HR brand success factors in global environments

The most influential rating “The World's Best Employers” by Forbes (2019) includes 500 companies from various industries. 1.4 million forms were analyzed to create the list. This was done in collaboration with Statista, from a global poll and several regional surveys. Employees were asked to evaluate their company HR brand (internal perception) and recommend another employer (public perception). The internal perception has been assessed using the scale method, where 0 means "I wouldn't recommend my employer under any circumstances" and 10 means "I would definitely recommend my employer". The public perception has been evaluated by analyzing the forms where employees should write good or bad employers in their industry. In addition, participants were answered if “The company is an attractive employer within the industry” and “The company is effective and well managed”. Due to national differences, the response scales were adjusted using an industry-specific harmonization index. In the end, the results were converted to a 100-point scale. 500 companies were included in the list “The World's Best Employers”.

Since the IT industry is the most attractive, the number of companies from this industry was analyzed. The rating “The World's Best Employers” by Forbes (2019) includes 9 sectors that are related to the IT industry (Table 3).

Table 3. IT sectors included in “The World's Best Employers” by Forbes (2019)

Sector	Number of representatives	Representatives
Communications equipment	3	Cisco Systems, Juniper Networks, Arista Networks
Computer & Electronics Retail	1	Best Buy
Computer Hardware	5	Apple, Dell Technologies, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Asustek Computer, HP
Computer Services	8	Alphabet, IBM, Facebook, Tencent Holdings, Wipro, NetEase, MercadoLibre, F5 Networks
Computer Storage Devices	1	Western Digital
Consumer Electronics	4	Sony, TCL, LG Electronics, Garmin
Electronics	5	Hon Hai Precision, Agilent Technologies, Zebra Technologies, Flex, LG Display
Internet & Catalog Retail	7	Amazon, Wayfair, Netflix, eBay, JD.com, Alibaba, Vipshop Holdings
Software & Programming	13	Microsoft, Red Hat, SAP, Oracle, Intuit, Adobe, Salesforce.com, Workday, VNware, Square, HCL Technologies, Symantec, Cadence Design

As can be seen from Table 3, there are 47 technological companies included in the employers' rating by Forbes. The largest number of representatives is concentrated in Software & Programming sector (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Number of representatives in each IT sector included in “The World's Best Employers” by Forbes (2019)

“Software & Programming” sector includes 13 companies with different number of employees, revenue and size. It should be noted that this sector contains companies with high and low rating: 3 companies among the TOP-10 and 2 companies among the last lines (Table 4).

Table 4. Software & Programming sector in “The World's Best Employers” by Forbes (2019)

Rank	Name	Country/Territory	Number of employees	Revenue
2	Microsoft	United States	131,000	$118.2 B
3	Red Hat	United States	13,360	$3.4 B
5	SAP	Germany	96,498	$29.1 B
27	Oracle	United States	2,497	$39.6 B
33	Intuit	United States	8,900	$6.4 B
58	Adobe	United States	21,357	$9.5 B
82	Salesforce.com	United States	35,000	$10.5 B
113	Workday	United States	10,500	$2.8 B
120	VMware	United States	24,200	$9 B
257	Square	United States	3,349	$3.3 B
321	HCL Technologies	India	120,081	$8.4 B
477	Symantec	United States	11,800	$4.8 B
498	Cadence Design	United States	7,500	$2.1 B

The companies in the Table 1 have different size, revenue and number of employees. As can be seen from Table 4 there is no connection between company's ranking, its revenue and number of employees. At the same time Figure 7 states that there is no connection between number of employees and company's revenue. It could be taken into consideration as an additional factor during the analysis of the research results.

Figure 7 - Connection between number of employees and revenue of the company

HR brands of selected companies (Table 4) were described according to the model (Figure 4) which consists of five external and three internal factors. External factors aimed on potential employees and internal factors - on existing employees. The external factors include Innovativeness, Diversity & Inclusion, Skills assessment. The internalfactors consist ofCulture & Values, Motivation System, Strong Management, Career Opportunities, and Customer Focus.

The information was collected from the websites of the companies and from the websites of the employers' evaluation “Glassdoor” and “Comparably” (Appendix 1). The information was gathered according to the following principles for each factor:

- The factor “Culture & Values” describes how organizational culture is presented within the company. On the company's websites there are a special tab that describes its purpose, mission, values and key strategies. This information was analyzed and the main features of organizational cultures of each company were highlighted. The parameter “Culture and Values”, which shows how employees evaluated the employer, presented on “Glassdoor” was also used to evaluate the factor.

- The factor “Motivation System” mainly describes the bonus system that the company provides to its employees. It can be different types of insurance and vacations, organization and payment of training, etc. To assess this factor, information was analyzed on the company's website, where the benefit system is presented. The parameter “Compensation and benefits”, which shows how employees evaluated the employer bonus system, presented on “Glassdoor” was also used to evaluate the factor.

- The factor “Strong Management” was measured using the Glassdoor rating for each company. This rating is based on feedback and reviews from company employees and includes a score from 0 to 5. For this research, the evaluation will be converted as follows: 0 is equal to the score from 0 to 1.5 on Glassdoor, 1 is equal to the score from 1.5 to 3 on Glassdoor, 2 is equal to the score from 3 to 4.5 on Glassdoor, 3 is equal to the score from 4.5 to 5 on Glassdoor.

