CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS

This chapter has explained data analysis of the research. The research questions are answered
and the proposed hypotheses are tested by detailed quantitative analysis.

4.1 Data Analysis

Data analysis was done with the help of excel and SPSS statistical tools. MS Excel 2013 was
used to organize data and to create some of the comparative charts. SPSS (version 21.0) was
used to analyze the results and create some graphics. Data cleaning, testing, integration,
coding and decoding was performed by the SPSS tool. Mean, Standard deviation-test, F Test
and cross tab were done to analyze the data.

Mean - The mean shows average score of all the ratings (1 = not at all important to 5 = most
important). For the representation purpose, ratings 1 and 2 are displayed as ‘Not Important’,
ratings 3 to 5 are displayed as ‘Important’. The mean of ratings is calculated by finding the
sum of the ratings and then dividing by the number of rating responses. The mean is also used
to calculate the standard deviation.

Standard Deviation (std. dev.)- The standard deviation is used to develop a statistical
measure of the mean variance. To understand the variation in the standard deviation, dual
axis charts were used where on LHS (left hand side) primary axis ratings were plotted and
means were displayed on the other hand (secondary axis). There is another requirement of
plotting dual axes is that both axes have different value category like one was in percentage
terms and another one was in decimal number terms. So, it is not possible to show both on the
same axis.

Interpreting Non-Significant Results - When a significance test results in a high probability

value, it means that the data provided little or no evidence that the null hypothesis is false.
However, the high probability value is not evidence that the null hypothesis is true. The
problem is that it is impossible to distinguish a null effect from a very small effect. So, in
some of the cases significant testing does not solely prove or disapprove the hypotheses and
we need do deep dive into analysis before making any judgment or comments

80
Performed means and variances analysis was done to show the similarity and difference
within groups and significance individually. Sometime means and value cannot tell about the
significant differences in the two groups then independent t-test can give much clarity about
the significance difference.

There are different approaches used to analyze data based on data and hypotheses e.g. t-test
and comparison of means (variance) performed to test the significant difference. As
respondents, results were skewed towards high importance rating and clear difference was
not visible based on overall means. So, within group and standard deviation were used to test
the hypotheses.

F-test is used to compare statistical models that have been fitted to a data set, in order to
identify the model that best fits the population from which the data were sampled for
employees and employers.

The crosstab can accommodate two, or more, variables. Its purpose is to examine the shared
distributions of the variables. When coupled with a statistical measure, such as the chi-square,
the researcher can assess the degree of association between variables.

Crosstabulation has been done to describe the relationships between categorical variables.
With Crosstabulation, analyzed following statistics:

 Observed Counts and Percentages

 Expected Counts and Percentages
 Residuals
 Chi-Square

Crosstab also used in order to test the quality of evidence, to compare the observed pattern of
preferences with the pattern expected to observe if male and female have exactly the same
preferences.

Gap analysis tells about the gap between employees and employers importance for any
analyzed factor e.g; How employer can fulfill employee’s aspirations and similarly how
employees can train themselves according to the industry and employer expectation. This gap
analysis can help in fish-bone problem solving approach. These results help in analysis to
identify pain point of any employer’s and employee’s dissatisfaction in the current role or in
a particular industry.

81
Graphical representation allows comparing results quickly and provides better view to reader.
So, analyses are displayed in the graphical manner with red circle for attention or highlight.
E.g. histogram and stack bar charts. Histogram tells about the spread of response rating and
comparison in two or more groups. Stack bar chart tells about the composition of different
ratings based on the percentages. There might be a case that there is a very small difference in
the overall mean value, however; standard deviation is different. Logic behind adopting the
above mentioned methods of research and analysis points have been elaborated along with
respective diagrams.

4.2 Big 5 personality Questionnaire Interpretation

There were 44 personality questions also under big five dimensions of personality as
below:

1. Extraversion
2. Agreeableness
3. Conscientiousness
4. Neuroticism
5. Openness
The standardization of Big Five Factor based on reliability and validity indicates high

correlation in results. These results were validated with some of the reverse wording

(negative to positive or positive to negative) questions. Reverse wording changes the

direction of the scale by asking the question in a positive (or negative) voice. The

point of reverse wording is that the question is asked twice (in different areas of the

survey), once using the positive voice and once using the negative voice. Once the

negative version’s scale is reversed, the score should be the same for both versions. If

respondents consistently an outlier on the reversed scaled, they are obviously not

reading the questions closely and are using a keystroke pattern or putting most

answers in a given column. 44 items of big 5 inventory personality questionnaire(

attached in Appendix I )and interpretation has been done according to the scoring and

reverse scoring suggested by McCrae,R.R and Costa P.T Jr (1999),McCrae,R.R

(2004) research. (Appendix J)

82
4.3 Demographic Analysis
Survey respondents have good mix of varied profiles, colleges, location, courses, age,
industry, Organisation, role, experience, etc. to minimize the skewedness and biasness. There
were 318 responses from employer category and 287 responses from prospective employee.
Below mentioned charts will reflect composition of the respondents.

4.3.1 Organisation Type: Employer Survey

In employer respondents, 13% responses are from Government employer and rest 87%
represent private sector.

Chart D.1 Organisations studied

4.3.2 Employee demographics and preferences:

Prospective employees’ responses have good representation of male (46%) and female
(54%). Most of the respondents are relatively fresher below or equal to 24 years age (92%),
however, 7% respondents are more than 24 years old.

