CLC Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segments Identifying Drivers of Attraction and Commitment in The Global Labor Market

CEB Corporate Leadership Council
Attracting and Retaining

Critical Talent Segments
Identifying Drivers of Attraction and Commitment
in the Global Labor Market
Please note that the CEB program names referenced in this document have changed since the time of publication.
CEB Corporate Leadership Council Creative Solutions Group

Lead Consultants
Brad Adams
Thomas Bedington
Stephanie Tarant

Corporate Executive Board
2000 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: +1-202-777-5000
Fax: +1-202-777-5100
The Corporate Executive Board Company (UK) Ltd.
Victoria House
Fourth Floor
3763 Southampton Row
Bloomsbury Square
London WC1B 4DR
United Kingdom
Telephone: +44-(0)20-7632-6000
Fax: +44-(0)20-7632-6001
Senior Graphic Design Specialist

Christie Drake
Senior Manager, Editorial
Ericka Perry
Practice Managers
Brian Kropp
Scott Lund
Managing Directors
Nick Connolly
Jean Martin-Weinstein
Executive Director
Conrad Schmidt
General Manager
Peter Freire
www.clc.executiveboard.com
Note to Members
Legal Caveat
This project was researched and written to fulfi ll the research requests of several members of the Corporate
Executive Board and as a result may not satisfy the information needs of all member companies. The Corporate
Executive Board encourages members who have additional questions about this topic to contact the Board
staff for further discussion. Descriptions or viewpoints contained herein regarding organizations profi led in
this report do not necessarily reflect the policies or viewpoints of those organizations.
The Corporate Leadership Council has worked to ensure the accuracy of the information it provides to its
members. This report relies upon data obtained from many sources, however, and the Corporate Leadership
Council cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information or its analysis in all cases. Furthermore, the
Corporate Leadership Council is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services.
Its reports should not be construed as professional advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances.
Members requiring such services are advised to consult an appropriate professional. Neither the Corporate
Executive Board nor its programs are responsible for any claims or losses that may arise from a) any errors or
omissions in their reports, whether caused by the Corporate Leadership Council or its sources, or b) reliance
upon any recommendation made by the Corporate Leadership Council.
Confidentiality of Findings
This document has been prepared by the Corporate Executive Board for the exclusive use of its members. It
contains valuable proprietary information belonging to the Corporate Executive Board and each member
should make it available only to those employees who require such access in order to learn from the material
provided herein and who undertake not to disclose it to third parties. In the event that you are unwilling to
assume this confidentiality obligation, please return this document and all copies in your possession promptly
to the Corporate Executive Board.
Please note that the CEB program names referenced
in this document have changed since the time of publication.
2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

CLC16H7961-CEB
CLC16H7961
Table of Contents
Letter from the Corporate Leadership Council v
Overview of the Competitive Employment Value Proposition Initiative vi
Summary of Conclusions ix
List of Participating Organizations x
Interpreting Study Findings xii
Note on Research Methodology xiii
Council Essay: From Talent Scarcity to Competitive Advantage 1

Chapter I: Defining the Differentiated Value Proposition 25
Chapter II: Managing EVP Variation Across Key Segments 61
Chapter III: Ensuring EVP Credibility in the Labor Market 111
Appendix 143
Methodology 144
Demographics 145
The Role of the Organizations Mission in the EVP 146
Additional Segment Level Results from the Councils Employment Value Proposition Survey 147176
Order Form 177


iv
Letter from the Corporate Leadership Council

Council members have observed a unique convergence of key labor market and business dynamicsan aging
workforce, specialized talent needs, globalization, and growth imperatives, to name only a fewforcing a
fundamental rethink of workforce staffing strategies in support of business need. In response, leading HR
organizations are moving beyond vacancy-driven staffing to explore proactive management of labor markets with
the goal of ensuring advantaged access to scarce talent pools.
To ensure this advantaged access to talent, organizations have grappled with three fundamental questions:
How can the organization position itself to compete effectively for scarce talent?
How can the organization compete across multiple talent segments?
How can the organization position itself to ensure the commitment and retention of its new hires, as well as
tenured employees?
In response, the Council is pleased to announce the launch of the 2006 Competitive Employment Value
Proposition Research Initiative, a three-part examination of how organizations can best attract and retain critical
talent. The first volumeAttracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segmentsoffers a new-to-world framework
for understanding how the employment value proposition (EVP) attracts candidates and builds employment
commitment, and examines how to effectively design and segment the EVP.
Two additional volumes will be published shortly under separate cover. The second volume profi les leading
organizations strategies for defining and managing the EVP, as well as how to ensure its credibility in the labor
market. The third volume examines how organizations should design and communicate effective EVPs for key
talent segments.
It is our hope that this initiative will support member organizations in attracting and retaining critical talent to
meet current and future business needs. Since the findings presented herein do not address every challenge faced
in attracting and retaining talent, members are encouraged to contact the Councils research team for further
assistance. As always, we encourage and look forward to your feedback.
With our continued appreciation,
Corporate Leadership Council
Washington, D.C. and London
Fall 2006

vi
Overview of the Competitive Employment Value Proposition Initiative
The Corporate Leadership Councils 2006 Research Series

The Councils Competitive Employment Value Proposition Initiative addresses
the difficult challenge of how to design an employment value proposition
(EVP) to attract and retain critical talent segments.
In this study, Volume I of the initiative, the Council presents empirical analysis
of more than 58,000 respondents at 90 member organizations and within the
labor market to understand which aspects of the EVP attract candidates to
organizations, as well as which aspects of the EVP drive employee commitment
(and therefore retention). This study also analyzes how organizations should
segment the EVP, and provides strategies for effectively communicating the
EVP to the labor market.

In Volume II, a companion best practice study, the Council provides examples
of tactics and strategies from leading organizations on how to:
Define a Differentiated EVP,
Manage EVP Variation Across Segments and,
Ensure EVP Credibility in the Labor Market.
Volume III further explores EVP segmentation, examining how organizations
should design and communicate effective EVPs for key talent segments.
Overview of the Competitive Employment Value Proposition Research Initiative
Council Series on the Competitive Employment Value Proposition




Identifying Drivers of Attraction

and Commitment in the Global Labor Market
Best Practices for Building a Competitive

Value Proposition

and Commitment in Emerging Markets
Attracting and Retaining Critical

Talent Segments (Volume I)


Talent Segments
Identifying Drivers of Attraction and

Commitment in the Global Labor Market
Best Practices for Building

a Competitive Value Proposition

and Commitment in Emerging Markets

Identifying Drivers of Attraction and
Commitment in the Global Labor Market
Critical Questions Addressed in This Volume
The first volume in the series defines the Employment Value Proposition (EVP) and provides detailed analysis on
the following:
Which EVP attributes have the greatest impact on attracting and committing talent?
How can organizations vary the EVP for different talent segments?
What strategies should the organization employ to effectively communicate the EVP?

vii

viii
Summary of Conclusions
Question: How Can Organizations Build Competitive Advantage in the Labor Market?
The Employment Value Proposition (EVP) Is Critical to Talent Attraction and Commitment. Constructing and delivering an effective
employment value proposition allows an organization to source more deeply within the labor marketincreasing its access to more passive
candidates. It also improves the commitment of new hires by up to 29%.
Improving EVP Attractiveness Reduces New Hire Compensation Premiums by Up to 50%. When candidates in the labor market view an
organizations EVP as attractive, they demand less of a compensation premium when deciding to join. Specifically, EVPs that are viewed as
unattractive require a 21% premium to hire employees, while attractive EVPs require only an 11% premium.
Question: What Defines the Competitive Employment Value Proposition?
A Core Set of 7 of 38 Potential Attributes Are Universally Important at Driving Both Attraction and Commitment. The starting point for any
organizations EVP should be the seven core elements that provide, on average, 60% of the attraction and commitment benefit across all major
talent segments.
The Competitive EVP Must Be Differentiated from Competitors and Strategically Relevant. A competitive EVP builds upon market realities
and leverages the organizations strengths relative to competitors in the areas most important to employees. The EVP must also align with the
organizations current capabilities and longer-term strategic objectives to succeed.
Question: How Can Organizations Increase the Competitiveness of Their Employment Value Proposition Across Critical Talent Segments?
The Winning EVP Addresses Geographic Variation in the EVP Preferences of Critical Talent Segments. Geographic differences account for
72% of the variation in EVP preferences. Segmentation based on function, gender, or ethnicity is unlikely to generate significant returns.
Talent Segments in Emerging Markets Have Unique EVP Preferences That Must Be Prioritized for Success in Those Markets. Contrary to the
developed economies, there is no universal EVP for emerging economies. Country-specific analysis shows that compensation is relatively less
important to attract talent in India while company growth and innovation are more important. In China, a disproportionately high importance
is placed on development opportunities.
Question: How Can Organizations Build a Credible Employment Value Proposition in the Labor Market?
A Successful Labor Market Communication Strategy Emphasizes Organizational Reality, Message Consistency, and Self-Assessment.
Organizations can increase new hire commitment up to 27% by ensuring that the recruiting processes accurately reflect the realities of the work
environment and that all communication of the EVP is consistent. This allows candidates to accurately assess their fit with the organization.
Three Keys to Increase the Number of Employees Advocating for the Organization Are Trust, Flexibility, and Organizational Values.
Employees are the most trusted communication channel of potential new hires, but only 24% of employees would recommend their
organizations to friends. Addressing three key issues can increase employees likelihood of advocating the organization in the labor market by
up to 47%.

Source: Corporate Leadership Council research.
ix
List of Participating Organizations
With Special Thanks

The Council surveyed more than 58,000 employees from 90 different organizations across 20 industries
Partial List of Participating Organizations

List of Participating Organizations (Continued)
With Special Thanks (Continued)

Partial List of Participating Organizations

xi
xii
Interpreting Study Findings

The results and recommendations in this study are derived from data
collected from a large sample of employees from a diverse group of member
organizations. Members interpreting and acting on these fi ndings may wish to
keep the following considerations in mind:
Generalizing to Employees in Other Organizations, Industries, and
Countries
The observations and conclusions presented herein are based on a nonprobability sample of organizations and, as with any such sample, should be
interpreted with caution. The Council believes, however, that the conclusions
of this study are likely to be generalizable to many, if not most, organizations
for the following reasons.
1. Employees and managers were sampled from a diverse set of
organizations (90), industries (20), and countries (34).
2. The size of the sample, more than 58,000 employees, is very large
by traditional standards. All other things being equal, large samples
increase the accuracy with which inferences can be drawn about the
target population.

3. The Council carefully tested the data to ensure that the findings were
consistent across industry, geography, and organization size. Instances
where findings differ according to segment are detailed in Chapter II of
this study.
Supplementing the Data in Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segment
with Other Sources
Although the analysis presented here is based on a large sample of employees
and managers, the Council advises members to supplement the information
presented in this study with other sources where appropriate. Research is
always most powerful when it draws from multiple data sources and methods.
A Note on Terminology
Throughout this study, the term EVP is used to refer to the Employment
Value Proposition, which is the set of attributes that the labor market
and employees perceive as the value they gain through employment in an
organization.
Note on Research Methodology

Research Methodology
Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segments is supported by two main
components.
The Corporate Leadership Councils Employment Value Proposition
Survey: The data presented in this study were collected using a new survey
instrument, the Corporate Leadership Councils Employment Value
Proposition Survey. This Web-based survey was conducted during the spring
of 2006, with more than 58,000 respondents from 90 member organizations
completing the survey.
Analytical Tools: Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segments makes use
of a number of analytical techniques, chiefly Q-Sort methodology and linear
regression.
The Q-Sort technique is a tool for measuring attitudes and preferences. It
uses a forced-choice method, where one must rank a series of items in a pool.
Typically a person is presented with a set of statements or options, and is
asked to rank-order them, either in groups or on an individual-item basis, an
operation referred to as Q sorting. These rankings are subject to analysis.
Linear regression is used to calculate the strength of the relationship between
an independent and dependent variable while controlling other factors, such
as employee age, organizational tenure, industry, function, and education. As
an example, linear regression would allow the analysis of how delivery of the
employment value proposition attribute Manager Quality (the independent
variable) impacts an employees commitment (the dependent variable).

xiii

xiv
Council Essay: From Talent

Scarcity to Competitive Advantage

Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent
Talent in Short Supply

Across 2006, organizations of all sizes and from a range of industries and
geographies have reported talent shortages and workforce management
problems. These problems have resulted from increased demand in supplyconstrained labor markets, and in turn manifest through a diverse and wideranging set of challenges: shortages of highly-qualified graduates, pending
retirements, an aging workforce, and lack of experienced talent.
These supply problems, coupled with rising demand for labor, also create two
additional problems with which organizations must contend: high turnover
and wage inflation. As competition for talent increases, organizations not only
have trouble attracting employees, but also with keeping them as competitors
raise compensation packages in bids to poach talent. The resulting wage
inflation places additional strain on organizations.

In combination, all these problems threaten to disrupt operations across the

globe, requiring organizations to seek new and more refined methods to attract
and retain the talent they need for success.
Heard Around the World

Across the globe, labor market and demographic shifts are giving rise to talent shortages
Expressions of Concern Re: Labor Shortages
2006
Aging Workforce
Half of the European
men aged 55 to 64 elect
early retirement.
Unwanted Turnover
Manufacturing company
experiences 25% turnover in
managerial ranks.
Shortage of Qualified Graduates

High-Tech company sponsors technology
contests to get students excited about
computer science because of shortage
of engineering graduates.
Shortage of Experience
Chinese companies require
75,000 internationally
experienced leaderscurrently
there are about 3,000 to
5,000 such leaders in China.
Pending Retirements
Government agency
reports that by 2011,
45% of its scientists will
be eligible to retire.
Wage Inflation
Near full employment of highskill Indian talent results in rapid
wage inflation.
Source: The Washington Post, 15 June 2006; Eurostat; McKinsey Quarterly, April 2005; Workforce Recruiting
Management, June 2006; CLC Agenda Settomg Survey; Corporate Leadership Council research.
Council Essay: From Talent Scarcity to Competitive Advantage
Increased Labor Market Competition and Complexity

The talent scarcity problem originates from the intersection of two trends:
intensifying competition for talent and increasing workforce complexity.
Trend #1: Intensifying Competition for Talent
A strong global economy has placed enormous strain on talent pools. Fueled by
a record-setting global GDP growth of 4.75% from 2003 to 2007 (estimated),
an increasing number of organizations, both local and international, now
compete for talent.
Skill shortages, both globally and in specific talent markets, often limits
the size of the labor pool from which the organization can recruit. As an
example, the growth of industries such as health care has outpaced the speed
at which schools can produce medical professionals such as nurses. Insufficient
experience further exacerbates this problem. Critical on-the-job experience,
such as leadership at senior levels, has grown even more scarce as the global
demand for executives has accelerated. Even where necessary technical skills
are available, insufficient experience often limits the size of the real labor pool
from which an organization can draw talent. Engineers are a frequently cited
example; though technical institutes worldwide produce increasing numbers
of engineering graduates, the pool of engineers with the experience to manage
large scale projects is thin.
Unemployment has declined as a result of increased demand and competition,
from 7.2% to 6.6% across developed economies, further increasing
competition within labor markets. Combined with accelerating retirement
rates as the baby boom generation ages, the global labor market is set to
experience a continued war for talent.