- The factor “Career opportunities” represents the opportunities offered to employees. It includes various programs for graduates, professionals, career development within the company, the possibility of transfer to another position or location. The parameter “Career opportunities” presented on “Glassdoor” was also used to evaluate the factor.

- The factor “Customer focus” includes customer orientation within the company's organizational culture and the quality of the product. To measure this factor was analyzes information on the companies' websites and identified whether the company contains customer orientation strategy or not.

- The factor “Innovativeness” was measured by the analysis of the company's innovation activity (whether the company creates new products or only improves the old ones). The numerical values were taken from the survey on website “Comparably”, which shows if employees consider their company innovative. 0 - needs improvement, 1 - neutral, 2 - somewhat innovative, 3 - extremely innovative.

- The factor “Diversity & Inclusion” shows how each company's diversity system is developed. For quantitative data, the percentage of working women in the company was taken. 35-40% - better than the industry average; 25-35% - average level of the industry; 15-25% - weaker than the industry average; 0-15% - factor is absent.

- The factor “Reputation” represents the assessment of the company by its clients, and whether the employees are willing to recommend the company as an employer. The evaluation of the website “Comparably”, where feedback from customers and employees of each company was collected, was taken as a numerical indicator. The 100-point scale was translated into a 4-point scale that used in the research. 65-100 - better than the industry average; 50-65 - average level of the industry; 35-50 - weaker than the industry average; 0-35 - factor is absent.

2.3 Data Analysis

HR brand factors presented in the model (Figure 4) were assessed based on the analysis of information collected (Appendix 1). The more developed the parameter is in the company, the higher the score. As a scale will be taken a 4-point scale:0 -factor is absent, 1 - there are specific elements, but weaker than the industry average, 2 - average level of the industry, 3 - is much better than the industry average. An assessment of the factors is presented in Table 5.

Table 5. An assessment of HR brand factors in IT companies (Software & Programming sector)

Ranking		Internal Factors	External Factors
		Culture &Values	Motivation System	Strong Management	Career Opportunities	Customer Focus	Innovativeness	Diversity & Inclusion	Reputation
2	Microsoft	2	2	2	2	3	3	2	2
3	Red Hat	2	2	2	2	2	3	2	3
5	SAP	3	3	2	3	3	3	2	2
27	Oracle	1	2	1	2	1	2	2	0
33	Intuit	3	3	2	2	2	2	3	3
58	Adobe	2	2	2	2	1	2	2	3
82	Salesforce.com	3	2	2	3	1	3	2	3
113	Workday	2	2	2	2	2	3	3	2
120	VMware	2	2	2	2	3	2	1	2
257	Square	2	2	2	2	2	3	3	1
321	HCL Technologies	1	2	1	2	2	0	1	1
477	Symantec	2	1	1	2	1	1	0	0
498	Cadence Design	2	2	2	2	1	0	1	0

The “Culture & Value” indicators for each company are shown on the Figure 8.It can be seen that there is no correlation between the company's place in the Forbes ranking and factor assessment. The highest assessment is given to three companies in the middle of the rating (SAP, Intuit and Sales force).These companies scored 3 points because they have components that are different from other companies. SAP is mainly oriented on its employees and supports all their ideas, therefore highly evaluated by the employees (“Glassdoor” survey). Intuit is focused on Corporate Responsibility which has a positive impact on employees' attitude (that can be seen from “Glassdoor” survey). Salesforce.com is building a good relationship between employees based on trust. This can be approved y “Glassdoor” survey. Thus, all the companies with a highest grade pay a lot attention to employee behavior and relationship. Oracle and HCL Technologies has standard values and culture within the company. The lowest assessment was made because of their evaluation by employees according to “Glassdoor” survey. It may be assumed that values and culture are not sufficiently implemented and developed in the company. The other companies have the middle assessment because they have almost the same corporate culture. All the companies have standard values as employee community, customer service, innovations, profitability and efficiency.

Figure 8 - “Culture & Values” factor assessment

The “Motivation system” assessment for each company is shown on the Figure 9. The system of motivation and bonuses is assessed equally at the average level in most companies. On average, the company's bonus system includes medical and dental insurance, assistance in pension planning, paid vacation days. The two companies in the middle of the rating have the biggest index - SAP and Intuit. SAP has additional benefits for its employees as Special benefits for working mothers and fathers, Enhanced Transgender benefits, Employee Assistance program and etc., which is appreciated by its employees (“Glassdoor” survey). Intuit has a lot of benefit programs for employees. There are expanded Health Care program (employees can receive psychological help within the company, stop smoking or lose their weight) and Financial program (help to manage finance). The effectiveness of the bonus system is confirmed by the high employee evaluation (“Glassdoor” syrvey). Symantec was rated worse than the industry average. The company provides only different types of insurances and financial bonuses. The bonus system contains fewer components than the market average, therefore it is rated worse.