Gender of the respondents

83
Chart D.2 Respondents Gender

Age of the respondents:

Chart D.3 Respondents Age

4.3.3 Industry and Dream Organisation preference:

Prospective employees have maximum preference for banking industry (32%) followed by
information technology (IT) (12%). research & development is at top three with 9%
preference and fast moving consumer goods(FMCG), academics/training and development
and media & entertainment have equal number of preference of 6% each. Respondents have
chosen 60% private Organisation as dream Organisation. Whereas, 40% respondents have
selected Government Organisation.

84
Industry Segmentation

Chart D.4 Industry Studied

4.3.4 Salary expectation and Organisational revenue preference:
Majority of respondent’s salary expectation was more than five lakhs and most of them have
expectation for 5-8 Lakhs annual salary. There are very few who wants to join an
organisation which revenue is less than Rs. 1 Cr. One out of three wants to join Organisation
that has revenue more than Rs. 50 Cr.There is also equal distribution (about 20% each) for
revenue range of Rs. 1-10 Cr, Rs. 11-30 Cr and Rs. 31-50 Cr. It shows that prospective
employees have acceptance of relatively small organisation also as they see high growth
opportunities there. This result may vary for premier top business schools.As tier II III
business school students may wants to sharpen their skills with small organisation at the early
career stage. Further after grooming professionally they may wish to explore big
Organisations which can ensure good success rates.
Salary Expectations

85
Chart D.5 Salary Expectations
Organisation revenue preference

Chart D.6 Organisational Revenue Preferences

86
4.4 Summary of Hypotheses:

No. Description Employee Employer Comment

There is a significant difference in
perceived importance of different
dimensions (Organisational reputation,
Difference in terms of
organisation culture and Human
H1 Accepted importance rating
resource management system) of
means and variance
employer brand and communication
strategy from employers and employees
perspective.
Accepted for both
groups with high
Organisational reputation of the
confidence and
organisation is one of the important
H2 Accepted Accepted measured as the most
dimension of employer brand from
important factor among
employers and employees perspective.
all employer branding
factors
Organisation culture is one of the
important dimension of employer brand Accepted for both
H3 Accepted Accepted
from employers and employees groups
perspective
Human resource management system of
the organisation is one of the important Accepted for both
H4 Accepted Accepted
dimension of employer brand from groups
employers and employees perspective
Communication strategy is one of the Accepted for both
H5 Accepted Accepted
important factor of employer brand. groups
Prospective employees with a particular Analyzed based on five
H6 personality type have preference for Accepted NA key personality types of
particular sectors. employees
Prospective employees with a particular Analyzed based on five
H7 Accepted NA
personality type have preference for a key personality types of

87
 specific industry. employees
Prospective employees with a particular Analyzed based on five
H8 personality type have preference for Accepted NA key personality types of
particular employer brand dimension. employees
Prospective employees with a particular Analyzed based on five
H9 personality type have preference for Accepted NA key personality types of
particular communication strategy. employees
Prospective employees with a particular Analyzed based on five
H10 personality type have preference for Accepted NA key personality types of
particular media of communication. employees
There is no significant impact of gender
in importance given to employer brand
H11 Rejected NA Difference measured
dimensions and communication
strategy.
There is no significant impact of Accepted based on
preference for a particular sector in overall results.
H12 importance given to employer brand Accepted Accepted However, there are
dimensions and communication some differences within
strategy. sector
There is no significant impact of gender
H13 Rejected NA Difference observed
on preference for a particular sector.
Significant differences
observed and analyzed
There is no significant impact of gender for some of the
H14 Rejected NA
on preference for a particular industry. industries such as
media and electronic
commerce
Communication is one
There is no significant difference in the of the important factor
importance given to communication of employer brand.
H15 Accepted
strategy used for employer branding by Thus, both set of
prospective employers and employees. respondents have given
importance to

88
 communication
strategy. However,
there are difference in
importance for
communication
medium

Table 4.1 Summary of hypotheses

4.5 Detailed analysis of hypotheses:

No. Description Employee Employer
Comment
H1 There is a significant difference in
perceived importance of different
Difference in terms
dimensions of Employer brand and
Accepted of importance
communication strategy from
rating means
employers and employees
Perspective.

There is significant difference in terms of employer brand dimensions and communication

strategy based on employee and employer responses. However, employees have shown
higher perceived importance for brand dimensions, on an average more than 4 rating
(important) as both set of groups have given higher importance to the entire employer brand
dimensions and factor. Organisational Reputation is rated as the highest important employer
branding parameter by both categories.

To further analyze, independent t-test is performed to observe the variance in two

independent data sets.