Trend #2: Increasing Workforce Complexity

Responding to these labor shortages is not simply a matter of dealing with
increased competition, however. The complexity of the workforce further
complicates the organizations response to these labor shortage problems,
increasing the potential costs of failing to attract and retain the critical talent
needed by the organization.
The span and operation of organizations increasingly crosses borders, creating
the needs for HR to attract, retain, and manage global workforces. Crossborder trade reflects this trend, increasing from 18% of world GDP in 1990
to an expected 30% by 2015. The steady pace of offshoring by organizations
in developed economies also reflects this trend, placing greater strain on
workforce management as organizations compete to attract and retain talent in
new talent markets.
Separately, any one of these challenges would occupy a considerable portion
of HRs attention and resources. Combined, they create conditions where a
heightened and new war for talent require more targeted and direct strategies
to attract and retain the organizations critical talent.
A Different Kind of War for Talent?

Intensifying labor market competition and increasing workforce complexity complicate the talent scarcity problem
Factors Influencing the Need to Focus on Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent
Competition for Scarce Talent
Complexity of Workforce
Strong Global Economy

Global GDP growth at near-record pace of 4.75% from 2003 to 2007
(second only to 4.9% growth during 19701974).
Crossing Borders
Cross-border trade increasing from 18% of world GDP in 1990 to 30%
by 2015.
Declining Unemployment
Average unemployment in a sampling of developed economies declined from
7.2% in 2003 to 6.6% in Q1, 2006.
Aging Workforce
Rising median age in sample of developed nations (up 12.4% from 40.4 in
2005 to 45.4 in 2025).
Skill Shortages in Low-Wage Countries

Despite large labor pools, an average of only 13% of university graduates in
low-wage countries are viewed as employable by global companies.
Moving Offshore
More than three million U.S. service jobs expected to move offshore by
2015.
Accelerating Retirement
In developed nations, the over-65 population is anticipated to rise from 14%
in 2000 to 23% by 2030.
Virtual Talent Pools Expanding

Of U.S. companies, 44% offered telecommuting options in 2005, significantly
up from 33% in 2001.
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics and National Statistical Sources (United States, Canada, Japan,
France, Germany, Italy, United Kingdom; McKinsey Quarterly (United States, United Kingdom,
Germany, Italy, Japan); UN, 2005; IMF and Deutsche Bank, 2006; CNN (2006); Corporate
Leadership Council research.
A Solution to the Talent Shortage

To address these talent shortages, organizations have increasingly recognized
the power of the employment value proposition (EVP) to better attract and
ensure the long-term commitment of talent.
Nature of the EVP
Specifically, the EVP is the set of attributes that the labor market and
employees perceive as the value they gain through employment in an
organization. The EVP consists of five dimensions:
The tangible rewards an employee receives for his or her work,
such as compensation and benefits
The opportunity a job or organization affords an employee,
such as development experiences
The nature of the work itself, such as the extent to which it
matches an employees interests
The characteristics of the organization, such as its size or
market position
The characteristics of the organizations people, such as
manager quality

Outcomes of the EVP

Combined, these five dimensions of the EVP inform whether candidates are
attracted to an organization and, once employed, the extent to which they will
commit to the organization.
Increasing the organizations attractiveness to the labor market increases
the size of the available talent pool from which it can source. In addition to
increasing the fit between the organization and job candidates, effective
EVP management is also likely to result in increased commitment levels of
employers. With increased levels of commitment, employees will work harder,
perform better, and stay with the organization longer.
Utilizing data collected from the Employment Value Proposition Survey, the
Council examined how to most effectively leverage the EVP to drive attraction
and commitment.
The Employment Value Proposition

A Key to Attraction and Commitment
The Employment Value Proposition (EVP) drives attraction and commitment in the labor market
Attraction
EVP Attributes
Commitment
Increases the size of

the available talent pool
The EVP
Improves employee effort

level and performance
Increases fit between

organization and the
candidate
Improves retention
Rewards
Opportunity
Organization
Work
People
EVP
Attractiveness
Index
Employment Value Proposition

The set of attributes that the labor market and employees
perceive as the value they gain through employment in
the organization.
Commitment

Benefits of Managing the EVP: Attraction

Organizations that manage the EVP effectively will increase their
attractiveness, and therefore the depth of the candidate pool from which they
can source talent.
Three Factors Determine Organizational Attractiveness
When managing the EVP to increase attractiveness, HR must consider
three things. First, HR must consider the importance of the attribute to the
candidate; do candidates care enough about a particular attribute for it to
inform their decision making? Second, HR must consider the extent to which
candidates are aware of the attribute; how readily can the organization relay
information about the attribute to the labor market? Finally, HR must then
consider how candidates in the labor market perceive the organizations
delivery of that attribute; do they have positive or negative impressions?

Increased Attractiveness Also Enables Deeper Labor Market Sourcing

Attractive EVPs allow the organization to recruit from the active labor market,
but also the passive labor market. Organizations with unmanaged EVPs will
only have access to the portion of the labor market which is either directly
applying for new jobs or considering applying to new jobs. These active
candidates comprise approximately 40% of the workforce. A managed EVP
will bolster the organizations success in recruiting these candidates, but will
also enable access to deeper portions of the remaining 60% of the labor market
which is passive. Passive candidates are higher performers, and more likely to
stay at their new organizations.
Benefit #1: Improving Attraction
Opening Up the Labor Market

Effective EVP management increases the attractiveness
of the organization in the labor market
making it possible for the organization to

source from a deeper segment of the labor market
Degree of Activity in the Labor Market
12%
EVP
Attractiveness
Index
Organizations with
managed EVPs are
able to effectively
source from more
than 60% of the
labor market
Labor Market
Penetration
while organizations with

unmanaged EVPs are able
to source from only 40%
of the labor market.
Distribution of
Labor Market by
6%
Degree of JobSeeking Activity1
Function of:
Importance of the attribute
Awareness of the attribute
Perception of the attribute
How deep into the labor

market can an organization
source talent?
Managed EVP Unmanaged EVP
0%
0
25
Very Passive
50
75
100
Very Active
The Value of Passive Candidates

Passive candidates are higher performers and more likely to stay at their new organizations.2
Respondents are measured on a scale of 1 to 100 based on how active they were in the labor market before they were hired
by their current organization. A score of 100 indicates that the respondent was very active, and a score of 1 indicates that the
respondent was very passive in their job search behavior.
For more detail on passive candidates, see the Recruiting Roundtable Study Building Talent Pipelines.
Source: Corporate Leadership Council, Employment Value

Proposition Survey: Corporate Leadership Council
research.

10
Benefits of Managing the EVP: Commitment

A stronger EVP not only increases the depth of the labor market from which
the organization can source, but also ensures that new hires have much greater
commitment to the organization. These higher levels of commitment in turn
lead to increased effort, performance, and retention.*
Strong EVP Delivery Impacts New Hire Commitment
In fact, excellent delivery on the EVP can yield a workforce where 38% of
new hires display the highest levels of commitment. Organizations with poor
delivery of the EVP typically have less than one in ten employees who are
highly committed to the organization after one month of employment.
* For more information on the impact of commitment on performance and retention, please see page 33.

EVP Delivery Will Ensure Commitment Over Time

EVP delivery has lasting impact on new hires. After 12 months of employment,
31% of new hires will have the highest levels of commitment at organizations
with strong EVP delivery. That number is remarkably lower at organizations
with poor EVP delivery, 3%. Given the substantial investments made in
recruiting employees in to the organization it becomes all the more imperative
to ensure their commitmentand therefore performance and retention
through strong delivery of the EVP.
Benefit #2: Improving Employee Commitment
Getting More Commitment at Day One

Commitment is higher when employees enter
and at their one year anniversary
Commitment Levels, Less Than One Month of Tenure
Commitment Levels, 12 Months of Tenure
Poor Versus Excellent EVP Delivery
Poor Versus Excellent EVP Delivery
40%
38%
When organizations
effectively deliver
on the EVP, new
employees arrive
with higher levels of
commitment
and maintain that

commitment across
the first year.
40%
31%
Percentage
of Employees
Displaying
20%
High Levels of
Commitment1
Percentage
of Employees
20%
Displaying
High Levels of
Commitment
= 29%
= 28%
9%
3%
0%
0%
Poor
Excellent
EVP Delivery2
High levels of commitment are defi ned as employees whose commitment scores are greater than 90 on a 100-point scale.
Poor EVP delivery is defi ned by employees that have an EVP delivery of 4 or less on a 7-point scale. Excellent delivery is defi ned
as an average score across all attributes of 6 or more.
Poor
Excellent
EVP Delivery2

Proposition Survey; Corporate Leadership Council research.

11
12
Benefits of Managing the EVP: Compensation Savings

Finally, increasing the attractiveness of the EVP has one further advantage with
direct cost implications: it reduces the compensation premium organizations
must pay to hire talent. In other words, an attractive EVP reduces the amount
of compensation increase (the premium) the organization must offer,
compared to the candidates current salary, to convince them to accept the
offer.
EVP Attractiveness Reduces the Compensation Premium
Measuring Compensation Premium
The chart demonstrates a clear trend: less attractive EVPs lead to higher
compensation premiums, while more attractive EVPs result in lower
compensation premiums. While not necessarily high on a per-employee basis,
the monetary benefits quickly add up across large numbers of hires. Assuming
that the organization hires 500 new employees a year at an average salary of
$50,000, the premium they would have to pay with an unattractive EVP would
be $2.6 million a year.
To test the impact which an attractive EVP has on compensation premiums,

the Council asked respondents with less than 18 months of tenure to provide
compensation data on both their current job and the job they held at their
previous employer. This data was then analyzed according to the extent which
they felt their current organizations EVP to be attractive. Further analysis was
conducted to ensure that these findings held for both vertical and horizontal
job changes across organizations.

As shown below, respondents to the Employment Value Proposition Survey

said that, on average, they received a compensation increase of 16% when
moving from one organization to another. The bars to the left and right show
the average increase in compensation according to the degree of attractiveness
of the organizations EVP.
In summary, as attractiveness of the EVP increases, organizations become less

reliant on higher compensation levels to attract talent.
Benefit #3: Compensation Savings
Decreasing Compensation Costs

An attractive employment value proposition decreases the compensation premium required to attract candidates
The Monetary Benefits of Increasing Attractiveness
Only a 11% increase in

compensation is needed
to attract candidates
who feel the EVP is
attractive
Average
Compensation
Increase When
Changing
Organizations
21%
while a 21% premium

is needed to lure
candidates who feel the
EVP is unattractive.
16%
11%
Increase in Compensation
for Candidates Who Think
the EVP Is Attractive
Average Increase
in Compensation
Increase in Compensation
for Candidates Who Think
the EVP Is Unattractive
Doing the Math

Assuming an organization hires 500 people per year at an average salary of $50,000, the additional compensation premium
that they pay by being relatively unattractive in the labor market is $2.6 million per year in base compensation.
Note: Respondents were asked about their compensation level in their previous job and that is compared against their compensation in
their current job. Analysis was conducted to ensure that these fi ndings hold for both vertical and horizontal movements.
Source: Corporate Leadership Council, Employment Value Proposition Survey: Corporate Leadership Council

13
The Problem: Poor EVP Management

Few Organizations Successfully Deliver the EVP
Across 90 surveyed organizations, the percentage of employees rating their
employer as delivering a strong EVP ranged from less than 30% to more
than 55%. In the average organization, 41% of employees agreed that the
organization delivered a strong EVP.
Building and delivering an effective EVP presents a significant challenge to
nearly all organizations. But why is this the case? Three problems, explored
on the following pages, explain poor EVP design and delivery: misalignment
with preferences, poor differentiation, and failure to deliver on attributes of the
EVP.

14
Overall Problem
Significant Room to Improve

Few organizations deliver the EVP well, but those that do realize disproportionate returns
Variation in Delivery of the EVP
By Organization
100%
Organizations that effectively

deliver the EVP have twice as
many highly committed new hires
as the average organization.
At the vast majority of
organizations, only 4 out of 10
employees perceive a good EVP.
Percentage
of Employees
Reporting
Strong
50%
Delivery of
the EVP
Average Delivery
Score = 41%
0%
Organizations
Note: Each bar represents the percentage of employees indicating effective EVP delivery averaged across the 38 attributes by organization. Delivery
effectiveness was calculated as the percentage of employees who somewhat agreed or strongly agreed (5, 6, or 7 on a 7-point scale).

Proposition Survey; Corporate Leadership Council
15
16
Problems with Managing the EVP: Lack of Preference Alignment

To successfully deliver an EVP, organizations must first base that EVP on
attributes which the labor market prioritizes. In general, however, misalignment
exists between labor market preferences and organizational EVPs.
HR Misprioritizes Labor Market Preferences
One cause of this misalignment is a general disconnect between what the labor
market prefers and what HR believes the labor market prefers. Organizations
can construct the EVP from a wide array of attributes, requiring it to prioritize
some over others. Unfortunately, when identifying what attracts candidates
to the organization, HR overestimates the importance of people while
underestimating the importance of rewards, opportunities, and the nature of
the employees work. This misalignment then results in misprioritization of
attributes when designing the EVP.
This does not mean that people attributes do not matter when designing the
EVP, nor that HR should solely base the EVP on rewards. This data suggests,
however, that on the absence of hard data HR risks building and marketing
an EVP that does not deliver what the labor market wants. Such fundamental
misalignments are a key cause of low employee satisfaction with EVP delivery.