Figure 9 - “Motivation System” factor assessment

The “Strong Management” indicators for each company are shown on the Figure 10. An assessment was made using the “Glassdoor” rating for each company. This rating is based on feedback and reviews from company employees and includes a score from 0 to 5. For this research, the evaluation will be converted as follows: 0 is equal to the score from 0 to 1.5 on Glassdoor, 1is equal to the score from 1.5 to 3 on Glassdoor, 2is equal to the score from 3 to 4.5 on Glassdoor, 3is equal to the score from 4.5 to 5 on Glassdoor. This component was assessed based on the rating because it is not possible to assess management without taking into account the opinions of employees. With the exception of three companies, the leadership is represented at the middle level in all companies. Oracle, HCL Technologies, Symantec are rated worse than the industry average. The employees of these companies do not give a good assessment of leadership style.



Figure 10 - “Strong Management” factor assessment

The “Career opportunities” assessment for each company is shown on the Figure 11. The factor is represented in all companies at the medium level. The most valuable companies are SAP and Sales force. SAP is constantly investing huge amount of money on employee development. The company has a recruiting platform, internal online courses, and career success center. All these features help the company receive high appreciation of its employees for this factor. Salesforce also has its own peculiarities. There are the Pathway Assessment and the Cultivating Your Career Workbook, which help employees develop their career. The other companies have the same options for career development - internships, full-time positions and career development based on employee results. Some of the companies have mentor's program but as could be seen from employee assessment (“Glassdoor” survey) it does not much affect their attitude towards this factor. Moreover, as can be seen from the Figure 11, there is no direct correlation between the assessment of factors and the place of the company in the Forbes' ranking.



Figure 11 - “Career Opportunities” factor assessment

The “Customer Focus” indicators for each company are shown on the Figure 12. The customer focus factor has the highest volatility among all other factors. Three companies are rated above the industry average, five are on average and five are worse than average. Microsoft, SAP and VMware have the highest evaluation because they are constantly changing their customer strategies according to changing technologies and customer requests. Red Hat, Intuit, Workday, VMware and Salesforce have a middle assessment. These companies have a customer orientation as one of the core values and present a good client support on their websites. Oracle, Adobe, Salesforce, Symantec and Cadence Design have the worst evaluation compared with the other companies. The companies are constantly collecting the feedback from their customers and it is the only way they improve the customer strategy. As the factor shows strong volatility, there is no correlation between the place of companies in the rating of Forbes and the customer focus factor.



Figure 12 - “Customer Focus” factor assessment

The “Innovations” assessment for each company is shown on the Figure 13. Innovations are rated at the highest level by half of the companies. There are Microsoft, Red Hat, SAP, SalesForce, Workday and Square. These companies define innovativeness as one of the core values. Thus, they have special projects (investments or research laboratories) that keep their product innovative and increase their product portfolio. Moreover, employees evaluate companies' innovativeness as “extremely innovative” (“Comparably” survey). Average score was given to companies Oracle, Intuit, Adobe and VMware. The companies also pay attention to innovativeness, but they only improve old products and do not develop the new ones. Employees consider the company to be “somewhat innovative” (“Comparably” survey).We can also see the correlation between a company's place in the rating and its score. The further a company is ranked, the less innovation factor is represented in the companies. This can be seen on the example of the last three companies -HCL Technologies, Symantec and Cadence Design. Symantec is estimated to be below average. The company collects feedback from customers, invest in developing new products, but is poorly rated by its employees (“Comparably” survey). HCL Technologies and Cadence Design are improving their products because of changing technologies, but they are valued by employees as “needs improvement” (“Comparably” survey).



Figure 13 - “Innovativeness” factor assessment

The “Diversity” indicators for each company are shown on the Figure 14. The decrease in the evaluation of the diversity factor decreases closer to the end of the rating. Most companies have communities within the company. Usually these are communities of women, Black, Latin and Hispanic, Asians, LGBTQ+ and Veterans. The percentage of women within the company was taken as a measurement indicator. Diversity of women is a priority in all companies' diversity strategies.35-40% - better than the industry average; 25-35% - average level of the industry; 15-25% - weaker than the industry average; 0-15% - factor is absent. As it can be seen from the Figure14, the companies VMware, HCL Technologies, Cadence Design have estimation below average in the market. Women in these companies make up less than 1/4 of the total workforce. Moreover in HCL Technologies and Cadence Design there are only two employee networks. In Symantec the factor is absent because women represents only 11%. Intuit, Workday and Square have the highest assessment. In these companies, the proportion of women is more than 35 %, including senior management. These companies are also actively developing their communities.



Figure 14 - “Diversity” factor assessment

The “Reputation” assessment for each company is shown on the Figure 15. By analyzing the reputation factor, the correlation between the company's place in the rating and the assessment of the factor can be seen. As can be seen from the Figure 15, the company's rating is falling, while the latter companies have no factor. There is no factor in Oracle, so the company's place in the rating was affected by other factors. "Reputation” was evaluated using “Comparably” rating, where feedback from customers and employees of each company was collected. As its external factor, the willingness of employees to recommend an employer was taken into consideration. Red Hat, Intuit, Adobe and Salesforce have the highest assessment. More than 65% employees are ready to recommend the company as an employer. Moreover, these companies have a good reputation among the clients: more than 80 points out of 100. The companies: Microsoft, SAP, Workday, VM wareranked on average level. More than a half of the total workforce recommends these employers (50-65% of labor force). Square and HCL Technologies is assessed by 1 point because only 35-50% of all employees recommend the employer. Oracle, Symantec, Cadence Design have a very low percentage of employees who are willing to recommend the company (0-35%). This factor should be improved in these companies.