89
Chart 4.1 Organisation Reputation from Employer Perspective

Chart 4.2 Organisation Reputation from Employee Perspective

Chart 4.3 Human Resource Management Process from Employer Perspective

Chart 4.4 Human Resource Management Process from Employee Perspective

90
Chart 4.5 Organisational Culture from Employer Perspective

Chart 4.6 Organisational Culture from Employee Perspective

Chart 4.7 Communication Strategy from Employer Perspective

Chart 4.8 Communication Strategy from Employee Perspective

91
Chart 4.9 Corporate Events from Employer Perspective

Chart 4.10 Corporate Events from Employee Perspective

Chart 4.11Digital Communication Channels from Employer Perspective

92
Chart 4.12 Digital Communication Channels from Employee Perspective

Chart 4.13 Print Media from Employer Perspective

Chart 4.14 Print Media from Employee Perspective

93
H1: ‘’There is a significant difference in perceived importance of different dimensions of
Employer brand and communication strategy from employers and employees Perspective’’.
Explanation:

Overall, each branding dimension within employee and employer has high importance that
means as a whole employer brand plays a very important role for both. However, there are
differences in overall means that also represent that employees give more weightage to
organisational reputation, organisational culture and communication strategy than employer.
Employers give more focus and importance towards human resource management system as
this is the key branding factor and first face for fresher who doesn’t have experience of
corporate culture and system. There is remarkable difference in standard deviation, it means
that employers opinions are varied and employees have more similar views overall. This also
proves that there is difference in perceived value of employer brand as more ‘not important’
(rating 1 or 2) responses were selected by employer respondents than prospective employees.
Independent t-test performed to analyze the variance between means of employers and
employees results. Results of t-test also show variance between employers and employees
means of employer brand important parameters. So, hypothesis is accepted that says ‘’There
is a significant difference in perceived importance of different dimensions of Employer brand
and communication strategy from employers and employees Perspective’’.
Group Statistics

Respondent_Type N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Q5._Employer_Branding_Dimension_Organisational_Reputation Employee 287 4.35 .712 .042

Employer 318 4.27 1.015 .057

Q5._Employer_Branding_Dimension_Human_Resource_Management_Syste Employee 287 4.17 .731 .043

m
Employer 318 4.18 .978 .055

Q5._Employer_Branding_ Dimension _Organisational_Culture Employee 287 4.18 .792 .047

Employer 318 4.17 .984 .055

Q5._Employer_Branding_Factor_Communication_Strategy Employee 287 4.22 .746 .044

Employer 318 4.21 .972 .055

Table 4.2: Hypothesis 1 Analysis

94
 Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test t−test for Equality of Means
for Equality of
Variances
F Sig. t df Sig. (2− Mean Std. Error 95% Confidence
tailed) Difference Difference Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Q5._Employer_B Equal variances 20.42 .00 1.083 603 .279 .078 .072 −.063 .219
randing_Dimensi assumed 0 0
on_Organisation Equal variances 1.102 569. .271 .078 .071 −.061 .217
al_Reputation not assumed 402
Q5._Employer_B Equal variances 21.08 .00 −.165 603 .869 −.012 .071 −.151 .127
randing_Dimensi assumed 7 0
on_Human_Reso Equal variances −.167 583. .867 −.012 .070 −.149 .125
urce_Manageme not assumed 027
nt_System
Q5._Employer_B Equal variances 10.59 .00 .203 603 .839 .015 .073 −.129 .158
randing_Dimensi assumed 5 1
on_Organisation Equal variances .206 595. .837 .015 .072 −.127 .157
al_Culture not assumed 351
Q5._Employer_B Equal variances 12.12 .00 .080 603 .936 .006 .071 −.134 .145
randing_Factor_ assumed 2 1
Communication_ Equal variances .081 588. .935 .006 .070 −.132 .143
Strategy not assumed 152

Table 4.3 Independent sample t-test to measure variance among employer brand dimensions
and communication factors

No. Description Employee Employer Comment

H2 Organisational reputation of the organisation is Accepted Accepted Accepted for both
one of the important dimension of employer brand groups with high
from employers and employees perspective. confidence and
measured as the
most important
parameter among
all employer brand
factors

Below chart shows employee and employer survey results on Organisational Reputation:
H2 Explanation:

Employers and employees data analysis results have proved hypothesis “Organisational
reputation of the Organisation is one of the important dimension of employer brand” by their
responses. Employee results have overall average rating of Organisational reputation
parameter is 4.35 vs. 4.27 employer survey responses on rating scale of 1 to 5 .

95
At aggregate level, all employer brand dimensions are important for both employees and
employers.

Chart 4.15 H2 Analysis Aggregate averages of employer brand dimensions and

communication factor

Chart 4.16 Analysis of Organisational Reputation Dimension

No. Description Employee Employer Comment

96
H3 Organisation culture is one of the important Accepted Accepted
dimension of employer brand from employers
and employees perspective

Below chart shows employees and employers survey results on Organisational reputation:
Organisation culture is proved as one of the important dimension of employer brand with
4.18 and 4.17 mean values for employer and employee group respectively.

Chart 4.17 Analysis of Organisational Culture Dimension

No. Description Employee Employer Comment

H4 Human resource management system of the Accepted Accepted
organisation is one of the important dimension
of employer brand from employers and
employees perspective

Below chart shows employee and employer survey results on Human Resource Processes:
Results have shown Human Resource Management System of the Organisation as one of the
important dimension of employer brand. Employee group’s average importance score is 4.17
whereas employer group has 4.18 score. Employer score is slightly higher than employee
group that shows that organisations have more importance of human resource management
Processes than employers think or perceive.

97
Chart 4.18 Analysis of Human Resource Management System Dimesnion

No. Description Employee Employer Comment

H5 Communication Strategy is one of the Accepted Accepted
important factor for employer brand.

Below chart shows employee and employer survey results on Communication Strategy:
Organisation Communication strategy is highly rated importance factor for both employees
and employers group. Both groups have 4.22 and 4.21 means for employee and employer
respectively.