Variation in Labor Market Preferences Compounds Alignment Problems

Variation in labor market preferences across segments exacerbates the problem
of aligning the EVP with labor market preferences. For instance, only 13%
of respondents in China highly value work-life balance when evaluating an
employer, compared to 44% in the United Kingdom. Clearly, basing an EVP on
worklife balance will generate different results between the two countries.
This raises the question of designing and implementing multiple EVPs.
Coordinating an EVP across a variety of employee segmentsby gender,
geography, function, or ethnicity, for instancepresents a daunting puzzle.
How far should organizations pursue such segmentation? Chapter Two will
explore this problem in greater detail.
Problem #1: EVP Is Not Aligned to Preferences
Most EVPs Are Not Aligned with Employee Preferences

Disconnect between what the labor market
prioritizes and what HR thinks is most important
is further compounded by variation in

what is most important across segments
Relative Importance to Candidate Attraction
Importance of WorkLife Balance
HR Executives Versus Labor Market
40%
HR executives overestimate
the importance of people
People
50%
Perception of
Importance to
Attraction 20%
(HR Executives)
and underestimate
other EVP categories.
44%
Rewards
39%
Opportunity
Organization
Percentage of
Respondents
Ranking in
Top Five Most
Important
Attributes
Work
33%
30%
22%
es
m
ite
d
St
at
do
Un
at
eg
r
gg
Ki
ng
sp
Re
ia
Ind
ite
d
d
on
Actual Importance to Attraction

(Labor Market)

ts
en
40%
Un
20%
Ch
10%
0%
0%
ina
13%
Labor Market Segments
Source: Corporate Leadership Council, Employment Value Proposition Survey; Corporate Leadership
Council, 2006 Chief Human Resources Officer Survey; Corporate Leadership Council research.
17
18
Problems with Managing the EVP: Lack of Variation
The Labor Market Cannot Differentiate Between EVPs
As an example, perceived differences in an organizations work characteristics

are particularly narrow. Most organizations generally position their jobs as
having impact, of recognizing and respecting employees, and providing work
life balance. But without more detail to clarify these assertions, the EVP will
lack the differentiation it needs to appear attractive to prospective employees.
Relatively little variation exists in perception of the five EVP categories, as

shown by the chart on the lower page. The key to the right of the chart explains
in detail how to read the box and whisker plots for each category. The boxes
show the typical range of perception, while the whiskers show the high and low
extremes of perception.
The organizations rewardssuch as the competitiveness of the compensation

or benefits packagesprovides a similar example. Little variation in
perception of this attribute category exists in the labor market, minimizing
the extent to which candidates can incorporate it into their perception of EVP
attractiveness.
With little perceived difference of EVP attributes from one organization to the
next, the labor market cannot clearly evaluate one potential employer to the
next.
Those organizations which can position themselves as different along these

dimensions will potentially increase their attractivenessand therefore
competitivenessof their EVPs.
Once HR understands which attributes form a compelling EVP for its

employees and relevant labor markets, it must overcome the problem of poor
differentiation.

Problem #2: EVP Is Not Differentiated
All EVPs Look Alike

The labor market perceives little variation in EVPs across organizations
Labor Market Perceptions of Organization
Very
Strong
By Category
6.0
5.4
Perception of
EVP Category
Across
Organizations
5.1
4.9
4.7
5.9
5.6
5.8
5.3
6.0
5.9
5.7
5.6
5.5
5.7
5.4
5.3
5.1
4.9
5.9
5.6
4.8
4.8
Highest Scoring
Organization
4.5
4.4
4
Top Quartile
Mean
Looking across organizations,

the labor market has very
similar perceptions of the
EVP attributes.
Very
Weak
Key
Bottom Quartile
Lowest Scoring
Organization
1
Rewards
Opportunity
Work
People
Organization
Attribute Category

Source: Corporate Leadership Council research;

Annual Executive Retreat survey.
19
20
Problems with Managing the EVP: EVP Delivery Failure

It is not enough to simply select the right EVP and differentiate it effectively
in the labor market; organizations must actually deliver on the EVP, providing
the rewards, opportunities, work, people, and organizational experience
promised to the labor market.
Few Employees Feel the Organization Successfully Delivers the EVP
Alarmingly, less than 25% of employees feel that the organization effectively
delivers the value proposition promised to them as candidates. In other words,
less than one in four employees agrees that their organizations compensation
is as competitive as promised, that its managers are as high-quality as
previously asserted in the recruiting process, or that the opportunities within
the organization are as strong as they were led to believe.

Poor EVP Delivery Diminishes New Hire Commitment

This failure to deliver on the EVP has a direct impact on employee
commitment. Poor EVP delivery leads to a precipitous decline in the
commitment levels of new hires across their first 12 months of employment,
with more than a 25% reduction in average commitment. This in turn impacts
the performance of these new hires, as well as their intent to stay with the
organization.
Problem #3: EVP Is Not Delivered
Poor EVP Delivery Reduces Employee Commitment

Only 24% of new hires agreed
that what was promised was delivered
causing significant declines

in new hire commitment
The Value Proposition Promised to Candidates Is Delivered1
Employee Commitment by Tenure with Poor2 EVP Delivery
Percentage of Employees Agreeing with Statement
50
Failing to deliver on the

EVP causes more than a
25% decline in new hire
commitment levels across
the first 12 months.
Agree
24%
New Hire
Commitment 40
76%
Neutral or
Disagree
on
t
th
12
on
Le
or
h
O
ne
on
t
hs
ss
30
n = 58,024.
The pie chart represents the percentage of respondents who indicate agree or strongly agree (6 or 7 on a 7-point scale)
with the question, At our organization, the employment experience promised to prospective employees before they join is
always delivered once theyre onboard. New hire is defi ned as tenure with the organization of 12 months or less.
Poor EVP delivery is measured as an average score of less than four across all EVP attributes.
Tenure

Proposition Survey: Corporate Leadership Council research.
21

22
Key Findings
1. An organizations employment value proposition (EVP) is the set of attributes that the labor
market and employees perceive as the value they gain through employment in the organization.
2. An effective EVP provides organizations with three quantifiable benefits:
Improved attractiveness: Organizations with effective EVPs are able to source from a much
deeper pool of talent in the labor market. Top-performing organizations draw candidates from
about 60% of the labor market, including passive candidates who would otherwise be content
to stay with their current job. Lesser-performing organizations are able to source only from the
most active 40% of the workforce.
Greater employee commitment: Organizations with effective EVPs enjoy significantly higher
levels of commitment from their employees. Top-performing organizations have 3040% of
their workforce displaying high levels of commitment, compared to less than 10% in underperforming organizations.
Compensation savings: Organizations with effective EVPs are able to reduce the compensation
premium required to attract new candidates. Top-performing organizations are able to spend
10% less on base pay compared to under-performing organizations.
3. Organizations fail to build a strong EVP because of three common pitfalls:
Comprised of the wrong attributes: In the absence of data, organizations risk over-investing
in employment attributes that are less important to the workforce, while under-investing in the
most critical elements necessary for attracting and retaining talent.
Not differentiating from competitors: The labor market perceives minimal variation in the EVPs
offered by different companies, suggesting that organizations are not sufficiently differentiating
(and communicating) their EVPs.
Failing to deliver on the EVP: Organizations that fail to deliver on the most significant elements
of the EVP see significant declines in the commitment of their workforce. This decline can begin
almost immediately for new hires who feel that their expectations are not met.
23

24
Chapter I
Defining the Differentiated Employment Value Proposition

25
26
Order from Chaos

Breaking Down the Employment Value Proposition
Developing the List of 38 EVP Attributes
Conceptual and operational definitions of what attracts key talent, along

with corresponding advice on how to retain it, vary significantly in academia,
consultant literature, and the business press. Many questions exist as to what
constitutes the value proposition. As a result, senior HR leaders and their
executive colleagues have grown increasingly frustrated with the failure of EVP
strategies yield the right talent for the business.
To develop an actionable list of EVP attributes, Council staff reviewed a variety

of sources to identify potential EVP attributes. These sources included job
postings, company Web sites, business press articles, consultant literature,
academic and business research, and interviews with Council members.
For the purposes of this studyand ultimately to make the findings

actionablethe Council has defined an Employment Value Proposition (EVP)
as a set of attributes that the labor market and employees perceive as the value
they gain through employment in the organization.

A master list of over 200 characteristics was compiled and evaluated for
similarity, distinctiveness, universality, and overall ratability, leading to the
consolidated list of 38 attributes seen below.
This final list of 38 organizational attributes can be categorized into five
categories: The Rewards, The Opportunity, The Organization, The Work, and
The People.
Testing an EVP Along 38 Attributes

Of all of the potential attributes, which are most important for attraction and retention?
Rewards
People
Opportunity
Work
Organization
The Rewards
Compensation
Health Benefits
Retirement Benefits
Vacation
The Opportunity
The Organization
The Work
The People
Development
Opportunities
Future Career
Opportunities
Organization Growth
Rate
Meritocracy
Organizational Stability
Customer Reputation
Diversity
Empowerment
Environmental
Responsibility
Ethics
Great Employer
Recognition
Industry
Informal Environment
Market Position
Product Brand Awareness
Product Quality
Respect
Risk Taking
Organization Size
Social Responsibility
Technology Level
Business Travel
Innovation
Job Impact
JobInterests Alignment
Location
Recognition
WorkLife Balance
Camaraderie
Collegial Work
Environment
Coworker Quality
Manager Quality
People Management
Senior Leadership
Reputation
Note: Building on existing academic and business research, business news, organization and employment Web
sites, and more than 100 member interviews, the Council distilled the EVP into 38 representative attributes.
These 38 attributes comprise fi ve EVP attribute groupings that together defi ne an organizations EVP.

Chapter I: Defining the Differentiated Value Proposition
27
28
Definitions of EVP Attributes

The table below presents definitions for the 38 attributes which constitute the Employment Value Proposition
Attribute Name
Definition
Business Travel
The amount of out-of-town business travel required by the job
Camaraderie
Whether working for the organization provides opportunities to socialize with other employees
Collegial Work Environment
Whether the work environment is team-oriented and collaborative
Compensation
The competitiveness of the jobs financial compensation package
Coworker Quality
The quality of the coworkers in the organization
Customer Reputation
The reputation of the clients and customers served in performing the job
Development Opportunities
The developmental/educational opportunities provided by the job and organization
Diversity
The organizations level of commitment to having a diverse workforce
Empowerment
The level of involvement employees have in decisions that affect their job and career
Environmental Responsibility
The organizations level of commitment to environmental health and sustainability
Ethics
The organizations commitment to ethics and integrity
Formal/Informal Work Environment Whether the work environment is formal or informal

Future Career Opportunities
The future career opportunities provided by organization
Great Employer Recognition
Whether or not the organizations reputation as an employer has been recognized by a third-party organization
Growth Rate
The growth rate of the organizations business
Health Benefits
The comprehensiveness of the organizations health benefits
Industry
The desirability of the organizations industry to the respondent
Innovation
The opportunity provided by the job to work on innovative, leading edge projects
Whether the job responsibilities match your interests

Definitions of EVP Attributes (Continued)

Attribute Name
Definition
Job Impact
The level of impact the job has on outcomes
Location
The location of the jobs the organization offers
Manager Quality
The quality of the organizations managers
Market Position
The competitive position the organization holds in its market(s)
Meritocracy
Whether or not employees are rewarded and promoted based on their achievements
Organization Size
The size of the organizations workforce
The level of stability of the organization and the job
People Management
The organizations reputation for managing people
Product Brand Awareness
The level of awareness in the market place for the products brand
Product Quality
The organizations product or service quality reputation
Recognition
The amount of recognition provided to employees by the organization
Respect
The degree of respect that the organization shows employees
Retirement Benefits
The comprehensiveness of the organizations retirement benefits
Risk Taking
The amount of risk that the organization encourages employees to take
Senior Leadership Reputation
The quality of the organizations senior leadership
The organizations level of commitment to social responsibility (e.g., community service, philanthropy)
Technology Level
The extent to which the organization invests in modern technology and equipment
Vacation
The amount of holiday/vacation time that employees earn annually
WorkLife Balance
The extent to which the job allows you to balance your work and your other interests

29
30
Focus on Whats Important to Candidates to Drive Attraction

Meeting Candidate Preferences Is the Primary Driver of EVP Attractiveness
Shaping Candidate Perception
Developing an EVP capable of attracting talent in the labor market involves

three steps: selecting the attributes for inclusion with the EVP, building
candidate awareness of the EVP, and shaping candidate perception. The first
step, however, is the most vital. Selecting the right EVP attributes explains 77%
of the variation in EVPs attractiveness in the labor market.
Finally, organizations must ensure that the labor market has a favorable
impression of how the organization can deliver on the attributes within its
EVP. Shaping candidate perception of attributes accounts for 13% of the
variation attractiveness of the EVP. This stage goes beyond simple awareness
to credibly convince employees of EVP attributes. Additional detail on the
channels candidates trust the most when evaluating potential employers can be
found on page 51.
Selecting EVP Attributes

Organizations must base the EVP on attributes which the labor market
considers when evaluating potential employers. Failure to correctly build the
EVP will undermine efforts in the first and second stages, since promoting
EVP attributes which the labor market does not incorporate in to its decision
making will clearly fail to attract potential candidates.
Building Candidate Awareness
Once the EVP has been aligned with attributes the labor market considers
important, the organization must work to build awareness of these attributes.
Building candidate awareness of attributes accounts for 10% of the variation in
attractiveness of the EVP. Doing so requires that organizations effectively reach
out to the labor market to communicate their EVP.

Keeping these three steps and their relative importance in mind, HR can work
to craft a compelling EVP capable of attracting key talent. The following pages
will provide further guidance on the critical first step, aligning the EVP with
attributes the labor market finds most important.
An Attractive EVP Builds on Whats Important

Attractiveness is a function of the EVPs alignment with candidate priorities
Relative Weight of Different Components of Attractiveness
100%
10%
Defining Attractiveness
13%
Three factors determine whether or not an organizations

EVP is attractive to the labor market:
1. Is the EVP based on the attributes that the labor
market cares about?
2. Does the labor market have a favorable impression of
the organization on those attributes?
50%
77%
3. Is the labor market aware of how the organization

scores on those attributes?
The biggest factor in

determining how attractive
an organization is to the
labor market is a function of
whether or not it is based on
the attributes that candidates
care about. Awareness and
perceptions are relatively
less important.
0%
EVP Aligned
with Important
Attributes
EVP
Perceptions
EVP
Awareness

31
32
Why Measure Commitment?

In addition to organizational attractiveness, this report also studies the
impact of EVP attributes on employee commitment (also known as employee
engagement). Commitment has both an emotional component, the extent to
which employees value, enjoy, and believe in their organizations, as well as a
rational component, the extent to which they believe it is in their best interests
to stay with the organization.
Commitment Drives Performance and Retention
The Corporate Leadership Councils Research on Employee Commitment
Similarly, improving employee commitment will also support retention,

reducing probability of departure by as much as 87%, from 9.2% to 1.2%.
Every 10% improvement in commitment can decrease an employees
probability of departure by 9%.
To arrive at this definition, the Council has surveyed more than 75,000
employees since 2004 to understand the nature of employee commitment
(engagement), what drives it, and what outcomes organizations will receive
from building it. The full results of this study can be found in Driving
Performance and Retention Through Employee Engagement, available
at www.clc.executiveboard.com

The results are two-fold: increased performance and higher levels of retention.
Specifically, improving employee commitment leads to greater discretionary
effort. Every 10% improvement in commitment can increase an employees
effort levels by 6%, which in turn can improve performance by 2 percentile
points.
The Impact of Commitment

Commitment drives performance
as well as retention
Maximum Impact of Commitment

on Performance Percentage*
Maximum Impact of Commitment

on the Probability of Departure
10%
Moving from low- to high-effort

levels can result in an improvement in
employee performance that moves an
employees performance rating up to
20 percentage points.
9.2%
Moving from strong
non-commitment to
strong commitment
decreases the probability
of departure by 87%.
Probability
of Departure
in the Next 12 5%
Months
Number
of Employees
1.2%
50th
Percentile
70th
Percentile
The 10:6:2 Rule

Every 10% improvement in commitment can increase
an employees effort level by 6%.
0%
Strongly Noncommitted
Strongly Committed
The 10:9 Rule

Every 10% improvement in commitment can decrease
an employees probability of departure by 9%.
Every 6% improvement in effort can improve an

employees performance by 2 percentage points.
* The analysis above presents a statistical estimate of the maximum total impact on discretionary effort and performance
emotional commitment will produce. The maximum total impact is calculated by comparing two statistical estimates: the
predicted discretionary effort or performance rank for an employee who scores high in emotional commitment, and the
predicted discretionary effort or performance rank for an employee who scores low in emotional commitment.
Source: Corporate Leadership Council 2004 Employee Engagement

Survey; Corporate Leadership Council research.
33
34
The Reasons People Join and Stay with Organizations

While there is some truth to the old adage that people join organizations and
leave managers, the reality of todays market is that employees join for the
rewards and opportunities and stay for the people and the organization.
Rewards and Opportunities Have the Greatest Impact on Candidate
Attraction
The opportunities and rewards an organization offers are the primary drivers
of attraction, carrying the most weight in influencing someones decision
to join an organization. These are not only the most externally visible and
assessable categories of attributes, but directly meet the rational needs of
candidates on the labor market.
The People and Organization Drive Employee Commitment
These categories are not the most important drivers of attraction, however.
Once candidates have accepted the job offer and started employment, the
organization and its people play a much more prominent role in driving
employee commitment. Once employees are in the organization, the day-today impact of the people and culture carry a lot more weight as they make
decisions about how hard to work and how long they intend to stay with the
organization.