Figure 15 - “Reputation” factor assessment

In order to track the dependence and influence of factors on the company's success, we will consider the presence of internal and external factors in companies separately. On Figure 16are shown internal factors and their assessment. As can be seen from it, all companies on the first positions have average figures compared to the market. Oracle and Adobe stand out from the list with their low scores. Oracle has “Culture & Values” and “Customer Focus” assessments below the industry average. Adobe's “Customer Focus” factor is evaluated lower that the industry average too. It can be assumed that low internal factors can be offset by high external factors in these companies.

Figure 16 - Internal factors assessment

The external factors assessment(Figure 17) also shows the relationship between the company's place in the Forbes rating and the factors' evaluation. The chart shows that companies HCL Technologies, Symantec, Cadence Design, which are in the last places of the rating, do not have all external factors in their HR brand model. Oracle also does not have all external factors, which does not confirm its place in the rating.

Figure 17 - External factors assessment

Figure 18 presents a combination between of external and internal factors and their evaluation in each company structured according to the Forbes rating.

Figure 18 - Internal and External factors assessment

For internal and external factors to be analyzed, it should be determined that the company's position in the Forbes rating defines the success of her HR brand.. Thereby, the further a company is in the rating, the less successful it is in terms of HR brand. From the Figure 18 it can be seen that decreases in one or another factor, or their absence, lead to a deterioration of the company's HR brand. For example, it can be seen that the low valuation of the “Customer focus” factor in Adobe is compensated by the company's high “Reputation”. In VMware, the high indicator of “Client orientation” compensates insufficiency of the “Diversity” factor in the company. In Cadence Design, the average estimate of internal factors is devalued due to the absence of two external factors. It has middle assessment of “Culture & Values”, “Motivation System”, “Strong Management” and “Career Opportunities”, which have been rendered irrelevant by the absence of “Innovativeness”, “Reputation”. At Oracle all external and internal factors are underdeveloped, so it can be assumed that there is another factor influencing HR brand.

2.4 Research results and Discussion

In the following part of the master thesis the results of the experiment will be analyzed and discussed in accordance to the goal of the master thesis and the theoretical basis.

The study examines the concept of a company's HR brand and its components. Based on the synthesis of theoretical material, the HR brand model was developed, which includes 8 factors. This model was used as a research tool in practical part. The Forbes rating (2019) was used as an indicator of success of the company's HR brand. Each factor included in the research model in 13 companies of the sector was analyzed. The data obtained were obtained for each factor separately, and a generalizing analysis of internal, external and generalizing data was carried out.

Taking into consideration all findings, it is possible to conclude that Hypothesis 1 (H1), which states that “HR brand success depends on external and internal factors included in the research model”, can be partly proved. As can be seen from the Figure 18, there is a correlation between the presence and assessment of factors and the place of the company in the Forbes rating (Hr brand success). The exception is the company Oracle, which is on the 4th place in the research list and has low indicators. This means that there is another factor affecting the success of the company's HR brand. As can be seen from the Table 4, Oracle is second in terms of revenue among the companies represented, and last in terms of number of employees. It can be assumed that the absence of any external or internal factors may be compensated by the company's economic efficiency indicator. Therefore, the economic efficiency indicator should be included in further analysis. Hypothesis 2 (H2), which states that “The absence and deficiency of external factors has an effect on internal factors, and vice versa”,can be supported. The lack of internal factors can be compensated for by the presence of external factors. For example, as can be seen from the Figure 18, the absence of a “Customer focus” factor in Adobe is compensated by its high “Reputation”. Also, the average score of internal indicators at “Cadence Design” or “Symantec” is depreciated due to the absence of external factors of reputation and innovativeness. This gives companies the flexibility to build a policy to promote and improve its HR brand.

2.5 Recommendations and implications

Before moving to the conclusions, the following master thesis offers different suggestions on the future research that can be developed and the implications that can be used in practice.

The following master thesis is mainly concerned with the success factors of the company's HR brand. Based on the literature review, the model of HR brand was developed, which includes external and internal factors. It should be noted that this model was used as a research tool and only 8 factors mentioned in the model were considered. The model can be extended in the framework of further research.

The study also examines companies in the narrow sphere and was conducted on the basis of secondary data analysis. In order to obtain more accurate and complete results, representatives of other industries have to be analyzed and primary data have to be obtained.

Nevertheless, the results of the following master thesis can be applied to human resources management. Creation and development of HR brand within a company becomes a priority for many companies because of the competition for talents. The model elaborated as part of this research can be used as a plan to build an employer's brand. As the analysis has shown, successful companies implement these factors within their HR strategy. Companies need to collect employee feedback on an ongoing basis in order to develop one or another factor depending on the recommendations. Moreover, the study emphasizes the importance of all factors in the development of HR and the possibility of compensating for the lack of some factors by others. Companies may also use this conclusion as part of their HR strategy development. If it is possible to develop only one factor, it is necessary to focus on the most developed one. As the research has shown, the developed factor may even compensate for the absence of the other one.