98
Chart 4.19 Analysis of Communication Strategy Factors

No. Description: Prospective employees with a Employee Employer Comment

particular personality type have preference for
particular
H6 sectors Accepted NA

Based on crosstab and regression analysis, it has been observed that personality type of
applicants play a very important role in their preferences towards selecting particular sector,
industry and brand dimensions during their employment. It helps to match the personality
type with the organisation culture, type, work and many other factors. In the same way, it is
beneficial for employer to get the right candidate from the available applicant’s pool. This
analysis would help to save time and effort and will reduce the chances of rejection in
selection of a job aspirant. Five key personality types like Agreeableness, Conscientiousness,
Extroversion Neuroticism, and Openness were analyzed with respect to brand through
employee survey. There were 44 different questions to analyze the personality type and
relation with branding strategy. Government and private sector has been given as a choice.
Relation of preferences towards these two sectors with personality has been studied and
depicted by different charts and tables.

99
 Crosstab
Dream_Organisation Total
Govt. Pvt.
Agreeableness 2 Count 2 1 3
% within Agreeableness 66.7% 33.3% 100.0%
% within 1.7% 0.6% 1.0%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 0.7% 0.3% 1.0%
3 Count 28 56 84
% within Agreeableness 33.3% 66.7% 100.0%
% within 24.1% 32.7% 29.3%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 9.8% 19.5% 29.3%
4 Count 81 106 187
% within Agreeableness 43.3% 56.7% 100.0%
% within 69.8% 62.0% 65.2%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 28.2% 36.9% 65.2%
5 Count 5 8 13
% within Agreeableness 38.5% 61.5% 100.0%
% within 4.3% 4.7% 4.5%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 1.7% 2.8% 4.5%
Total Count 116 171 287
% within Agreeableness 40.4% 59.6% 100.0%
% within 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 40.4% 59.6% 100.0%

100
Table 4.4 Cross Tab: Agreeable Personality and Dream
Organisation

Personality type 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree

Chart 4.20 Dream Organisation for Agreeableness

Prospective employees are agreed with around 70% Agreeableness personality type and these
employees have given more preference to private organisation (40%) than government
organisation (30%).

101
 Crosstab
Dream_Organisation Total
Govt. Pvt.
Extroversio 2 Count 3 1 4
n % within Extroversion 75.0% 25.0% 100.0%
% within 2.6% 0.6% 1.4%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 1.0% 0.3% 1.4%
3 Count 67 77 144
% within Extroversion 46.5% 53.5% 100.0%
% within 57.8% 45.0% 50.2%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 23.3% 26.8% 50.2%
4 Count 44 89 133
% within Extroversion 33.1% 66.9% 100.0%
% within 37.9% 52.0% 46.3%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 15.3% 31.0% 46.3%
5 Count 2 4 6
% within Extroversion 33.3% 66.7% 100.0%
% within 1.7% 2.3% 2.1%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 0.7% 1.4% 2.1%
Total Count 116 171 287
% within Extroversion 40.4% 59.6% 100.0%
% within 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 40.4% 59.6% 100.0%

Table 4.5 Crosstab Extraversion Personality and Dream Organisation

102
Personality type 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree

Chart 4.21 Dream Organisation for Extroversion

Prospective employees are agreed with around 48% Extroversion personality type and these
employees have given more preference to private organisation (32%) than government
organisation (15%).

Crosstab
Dream_Organisation Total
Govt. Pvt.
Neuroticism 1 Count 0 2 2
% within Neuroticism 0.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% within 0.0% 1.2% 0.7%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 0.0% 0.7% 0.7%
2 Count 28 72 100
% within Neuroticism 28.0% 72.0% 100.0%
% within 24.1% 42.1% 34.8%

103
 Dream_Organisation
% of Total 9.8% 25.1% 34.8%
3 Count 79 80 159
% within Neuroticism 49.7% 50.3% 100.0%
% within 68.1% 46.8% 55.4%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 27.5% 27.9% 55.4%
4 Count 9 17 26
% within Neuroticism 34.6% 65.4% 100.0%
% within 7.8% 9.9% 9.1%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 3.1% 5.9% 9.1%
Total Count 116 171 287
% within Neuroticism 40.4% 59.6% 100.0%
% within 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 40.4% 59.6% 100.0%

Table 4.6 Crosstab: Neuroticism Personality and Dream Organisation

104
Personality type 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree

Chart 4.22 Dream Organisation for Neuroticism

Prospective employees are neither agree nor disagree with around 55% Neuroticism
personality type and these employees have given more preference to private organisation
(28%) than government organisation (25%).

105
 Crosstab
Dream_Organisation Total
Govt. Pvt.
Openness 2 Count 1 0 1
% within Openness 100.0% 0.0% 100.0%
% within 0.9% 0.0% 0.3%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 0.3% 0.0% 0.3%
3 Count 61 66 127
% within Openness 48.0% 52.0% 100.0%
% within 52.6% 38.6% 44.3%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 21.3% 23.0% 44.3%
4 Count 54 104 158
% within Openness 34.2% 65.8% 100.0%
% within 46.6% 60.8% 55.1%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 18.8% 36.2% 55.1%
5 Count 0 1 1
% within Openness 0.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% within 0.0% 0.6% 0.3%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 0.0% 0.3% 0.3%
Total Count 116 171 287
% within Openness 40.4% 59.6% 100.0%
% within 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 40.4% 59.6% 100.0%

Table 4.7 Crosstab: Openness Personality and Dream Organisation

106
Personality type 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree

Chart 4.23 Dream Organisation for Openness

Prospective employees are agreed with around 55% Openness personality type and these
employees have given more preference to private organisation (37%) than government
organisation (19%).

