 4.24 Cronbach Alpha of DEV ...................................................................... 253
Table 4.25 Scale validity result of DEV ................................................................ 253
Table 4.26 Cronbach Alpha of APP ....................................................................... 254
Table 4.27 Scale validity result of APP ................................................................. 254
Table 4.28 Cronbach Alpha of SAF ....................................................................... 255
Table 4.29 Scale validity result of SAF ................................................................. 255
Table 4.30 Cronbach Alpha of ECO ...................................................................... 256
Table 4.31 Scale validity result of ECO ................................................................ 256
Table 4.32 Cronbach Alpha of DED ...................................................................... 257
Table 4.33 Scale validity result of DED ................................................................ 257
Table 4.34 Cronbach Alpha of VIG ....................................................................... 258
Table 4.35 Scale validity result of VIG ................................................................. 258
Table 4.36 Cronbach Alpha of ABS ...................................................................... 259
Table 4.37 Scale validity result of ABS ................................................................. 259
Table 4.38 Cronbach Alpha of TEA ...................................................................... 260
Table 4.39 Scale validity result of TEA ................................................................. 260
Table 4.40 Cronbach Alpha of INO ....................................................................... 261

Table 4.41 Scale validity result of INO ................................................................. 261


Page vii

Table 4.42 Cronbach Alpha of JOB ....................................................................... 262
Table 4.43 Scale validity result of JOB.................................................................. 262
Table 4.44 KMO and Bartlett’s test of Employer Branding .................................. 262
Table 4.45 Total variance explained of Employer Branding ................................. 263
Table 4.46 Rotated component matrix of Employer Branding .............................. 265
Table 4.47 KMO and Bartlett’s test of Employer Attractiveness .......................... 267
Table 4.48 Total variance explained of Employer Attractiveness ......................... 268
Table 4.49 Rotated component matrix of Employer attractiveness ....................... 269
Table 4.50 KMO and Bartlett’s test of Employee Engagement ............................ 270
Table 4.51 Total variance explained of Employee Engagement ........................... 271
Table 4.52 Rotated component matrix of Employee Engagement ........................ 272
Table 4.53 KMO and Bartlett’s test of Employee Performance ............................ 273
Table 4.54 Total variance explained of Employee Performance ........................... 273
Table 4.55 Rotated component matrix of Employee Performance ........................ 274
Table 4.56 Outer loading and the internal consistency reliability of Employer
Branding.......................................................................................................... 276
Table 4.57 HTMT of Employer Branding ............................................................. 278
Table 4.58 HTMT Ratio of Employer Branding.................................................... 278
Table 4.59 Outer loading and the internal consistency reliability of Employer
Attractiveness.................................................................................................. 280
Table 4.60 HTMT of Employer Attractiveness ..................................................... 281
Table 4.61 HTMT Ratio of Employer Attractiveness............................................ 281
Table 4.62 Outer loading and the internal consistency reliability of Employee
Engagement .................................................................................................... 283
Table 4.63 HTMT of Employee Engagement ........................................................ 284

Table 4.64 HTMT Ratio of Employee Engagement .............................................. 284
Table 4.65 Outer loading and the internal consistency reliability of Employee
Performance .................................................................................................... 285
Table 4.66 HTMT of Employee Performance ....................................................... 286


Page viii

Table 4.67 HTMT Ratio of Employee Performance.............................................. 286
Table 4.68 VIF value in research model ................................................................ 287
Table 4.69 Determination coefficient R2 adjusted ................................................. 288
Table 4.70 Impact coefficient f² ............................................................................. 289
Table 4.71 Q2 value ................................................................................................ 290
Table 4.72 Hypothesis testing result ...................................................................... 291
Table 4.73 The Employer Branding scale .............................................................. 294
Table 4.74 Items of the interesting value ............................................................... 298
Table 4.75 The Employer Attractiveness scale ...................................................... 299
Table 4.76 Employee Engagement scale ............................................................... 301
Table 4.77 The Employee Performance scale ........................................................ 303


Page ix

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 Various Conceptualizations of Person – Organization Fit ................... 38
Figure 2.2 Theory of planned behavior .................................................................. 54
Figure 2.3 Relations among three factors in social cognitive theory .....................56
Figure 2.4 The theory framework of research model .............................................58
Figure 2.5 Antecedents and consequences of EB and EA ................................... 119
Figure 2.6 Detailed Proposal research model ...................................................... 166