Do You Maximize Attraction or Commitment?

This raises a critical question: will EVP strategies designed to maximize
organizational attractiveness lead to workforces with lower commitment, and
therefore lower performance and higher turnover?
While each set of attributes has a dominant role for driving either attraction
or commitment, that does not mean that organizations can rely solely on one
set or the other to drive a particular outcome. Opportunities, for instance,
remain important for driving commitment as well for attraction, and failing
to deliver on opportunities would have notable negative impacts on employee
commitment.
Organizations must ultimately balance the EVP across these attributes. Before
addressing this question in greater detail, the following pages will first look at
the top drivers of attraction and commitment separately.
Putting Science Behind an Old Adage

Employees join for the opportunity and the rewards and stay for the people and the organization
Importance of Attribute Categories
By Outcome
Attribute
Categories
The People
100%
The Organization
12%
The Work
23%
11%
19%
Relative
Importance
50%
of Categories,
Indexed to 100
The Key for

Attraction
Emphasizing the
opportunity and the
rewards are critical for
attraction.
The Opportunity
The Rewards
20%
19%
29%
The Key for

Commitment
However, focusing
on the people and
the organization
become increasingly
important for driving
commitment.
22%
29%
16%
0%
Attraction
Commitment
Note: Attraction bars represent the percentage of respondents reporting attributes as top fi ve in importance when evaluating an
organization as a potential employer, averaged within attribute grouping and indexed to one-hundred. Commitment bars represent
the maximum impact each attribute had on commitment, averaged within attribute grouping and indexed to one hundred.
35
36
Compensation and Career Opportunities Attract

Looking at the individual attributes which compose the EVP, which
does the labor market hold most important?
The graph below presents the aggregate EVP preferences of the workforce, and
shows the percentage of respondents who listed each attribute within their top
five most important attributes when assessing a potential employer. Bars with
darker gray shading indicate that there is little variation in preferences for that
attribute across demographic segments. Lighter gray shading of a bar indicates
that there is variation in preference for that attribute across demographic
segments.
The Top Drivers of AttractionCompensation and Future Career
Opportunity
Looking across the attribute categories, opportunities and rewards drive
candidate attraction more than any other category, followed by work
characteristics, organizational characteristics, and then people.
When considering an organization as a potential employer, compensation is
by far the most important driver of attraction. That said, several other drivers
figure prominently in the labor markets evaluations of potential employers:
future career opportunities, organizational stability, worklife balance,
development opportunities, and respect. Given that, of these, only worklife balance shows strong variation by region, organizations must carefully
consider the extent to which they can compete on these attributes when
evaluating their EVP strategies.

Attributes That Do Not Drive Attraction

Surprisingly, a few attributes that have been heavily relied upon in the past
such as product brand recognition, great place to work recognition, or market
positionactually have very little impact on attracting employees to the
organization. Organizations that rely on these attributes to attract the talent
they need risk lower EVP attractiveness in the labor market.
It is important to note why some attributes drive attraction more than others.
Some are genuinely less important to candidates. Others, such as manager
quality, are important (in this case manager quality is a powerful driver of
commitment), but much harder for candidates to assess with confidence from
an external perspective. Job seekers will put more weight on dimensions they
believe they can assess accurately, such as compensation.
Using This Data to Develop an EVP Strategy
Many attributes that have featured prominently in organizational branding
campaigns do not weigh heavily in the decision-making factors of the labor
market. As an example, 6% and 4% of respondents prioritize an organizations
social and environmental responsibility, respectively. An EVP based on these
attributes would appeal to this small segment of the labor market, but would
fail to strike a larger segment of the labor market as a compelling employment
value proposition.
Opportunity and Rewards Are Most Important

Compensation and career opportunities show disproportionate returns at improving attraction
Percentage of Respondents Rating EVP Attribute in Top Five Most Important for Assessing Potential Employers
The Opportunity The Rewards
The Work
The Organization
The People
50%
Compensation is the
most important driver
of attraction.
44%
35%
33%
Attributes That Display

Consistency Across Segments
Attributes That Display
Variation Across Segments
33%
28%
Percentage of
Respondents
25%
Rating in Top Five
22%
20%19%
17%
15%
13%
10%10%
7% 6%
15%
9%
12%
11%11%11%
4%
ev
en
ac
ga
tio
a
niz
te
Ra
2%
14%
10%
5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4%
ss
en
as is manager quality.
9% 9%
3%
t
7%
ilit
en
pe
n
H
Re e V satio
tir alt ac n
em h ati
en Ben on
t B ef
W
en its
or
ef
k
its
Lif
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
s
Em
pe
Pr pow Et ct
Te odu er hics
ch ct me
n Q n
M olo ua t
ar gy lit
ke L y
So
t P ev
cia
os el
itio
lR
es
n
po
n
sib
Inf
o
Ind ility
Cu rma
us
sto l E
try
m nvir
e
o
O r R nm
rg ep e
an u n
iza ta t
tio tio
n n
D Size
ive
rsi
ty
Ri
Pe
s
k
op
Ta
le
ki n
g
M Man
an ag
ag em
er e
Co
Q nt
ua
wo
l it y
rk
e
Ca r Q
m ua
ar lit
ad y
er
ie
tO
m
op
ro
bil
it
o
pp
th
sts
Jo
e
ar
Al
nd
re
plo
Pr
at
re
e
R
ib
ns
m
on
sp
er
tB
c
du
n
og
Aw
ra
nt
I
b
itio
ne
m
ign
Co
m
tio
na
iza
an
el
re
tu
Fu
ee
r
Ca
rg
rO
cr
ito
G
lS
pp
nit
er
ta
rtu
nit
rtu
ies
ies
0%
Product brand awareness

is relatively unimportant
at driving attraction
28%
vir
n
kE
e
lR
or
ta
en
Em
nm
vir
En
io
at
t
pu
Re
ad
W
ial
e
rL
lle
Co
ip
rsh
5%
nio
Se
Attributes
Note: Each bar represents the percentage of respondents reporting attributes as top fi ve in importance when evaluating an organization as a potential
employer. The data above represent the aggregate level of attribute importance at the country-level averaged across countries.

The relative variation of attributes is calculated by the ratio of the standard deviation of the importance of the attribute to the average importance of
the attribute. Attributes with a ratio above 0.3 are considered to display significant variation across segments.
37
38
Its Not All About Compensation and Product Brand

Many organizations have long held that successful EVP strategies could rely
almost exclusively on the product brand. Data on the previous page casts doubt
on this, showing that product brand awareness was highly important for only
7% of respondents. But what about compensation? Can organizations buy
their way out of labor market trouble?
Strong EVPs Do Not Require High Compensation and Strong Product
Brands
Compensation is in fact a powerful tool for attracting talent to the
organization. But it is not the only tool available to successfully attract
candidates in the labor market.
The graphic below shows three sample EVPs selected from the organizations
that participated in the 2006 Employment Value Proposition Survey: one with
average awareness and perception of all attributes, one which prominently
features compensation and product brand, and one which prominently features
future career opportunities and respect for employees. Each organization has
an indexed attractiveness score, based on the importance the labor market
places on a particular set of attributes and the extent to which the labor market
is aware of and perceives those attributes.

Not surprisingly, the EVP with high compensation and product brand is more
attractive to the labor market than the average EVP, with an attraction score
of 73 versus 66.
The high-compensation and strong product brand EVP does not always
outperform, however. The second EVP, featuring career opportunities and
respect, is even more attractive to the labor market, with an attraction score of
74 versus 73.
Overcoming Low Compensation and a Weak Product Brand

Organizations can compete on more than just brand and compensation
Attractiveness of Multiple EVPs
80
73
74
Organizations that
compete on attributes
outside of compensation
and product brand can
be just as attractive to
the labor market.
Attractiveness 70
Score1
66
60
Average EVP
Average Corp.2
Average awareness
and perceptions of
all EVP attributes
EVP #1
Mega Corp.2
Well-known and positive
perception of compensation
perception of product brand
Average awareness and
perception of all other
EVP attributes
Attractiveness is a measure of how important the labor market views a particular set of attributes, multiplied by awareness and perception levels.
Pseudonym.
EVP #2
Focused EVP Corp.2

perception of future career
opportunities
perception of respect for
employees
Average awareness and perception
of all other EVP attributes
39
40
The People and the Organization Drive Employee Commitment

When designing the EVP, organizations must not only consider the impact that
attributes have on attracting candidates, but also on their commitment levels.
Understanding the Top Drivers of Commitment
The graph below presents the maximum potential impact that delivering each
EVP attribute can have on an employees level of commitment. Bars shaded in
dark gray indicate that the attribute consistently drives commitment across
talent segments; bars shaded in light gray indicate that variation exists in how
the attributes drives commitment across segments.
EVP attributes concerning the organization and its people have the greatest
overall impacts on driving commitment, though attributes concerning
opportunities and work play an important role as well. Development
opportunities, job-interests alignment, and respect for employees are the most
important, potentially impacting commitment by 45%.
Beyond these top three attributes, however, organizations have a wide array
of attributes to rely on when designing EVPs to build commitment. Seven
other attributes have impacts of 40% or greater: future career opportunities,
recognition, innovation, empowerment, ethics, manager quality, and senior
leadership reputation. Importantly, nearly all of these attributes (except people
management and ethics) have consistently high impacts on commitment
across talent segments. As with attraction, there is a surprising degree of
consistency in what drives commitment among employees.

Attraction and Commitment Drivers Dont Always Overlap

While many of the strongest drivers of attraction also have a strong impact
on commitment, there is not a perfect overlap between the two. In general,
compensation and career opportunities are important for attracting talent, but
working with quality people in an environment that respects and empowers
employees is the key to driving employee commitment. Compensation is
one of the starkest differences. It is the most notable driver of attraction, but
more than 25 other EVP attributes play a greater role in driving employee
commitment.
The reverse is true as well; what drives commitment doesnt necessarily drive
attraction. As an example, manager quality does not figure prominently
in most candidates evaluations of a potential employer, but it does have a
substantial43%potential impact on an employees commitment. As noted
previously, these differences often result from the candidates inability to assess
such dimensions accurately.
Developing an EVP Which Maximizes Both Attraction and Commitment
These past pages have introduced two key concepts. First, that EVP attributes
drive attraction and commitment to varying degrees. Second, that these
impacts on attraction and commitment can vary according to talent segments.
To bring these concepts together, the following pages will discuss the core
EVP for the labor market: an EVP with high impact on both attraction and
commitment, and which is consistent for all major talent segments.
Quality of the Job Experience Drives Commitment

Development opportunities, job-interests alignment, respect, and people management are critical for commitment
Impact of Employee Perceptions on Commitment
Attributes that display

consistency across segments
Attributes that display variation
across segments
The Opportunity
The Rewards
The Work
The Organization
The People
50%
45%
45%
42%
Opportunity drives
commitment
39%
but compensation
is less important.
45%
40% 40%
36%
Maximum
Impact on
Commitment
28%
26%
25%
29%
Manager quality
becomes critical
at driving
commitment.
41%40%
39%
36%
35%35%
33%32%
29%
28%
26%
25%
23%
21%
22%
0%
lig
Jo
ilit
n t
io en
at nm
t
pu iro
Re Env
ip k
rsh or
e
ad l W
Le gia
r
lle
nio o
Se C
es
og
Inn niti
W
o on
or Jo vat
k b I ion
Lif m
e pa
Ba ct
Bu L lanc
sin oc e
es atio
sT n
ra
ve
l
Em R
e
po sp
we ec
rm t
en
Et t
Pr
hic
o
s
O du
rg ct
an Q
iza ua
tio lit
Ri n S y
s
So
k T ize
cia
l R I akin
es nd g
po us
ns try
ibi
lity
Te
ch D
n i
Cu M olo vers
sto ark gy ity
m et Lev
er Po e
Re sit l
Inf
pu ion
or
ta
m
tio
al
En
n
v
i
Pe
ro
nm
op
le
en
M
t
M an
an ag
ag em
er e
Q nt
ua
lity
Co
wo
rk
CCa er Q
m
oma ua
rear lity
dade
erire
ie
an
rg
io
it
gn
nm
co
e
R
Re
c
iza Me
tio rit
na ocr
l S ac
ta y
bil
ity
Re Co
tir m
em pe
e ns
H nt B atio
ea e n
lth ne
Be fits
n
Va efits
ca
tio
n
re
15%
en
A
sts
e
Int
37%
36%
32%
30% 30%29%
15%14%
s s
te
itie nitie
Ra
n
tr u rtu
th
w
o o
ro
pp pp
G
O
O
n
t r
tio
en ree
a
a
m
z
i
p C
an
elo re
rg
ev utu
O
D F
44%43%
42%
ye
plo
E
at
re
En
o
vir
nm
t
en
al
s
Re
po
ib
ns
n
re
an
r
tB
du
o
Pr
Aw
Attributes
Note: Each bar represents a statistical estimate of the maximum impact on commitment that changing EVP perceptions will produce. The impact is calculated
by comparing two estimates: the predicted impact on commitment for an employee who rates the organization high on the attribute and the predicted
impact on commitment for an employee who rates the organization low on the attribute averaged across emotional and rational commitment.
The relative variation of attributes is calculated by the ratio of the standard deviation of the importance of the attribute to the average importance of the
attribute. Attributes with a ratio above 0.3 are considered to display significant variation across segments.