107
 Crosstab
Dream_Organisation Total
Govt. Pvt.
Conscientiousness 3 Count 40 51 91
% within 44.0% 56.0% 100.0%
Conscientiousness
% within 34.5% 29.8% 31.7%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 13.9% 17.8% 31.7%
4 Count 71 113 184
% within 38.6% 61.4% 100.0%
Conscientiousness
% within 61.2% 66.1% 64.1%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 24.7% 39.4% 64.1%
5 Count 5 7 12
% within 41.7% 58.3% 100.0%
Conscientiousness
% within 4.3% 4.1% 4.2%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 1.7% 2.4% 4.2%
Total Count 116 171 287
% within 40.4% 59.6% 100.0%
Conscientiousness
% within 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Dream_Organisation
% of Total 40.4% 59.6% 100.0%

Table 4.8 Crosstab: Conscientiousness Personality and Dream Organisation

108
Personality type 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree

Chart 4.24 Dream Organisation for Conscientiousness

Prospective employees are agreed with around 68% Conscientiousness personality type and
prospective employees have given more preference to private organisation (42%) than
government organisation (26%).

No. Description: Prospective employees with a Employee Employer Comment

particular personality type have preference for
particular -
H7 industry Accepted NA

The R2 quantifies the linear relationship in the sample of data which has been analyzed. Even
if there is no underlying relationship, there is almost certainly some relationship in the group. R-
squared shows personality in the model and explains the variation in the dependent variable.
Adjusted R-squared gives the percentage of variation explained by only those

109
independent variables that in reality affect the dependent variable. The F-test of overall
significance determines that relationship is statistically significant. Histograms show the
preferences of each personality type for industry that is varied among five different
personality types. It shows that prospective employees with a particular personality type have
preference for particular industry. Fifteen industries have been selected to study its relation
with personality types.

Model Summaryb

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the Change Statistics

Square Estimate R Square F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change
Change
1 .183a .033 .016 5.480 .033 1.942 5 281 .087

a. Predictors: (Constant), Openness, Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Extroversion,

Conscientiousness
b. Dependent Variable: Industry_Code
Table 4.9 Regression summary table for Personality type and Industry

ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 291.628 5 58.326 1.942 .087b

Residual 8437.515 281 30.027

Total 8729.143 286

a. Dependent Variable: Industry_Code

b. Predictors: (Constant), Openness, Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Extroversion,
Conscientiousness

Table 4.10 Model Summary: ANOVA table for Personality type and
Industry

Personality type correlation Coefficientsa matrix

110
 Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig. Correlations Collinearity Statistics

Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta Zero-order Partial Part Tolerance VIF

(Constant) 5.292 4.556 1.162 .246

Agreeableness -.354 .660 -.036 -.536 .593 -.051 -.032 -.031 .779 1.283
Conscientiousness -.855 .743 -.082 -1.151 .251 -.066 -.069 -.068 .670 1.492
1
Extroversion -.132 .620 -.014 -.213 .832 -.020 -.013 -.012 .851 1.176

Neuroticism -.044 .588 -.005 -.074 .941 .037 -.004 -.004 .769 1.300
Openness 1.871 .651 .173 2.876 .004 .151 .169 .169 .947 1.056

a. Dependent Variable: Industry_Code

Table 4.11 Personality type correlation with Industry

Agreeableness has the highest preference for banking industry, followed by

telecommunication then research & development.

Chart 4.25 Industry Preferences for Agreeableness

Extroversion has the highest preference for banking industry.

111
Chart 4.26 Industry Preferences for Extroversion

Neuroticism has not given high preference to any industry and either seems indifferent for
any particular industry or gives no importance to industry preferences.

Chart 4.27 Industry Preferences for Neuroticism

Openness has preference for Banking, information technology and research &development
industry, followed by fast moving consumer goods.

112
Chart 4.28 Industry Preferences for Openness

Conscientiousness has the highest preference for banking industry, followed by information
technology then research & development, fast moving consuming good and media &
entertainment.

Conscientiousness
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10% 23%
5% 13%
8% 7% 5% 5%
0% 4% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0%

Most Conscientiousness Average Conscientiousness Least Conscientiousness

Chart 4.29 Industry Preferences for Conscientiousness

Banking industry is the most conscientiousness among all personality type followed by
information technology industry of employees except for Neuroticism personality type
employees.

113
No. Description: Prospective employees with a Employee Employer Comment
particular personality type have preference for
particular -
H8 employer brand dimension and communication Accepted NA
strategy

Agreeableness personality type employees have strong correlation with human resource
management systems and communication Strategy. Openness personality type has highest
correlation with overall employer brand dimension. Whereas, Neuroticism have least
association with employer branding factors.
Extroversion has small negative correlation (inverse) with Organisational Culture.