Figure 3.1 Research procedure ............................................................................ 170
Figure 3.2 General research process .................................................................... 171
Figure 4.1 The PLS-SEM research model (Standardize) .................................... 292


Page 1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the most general content: research reasons, problem
statement, research objectives and research questions. This chapter also clarifies
the research scope, the participants as well as the survey time. Moreover, this
chapter shows the new findings, study significance and thesis structure. Last but not
least, the overall research process is also presented for the overview of the research
steps.
1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
1.1.1 Practical reasons
From the macro perspective, human resource is one important factor that
determines the success or the failure of an organization. Human resource is both
development motivation and goal in each organization and the economy - society.
Firstly, human factor is the driving force for the socio-economic development
because the employees use the input factors of enterprises (machinery, equipment,
raw materials, finance and so on) to create products for the business. Although the
inputs are good whereas the capacity of the human resources is poor, it cannot
create value for the organization. Therefore, if any organization possesses high
quality human resources, this organization will take advantage of its competitive
advantage so as to develop in the market. In addition, human resources research and
create new and creative products for the organization, whether tangible product
(product) or intangible (service). This shows that organizations, especially
businesses aiming to survive, must have these creative products; in other words, so
as to depend on the creative capacity of their human resources. Consequently, a

society can develop in a sustainable way thanks to an important development force:
human capacity. Secondly, human resource is also the development goal for each
organization and society because human needs are the targets of all producing and
business activities. The rich and diverse human resource needs both physical and
mental for opportunities for companies, businesses and organizations to develop

Chapter 1: Introduction


Page 2

their production and business activities in continuous development. The number and
the types of products are also dependent upon that being developed and grown
continuously. To help the socio-economic development, employment increases,
unemployment rate decreases and the positive impact on the economic growth of
the countries in the world is born. Thirdly, when the industrial revolution 4.0 is
taking place in a strong way around the world, a profound shift from the economy,
mainly based on resources and low cost labor to the economy-based knowledge and
dependent on human resources requiring higher skills and technology, has been
available. Therefore, that high-quality human resources at organizations become
increasingly scarce leads to the battle called ‘war of talent’ to attract and retain
potential employees. In short, because of the enormous role of the human factor in
the macro aspect above, most organizations from enterprises to state management
agencies, social organizations and so on have considered human resources as the
most valuable asset of every organization. Therefore, the research direction
focusing on solutions to attract and retain talented human resource is an important
goal towards all organizations.
From the micro perspective, the turnover rate in enterprises is on the rise. As
reported by the human resources consultancy, Anphabe Company, the employee
turnover rate has increased rapidly in the last 3 years. In particular, in 2019, the

warning level of 24% has been reached: At the employee level with below-10million-VND salary, the rate of leave is up to 29%. This implies that for every 5
employees, 1 employee quits. According to Vietnamworks' 2019 recruitment
market report, up to 79% of employers surveyed reported that they were short of
human resources in their organizations. Up to 36% reason that this was from the
high rate of resignation. That the relatively risky human resources situations in
Vietnam, leading to the great impact on the stability and performance of each
business is explained by the current economic development in Vietnam and the
world over the years (Vietnamworks, 2019). At the same time, the trend of
increasing integration and globalization has led to an increase in both domestic and

Chapter 1: Introduction


Page 3

foreign enterprises. The employees have more career opportunities and choices.
Therefore, the degree of employee engagement with an enterprise is decreasing
compared to that of the previous time so retaining employee is becoming a huge
challenge for every business and organization. Besides, according to Anphabe, a
reputable human resource consulting organization in Vietnam, the current level of
employee engagement in companies in Vietnam tends to decrease alarmingly.
According to survey report of Anphabe, up to 39.3% of human resources in
Vietnam are not engaged; in which, 2.5% are very non-engaged whereas 36.8% are
apathetic. However, 36.8% of employees are indifferent, up to 66.9% decided to
stay in business. That means they are working without making an effort; in other
words, they have no intention of quitting even though they are not totally engaged.
These employees are called ‘office zombies’: employees understood as a ‘virtual
engagement’. This proportion of "office zombie" is increasing over time with the
negative impact on the performance of each organization. This is one urgent
problem from reality for business managers in this period. However, up to this