2.6 Limitations

Certain factors, that may have had the effects on the following research, need to be taken into consideration when the findings of the research are discussed.

First of all, an important fact, which has already been mentioned above, is that the next master's thesis, as well as the analysis was conducted using the developed model of the employer's brand. It means that only certain success factors of HR brand, which are included in this model, were considered.

In addition, only one specific sector was considered. The results of the evaluation of 13 companies can be the basis for a new study. More sectors and companies included will help to consider this topic more widely and will increase master's thesis validity level.

One more possible limitation is can be estimation of the companies because it was made by a method of expert estimation and analysis of the existing information. In further researches it is possible to carry out interrogations in the existing companies for more reliability of results. Therefore, the future research on the topic is recommended in order to extend the findings.

Conclusion

The following master thesis is aimed at the investigation of HR brand success factors and the analysis of HR brands of the global companies in IT industry. In accordance with the goal set, a number of the tasks set in the introduction have been solved.

Nowadays, labor market assumes that the majority of organizations wishing to attract and retain the best employees in order to maintain their competitiveness and survive are increasingly resorting to such techniques as the formation of a quality HR brand. HR brand is a set of unique advantages that the company offers to its existing and potential employees, and distinguishes the firm as an employer from its competitors. Brand formation includes such activities as branding, for potential employees and creating internal brand, in order to form a positive the perception of the organization in the eyes of its employees. As it can be seen, the employer's brand plays an important role both for the company and the applicants. With the help of a clearly formulated HR offer, reflected in the HR brand, it is easier for a potential employee to choose a place of work. Companies with the help of a strong HR brand are able to attract and retain the most interesting candidates, while minimizing time and money costs. This increases the efficiency of the company's operations and profits.

In the following master thesis the HR brand model was developed based on the synthesis of theoretical material. The model includes internal and external factors. Internal factors are Culture & Values, Motivation System, Strong Management, Career Opportunities, and Customer Focus. External factors include Innovativeness, Diversity & Inclusion, and Reputation. This model was a tool for analyzing HR brands of companies in the practical part of the research.

The results of the analysis of the collected data, based on the model developed in Chapter 1, showed that: (1) HR brand success depends on external and internal factors included in the research model; (2) the absence and deficiency of external factors has an effect on internal factors, and vice versa. The research has shown that there is a correlation between the existence of a factor in the company and the success of its HR brand. The assessment of the success of the company's HR brand changes depending on the level of presence of this or that factor in the HR brand of the company. Moreover, it shows that internal factors can compensate the absence and deficiency of external factors, and vice versa. If one factor is underdeveloped in a company, it can be compensated for by a factor developed at a higher level. Also, even if a company lacks a factor, it may be compensated by the presence of another factor at the middle or maximum levels. At the same time, if there are no factors in the company that can compensate for the absence of the other factor, the assessment of HR brand success will decline.

The topic of the HR brand successful factors should be further researched. For example, more companies can be taken. It is also possible to take companies from different sectors to see if there are differences between the factors affecting the HR brand in a certain area or not. Furthermore, a more detailed study of the presence of these factors in companies may also be conducted. For this purpose, a survey of employees should be conducted and primary data obtained.

The results of this research can be used by specialists in the field of human resources management. In creating an employer brand, specialists can take into account the model proposed by this study. The results also show that it is possible to strengthen one factor by compensating the absence of the other. Therefore, the HR department of the company, after analyzing the relevant factors of the HR brand, can make a decision, which will be most effective for the company in financial and corporate terms.

In conclusion, the following master thesis successfully supplemented the existing literature by analyzing and researching the factors of HR brand that influence its success. A strong and developing HR brand is one of the most important components of a successful and prosperous company. It is expected that the research will stimulate further study of the topic and interest of scientists and, therefore, will help HR specialists to develop the HR brand within the company.

References

1. Ambler, T., & Barrow, S. (1996). The employer brand. Journal of Brand Management, 4 (3), 185-206

2. Backhaus, K., &Tikoo, S. (2004). Conceptualizing and researching employer branding. Career development international, 9(5), 501-517.

3. Bansal, H. S., Mendelson, M. B., & Sharma, B. (2001). The impact of internal marketing activities on external marketing outcomes. Journal of quality management, 6(1), 61-76.

4. Barrow, S., & Mosley, R. (2011). The employer brand: Bringing the best of brand management to people at work. John Wiley & Sons.

5. Baruch, Y. (2004). Transforming careers: from linear to multidirectional career paths. Career development international, 9 (1), 58-73.

6. Becker, B. E., &Huselid, M. A. (2006). Strategic human resources management: where do we go from here?. Journal of management, 32(6), 898-925.

7. Berthon, P., Ewing, M., & Hah, L. L. (2005). Captivating company: dimensions of attractiveness in employer branding. International journal of advertising, 24(2), 151-172.

8. Bonaiuto, M., De Dominicis, S., Illia, L., Rodríguez-Cánovas, B., & Lizzani, G. (2013). Managing employer brand attributes to attract potential future leaders. Journal of Brand Management, 20(9), 779-792.

9. Botha, A., Bussin, M., & De Swardt, L. (2011). An employer brand predictive model for talent attraction and retention. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 9(1), 1-12.