114
 Q5_Employer_Branding_Dimension_Organi Q5_Employer_Branding_Dimension_Human Q5_Employer_Branding_Dimension_Organi
sational_Reputation _ Human Resource Management Systems sational_Culture
Pearson Correlation Agreeableness .140 .234 .129
.009
Sig. (1-tailed) Agreeableness .000 .015
.021
Pearson Correlation Conscientiousness .171 .157

Sig. (1-tailed) Conscientiousness .002 .004 .359

Pearson Correlation Extroversion .042 -.018 -.055

Sig. (1-tailed) Extroversion .238 .384 .177

Pearson Correlation Neuroticism .025 -.013 -.018

.414
Sig. (1-tailed) Neuroticism .338 .379

Pearson Correlation Openness .140 .223 .144

Sig. (1-tailed) Openness .009 .000 .007

Table 4.12 1-Tailed Test for Personality types and Employer Brand Dimensions

No. Description: Prospective employees with a Employee Employer Comment

particular personality type have preference for
particular -
H9 communication strategy Accepted NA

Personality types have distributed correlation with communication strategy type.

Agreeableness type employees show correlation with events. Openness type employees relate
with media.

Q9_Communica Q9_Communica Q9_Communica Q9_Communica Q9_Communica Q9_Communica

tion_Strategy_ tion_Strategy_E tion_Strategy_E tion_Strategy_E tion_Strategy_M tion_Strategy
Word_of_Mouth mployee_Testi mployee_Referr vents edia
monials als
Pearson .150
Correlation Agreeableness .139 .098 .036 .145 .184

Sig. (1-tailed)
Agreeableness .009 .049 .271 .005 .007 .001

Pearson Conscientiousne
Correlation .032 .087 -.066 .046 .029 .039
ss
Sig. (1-tailed) Conscientiousne
.295 .071 .132 .217 .313 .254
ss
Pearson
Correlation Extroversion -.044 .014 -.111 -.031 .054 -.006

Sig. (1-tailed)
Extroversion .227 .407 .031 .299 .183 .459

Pearson
Correlation Neuroticism -.022 .001 .079 -.001 .019 .036

Sig. (1-tailed)
Neuroticism .356 .491 .092 .494 .375 .274

Pearson
Correlation Openness .142 .245 .089 .170 .191 .228

Sig. (1-tailed)
Openness .008 .000 .066 .002 .001 .000

Table 4.13 1-Tailed Test for Personality types and Communication Strategy

115
No. Description: Employee Employer Comment
Prospective employees with a particular
personality type have preference for particular -
H10 media of communication Accepted NA Explained

Agreeableness and Conscientiousness show preference for corporate events and openness
type shows for print media. However, Extroversion and Neuroticism have some preference
for digital communication channels.

Q10_Corporate_Events Q11_DigiComm_channels Q12_Print_Media

Pearson Correlation .226

Agreeableness .193 .150
Sig. (1-tailed)
Agreeableness .000 .000 .005
Pearson Correlation .141
Conscientiousness .122 .089
Sig. (1-tailed) .020
Conscientiousness .008 .067
Pearson Correlation
Extroversion .081 .090 .069
Sig. (1-tailed)
Extroversion .086 .063 .121
Pearson Correlation .079
Neuroticism .042 .068
Sig. (1-tailed)
Neuroticism .241 .091 .126
Pearson Correlation .229
Openness .213 .187
Sig. (1-tailed)
Openness .000 .001 .000

Table 4.14 1-Tailed test for Personality types, events, digital channels, media

No. Description: Employee Employer Comment

There is no significant impact of gender
H11 in importance given to employer brand Rejected NA
dimensions and factor.

Perspective employees have some importance rating differences within gender, survey results
summarised that ‘Female’ candidates give more importance to employer brand dimensions
and communication factors. Overall, in all the factors ‘Female’ respondents have given
higher rating than ‘Male’ respondents in terms of percentages. When analyzed further, male
respondents did not perceive employer brand dimensions as important factor for employer
preferences. Overall cumulatively, male have selected 14% employer brand as 1 or 2 rating
(not important) whereas female employees have selected only 6% as 1 or 2 rating for
employer brand dimension. That shows that among female, employer brand dimensions are
very important while choosing any employer. In that regards, employer should focus on
different strategy while targeting a female candidate also for a particular role or nature of job.
It is in employer’s favor that they should create their brand image so they would not miss the
best fit female candidates for the position due to their misinterpreted employer brand.

116
 Questions Ratings Total Male Female
Not Important (rating 1−2) 1% 2% 1%
Organisational Reputation Important (rating 3−5) 99% 98% 99%
Average 4.3 4.3 4.4
Not Important (rating 1−2) 2% 4% 1%
Human Resource Management System Important (rating 3−5) 98% 96% 99%
Average 4.2 4.1 4.2
Not Important (rating 1−2) 3% 5% 3%
Organisational Culture Important (rating 3−5) 97% 95% 97%
Average 4.2 4.1 4.3
Not Important (rating 1−2) 2% 3% 1%
Communication Strategy Important (rating 3−5) 98% 97% 99%
Average 4.2 4.1 4.3

Table 4.15 Employer brand dimensions and factor importance summary by gender

117
 Q5_Employer_Branding_ Dimensions_and_Factor * Gender Crosstabulation
Gender Total
F M

Q5_Employer_Branding_Dimensions_and 1 Count 0 1 1
_Factor % within Q5 0.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% within Gender 0.0% 0.8% 0.3%
% of Total 0.0% 0.3% 0.3%

3 Count 5 10 15
% within Q5 33.3% 66.7% 100.0%
% within Gender 3.2% 7.5% 5.2%
% of Total 1.7% 3.5% 5.2%

4 Count 81 72 153
% within Q5 52.9% 47.1% 100.0%
% within Gender 52.6% 54.1% 53.3%
% of Total 28.2% 25.1% 53.3%
5 Count 68 50 118
% within Q5 57.6% 42.4% 100.0%
% within Gender 44.2% 37.6% 41.1%
% of Total 23.7% 17.4% 41.1%