point, solutions to retain employees as well as to increase their true engagement are
still ineffective in the long term. Therefore, practical requirements should include
adequate researche on the factors that can positively impact employee engagement
(Anphabe, 2017).
In addition, according to Asian Economy and Productivity Map data (2020) shows
that labor productivity of Vietnam in 2018 only ranked 9th among 11 ASEAN
countries with labor productivity of 12,740 USD/worker. While the leading country
in labor productivity is Singapore with a rate of 149,050 USD/worker. Thus,
Vietnam is only 1/12 of the labor productivity of Singapore. This shows that
Vietnam needs solutions to improve employee performance. Therefore, it is still
urgent to study the factors affecting employee performance and productivity of
employees of enterprises and organizations in Vietnam.

Chapter 1: Introduction


Page 4

In the last 5 years, businesses in Vietnam have implemented employerbranding strategies in creating their brands towards more attractive and potential
candidates. From the survey report by Vietnamwork, among the reasons for
employee shortage, up to 24% is that the employer branding is not strong enough
(Vietnamwork, 2019). In recent years, the annual award of ‘Vietnamese best places
to work’ has been awarded to multinational companies (Unilever) or large domestic
companies (Vinamilk). That Unilever continuously won the award for 3 consecutive
years 2014, 2015 and 2016 while Vinamilk won the award for 2 consecutive years
2017 and 2018 implies that only a few large enterprises and multinational
corporations have new activities effectively for employer branding (Anphabe,
2019). As for the majority of small and medium enterprises in Vietnam, this activity
is rather new and weak according to the survey results above by Vietnamwork
(Vietnamwork, 2019). In particular, the role of employer branding affecting

employee engagement at organizations has not been implemented effectively. At the
same time, the impact of employing mainly focuses on attracting potential
candidates, rather than talent retention application in organizations. Therefore, this
research direction is towards the relationship between employer branding and
employee engagement.
In a nutshell, the practical reasons both from macro or micro perspectives
require the need to study the factors that form an effective employer branding in
organizations. At the same time, another important issue that should be explored
deeply in further details is the impact of employer branding on employee
engagement.
1.1.2 Literature review
Brand is an important element in any business, including tangible value and
intangible value. This is the factor that makes the difference between one business
and another in the market. Currently, there are three approaches to branding,
including financial-based brand equity (FBBE), customer-based brand equity

Chapter 1: Introduction


Page 5

(CBBE), and employee-based brand equity (EBBE) (Ailawadi et al., 2003; Chu &
Keh, 2006; King & Grace, 2010; Netemeyer et al., 2004). Thus, employer
branding is the brand value based on an employee-based approach. Therefore, the
dissertation focuses on employer branding which is necessary for contributing to
improving the efficiency of production and business activities of the company.
Currently, the theory of employer branding is in incomplete stage due to its
recent appearance. This theory is derived from the combination of marketing and
human resources (Ambler & Barrow, 1996). Researchers only study in some certain
areas. First, researchers focus on employer branding concepts: Employer branding

as a package of economic and psychological benefits provided to employees from
the management level of the organization (Ambler & Barrow, 1996) creating an
organizational culture as well as an internal spirit (Fombrun & Wally, 1989) or the
organization's reputation for the relevant partners (Hlavsa et al., 2015). Second,
other follow-up studies go towards human capital (K. Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004),
characteristics of company resources (Barney, 1991) and competitive advantages of
the organization (Priem & Butler, 2001) and so on.
Because employer branding is closely linked with human resource
management activities in businesses. These studies, despite highly applicable, do
not provide much support to the theoretical framework of employer branding. Third,
the employer branding theory largely focuses on potential candidates: building and
developing scales (Berthon et al., 2005), positioning the organization's brand in the
market and building a good employer brand (Elving et al., 2013). Finally, the
employer branding theory goes into research on brand equity (Aaker & Equity,
1991): Brand equity can affect both potential candidates and current employees in
talent recruitment, selection and retention. In terms of the theory of employer
branding, the lack of research direction on the relationship between employer
branding to employee engagement is obvious. In other words, the research direction
on the role of employer branding in affecting current employees of the
organizations is limited in quantity and incomplete. Therefore, one research on the