10. Branham, L. (2012). The 7 hidden reasons employees leave: How to recognize the subtle signs and act before it's too late. Amacom.

11. Broady?Preston, J., & Steel, L. (2002). Employees, customers and internal marketing strategies in LIS. Library management, 23, 384-393

12. Burmann, C., &Zeplin, S. (2005). Building brand commitment: A behavioural approach to internal brand management. Journal of brand management, 12(4), 279-300.

13. Columbus L. (2019). Glassdoor's Best Places To Work In 2020 Shows Tech Is The Future, Forbes. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/louiscolumbus/2019/12/11/glassdoors-best-places-to-work-in-2020-shows-tech-is-the-future/#1edd4d84965e(assessed 20 April 2020)

14. Comparably - Transparent compensation & Culture. Available at: https://www.comparably.com/ (assessed 24 April 2020)

15. De Chernatony, L., Christodoulides, G., Roper, S., Abimbola, T., & Davies, G. (2008). Employer branding and its influence on managers. European Journal of Marketing, 42 (5), 667-681.

16. Du Preez, R., & Bendixen, M. T. (2015). The impact of internal brand management on employee job satisfaction, brand commitment and intention to stay. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 33 (1), 78-91.

17. Edwards, M. R. (2010). An integrative review of employer branding and OB theory. Personnel review, 39 (1), 5-23.

18. Employer brand research. Global report. (2019). Randstad. Available at: https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/481927/REBR%20Global%20report%202019.pdf?__hstc=243245085.5b7e3b4948ba1b8366e12e1ce0ae622a.1588847689657.1588847689657.1589032562181.2&__hssc=243245085.1.1589032562181 (assessed 26 April 2020)

19. Ewing, M. T., Pitt, L. F., De Bussy, N. M., &Berthon, P. (2002). Employment branding in the knowledge economy. International Journal of advertising, 21(1), 3-22.

20. Figurska, I., &Matuska, E. (2013). Employer branding as a human resources management strategy. Human Resources Management & Ergonomics, 7(2), 35-51.

21. Foreman, S. K., & Money, A. H. (1995). Internal marketing: concepts, measurement and application. Journal of marketing management, 11(8), 755-768.

22. Garavan, T. N., Carbery, R., Rock, A., Kucherov, D., &Zavyalova, E. (2012). HRD practices and talent management in the companies with the employer brand. European Journal of training and Development.

23. Glassdoor Job Search. Available at: https://www.glassdoor.com/ (assessed 27 April 2020)

24. Global 2000: The world's best employers. Forbes. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/lists/worlds-best-employers/#1a43bb2e1e0c (assessed 20 April 2020)

25. Helm, S. (2011). Employees' awareness of their impact on corporate reputation. Journal of Business Research, 64(7), 657-663.

26. Hendry, C., & Jenkins, R. (1997). Psychological contracts and new deals. Human Resource Management Journal, 7(1), 38-44.

27. Hill B.,&Tande C. (2006) The Employment Value Proposition. Tandehill Human Capital Consulting, 10, 19-22. Available at:http://www.tandehill.com/pdfs/Total-Rewards.pdf(assessed 15 April 2020)

28. Holbeche, L., & Matthews, G. (2012). Engaged: Unleashing your organization's potential through employee engagement, 1st ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

29. Ito, J. K., Brotheridge, C. M., & McFarland, K. (2013). Examining how preferences for employer branding attributes differ from entry to exit and how they relate to commitment, satisfaction, and retention. Career Development International, 18 (7), 732-752.

30. Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of management journal, 33(4), 692-724.

31. Kim D., Sturman M. (2012), HR Branding: How Human Resources Can Learn from Product and Service Branding to Improve Attraction, Selection, and Retention, The Center for Hospitality Research, Cornell University.

32. Knox, S., & Freeman, C. (2006). Measuring and managing employer brand image in the service industry. Journal of Marketing Management, 22(7-8), 695-716.

33. Leary-Joyce, J. (2004). Becoming an employer of choice: Make your own organisation a place where people want to do great work. CIPD Publishing.

34. Lievens, F., Van Hoye, G., &Anseel, F. (2007). Organizational identity and employer image: Towards a unifying framework. British Journal of Management, 18, S45-S59.

35. Minchington, B. (2010). The employer brand manager 's handbook: Torrensville: Collective Learning

36. Michaels E., Handfield-Jones H., & Axelrod B. (2001). The war for talent.Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

37. Moroko, L., & Uncles, M. D. (2008). Characteristics of successful employer brands. Journal of brand management, 16(3), 160-175.

38. Mosley, R. W. (2007). Customer experience, organisational culture and the employer brand. Journal of brand management, 15(2), 123-134.

39. Murari, K. (2015). Impact of leadership styles on employee empowerment. Partridge Publishing.

40. Naudé, P., Desai, J., & Murphy, J. (2003). Identifying the determinants of internal marketing orientation. European Journal of Marketing, 37(9), 1205-1220.

41. OstojiæMihiæ, A., Umihaniæ, B., &Fazloviæ, S. (2015). The role of organizational innovation in achieving and maintaining company's business excellence. Management: journal of contemporary management issues, 20(1), 79-100.