41
42
An EVP for All Talent Segments

The previous pages discussed the top drivers of attraction and commitment
within the EVP, and how the drivers that influenced one outcome did not
necessarily influence the other. Which then, drive both, and how should
organizations take this in to account when designing their EVP? Furthermore,
how can organizations develop an EVP that is scalable across multiple talent
segments?
The Core EVP Can Attract and Commit All Talent Segments
The Venn diagram below presents the EVP attributes with the strongest and
consistent impact on attraction as well as the strongest and most consistent
impact on commitment, with the gray-shaded overlap signifying attributes
that both attract candidates to the organization and ensure their commitment
once hired. Compensation and organizational stability drive attraction,
manager quality and a collegial work environment drive commitment, while
development opportunities, future career opportunities, and respect drive
both.

Those attributes which drive both attraction and commitment would of course
prove ideal for inclusion within an EVP, but, for various reasons discussed
across the following pages, may prove unsuitable for inclusion with a specific
organizations EVP. For this reason, organizations will also need to consider
attributes that only have a strong impact on attraction or commitment when
designing their EVP. Organizations may need to utilize these attributes to
create differentiated EVPs, to leverage their organizational strengths, or to
tackle specific attraction or commitment problems.
Variations on the Core
Does the core change significantly across different segments? Yes, and no.
Organizations that rely on these EVP attributes will drive attraction and
commitment across all major talent segments and geographies. That said,
certain segments will have additional attributes come into their specific core
EVP. Chapter II will examine segment-level variations in greater detail.
Defining the Core EVP for the Labor Market

Out of 38 EVP attributes, seven are critical for driving attraction or commitment
across all major talent segments and geographies, but only three drive both
Core EVP Attributes
Across All Major Segments
These attributes improve both
the quantity of employees
attracted and the quality of
their commitment levels.
Compensation
Respect
Manager Quality
Certain EVP attributes are

critical drivers of attraction or
commitment, but not both.
Top Drivers: Attraction
Top Drivers: Commitment
Defining the Core

Core attraction attributes are rated in the top 13 in importance for more than 60% of respondents across all talent segments
(e.g., geography, function)*.
Core commitment attributes have greater than a 30% impact on commitment for all talent segments.
Some non-core attributes are important for particular talent segments.
* The Q-sort methodology forces a distribution of importance across attributes by

respondent; the top 13 is one of the breakpoints in the distribution.


43
44
A Few Attributes Provide Disproportionate Benefit

The Universal Core EVP Provides 60% of Potential Returns
The Universal Core Provides High Benefits Regardless of Geography
Organizations can rely on the core EVP attributes to provide more than half of
the benefits provided by the EVP: a reduced compensation premium, deeper
sourcing in to the labor market, and increased employee commitment.
The universal core not only provides more than half of potential EVP benefits
within the United States, but also across major developed and developing
economies. For example, in Japan the universal core EVP provides 54% of the
benefits, in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom 58% of the benefits,
and in the China 60% of the benefits.
As an example, focusing within the U.S. labor market on the seven attributes
in the corecompensation, stability, development opportunities, future career
opportunities, respect, manager quality, and collegial work environmentwill
yield 60% or more of the potential compensation, sourcing, and commitment
benefit.

In short, the universal core EVP provides a strong platform from which
organizations can build a consistent, foundational EVP. Chapter II will
explore the frameworks HR must consider to develop a segmented EVP which
leverages attributes beyond those within the core EVP.
The Power of the Core

Focusing on the Core attributes captures 60% of the EVP benefits
EVP Return* by Strategy
Australia
Canada
France
Germany
Japan
United
Kingdom
United
States
China
India
59%
60%
58%
58%
54%
58%
60%
60%
56%
Benefits Received
by Focus on Seven
Attributes in
Universal Core
EVP
* The percent indication in the table is the average return of the compensation premium, labor market sourcing, and commitment benefi t.
For example, by focusing on the core attributes in Australia, organizations are able to obtain 59% of the average of the compensation
premium (pages 12-13), sourcing benefi t (pages 8-9), and commitment benefi t (pages 10-11).
45
Evaluating EVP Competitiveness

Compete on EVP Attributes Where Others Underperform
Understand Competing Party
When analyzing the organizations EVP, HR must carefully consider the

extent to which the organization can compete with other organizations on the
attributes which compose the EVP. The competitive advantage which attributes
can provide in the labor market varies significantly, based on differences in
competitor delivery and organization delivery of the attribute.
Organizations need to be competitive on particular attributes with talent

competitors. If the organization can excel in delivery on the attribute, or has
a competitive edge in shaping candidates awareness of that attribute, then it
presents a competitive opportunity the organization may choose to exploit.
The four-quadrant matrix below provides a framework for evaluating an

attributes suitability for inclusion in an EVP, based on the market opportunity
to competitively differentiate. The horizontal axis of the graph considers
the extent to which organizations can successfully deliver the attribute. The
vertical axis of the graph considers the extent to which organizations talent
competitors drive awareness and delivery of the attribute.
Be Cautious of Competitive Disadvantages
Seek Opportunities for Competitive Advantage

To achieve competitive advantage, organizations should focus where other
organizations underperform: poor awareness among candidates and poor
delivery by organizations. By focusing communication efforts on these
attributes and improving delivery, organizations can develop an EVP that
attracts and retains highly-committed employees. The ROI on these strategies
is likely to be high.

Organizations should consider investments in this area; their talent

competitors are relatively stronger on those attributes.
46
Identify the Opportunity for EVP Competitive Advantage

Creating a competitive EVP requires delivering and communicating well against attributes where others underperform
EVP Evaluation Matrix
Talent Competitor EVP Position
Poorly Positioned
Organization EVP Position
Well Positioned
Well Positioned

Competitive Parity
Poorly Positioned
Competitive Advantage
Organizations need to ensure that

Organizations need to ensure they
they are at equal levels, both in terms are effectively communicating these
of delivery and communication, with attributes.
their talent competitors on these
attributes.
Competitive Disadvantage
Competitive Parity
Organizations need to improve their

performance on these attributes and
then communicate at the same level
as talent competitors.
Organizations need to ensure that

they are at equal levels, both in terms
of delivery and communication, with
their talent competitors on these
attributes.

47
Limited Awareness
The Labor Market Is Not Aware of Core Attributes
Significant Opportunities for Organizations to Exploit
The labor market has little awareness of the core EVP attributes, as shown
by the graph below. As an example, the labor market does not have a strong
sense of a compensation packages competitiveness. Candidates may know the
general compensation levels of jobs they can apply for, but only 33% have a
strong sense of whether those compensation packages are significantly higher
or lower than packages elsewhere. Awareness of other attributes is even lower.
Less than a third of candidates are strongly aware of the organizations future
career and development opportunities, and only one in five candidates has
strong awareness of the organizations manager quality.
The state of labor market awareness clearly indicates that EVP messages fail
to leave a strong impression on the labor market. This presents organizations
with both a challenge and an opportunity. Most of these attributes are
difficult to credibly convey to the labor marketthus the current levels of
low awarenessbut organizations which can do so will have a tremendous
advantage over their competitors in the labor market.

48
Not Much Awareness of Core EVP Attributes

Most respondents are relatively unaware of the organizations performance on core attributes
Labor Market Awareness* of Core EVP Attributes
36%
33%
Compensation
30%
Attributes
Only one third of the labor

market was aware of the
stability of the organization
25%
Respect
24%
24%
20%
Manager Quality
0%
20%
and only one in

five were aware of
manager quality.
40%
Percentage of the Labor Market Aware of Attribute
* The awareness level is defi ned as the percent of the labor market
that was aware or very aware of the attribute before they applied.

49
50
Credibility Out of Your Hands

To effectively take advantage of low-labor market awareness of EVP attributes,
HR must first leverage communication channels which the labor market will
find credible. The graph below provides the percentage of candidates who
used each information channel during their job search. The channels are
grouped according to the credibility with which the labor market views them.
A channels is marked high credibility if 67% or more of the labor market
viewed it as credible, moderate credibility if 33% to 66% of the labor market
viewed it as credible, and low credibility if less than 33% of the labor market
viewed it as credible.
The Labor Market Finds Few Channels Credible
Few information channels are highly credible in the labor market, and those
that are credible are decidedly not under the direct control of the organization:
friends, family, and current employees of the organization. In short, candidates
place the greatest trust in their personal networks and in people with direct
knowledge of the organization.

More concerning, however, is the moderate credibility of most channels

commonly used by organizations, such as the organizations Web site or job
advertisements. While candidates in the labor market do not necessarily
distrust these sources, they do view them with increased skepticism. As a result
HR must carefully consider the way content is relayed through these sources,
or risk underleveraging the limited opportunities organizations have to make a
favorable impression on job candidates.
Leverage Current Employees to Ensure Credible Communication
While organizations must continue to rely on traditional means of
communicating the EVP, those that successfully leverage highly credible
personal networks will have a distinct advantage over their competitors. To
this end Chapter III provides greater detail on how to effectively leverage
current employees as advocates of the organization in the labor market.
Credibility Varies by Channels

The labor market is most likely to trust their personal networksespecially those with inside knowledge
Information Channel Usage by Credibility*
High Credibility
Moderate Credibility
30%
30%
Traditional job Web sites are

only moderately credible in
the eyes of the labor market.
26%
24%
19%
Online social network

tools usage is low, but
so is credibility.
16%
15%
10%
8% 7%
7% 6% 6%
5% 5%
ts
or
p
Re
te
r
or
p
Re
a
rR
Po
s
ns
io
s
es
ice
v
er
an
Lis
er
s
d
ar
ns
sto
io
es
ch
Co
cr
t
cia
Br
o
te
r
Ex
iza
rN
Re
ty
Jo
ew
rN
O
rg
an
dPa
r
Th
ir
Fr
ien
ds
a
ew " Job
rg
e
O
h
o
e
e
ic
s
th
th
so
N
ine a "
of
of
ine
z
s
z
s
a gh
a
e
e
ag
ag
ye
ye
M rou
o
M
l
lp o
n
h
p
in
T
si
m
m
ds
cle Ads
tE
rE
i
A
t
n
e
b
Ar Job
rm
rre
Jo
Fo
Cu
rg
tio
a
niz
4% 4%
3% 3%
o
g)
In)
dio adi
ed Blo
R
k
in
S
S
or
sa
o
w
al
so
., L h a
n ion
or tion nu stor
g
.
o
As r" A
i
s
c
n
e
a
is
ct
A
vis
ve
Su
ye
de
s(
lev ele
du form n's t/In
ra plo
ol m (
e
o
o
s
T
T
r
o
T
l/ Em
T oru
n
l In ati
aly
sP
on
na
n' ona aniz An
ing e F
s o ies
io est
k
o
s
d
i
i
or
"B
lin
A tor
es
rg
at
at
of
O
tw On
niz aniz
ob s S
e
J
a
Pr
N
rg
rg
ew
e
O
O
N
lin
e
n
h
t
O
of
e
s
U
ar
Bo
Cu
ts/
sp
er
p
pa
6%
4% 3% 3%
2%
ien
/F
an
rs
e
ap
Cl
io
t
iza
wo
uit rke
ing rs
Co
Ev
lle
en
ge
t
Ca
re
Al er C
um
e
H ni N nter
elp
e
W tw
an ork
te
d
Sig
n
am
ily
0%
tio
n
W
na
e
lS bS
ea
i
rc te
h
Fir
m
The majority of highly

trusted information
channels are outside of
the direct control of
human resources.
ur
12% 11%
Bo
ar
d
Percentage of
Candidates Using
Channel to Learn
About the EVP
23%
23%
Low Credibility
Information Channels
* Credibility was defi ned according to the percentage of respondents who rated the item, To what extent do you
believe the information you received from each source? as a 6 or 7 on a 7-point scale. A channel has highly credibility if
at least 66% of respondents rated at as credible; moderate credibility if 33 to 66%; low credibility if less than 33% .
51
52
Organizations Need to Deliver the Intangibles

Not only are candidates unaware of the core attributes of the value proposition,
but organizations also fail to successfully deliver many of those attributes. The
graph below highlights this problem, showing the percentage of respondents
who felt the organization successfully delivered each of the attributes within
the core EVP.
Organizations Strongest on Attributes for Which Employees Can Selfselect
Organizations perform well on the attributes for which candidates can
largely self-select before joining the organization, such as stability. Since these
attributes are largely static and easily assessable by candidates, it is no surprise
that the organization will successfully meet employee preferences for these
attributes.

Failing to Deliver on the Intangibles

More than 50% of employees indicate that organizations fail to deliver on the
less tangible aspects of the EVP, such as development opportunities, respect,
or manager quality. Given that these attributes are harder to assess during
the recruiting process and more volatile over time, the organization faces
a greater risk of employee dissatisfaction with their delivery. Furthermore,
these attributes have strong impacts on commitment, putting organizations
at significant risks of disengaged employees. Organizations which can
successfully deliver these attributesand create awareness of their strengths
will have a competitive edge in the labor market as well as with their own
employees.
Below Average Delivery of Most Core EVP Attributes

Most employees report that their organization does not deliver on some of the most important EVP attributes
Delivery on Core EVP Attributes*
Observable attributes are

more likely to be delivered
relative to the
more experiential
attributes
80%
with consistent
disappointment
with compensation.
60%
55%
49%
Percentage
of Employees
Reporting Strong 40%
Delivery of the
EVP Attribute
47%
47%
32%
ee
m
op
el
le
l
Co
rO
ev
re
lity
sa
ua
pe
n
m
er
Co
tio
iza
an
O
rg
l
gia
pp
O
nt
ag
lS
na
pp
or
rtu
an
ity
bil
ta
vir
n
kE
ies
nit
rt
ies
it
un
en
nm
Re
sp
ec
0%
tio
n
21%
r
Ca
tu
Fu
Attributes
* Delivery is defi ned as the percent of employees that indicated 6 or 7

on a 7-point scale that their organization is strong on this attribute.
53
54
Reducing Commitment from Day One

Overselling the Organization Reduces Commitment
Avoid Inflating Candidate Expectations
Hiring managers and recruiters have a strong incentive to present the EVP
in the strongest possible light during the recruiting process, and particularly
to avoid discussing any negative aspects. While doing so may increase the
likelihood that the candidate will join the organization, it does so at a cost:
decreased employee commitment if the organization can not deliver.
The second form of overselling, inflating candidate expectations of future

returns and opportunities they could receive as an employee, is more discreet,
but just as harmful. When positioning EVP attributes such as the employees
development or future career opportunities, HR and hiring managers
must ensure that their promises are in line with what the organization can
realistically deliver and what the candidate can realistically achieve. Failure
to do so will result in diminished commitment after the candidate has joined,
with commitment levels as much as 36% lower.
The failure of the recruiting process to accurately reflect the organization has
immediate repercussions on candidates once they join the organization. The
impact of overselling candidates and raising unwarranted expectations can
reduce commitment by as much as 20%.
Avoid Misrepresenting the Organization
This tendency to oversell the organization typically takes two forms. The
first is to oversell the organization, its people, or the nature of the work. As
an example, hiring managers or HR may oversell candidates on the quality
of managers, a reality that new employees will quickly confirm or refute
soon after beginning employment, risking the reduction of the new hires
commitment by as much as 19%.