Chapter 1: Introduction


Page 6

impacts of employer branding on employee engagement is essential and meaningful
to be incorporated into general theoretical systems.
The theory of employee engagement, initiated in the 1990s, concentrated on
clarifying the concepts related to employee engagement (Kahn, 1990). Three

psychological conditions have been described and illustrated: meaning, safety and
availability whereas other issues mentioned are the external manifestations of
employee engagement: attitudes, behaviors and outcomes (Sange, 2015) or the
impact of employee engagement on suffixes: labor productivity, product loss rate,
inconsistency level, absenteeism rate, job fatigue level (Sange, 2015), work
motivation (Arrowsmith & Parker, 2013; Shuck & Herd, 2012) and so on. Other
studies pay attention to how to measure and improve employee engagement in an
organization (Arrowsmith & Parker, 2013) as well as on the prefix factors that
affect employee engagement. However, little content in the employee engagement
theoretical system that deals with the impact of employer branding on employee
engagement is mentioned Therefore, research on the relationship between employer
branding and employee engagement is necessary.
From the literature review of the two theories above, at present, theoretically,
there has been no systematic content in the relationship between employer branding
and employee engagement. Therefore, the study of the relationship between these
two factors will help discover and contribute to the theory system for both employer
branding and employee engagement. From this, researchers are provided with
results concerning this research direction.
1.1.3 From previous studies
In the previous studies related to employer branding, the main content is as
follows. First, many researches related to the definition of employer branding are
based on unclear scale. Therefore, many researchers focus on clarifying the
concepts and scales of employer branding (Ambler & Barrow, 1996; Bakanauskienė
et al., 2011; Bergstrom et al., 2002; Berthon et al., 2005; Lievens, 2007;

Chapter 1: Introduction


Page 7

Priyadarshini et al., 2016). Second, other researchers have followed the direction of
applying employer branding into human resource management to help improve
HRM performance (Aggerholm et al., 2011; Ambler & Barrow, 1996; M. R.
Edwards, 2010; Gapp & Merrilees, 2006). Third, a sustainable developmentoriented approach is an important content, particularly, the focus on the relationship
between employer branding and corporate social responsibility (CSR) implemented
by (K. B. Backhaus et al., 2002) as well as (Aggerholm et al., 2011). Fourth, a few
studies on the impact of employer branding on employee loyalty and engagement
help to improve the retention of employees of organizations (Biswas & Suar, 2016;
Burawat, 2015; Davies, 2008; Kheswa, 2015; Sengupta et al., 2015). Fifth, that
researchers are looking at the impacts of employer branding on employee
performance as well as organization leads to the implications for improving
organizational performance (K. Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004; Biswas & Suar, 2016;
Chaudhary & Sharma, 2012). Finally, many researchers, mostly interested in the
impact between employer branding and the organizational ability to attract potential
candidates, conduct studies with the hope of improving the efficiency of corporate
recruitment (R. K. Agrawal & Swaroop, 2009; Cable & Graham, 2000; M. R.
Edwards, 2010; Sengupta et al., 2015; Sivertzen et al., 2013).
In addition, the research on employee engagement was conducted earlier than that
on branding employer have been interested in the concept of employee engagement
(Buchner, 2007; Chen et al., 2008; English, 1998; Kahn, 1990; Schaufeli et al.,
2002; Thomas & Oldfather, 1995). The relationship between leadership-related
content (leadership style coaching with employee engagement) has received
attention from Maceachern (2003), Ghuman (2016) as well as Meswantri & Ilyas
(2018). In addition to leadership-related content, organizational issues (culture,
beliefs, contradictions, corporate social responsibility (CSR), communication and
organizational support impact on the employee engagement) also attract authors
(Biddison et al., 2016; Ferreira & Real de Oliveira, 2014; Iyer & Israel, 2012;
Kimball, 2004; Nazir & Islam, 2017; Ugwu et al., 2014). Besides researching on