42. Punjaisri, K., & Wilson, A. (2007). The role of internal branding in the delivery of employee brand promise. Journal of Brand Management, 15(1), 57-70.

43. Punjaisri, K., & Wilson, A. (2011). Internal branding process: key mechanisms, outcomes and moderating factors. European Journal of Marketing, 45(9/10), 1521-1537.

44. Raj, A. B., &Jyothi, P. (2011). Internal branding: exploring the employee perspective. Journal of Economic Development, Management, IT, Finance, and Marketing, 3(2), 9.

45. Robertson A. (2013), Building the Employer Image: The HR Challenge. 1 (1), 2-9.

46. Roper, S., de Carvalho, L. V., Guzman, F., Sivertzen, A. M., Nilsen, E. R., &Olafsen, A. H. (2013). Employer branding: employer attractiveness and the use of social media. Journal of Product & Brand Management.

47. Russell, S., & Brannan, M. J. (2016). “Getting the Right People on the Bus”: Recruitment, selection and integration for the branded organization. European Management Journal, 34(2), 114-124.

48. Rusu, G., &Avasilcãi, S. (2014). Human resources motivation: an integrative model. In Proceedings of the 15th Romanian Textiles and Leather Conference-CORTEP (pp. 3-6).

49. Sabharwal, M. (2014). Is diversity management sufficient? Organizational inclusion to further performance. Public Personnel Management, 43(2), 197-217.

50. Sahoo, S. &Mohanty, S. (2019). Antecedents and Dimensions of Internal Branding: An overview. Revista, 40(37), 28-38.

51. Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of managerial psychology, 21 (7), 600-619.

52. Sullivan, J. (2004). Eight Elements of a Successful Employment Brand.ER Daily, 23 (2), 501-517

53. Van Dam, N., & Marcus, J. (2012). Organization and management: An International approach. Routledge.

54. Vijayalakshmi, V. & K Uthayasuriyan, Dr. (2015). The Impact of Employer Branding on Employee Performance. 5. 211-213.

55. Adobe: Creative, marketing and document management. Available at: https://www.adobe.com/ (assessed 24 April 2020)

56. Intuit: Powering Prosperity. Available at: https://www.intuit.com/ (assessed 24 April 2020)

57. HCL Technologies: IT services, Digital Solutions, Technology. Available at: https://www.hcltech.com/ (assessed 24 April 2020)

58. Microsoft. Official Page. Available at: https://www.microsoft.com/ (assessed 24 April 2020)

59. Oracle. Integrated Cloud Applications and Platform Services. Available at: https://www.oracle.com/index.html (assessed 24 April 2020)

60. Red Hat - We make open source technologies for the enterprise. Available at: https://www.redhat.com/en (assessed 24 April 2020)

61. Salesforce. CRM Software & Cloud Computing Solutions - Salesforce EMEA. Available at: https://www.salesforce.com/eu/ (assessed 24 April 2020)

62. SAP. About SAP SE - SAP.com. Available at: https://www.sap.com/corporate/en.html (assessed 24 April 2020)

63. Square: solutions & tools to row your business. Available at: https://squareup.com/us/en (assessed 24 April 2020)

64. Symantec. NortonLifeLock: A global leader in consumer Cyber Safety. Available at: https://www.nortonlifelock.com/us/en/ (assessed 24 April 2020)

65. VMware - Official Site. Available at: https://www.vmware.com/ (assessed 24 April 2020)

66. Workday: Cloud ERP System for Finance, HR and Planning. Available at: https://www.workday.com/ (assessed 24 April 2020)

Appendix 1

Analysis of HR brand of companies from the “Software & Programming” sector included in “The World's Best Employers” rating by Forbes

1. Microsoft

General information

Microsoft is a multinational American company with a headquarter in Redmond, Washington. The company develops and releases a wide range of software products. Microsoft products are sold in more than 80 countries worldwide, translated into more than 45 languages and are compatible with most PC platforms. According to Forbes Best Employers list it's on the second place. Total number of employees working in the company is equal 131,000 with revenue 118.2 billion dollars.

Internal Factors

Culture &Values

The company's main goal is to help each person and company achieve more. The company's three core values are respect, integrity and accountability. Main aspects included in the corporate culture are growth mindset, customer obsessed, one Microsoft, diverse and inclusion, making a difference. The values and components of the corporate culture relate to the mission of the company, and show how relationships and communications are built within the company. According to Glassdoor survey, “Culture & Values” is valued as 4.2 out of 5.

Motivation System

Microsoft offers a lot of benefits to their employees, which are divided into several sections. There are health supports (medical insurance, various sporting activities), retirement, bonuses and discounts for employees, vacation and paid holidays, maternity leave, training fees, donations program. Moreover, any employee can become a shareholder of the company on favorable terms. According to Glassdoor survey, “Compensation and Benefits” is valued as 4.1 out of 5.

Strong Management

According to the information on the popular employer search website “Comparably”, the company's management assessment is 76/100. It is based on a survey of employees about their attitude towards the executive team and the general director. Moreover, the Glassdoor survey states that Senior Management is equal 3.8 out of 5.