The Danger of Overselling

Overselling the EVP in the recruiting phase negatively impacts new hire commitment
45%
Impact of Overselling Candidates on Commitment
Impact of Overselling Candidates on Commitment
Example: Manager Quality
Example: Future Career Opportunities
Organizations setting
unrealistic candidate
expectations of manager
quality not only miss out on
significant returns, but also
drive commitment down
43%
45%
42%
this effect holds

true across other
attributes as well.
= 78%
= 62%
New Hire
Commitment 0%
New Hire
Commitment
0%
(19%)
(36%)
(45%)
(45%)
Candidate Has
High Expectations
Which Are Met as
Employee
Candidate Has High

Expectations Which
Are Not Met as
Employee
Candidate Has
High Expectations
Which Are Met as
Employee
Candidate Has High

Expectations Which
Are Not Met as
Employee

55
Scotiabank: Employment Value Proposition Redesign

Volume II of Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segments presents a best
practice identified through the Councils research for developing an EVP, from
Scotiabank. The practice, entitled Employment Value Proposition Redesign,
provides a strategy for creating an employment value proposition that
centers around the most competitive and strategically relevant aspects of the
organization and identifies the HR investments that matter most to reinforcing
the value proposition. For the full case, please see Volume II of this study.
Company Profiled
Industry: Financial Services

Revenues: CAN$15 Billion
Employees: 51,000
Headquarters: Toronto, Canada
Situation
Increasingly concerned about its ability to
attract talent for hard-to-fi ll roles, Scotiabank
learns through employee surveys, job seeker
surveys, and interviews that its employment
value proposition lags behind that of its main
competitors.
Action
Scotiabank first diagnoses the strengths
and weaknesses of its employment value
proposition and creates a new employment
brand aligned around the most competitive
and strategically relevant aspects of the
organization. Second, Scotiabank prioritizes
HR investments toward those with the highest
impact on its new employment brand.
Likely Returns on Investment

Significant rise in employee and candidate
perceptions of your organization as an
employer of choice
Sustained ability to attract and retain
employees
Higher talent attraction and retention
returns from HR investments
Key Teachings
Identify competitive aspects of value
proposition that best align with the
organizations strategic priorities and
culture.
Anchor value proposition around
organizational realities to avoid new-hire
attrition and dilution of external brand.
Align HR investments with the employment
value proposition to increase talent
attraction and retention outcomes over time.
For the full case, please see Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segments: Best Practices for Building a Competitive Value Proposition.

56
Practice in Context: ScotiabankEmployment Value Proposition Redesign
Beyond the Usual Employment Brand Strategy

Scotiabank creates an employment value proposition focused on the most competitive aspects
of the organization, and identifies HR investments that matter most to reinforcing the value proposition
Key Aspects of Scotiabanks Employment Value Proposition Strategy
Step #1:
Understand Employee
and Candidate Preferences
and Perceptions
Identification of Employment
Value Proposition Attributes
Employee
Preferences
and
Perceptions
Candidate
Preferences and
Perceptions
Scotiabank Insight
Focus employment value proposition
on aspects that drive both attraction
and retention.
Anchor employment value
proposition in workplace realities.
Step #2:
Define the Competitive
Identification of Competitive
Value Proposition
Potential Value
Proposition
Aspects
Relevance
to Strategic
Objectives
Perceived as
Current Strength
by Employees and
Candidates
1. Recognizes
and Rewards
Performance
High
Low
Medium
Focus area; critical

to strategy
Medium
Low
Medium
Low
3. Fun,
Hardworking
Colleagues
Medium
High
Low
High
Low strategic
relevance
4. Successful
Organization
High
High
Low
High
Focus area,
competitive
strength
5. Many Career
Opportunities
Medium
High
Medium
Low
Low opportunity
for differentiation
6. Strong
Relationships
High
High
Low
High
Focus area, strong

differentiation
High
Implement and Measure

High-Return Investments
Conclusion
High
Current weakness,
low differentiation
Low
Identification of
High-Return Investments
Step #4:
Implement Employment Value
Proposition Improvements and
Measure Impact
Prioritization of Investments
Opportunity
Implementation
for Competitive
Cost
Differentiation
2. Strong
Managers
7. Cares About
People
Step #3:
Identify Highest-Return
Investments to Reinforce the
Low
Medium
Low strategic
relevance
Scotiabank Insight
Focus on aspects of the employment
value proposition that support
strategic priorities and are
competitive strengths.
Rewarding and
Recognizing
Performance
Rewarding
and
Recognizing Performance
Related Engagement Attributes
Recognition
Related
Engagement Attributes
Promotion
Recognition
Promotion
High
Engagement
High
Impact
Engagement
Impact
Moderate
Engagement
Moderate
Impact
Engagement
Impact
Low
Engagement
Low
Impact
Engagement
Impact
Jobs Online
Position Vacancy Staffing
Career Management
Performance Management System
Appreciation programs
Incentive Programs
Base Salary Program
Management Incentive Program
Candidate selection
Leading Edge Program
Financial
Services
MBA
Leading
Edge Program
Educational
Program
FinancialAssistance
Services MBA
Institute
of Canadian
Bankers
(ICB)
Educational
Assistance
Program
Acting
Allowance
Institute
of Canadian Bankers (ICB)
Acting Allowance
Establishing Strong
Relationships
Establishing Strong
Related Engagement
Attributes
Relationships
Manager
Quality
Related
Engagement
Attributes
Coworker
ManagerQuality
Quality
Coworker Quality
Orientation Program
View Point Survey/Actions
Employee Community Programs
Candidate Selection
Accommodation Policy
Alternate Work Arrangement
Mentorship Program
Management Incentives
Public Relations
Succession Planning
Successful
Company
Successful
Related Engagement
Attributes
Company
Senior
Team Quality
Related
Engagement
Attributes
Company
SeniorBrand
Team Quality
Company
Brand
Leadership Resource
Planning
Performance Management System
Leadership Development
Corporate Branding/CSR
Effectiveness
Gap
Executive Communication
Mentorship Program
Leadership Development
Orientation Program
Performance Management
System
Career Management
Candidate Selection
Base Salary Program
Appreciation Program
Alternate Work
Arrangement
ROI
Measure Impact on Investments

Internal Perception of EVPs
Referral Program
Scotiabank
ReferralScholarship
Program Program
Work
Experience
ProgramsProgram
Scotiabank
Scholarship
Employee
Policy
Work Communication
Experience Programs
IdeasEmployee
in ActionCommunication Policy
Pension
IdeasPlan
in Action
Pension Plan
Brand Equity Survey

Employee Share Ownership Plan
Job Employee
Level Protection
Share Ownership Plan
Town
Conference
JobHall
Level
Protection
Town Hall Conference
Guidelines for Employing Family

Suspensions,
Policy
GuidelinesResignations
for Employing
Family
Employee
HumanResignations
Rights
Suspensions,
Policy
Occupational
Safety
Employee Health
Humanand
Rights
Smoking
Policy Health and Safety
Occupational
Smoking Policy
Scotiabank Insight
Use key aspects of the employment
value proposition as a filter to
prioritize HR investments.
Employer of Choice Survey
External Perception of EVPs
Execute on Highest
Impacting Programs
Annual Employment
Preferences Survey
Annual Engagement Pulse
Survey
Global HR Strategy
2005 Priorities
Global orientation program
Launching of compensation
philosophy
Leadership development
Implementation of new learning
programs
New approach to performance
management
New recruiting marketing campaign
Scotiabank Insight
Ensure EVP investments have real
impact on talent attraction and
retention.
Source: The Bank of Nova Scotia; Corporate Leadership Council research.

57
58
Key Findings
1. The set of EVP attributes that are most powerful for attracting candidates to organizations
is different from the set of attributes that are most effective at driving commitment and
retention: Consequently, an effective EVP has to include elements from both sets.
2. The most powerful drivers of attraction include compensation, future career
opportunities, organizational stability, and a culture of respect for employees: These
drivers consistently rank as the most important attributes in attracting candidates to an
organization, for all demographic segments. Organizations that are not competitive in at least
some of these attributes will consistently struggle to attract talent in the labor market.
3. In contrast, employee commitment and retention are driven by a much larger group of
attributes: While some of the key attraction drivers (culture of respect, career opportunities)
are also strong drivers of commitment, others (compensation, organizational stability) are
much less so. Additional universal drivers of commitment include manager quality, employee
empowerment, and alignment between an individuals job and career interests.

Key Findings (Continued)

4. Seven attributes of the EVP are universally important at driving either attraction or
commitment: While conventional wisdom holds that employees in different geographies, age
bands, or gender groups require fundamentally different elements from their employment
experience, there are in fact seven attributes that are essential for every major talent segment.
These seven include:
Compensation
Organizational stability
Development opportunities
Future career opportunities

Culture of respect
Manager quality
A collegial work
environment
5. Taken together, these seven elements of the core EVP provide at least 60% of the total
possible attraction and commitment benefit for all major talent segments: Organizations
should build their employment value propositions around at least some of these critical
attributes.
6. To build an effective EVP, organizations must go beyond an assessment of each attributes
importance to attraction and commitment: Specifically, organizations should also consider
the following questions:
Which attributes are consistent with our organizations strategic objectives?

How capable are we of delivering each attribute?
How much will it cost to improve our delivery of each attribute?
How well do our labor-market competitors deliver each attribute?

59

60
Chapter II
Managing EVP Variation Across Key Segments

61
Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segments
62
The Importance of Segmentation

Failure to Segment the EVP Can Lead to Missed Opportunities
Segment the EVP Where Preferences Differ Substantially
While 7 of the 38 EVP attributes discussed in Chapter One are important

across all major talent segments and geographies, there are still notable
differences within talent segments. As a result, EVP management strategies
that fail either to deliver or communicate the EVP appropriately to talent
segments can result in substantial missed opportunities.
For the EVP to effectively attract and commit talent, organizations must
consider the implications of different EVP investments for different segments
of the workforce. While the core EVPs benefits are substantialcapturing
more than half of the potential benefits an EVP can providethe addition
of further attributes can make the EVP even stronger. The incorporation of
additional attributes must be done with care, however, and only where EVP
preferences or impacts on commitment differ substantially for a particular
talent segment.
Two Examples: Development Opportunities and Retirement Benefits

Imagine, for example, two candidates applying for similar positionsone
is 25 years old and the other is 55 years old. As expected, the returns on
communicating about future career opportunities associated with the job
during the interview will be greater for the younger candidate who, on average,
ranks future career opportunities in his/her top five EVP attributes nearly half
of the timecompared to only one in five for older employees.
Likewise, if both individuals joined the organization, delivering competitive
retirement benefits would typically drive the older employees commitment
more than the younger employees. The older workers perceptions of
retirement benefits result in a nearly three times greater impact on his/her
commitment as compared to the younger employee.

One Size Fits All EVP Incurs Cost

Failing to properly segment leads to lost opportunities
Example: Future Career Opportunities
50%
Example: Retirement Benefits
50%
47%
Describing career
opportunities to a 25
year old as you would to
a 55 year old leads to lost
attraction opportunities
Percentage of
Respondents
25%
Rating in
Top Five in
Importance
20%
describing
retirement benefits to
a baby boomer as you
would to a younger
employee leads to
lost opportunities to
improve commitment.
35%
Maximum
Impact on 25%
Commitment
11%
0%
0%
Age 2329
Age 5059
Age 2329
Note: Each bar on the left graphic represents the percentage of respondents reporting a given attribute as top fi ve in importance when evaluating an organization as a
potential employer for each segment compared to the global benchmark. Each bar on the right graphic represents a statistical estimate of the maximum impact on
commitment that changing EVP perceptions will produce. The impact is calculated by comparing the predicted impact on commitment for an employee who rates
the organization high on the attribute and the predicted impact on commitment for an employee who rates the organization low on the attribute.
Age 5059

Chapter II: Managing EVP Variation Across Key Segments
63
64
Embarking on the Segmentation Challenge

While segmentation strategies often appear feasible in theory, deciding which
talent segments warrant tailored EVP strategies requires careful consideration.
Segmentation Step #1: Understand Potential Segments
Before segmenting the EVP, HR must first understand potential segments.
Dozens to hundreds of segments will exist within an organization, but
organizations have limited ability to implement EVPs for each possible
segment.
To specifically target potential segments, HR must first determine which
segments are readily identifiable. If the group cannot be identified with
information readily accessible to the organization, then HRs ability to tailor
an EVP to the groups needs will be limited. Second, the segment must be
accessible; if the organization cannot specifically reach out to or communicate
with the segment then investments in EVP differentiation will certainly
not provide appropriate returns. Finally, the segment must be substantial
enough in size to warrant the additional investment of resources required for
segmentation.
Segmentation Step #2: Addressing Segment Needs

Once the potential segments are identified, HR must consider three additional
factors.
First, HR must identify how each segment is unique in terms of EVP
preferences. Does the group differ significantly from others to warrant the
creation of a segmented EVP? Will strengths of the existing EVP meet many of
the target segments preferences?
Second, HR must consider how each group consumes information. The success
of a segmented EVP will depend not only on the attributes on which it is based,
but also on the effectiveness with which the organization communicates it to
the target segment. If the segment consumes information about organizations
in fundamentally different ways than talent that the organization currently
attracts, then the organization will need to adjust its communication strategy
accordingly to realize the full returns of a segmented EVP.
Finally, HR must determine the extent to which the organization can and
should deliver a segmented EVP that supports the segments needs; will
additional investments in attracting and retaining the target group support
broader organizational strategy needs?
Should a target segment meet these criteria, then HR should strongly consider
the implementation of a segmented EVP strategy.

Where to Segment
Organizations decisions to segment should be determined by answers to critical questions
Step 1: Understand Potential Segments
Identifying Potential Segments*
Is it measurable?
Is it accessible?
Is it substantial?
Step 2: Addressing Segment Needs
Do the groups preferences vary

enough to warrant investment
in a segmented EVP?
* Measurable is defi ned as whether or not a particular segment can be identified. Accessible is
defi ned as whether or not a segment can be contacted with unique information. Substantial is
defi ned as whether or not the segment is large enough to justify an investment.
Do the groups ways of

consuming information vary
enough to warrant a different
competitive approach?
Is the group important to

organizational strategy and
can the organization support
the needs of this group?
Source: Weitz, Barton and Robin Wensley, eds.: The Handbook of Marketing, London; SAGE
Publications, 2002, pp 86125; Corporate Leadership Council research.