Chapter 1: Introduction

Page 8

factors affecting employee engagement, many researchers focus on employee
engagement's impact on factors (employee performance and organization, wellbeing, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, intentions to quit, and
organizational citizenship behavior) (Heger, 2007; Luthans & Peterson, 2002a;
Robertson & Cooper, 2010; Saks, 2006). In addition, prior employee engagement
antecedents often include factors (job characteristics, perceived organizational
support, perceived supervisor support, rewards and recognition, procedural justice,
distributive justice)(Saks, 2006).
Consequently, not many researches on the impact of employer branding and
employer attractiveness on employee engagement have been performed; particularly
in identifying the differences between employer branding and employer
attractiveness as well as the relationship between these two concepts. Therefore, our
thesis will go deeper into clarifying this gap research. In other words, our findings
will provide more current knowledge in not only literature review section but also
employer branding’ benefits and roles in complete human resources management
procedures from talent attraction, recruitment to retention. Moreover, the
dissertation will assist company leaders in applying the employer branding on
building engagement to better employee performance. These benefits are absolutely
more significant according to the current job change trends as well as employees’
active choices for the best working place varying in the labor market; in which,
talent retention is a huge challenge for any organization leader.
Currently, many different solutions to improve employee engagement have
been presented but efficiency is not as high as mentioned above. It is necessary to
find a synchronous and strategic solution. Employer branding is an overall and
strategic solution in retaining employees. However, in theory, employer branding,
employer attractiveness and employee engagement factors are not inter-connected
directly with statistical significance because employer branding theory targets the

object of potential candidates. Moreover, the research content on the impact of
employer branding and employer attractiveness on employee engagement is limited.

Chapter 1: Introduction


Page 9

This can be a research gap addressed in this study. Besides, an encroachment
between the two concepts employer branding and employer attractiveness is
existing so it is necessary to study this relationship theoretically.
In summary, when considering overall all aspects in both macroeconomic
and macroeconomic practice, from theory and other previous studies, the research
directions on the relationship among employer branding, employer attractiveness,
employee engagement and employee performance are stated: clarifying the scale of
employer branding, clearly distinguishing between employer branding and
employer attractiveness and the relationship between these two factors are
important and urgent gap researches in the current period. The results of this study
will not only contribute to the academic system of employer branding and employee
engagement but also provide governance implications that help managers find the
best solutions in attracting and retaining talent in each organization.
1.1.4 Problem statements
Topics in the research directions about employer branding and employee
engagement have not been thoroughly explored in the previous studies. In this
dissertation, the following issues will be explored as follows:
Firstly, related to the scale for the concept of employer branding, the scales
are not consistent with each other. According to Tanwar & Prasad (2017), the
employer branding has five-dimensional structure: training and development, ethics
and corporate social responsibility (CSR), work-life balance, healthy work
atmosphere and compensation and benefits. Due to an encroachment on the concept

of employer branding and employer attractiveness, many studies are using the
employer attractiveness scale comprising value components, social value, economic
value, development value and application value. Chauhan & Mahajan, (2013)
proposed the employer branding scale with 6 factors: compensation &
empowerment, growth and benefits, responsibility and development, work
environment, organizational culture and social and location. In addition, another

Chapter 1: Introduction


Page 10

study by (Lievens, 2007) adds travel opportunities. Based on the above concepts,
the employer branding scale implies many differences in different contexts and
countries. Therefore, this dissertation will go into depth so as to develop an
appropriate employer branding scale.
Secondly, the two concepts employer branding and employer attractiveness
overlap. Although many authors define as two independent concepts, the
encroachment with no clear distinction between these two factors is available. Some
studies view employer attractiveness as a part of employer branding or to represent
employer branding (Moroko & Uncles, 2008). According to (Bergstrom et al.,
2002), employer branding is seen as a form of internal branding. (Moroko &
Uncles, 2008) identify two important components of a successful employer brand:
attractiveness and accuracy. On the contrary, other studies clearly distinguish these
two concepts (Broek, 2015; Hendriks, 2016): Employer attractiveness is a more
tactical concept that a company can rely on to identify components that attract
candidates

(external

and

internal)

while

branding

employers

focus

on

communicating these elements to help the company become more attractive (Broek,
2015). This distinction is supported because the differences between the three
concepts organizational reputation, employer branding and organizational
attractiveness cannot be merged into a concept. Therefore, the dissertation will
research the relationship between employer branding and employer attractiveness to
answer this problem.
Thirdly, the current studies on the impacts of employer branding factors on
the potential candidates: applying intention (Ha & Luan, 2018; Sivertzen et al.,
2013) or talent retention (Kheswa, 2015; Matongolo et al., 2018), organizational
commitment and employee retention (Arasanmi & Krishna, 2019; Thalgaspitiya,
2020). Besides, many studies towards application or linking this factor with general
human resources management processes that link existing theories enable
practitioners to recognize the relevance of theories and research in the academic
field (M. R. Edwards, 2010) or application of brand management techniques to

Chapter 1: Introduction