Total Count 154 133 287

% within Q5_Employer_Branding_Factor 53.7% 46.3% 100.0%
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% of Total 53.7% 46.3% 100.0%

Table 4.16 Employer brand dimensions and factor ratings summary by gender

118
 Q5_Organisational_Reputation

(1 = Not at all Important, 2 = Least Important, 3 = Somewhat Important, 4 = Important and 5

= Most Important)

Chart 4.30 Organisational Reputation importance by gender

Female (99%, mean = 4.4) gives more importance to Organisational Reputation than male
(98%, mean = 4.3).

119
 Q5_Human_Resource_Management_System
(1 = Not at all Important, 2 = Least Important, 3 = Somewhat Important, 4 =
Important and 5 = Most Important)
Chart 4.31 Human Resource Management System importance by gender

Female (99%, mean = 4.2) gives more importance to Human Resource Management System
than male (96%, mean = 4.1).

120
 Q5_Organisational_Culture
(1 = Not at all Important, 2 = Least Important, 3 = Somewhat Important, 4 =
Important and 5 = Most Important)

Chart 4.32 Organisational Culture importance by gender

Female (99%, mean = 4.3) gives more importance to Organisational Culture than male (97%,
mean = 4.1).

121
 Q5_Communication_Strategy

(1 = Not at all Important, 2 = Least Important, 3 = Somewhat Important, 4 = Important and 5

= Most Important)

Chart 4.33 Communication Strategy importance by gender

Female (almost 100%, mean = 4.4) gives more importance to Communication Strategy than
male (99%, mean = 4.3).

122
 (1 = Not at all Important, 2 = Least Important, 3 = Somewhat Important, 4 = Important and 5
= Most Important)

Chart 4.34 Communication Stratgey -Media importance by gender

Female gives more importance to Communication Strategy – Media than male.

123
(1 = Not at all Important, 2 = Least Important, 3 = Somewhat Important, 4 =
Important and 5 = Most Important)
Chart 4.35 Communication Channels importance by gender

Female prospective employee gives more importance to Communication Channels than male
prospective employee as no female has selected lower than 3 rating.

124
(1 = Not at all Important, 2 = Least Important, 3 = Somewhat Important, 4 = Important and 5
= Most Important)

Chart 4.36 Print Media importance by gender

Female prospective employee gives more importance to Print Media than male prospective
employee as no female has selected lower than 3 rating

No. Description: Employee Employer Comment

There is no significant impact of gender -
H13 on preference for a particular sector. Rejected NA

Female candidates have more preference to Government (62.9%) Organisations as compared

to male (37.1%) candidates. Males have shown higher preference for private Organisations
(52.6%) than female (47.4%) for dream Organisation.

125
 Dream_Organisation * Gender Crosstabulation

Gender Total

F M

Dream_Organisation Govt. Count 73 43 116

% within Dream_Organisation 62.9% 37.1% 100.0%

% within Gender 47.4% 32.3% 40.4%

Pvt. Count 81a 90b 171

% within Dream_Organisation 47.4% 52.6% 100.0%

% within Gender 52.6% 67.7% 59.6%

Total Count 154 133 287

% within Dream_Organisation 53.7% 46.3% 100.0%

% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Table 4.17 Dream Organisation Gender Cross Tab

Chart 4.37 Gender Preferences towards dream Organisation

Female prospective employee gives more preference to government organisation than private
organisation. However, male prospective employee gives more preference to private
organisation than government organisation.

126
No. Description: Employee Employer Comment
There is no significant impact of gender -
H14 on preference for a particular industry. Rejected NA

Female respondents have shown more inclination towards academics/training and

development, banking, healthcare, media & entertainment and telecommunication industry.
Whereas; airline hospitality, consultancy, fast moving consumer good, electronic commerce,
information technology and research & development have fetched more importance from
Male respondents. There is wide difference in media and entertainment and electronic
commerce for male and female as more than twice of female respondents have chosen media
& entertainment and electronic commerce with respect to male. On the same line, electronic
commerce has three times higher importance for male respondents than female.
Industry * Gender Crosstabulation
Gender Total
Female Male

Industry Academics/ T&D Count 13 4 17

% within Industry 76.5% 23.5% 100.0%
% within Gender 8.4% 3.0% 5.9%
% of Total 4.5% 1.4% 5.9%

Airline Hospitality Count 3 6 9

% within Industry 33.3% 66.7% 100.0%
% within Gender 1.9% 4.5% 3.1%
% of Total 1.0% 2.1% 3.1%

Banking Count 51 41 92
% within Industry 55.4% 44.6% 100.0%
% within Gender 33.1% 30.8% 32.1%
% of Total 17.8% 14.3% 32.1%

Consultancy Count 2 3 5
% within Industry 40.0% 60.0% 100.0%
% within Gender 1.3% 2.3% 1.7%
% of Total 0.7% 1.0% 1.7%

FMCG Count 8 10 18
% within Industry 44.4% 55.6% 100.0%
% within Gender 5.2% 7.5% 6.3%
% of Total 2.8% 3.5% 6.3%