65
66
Geography Matters Most to Segmentation

When evaluating EVP differentiation strategies, HR must determine how
each segment is unique in terms of EVP preferences. Of the large number of
potential segmentsgeography, level, age, function, gender, or ethnicity, to
name the most common exampleswhich show the greatest variation in EVP
preferences?
Employee Level is the Second Most Important Segment Consideration
Geography Explains Most Differences in EVP Preferences
Other Demographic Segments Explain Little Variation
Geography explains the majority of differences in employee EVP preferences,

accounting for 72% of the variation seen in the 58,000 respondents surveyed in
the Councils Employment Value Proposition Survey. As a result, organizations
should use geography as a starting point when considering segmentation
strategies, and then turn to other segment differences.
Age, function, gender, and ethnicity explain progressively less variation, in

total accounting for less than 15% of the variation in preferences. As a result,
organizations must consider how to most effectively vary their EVP across
geographies and levels. Segmentation strategies based on function, gender, or
ethnicity are not likely to generate substantial returns, unless labor market or
business conditions require that the organization aggressively pursue those
segments.
The ramifications of this are important for HR to consider. Organizations

working in multiple geographieswhether multinationals or smaller
organizationswill need to analyze whether their target labor pools require a
segmented EVP and determine an appropriate response.

Employee level accounts for a further 13% of variation in EVP preferences.

As employees move through the organization and become increasingly
senior, their preferences begin to diverge from the typical preferences of their
geography or other demographic factors.
Geography Is the Main Driver of Variation

Most variation in preferences is a function of geography
Percentage of Variance Explained
By Segment
Geographic differences account

for the majority of the variation
in EVP preferences
6.7%
2.5%
2.7%
3.5%
13.0%
72.0%
Implications
Organizations need to strongly
consider how they can vary their
EVP across geographies
Segmentation based on function,
gender, or ethnicity is unlikely to
generate returns
with some additional

differences across employee
levels.
Geography
Level
Age
Function
Gender
Total
Variation
Explained
Ethnicity

67
68
EVP Segmentation Map

The chart on the previous page presented the percent of EVP preference
variation explained by common demographic categories. The chart below
displays the levels of variation in EVP preferences across 24 segments within
these demographic categories, as well as segment differences in the way that
EVP information is consumed. To read the chart, note that the coloring of
the circle indicates the extent to which that given segment differs from the
aggregate. Full shading indicates that the group differs substantially, partial
shading indicates moderate differences, and no shading indicates minimal
differences.
Geography Explains Labor Market EVP Preferences
These findings provide additional context for the analysis on the previous page,
showing that EVP preferences vary a great deal across geographies and for
senior executives, but only moderately across functions, age, and gender.
Specifically, all countries examined within the Employment Value Proposition
Survey showed moderate or large differences in the EVP preferences of their
labor markets. Across other demographict categories, only employee level
had a particular segment show large differences in preferences, with senior
executives showing substantial differences. Looking across functions shows
that a handful have moderate preference differences, while no substantial
differences exist across gender or ethnicity.

Geography Explains Labor Market Information Consumption

Similarly, most variability in the way EVP information is consumed occurs
across geographies and level, but less so across other segments. Encouragingly
for HR, no segment shows large differences in EVP information consumption.
HR will need to take some geographic and level differences into account when
designing EVP communication strategies, but less segmentation is required
when communicating to the labor market.
The remainder of this chapter will explore some of the most interesting
segments where significant variations exist. The particular cases highlighted
provide examples of the way EVP preferences and information consumption
patterns differ. For further information, Corporate Leadership Council
members are encouraged to examine the appendix and online resource center
(available at www.clc.executiveboard.com) to explore additional variations.
Apply Segment-Specific EVPs Selectively

EVP segmentation is most critical across geographies and for senior executives
Level of Variation in Preferences1 and Differentiation Across Employee Segments
r in
ty 3
i ci
hn
Et
ale
M
m
Fe
il
les
Sa
ta
Re
ale
tu
D
ac
uf
an
M
IT
um
an
ce
H
an
Fin
ur
so
Re
g
r in
ee
gin
En
50
R&
s
ld
rO
ld
5
9
Ye
a
rO
tiv
Ye
a
2
9
rE
23
nio
Se
an
ag
er
at
St
d
te
xe
es
cu
m
do
ng
d
ni
U
ni
te
an
U
Jap
di
Ki
an
y
In
er
ce
G
an
da
a
Fr
in
Ch
na
ra
lia
Ca
st
Au
ce
s
Functions show only moderate

variations in EVP preferences.
es
EVP preferences vary

significantly by geography.
Importance: Are there

significant differences in
which EVP attributes drive
attraction and commitment?
Awareness: Are there
significant segment
differences in the way EVP
information is consumed?
Geography
Level
Age
Function
Gender Ethnicity
Large Differences2
Moderate Differences
Minimal Differences
The level of variation in EVP content and competitiveness by segment was assessed by determining the number of attributes that are substantially different from the aggregate
population. Content variation was determined by assessing the extent to which EVP preferences across the 38 attributes were substantially different for a given segment compared to
the benchmark. Competitive variation was determined according to whether a given segments level of awareness was substantially different across the 38 attributes.
Significant differences are segments where more than six statistically significant differences occur. Moderate differences are situations where three to six significant differences occur.
Minimal differences are situations with less than three statistically significant differences.
The following ethnicities were tested: Asian, Black or Black African, Hispanic, Middle Eastern, Native American, Pacific Islander, Western or Eastern European.


69
70
A Broader Set of Attributes

A Broader Core EVP Exists for the Developed Economy
No Consistent EVP Exists in Developing Economies
The core EVP presented in Chapter One applies to all major talent segments
and geographies, including both developed and developing economies.
Organizations operating in developed economies, however, may focus their
core EVP on a broader array of attributes which are consistent across all major
talent segments in those geographies.
In developing economies, however, there is not a consistent set of EVP

attributes beyond the global core. As an example, worklife balance is
particularly important for the Indian labor market, but not in the Chinese
labor market. Given this increased geographic variation HR will need to closely
examine regional differences when considering how the labor market
or employees will respond to the EVP.
Changes to the Developed Economy EVP

To attract employees in developed economies, location and worklife balance
enter the core EVP. To drive commitment, organizations can also rely on
people management. Meritocracy and ethics are also added to the developed
worlds core EVP, driving both attraction and commitment.
These attributes, combined with the universal core EVP, provide organizations
with a set of 12 attributes they can leverage to attract candidates and ensure
workforce commitment. HR will need to consider segmented EVPs for specific
talent segments outside of developed economies, or for those which pose
unique recruiting or commitment challenges, but ultimately can leverage
the developed economy core EVP as a foundation for building a strong,
competitive EVP.

The Developed Economies Core EVP

In the developed economies, five additional attributes become critical for driving attraction and/or commitment
across all major talent segments
The Developed Economies1 Core EVP Attributes2
Across All Major Segments
Compensation
Location
WorkLife Balance
Respect
Meritocracy
Ethics
Manager Quality
People Management
Certain attributes become

uniquely important in
developed economies at
attraction
while others
become critical at
driving commitment.
Top Drivers: Attraction
Note: Bold attributes are part of the developed economies core EVP but not the global core EVP.
1
This analysis is based on respondents from Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, United Kingdom, and
United States.
Some non-core attributes may be of critical importance for particular segments. Chapter II and the appendix provide additional
segmentation potential.
Top Drivers: Commitment


71
72
Benefits of the Developed Economies EVP

The chart below presents a new version of the chart seen on page 45, within
Chapter I, which identified the percent of EVP benefits received by focusing
on the seven attributes in the universal core EVP. This chart includes a new
row of data, highlighting the incremental benefit provided by adding the
five additional attributes included within the developed economy core EVP
discussed on the previous page.
Use of Developed Economy Attributes Increases EVP Benefits
Broadening the core EVP to include attributes from the developed economies
core will yield even greater benefits compared to just focusing on the core EVP.
In the United Kingdom, for instance, using the full developed economy EVP
will increase the total benefit by 19%, from 60% to 79%. Other developed
economies see similar improvements, ranging from 12% to 23%; they typically
result in EVPs that provide 70% to 80% or more of the EVPs total benefits.
This results in lower compensation premiums, strengthened labor market
sourcing, and increased employee commitment.

Developed Economy Attributes Less Effective in Developing Economies

Using developed economy attributes in India or China, however, provides
decidedly lower returns: 3% and 4% for China and India, respectively. To
realize the full benefits the EVP can provide in India and China, organizations
will need to tailor their EVP strategies to meet the unique preferences of their
labor markets. The EVPs for both India and China will be explored in greater
detail later this in this chapter.
Segmentation Increases EVP BenefitsBut Only to a Point
The developed economy core EVP provides an example of the power of
segmentation. In other words, with just a very general segmentation cut HR
can design an EVP that provides 80% of the possible value for attracting and
committing talent in developed economies.
This example also shows the limits of segmentation. With 80% of the benefit
already captured, the value achieved through additional, highly customized
segmentation will be incremental.
High Returns from Developed Economies Core EVP

Broadening the core EVP to include attributes relevant
to the developed economies adds additional benefits
EVP Return* by Strategy

Australia
Australia
Canada
Canada
France
France
Germany
Germany
Japan
Japan
United
United
Kingdom
Kingdom
United
United
States
States
China
China
India
India
59%
59%
60%
60%
58%
58%
58%
58%
54%
54%
58%
58%
60%
60%
60%
60%
56%
56%
+23%
+23%
+19%
+19%
+16%
+16%
+12%
+12%
+17%
+17%
+22%
+22%
+19%
+19%
+3%
+3%
+4%
+4%
Benefi
BenefitstsReceived
Received
by
byFocus
Focuson
onSeven
Seven
Attributes
Attributesinin
Universal
UniversalCore
Core
EVP
EVP
Additional
Additional
Benefi
BenefittofofAdding
Adding
Five
FiveDeveloped
Developed
Economy
Economy
Attributes
Attributes
Developed Economies
The five additional developed

economy attributes increase returns
in developed economies
but have marginal

returns in India and
China.
* The percent indication in the table is the average return of the compensation premium, labor market sourcing,
and commitment benefi t. For example, by focusing on the core attributes in Australia, organizations are able to
obtain 59% of the average of the compensation premium (pages 12-13 in the essay), sourcing benefi t (pages 8-9
in the essay), and commitment benefi t (pages 10-11 in the essay).
73
74
Tuning the EVP to Meet Segmented Needs

Determining Additional Attributes
Segmented EVPs Do Not Require Overhauling the EVP
An EVP attribute may be included within a segment-specific EVP for one of

two reasons. First, a given talent segment may find even greater value in some
core attributes than the labor market overall. Second, a given attribute may be
uniquely important to a particular talent segment. In both cases, organizations
will need to consider prioritizing these attributes accordingly in their EVPs.
This example proves an important point. Segmenting an EVP does not require
a radical change to an organizations existing EVP. Segmentation does require
changes, but not a completely different set of attributes. HR may begin with
the core or developed economy core EVP as a foundation, then incorporate
additional attributes or further highlight existing attributes and achieve the
majority of the benefit which a segmented EVP can provide.
The page below provides an example, looking specifically at the U.S. EVP.
Compensation, organizational stability, respect, and worklife balanceall
developed economy EVP attributesbecome particularly important in the
United States, where the labor market places particular importance on these
attributes. The U.S. labor market also places unique importance on attributes
such as health and retirement benefits, as well as empowerment and jobinterests alignment. These attributes must also be considered when building a
segment-specific EVP for the United States.
Taken together with the developed economy attributes, these additional
attributes form the EVP for the United States labor market. While an
organization does not necessarily need to excel in all attributes, the extent
to which it can meet the labor markets preferences for each attribute will
strengthen its position in hiring and retaining critical talent.

It is also important to note that attributes do not drop off of the universal
core or developed economy EVPs. Each of the attributes within these EVPs is
important for either attracting or retaining talent for all relevant segments.
In short, segment-specific EVP design is a matter of identifying further
points of differentiation for a given segment beyond the core or developed
economy EVP.
From the Core to the Segment

Organizations may need to adjust their EVP based on specific segment needs
Example: Building the EVP in the United States
The U.S. EVP*

Developed Economy
Core EVP

Compensation
Ethics
Location
Manager Quality
Meritocracy
People Management
Respect
WorkLife Balance
Additional Attributes
That Are Also Important for
the United States
Empowerment
Health Benefits
Retirement Benefits

Compensation
Empowerment
Ethics
Health Benefits
Location
Manager Quality
Meritocracy
People Management
Respect
Retirement Benefits
WorkLife Balance
* Bolded attributes drive both attraction and commitment.

75
76
Indian Labor Market Values Innovation and Growth

Note on Benchmark Comparisons
On the following pages, segment-specific findings are highlighted and
compared to results for the United States, unless otherwise noted. When
organization-specific analysis is undertaken, organizations may want to use
other regions for comparison, if appropriate. Greater detail can be found in the
appendix of this book, as well as online at www.clc.executiveboard.com.
Growth Rate and Innovation Drive Attraction in India
Organization growth rate, market position, and level of innovation are more
important in India than in the U.S. labor market, with nearly twice as many
Indian respondents ranking these attributes among their top five attributes for
evaluating organizations as potential employers.
Compensation, interestingly, falls slightly in importance: it is ranked
among the top five attributes by 58% of the U.S. sample but by only 35% of
respondents in India.
as well as Employee Commitment
Organizational growth rate and innovation not only drive attraction, but also
have greater impact on commitment in India compared to the U.S. population.

The reverse, however, is true for compensation. While relatively less important
for attracting talent, it is still important for ensuring the commitmentand
therefore performance and retentionof that talent once theyve been hired.
This difference highlights the need for organizations to carefully consider
the trade-offs and decisions made in designing an EVP; removing resources
from one attribute to invest in another can have unintended consequences,
depending on the extent to which the attribute drives both outcomes.
Segmenting the EVP for India
Accordingly, organizations operating in India must still be competitive on
compensation but should augment the core EVP to also leverage growth,
market position, and innovation where possible.
EVP Segmentation: India
Focus on Innovation and Growth in India

The Indian labor market will trade-off compensation for innovation, high-growth, and market position
Difference in Attraction, by Attributes
Difference in Commitment, by Attributes
India Versus United States
India Versus United States

United States
India
60%
Compensation is relatively less

important in India while growth rate
and innovation are more important
for attraction
58%
and are also relatively

more effective at driving
commitment.
60%
45%
37%
35%
Percentage of
Respondents 30%
Rating in Top
Five
Maximum
Impact on 30%
Commitment
21%
39%
32%
30%
31%
30%
25%
20%
16%
7%
6%
5%
Note: For this segment, the Council assessed the relative importance of all the EVP attributes for driving attraction and commitment compared to the benchmark
to determine which attributes are most important to include in EVP segmentation strategies. The most important deviations from the benchmark are shown above.
Ra
t
n
io
n
io
wt
ro
G
tP
ke
M
ar
os
it
at
ov
Inn
Co
m
pe
ns
at
io
n
ke
ar
M
ro
tP
wt
os
it
Ra
at
ov
Inn
io
te
n
io
io
pe
ns
at
Co
m
0%
n
0%

Each bar on the left graphic represents the percentage of respondents reporting a given attribute as top fi ve in importance when evaluating an organization as a potential
employer for each segment compared to the global benchmark. Each bar on the right graphic represents a statistical estimate of the maximum impact on commitment that
changing EVP perceptions will produce. The impact is calculated by comparing the predicted impact on commitment for an employee who rates the organization high on the
attribute and the predicted impact on commitment for an employee who rates the organization low on the attribute.
77
The India EVP

Developing the India EVP
To determine the optimum EVP in India, organizations must add attributes
to the universal core EVP which are relatively more important for the Indian
labor market and which are unique to the Indian labor market.
The core attribute that is relatively more important is compensation, given
the high impact that compensation has on employee commitment.
Additional, non-core attributes that are important to the Indian labor
market and employees are jobinterests alignment, innovation, growth rate,
market position, empowerment, job impact, people management, and senior
leadership reputation.
Together with the global core EVP, these attributes constitute the India EVP.