Career Opportunities

Microsoft provides various career opportunities for graduates and experienced employees. Graduates are offered various scholarships and internships to get involved in the company's work. For experienced employees, various positions are offered depending on their skills and achievements, as well as opportunities to move to other locations. According to Glassdoor survey, “Career Opportunities” is equal 4.0 out of 5.

Customer Focus

Due to technological changes in society, Microsoft has changed its purchasing strategy. The company switched to a digital model of interaction as it found out that their customers needed it. The sales team is mainly focused on the customer.

External Factors

Innovativeness

In Microsoft people believe that technologies help to achieve the main goal of the company, thus to create better world in different ways. There pays great attention to the several research areas: artificial intelligence, computer vision, human-computer interaction, security, privacy and cryptography, systems and networking.

Diversity & Inclusion

Company has several communities: black community, LGBTQI+ community, disability community, military community, Asian community, community of families, Hispanic or Latinx community, community of women. For example, in 2019 the number of women worked in Microsoft is equal 27.6%, which is 1% more than the previous year. 88% of employees has positive attitude to inclusion policy in the company. It was calculated for the first time to analyze the effectiveness of inclusion strategy.

Reputation & Popularity

According to the data on the portal of employers' search “Comparably”, the reputation among employees is 75, and among clients - 76 out of 100. Feedback also shows that 51% of employees are ready to recommend the company, while 84% are proud of their work in Microsoft.

2. Red Hat

General information

Red Hat is founded in 1993. It is a multinational, American company that makes software for corporate use. The company has more than 95 offices in more than 35 countries. According to Forbes Best Employers list it's on the third place. Total number of employees working in the company is equal 13,360 with revenue 3.4 billion dollars.

Internal Factors

Culture &Values

Red Hat defines its goal as “to be the catalyst in communities of customers, contributors, and partners creating better technology the open source way”.The core values in the company arefreedom, courage, commitment, accountability. All these components should be in a balance.According to Glassdoor survey, “Culture & Values” is valued as 4.3 out of 5.

Motivation System

Red Hat has a flexible benefits system for its employees. Medical, dental, retirement support are includedin a package. It also offers some tuition payments for education and employees' development. Moreover, there are some packages that provides healthy activities to support correct lifestyle. According to Glassdoor survey, “Compensation and benefits” is valued 3.8 out of 5.

Strong Management

According to the information on the popular employer search website “Comparably”, the company's management assessment is 76/100. It is based on a survey of employees about their attitude towards the executive team and the general director. Moreover, the Glassdoor survey states that “Senior Management” is equal 3.6 out of 5.

Career Opportunities

Red Hat provides opportunities for career development in the following departments - technology, sales, marketing, management, internships. In all departments there are a variety of jobs with different skill levels. Also in the internship department, young talents can be selected and trained the necessary knowledge and skills within the company. According to Glassdoor survey, Career Opportunities is equal 3.9 out of 5.

Customer Focus

The company has a wide range of clients from different fields such as medicine, finance, technology, etc. The goal of the company highlights that the client is important and the company develops for its customer.

External Factors

Innovativeness

In the company exists special Red Hat Innovation Awardsas recognition of using innovative technologies that are used by the company's customers.Therefore, the company itself actively introduces new products and improves the old ones, but also encourages innovative activities of the client companies.

Diversity & Inclusion

Remote work facilitates the participation of different people (gender, culture, nationality, etc.) in the company's work. Around 30% of employees work remotely. The company has communities forimplementing its diversity and inclusion strategy. There are Red Hat Pride (LGBTQ+), Red Hat Military Veterans, Red Hat B.U.I.L.D. (Blacks United in Leadership and Diversity), Red Hat Neurodiversity Community, Women's Leadership Community (women represent 25% of the total workforce), Red Hat Native + Indigenous Community, Unidos (Latinx and Hispanic communities).

Reputation & Popularity

According to the data on the portal of employers' search “Comparably”, the reputation among employees is 76, and among clients - 81 out of 100. Feedback also shows that 67% of employees are ready to recommend the company, while 82% are proud of their work in Red Hat.

3. SAP

General information

SAP is a multinational European company that makes software for managing business and relations with customers. Is has a headquarter in Walldorf, Baden-Württemberg, Germany and offices in 180 countries. According to Forbes Best Employers list it is on the fifth place. Total number of employees working in the company is equal 96,498 with revenue 29.1 billion dollars.

Internal Factors

Culture &Values

SAP's corporate culture is built on long-term relationships with its employees. Everyone's success is important to the company, so they support all ideas. Initiative, curiosity, diversity, trust and reliability, teamwork are the basic values. Within the company they are called “Tell me like it is”, “Stay curious”, “Emrace differences”, “Keep promises”, Build bridges”. These are 5 principles that help to achieve the main goal. According to Glassdoor survey, “Culture & Values” is valued as 4.5 out of 5.

Motivation System

SAP provides additional bonuses to salary according to employee's effectiveness and productivity. Moreover, SAP has a very big benefits package for its employees. It includes medical, dental and life insurances, retention support, voluntary benefits. In addition the company has 6 additional health programs as Special benefits for working mothers and fathers, Enhanced Transgender benefits, Employee Assistance program and etc. According to Glassdoor survey, “Compensation and Benefits” is valued as 4.4 out of 5.

...