Healthcare Count 3 2 5
% within Industry 60.0% 40.0% 100.0%
% within Gender 1.9% 1.5% 1.7%
% of Total 1.0% 0.7% 1.7%

E-Commerce Count 1 2 3
% within Industry 33.3% 66.7% 100.0%
% within Gender 0.6% 1.5% 1.0%
% of Total 0.3% 0.7% 1.0%

IT Count 15 19 34
% within Industry 44.1% 55.9% 100.0%
% within Gender 9.7% 14.3% 11.8%
% of Total 5.2% 6.6% 11.8%

Media & Entertainment Count 13 4 17

% within Industry 76.5% 23.5% 100.0%
% within Gender 8.4% 3.0% 5.9%
% of Total 4.5% 1.4% 5.9%

Table 4.18 Industry and Gender Crosstab

127
 o
m
rce

Chart 4.38 Gender preferences towards Industry

No. Description Employee Comment

Employer
H15 There is no significant difference in the Accepted Communication is one of the
importance given to communication important factors to promote
strategy used for employer branding by employer brand. Thus, both
prospective employee and employer. set of respondents have given
importance to communication
strategy. However, there are
differences in importance for
communication medium.

Overall rating average for employer (mean = 3.96) is higher than employee (mean = 3.76)
that shows that there is difference in the importance given by employer and employee.
Employer’ ratings are higher for employee testimonials and referrals that means internal
communication is more important for employer perspective. However, communication
strategy is one of the important factor of employer branding. Thus, both set of respondents
have given importance to communication strategy. However, there are differences in the
importance given for communication mediums.

128
Employer perceives more importance of Organisation’s employee testimonial or referrals
than employee (employer mean ~3.92 vs. employee mean ~3.67). Employer may choose
some branding imitative towards increasing importance of organisation’s employee
testimonial or referrals like featuring in the importance and success stories of these
communication strategy to make the employer perspective aligned with employee views.
Employer can focus on corporate events as these could be one of the way to create employer
brand as employee give more importance to these events as compared to employer
perspective. Mainly, organizing workshop, etc. are recognized by the both group. However,
employer can focus on trade shows (employer mean = 3.61 vs. employee mean = 3.46) to
promote corporate events as these corporate events have some difference in both group’s
perspective. Although, alumni meets (employer mean = 3.67 vs. employee mean = 3.71) have
higher importance among employees. This can be aligned with employer strategy of focusing
on organisation’s employee testimonial or referrals as alumni meets could be the best
possible opportunities for effective branding. Similarly, corporate website has the highest
importance in all digital communication channels (employer mean = 4.20 vs. employee mean
= 4.12 close to company presentation mean = 4.14). There are same importance rating for
both groups while comparing on overall digital communication channels (mean = 3.92 for
both the groups). However, employer may focus on mobile applications/instant messaging
(employer mean =3.69 vs. employee mean = 3.78) and direct mailing (employer mean = 3.70
vs. employee mean = 3.92) as there is some difference in this perspective. Company
presentation has high preference for both groups (employer mean = 4.01 vs. employee mean
= 4.14) so, employer may consider this as the target opportunity while looking for digital
communication for branding. For employee, university press and student Organisation
publications is the most important source of print media (employer mean = 3.84 vs. employee
mean = 4.01) source of communication strategy. This is observed that employer perceive
higher importance to digital media than print media (mean = 3.92 for digital and 3.87 for
print), however; employee showed equal importance towards digital and print (mean = 3.92
for both digital and print). Therefore, employer should not ignore the power of print even in
the digital world as prospective employee gets easy and regular access for print media.

Chart 4.39 Communication Strategies - Employer

129
Chart 4.40 Communication Strategies - Employee

Chart 4.41 Corporate Events - Employer

Chart 4.42 Corporate Events - Employee

130
Chart 4.43 Digital Communication Channel - Employer

Chart 4.44 Digital Communication Channel - Employee

Chart 4.45 Print Media - Employer

131
Chart 4.46 Print Media - Employee

4.5 Employer branding barriers, initiatives and benefits from employer perspective:
Employers’ data show that ‘Lack of awareness about Employer Brand benefits’ is the major
barrier in managing the employer brand successful. However, senior management support is
not observed as the major issue.

Chart 4.47 Barriers of Employer Branding

Employers understand that branding for employee is a very important part of corporate image
and give so much importance to branding initiatives. As this is validated with employers
results that show very high importance for branding initiatives. Among all brand dimensions,
employers have chosen internal and current employee research as the most important
initiative and want to give maximum focus on it. They have given least importance to
competitor analysis though it is also one of the important initiatives.

132
Chart 4.48 Branding Initiatives – Employer

Employer branding can provide benefits like job satisfaction and recognition as an employer
of choice that can be perceived as great place to work for employees. However, employer’s
expectations should match with employee’s aspiration to have a healthy and long-term
relationship.

Chart 4.49 Benefits of Employer Branding in order

Employers can take strategic initiatives to develop, maintain and promote employer brand
framework. Employers are required to overcome barriers in implementing employer brand
framework for strategic advantage. Above mentioned benefits can be incorporated in the
employer brand framework for prospective applicants attractiveness.Startegic development of
employer brand framework for prospective employees by incorporating the key factors of the
analyzed dimensions can help organizations to overcome the war of talent in this competitive

133
environment. Projection and promotion of employer brand framework for employee’s
attraction can be done by the right communication strategy. It has further been discussed and
elaborated in the following chapters.

134