78
From the Core to the Segment: India

Building the EVP in India
The India EVP*

That Are
Important for India
The Global Core EVP

Compensation
Manager Quality
Respect
Ethics
Growth Rate
Innovation
Job Impact
Market Position
WorkLife Balance

Compensation
Ethics
Growth Rate
Innovation
Job Impact
JobInterest Alignment
Manager Quality
Market Position
Respect
WorkLife Balance

79
80
Leverage Printed Media in India

Implementing a strong EVP for a specific segment does not guarantee
the EVPs full benefit. Organizations must also ensure that the EVP
communication strategy matches the ways in which candidates in the target
labor market consume information during their job searches.
Indian Labor Market More Reliant on Written Communication
Further analysis of the Indian labor market reveals that it uses printed
communicationsincluding organization Web sites and trade press articles
much more than other populations. Use of these sources ranges from 27%
to 41% of all job candidates, notably higher than for other segments. Use
of job advertisements in magazines and newspapers, at 41%, is also the
most used information source by candidates in India. Organizations should
disproportionately leverage these channels when positioning their EVP in the
Indian labor market.

Indian Labor Market Trusts Content of Written Communication

Not surprisingly, the sources that the Indian labor market uses the most are
also the sources that they trust the most. Eighty-eight percent of job candidates
reviewing an organizations Web site tend to trust that source, while 86% of
candidates reading about an organization in a magazine or newspaper will
trust the content of the article.
These high-levels of trust create both an advantage and a danger. It strengthens
the credibility of many organization-controlled channels, such as its Web
site, but also leaves the organization vulnerable to damage from negative
press. HR must consider the potential impacts from both when evaluating the
effectiveness of the organizations EVP communication strategy.
Use Written Communications in India

Utilizing written communication channels
not only leverages their high usage
but capitalizes on greater trust

in the information those sources relay
Top Channel UsageIndia Labor Market
Respondent Trust in ChannelIndia

Organization Web Site
Job Advertisements
in Magazines or
Newspapers
Neither Believed
nor Doubted
41%
Doubted
8%
Someone Who Knew

About the Organization
Proactively Reached
Out to Me
Channel
4%
37%
Job Advertisements
Through a Nontargeted, Third-Party
Online
31%
28%
Friends/Family
Articles in
Magazines or
Newspapers
88%
The Indian labor
market places
greater emphasis
on written
communications
than any other
segment.
28%
Believed
Articles in Magazines or Newspapers

Neither Believed
nor Doubted
Doubted
9%
Organization
Web Site
5%
27%
0%
25%
50%
Percentage of Respondents Using Channel
Note: For this segment, the Council assessed the usage and credibility of all communication channels compared to the benchmark to determine whether any
segment-specific differences warrant segment-level EVP communication strategies. The most important deviations from the benchmark are shown above.
86%
Believed


81
82
Chinese Market Values Compensation,

Development Opportunities, and Health Benefits
Development Opportunities Paramount for the Chinese Labor Market
As in the United States, compensation in China is the most important attribute
for attracting talentwith 6 in every 10 respondents ranking it in their top
five most important attributes when evaluating potential employers. Thus,
being competitive on compensation in China is critical. In fact, compensation
is more critical in China than in any other country, perhaps reflecting a
workforce adjusting to the realities of a freer market.
Interestingly, health benefits also play a prominent role in the Chinese labor
market when evaluating potential employers; 23% of respondents ranked it in
their top five, compared to 39% in the United States*. Once provided, however,
health benefits can be a powerful driver of commitmentand therefore
performance and retentionin a labor market rapidly gaining a reputation for
high turnover.
Compared to other labor markets, developmental opportunities are

substantially more important for attracting talent in Chinawith nearly 42%
of Chinese respondents placing development opportunities in their top five
EVP attributes when evaluating potential employers.
The commitment created by health benefits may reflect the shift from stateowned firmsrequired to offer health benefitsto private firms, which are
not required to provide benefits. Consequently, Chinas rate of uninsurance has
risen to 87% as of 2006. As a result, organizations offering health benefits reap
clear rewards from doing so.
Health Benefits Drive Employee Commitment
Segmenting the EVP for China
Health benefits also present an opportunity for competitive EVP advantage

within China. Delivering on health benefits assumes much greater importance
for committing employees, with a disproportionately large impact on employee
commitment (33%) as compared to the United States (22%).
Accordingly, organizations operating in China should augment the core EVP

to also leverage compensation, development opportunities, and health benefits
where possible.
* The global avearage is 11% .

EVP Segmentation: China
Development Opportunities and Health Benefits for China

The Chinese labor market places a premium on development
opportunities when evaluating potential employers
and shows higher levels of commitment

when provided health benefits
China Versus United States

United States
A disproportionately high
importance is placed on
development opportunities.
60%
China
59%
58%
Health benefits is an
important driver of
commitment.
70%
42%
39%
42%
Percentage of
Respondents 30%
Rating in Top
Five
23%
Maximum
Impact on 35%
Commitment
38%
30%
22%
18%
St
ab
ilit
fit
s
H
ea
lth
Be
ne
io
pe
ns
at
m
Be
n
ea
lth
H
Co
m
tO
en
its
ef
tio
n
pe
n
sa
rtu
0%
ie
nit
Co
0%
o
pp
33%
30%
pm
lo
e
ev
Note: For this segment, the Council assessed the relative importance of all the EVP attributes for driving attraction
and commitment compared to the benchmark to determine which attributes are most important to include
in EVP segmentation strategies. The most important deviations from the benchmark are shown above.
Source: Corporate Leadership Council, Employment Value Proposition Survey;

Corporate Leadership Council research.

83
The China EVP

Developing the China EVP
To determine the optimum EVP in China, organizations must add attributes
to the global core EVP which are relatively more important for the Chinese
labor market and which are unique to the Chinese labor market.
Core attributes which are relatively more important to the Chinese labor
market are compensation and development opportunities.
Additional, non-core attributes that are important to the Chinese labor market
and employees are health benefits, jobinterests alignment, market position,
meritocracy, and senior leadership reputation.
Together with the global core EVP, these attributes constitute the China EVP.

84
From the Core to the Segment: China

Building the EVP in China
The China EVP*

The Global Core EVP

Compensation
Manager Quality
Respect
That Are Also
Important for China
Health Benefits
Meritocracy

Compensation
Health Benefits
JobInterest Alignment
Manager Quality
Meritocracy
Respect

85
86
People Over Print in China

Chinese Labor Market Places Less Trust in Written Communication
Greater Trust of Interpersonal Channels
In contrast to the communication channel usage and trust findings in India,

the Chinese labor market places notably less trust in printed communications.
As an example, only 67% of respondents find printed job advertisements
credible, versus 80% in the United States. Put in context, this means that one
in three people within the labor market who view a written advertisement will
either view it with neutrality, skepticism, or outright distrust. Organizations
that successfully reach out to these candidates through other means will gain
a competitive edge in the Chinese labor market.
The Chinese labor market is more likely to trust interpersonal channels of EVP
communicationespecially alumni and college networks,
as well as external search firms, with 74% and 72% of respondents trusting
these sources.

While the differences may appear marginal, in heightened competition for

talent it becomes all the more critical to deliver credible messages to as great
a percentage of the labor market as possible. Organizations that can take
advantage of these differences will have greater ability to position and credibly
convey their EVP message for target talent pools in China.
Leverage Networks in China

Cautiously use written communications in which
the Chinese labor market places less trust
and leverage, high trust

networks to maximize EVP awareness
Written Job Advertisement Credibility
Alumni Network
Credibility of Message, China

Neither Believed
nor Doubted
United States
China
90%
20%
80%
6%
Doubted
68%
74%
Believed
Percentage of
Respondents 45%
Social networks
have higher levels of
credibility in China
External Search Firm

Credibility of Message, China
15%
15%
17%
Neither Believed
nor Doubted
5%
00%
12%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
The Chinese labor market

is less likely to believe print
sources as credible, and
more likely to distrust them.
Note: For this segment, the Council assessed the usage and credibility of all communication channels compared
to the benchmark to determine whether any segment-specific differences warrant segment-level EVP
communication strategies. The most important deviations from the benchmark are shown above.
Doubted
16%
72%
Believed


87
88
Variation in Attraction Top 10 by Geography

The table below shows country-specific differences in EVP preferences for
9 countries, spanning both developed and developing economies. Within
each column, the top 10 drivers of labor market attraction are presented in
descending order, allowing quick comparison of the top 10 attraction profiles
for each country.
Notable Similarities and Differences Exist Across Countries
While some attributes, such as compensation, future career opportunities,
respect for employees, and worklife balance are in the top ten for nearly
all countries, there are notable differences in attribute preferences across
geography beyond the cases of India and China discussed on the previous
pages. For instance, in Japan the organizations technology level holds much
more importance, while in France camaraderie is in the top 10 list.
Notable differences also exist in the relative importance of attributes. Location,
as an example, is the third most important attribute for the German labor
marketmore important than future career opportunities, organizational
stability, or work-life balancebut falls in importance for both Australia and
the United States to eighth.
Accordingly, organizations operating across multiple geographies will need
to consider how to most appropriately position and segment their EVPs to
account for these variations across countries. More details on variation in
attraction drivers by country may be found within the appendix or online at
www.clc.executiveboard.com.

The Ramifications of Country Differences: EVP Design and Communication

Caution should be used when evaluating segmentation strategies, however. As
noted earlier, the developed economy core EVP provides the organization with
approximately 80% of the potential EVP benefit, so additional differentiation
provides only marginal benefits. Organizations should pursue such
segmentation strategies when intense talent competition or shortages require
it to do so.
These differences in EVP preference are perhaps most useful when considering
EVP communication strategies. While the EVP may be designed around a
consistent set of attributes, most communication strategies by definition will
have to focus on only a handful.
Attraction Drivers: By Geography

Rank Order of EVP Attraction Drivers
By Geography
Australia
Canada
China
France
Germany
India
Japan
United Kingdom
United States
WorkLife Balance Compensation
Compensation
Compensation
Compensation
Future Career
Opportunities
Compensation
WorkLife Balance Compensation
Future Career
Opportunities
WorkLife Balance
Development
Opportunities
WorkLife Balance
Collegial Work
Environment
Compensation
WorkLife Balance
Future Career
Opportunities
Health Benefits
Compensation
Respect
Future Career
Opportunities
Future Career
Opportunities
Location
Development
Opportunities
Organizational
Stability
Compensation
Organizational
Stability
Organizational
Stability
Future Career
Opportunities
Meritocracy
Respect
Organizational
Stability
Organizational
Stability
Vacation
Location
WorkLife Balance
JobInterests
Alignment
Organizational
Stability
Health Benefits
Organizational
Stability
Development
Opportunities
JobInterests
Alignment
Location
Organizational
Stability
Future Career
Opportunities
Respect
JobInterests
Alignment
JobInterests
Alignment
Recognition
Future Career
Opportunities
Respect
Technology Level
Development
Opportunities
Respect
Development
Opportunities
Health Benefits
Respect
Product Quality
WorkLife Balance WorkLife Balance
JobInterests
Alignment
JobInterests
Alignment
JobInterests
Alignment
Location
Location
Organizational
Stability
Camaraderie
JobInterests
Alignment
Innovation
Organization
Growth Rate
Respect
Location
Ethics
Development
Opportunities
Industry
Development
Opportunities
Respect
Recognition
Development
Opportunities
Recognition
Retirement
Benefits
10
Recognition
Empowerment
Retirement
Benefits
Coworker
Quality
Recognition
Organization
Growth Rate
Product Quality
Empowerment
Ethics

89
90
Impact of EVP Perceptions on Commitment

Also Vary Across Geography
The table below follows the same format as the table on the previous page, but
shows the top drivers of employee commitment for each country, as opposed
to the top drivers of talent attraction. Within each column the top ten drivers
of employee commitment are presented in descending order, allowing quick
comparison of the top 10 commitment profi les for each country.
Some Attributes Consistently Impact Commitment Across Geographies
As observed for EVP preferences across geographies, a handful of key EVP
attributes consistently drive employee commitment across country-specific
populations. Not surprisingly respect for employees, senior leadership
reputation, and manager related attributes (e.g., manager quality and people
management) consistently drive employee commitment levels.

Segmented EVPs Can Yield Greater Commitment Outcomesto a Point

Variations across geographies consist mostly of the relative importance placed
on attributes, such as development and future career opportunities. For
example, some regions place very high importance on development and future
career opportunities (e.g., Australia, Canada, China, Germany, and the United
States), while others place greater emphasis on attributes such as respect and
recognition (e.g., France and Japan).
As noted previously, organizations will need to exercise caution when
considering segmented EVPs, particularly within developed economies. While
enough variation exists to warrant a segmented approach, the benefits from
doing so will be incremental.
HR may also wish to use information concerning these differences for internal
branding campaigns. While the organizations EVP may be consistent across
geographies, the elements of the EVP which HR chooses to emphasize in
internal campaigns to bolster engagement or retention may vary depending on
geographical differences in impact.
Commitment Drivers: By Geography

Rank Order of Commitment Drivers
By Geography
Australia
Canada
China
France
Germany
India
Japan
United Kingdom
United States
Innovation
People
Management
Development
Opportunities
Recognition
Development
Opportunities
Manager Quality
Senior Leadership
Reputation
Respect
JobInterests
Alignment
Respect
Innovation
Manager Quality
Great Employer
Recognition
Manager Quality
People
Management
Coworker
Quality
Job-Interests
Alignment
People
Management
Empowerment
Development
Opportunities
Coworker Quality
People
Management
Respect
Job Impact
Ethics
Manager Quality
Respect
Senior Leadership
Reputation
JobInterests
Alignment
Senior Leadership
Reputation
Respect
Recognition
Senior Leadership
Reputation
Respect
Senior Leadership
Reputation
Manager Quality
Great Employer
Recognition
Senior Leadership
Reputation
Future Career
Opportunities
Meritocracy
Empowerment
Respect
Empowerment
People
Management
Development
Opportunities
Future Career
Opportunities
Respect
Meritocracy
JobInterests
Alignment
Future Career
Opportunities
Meritocracy
Great Employer
Recognition
Ethics
Future Career
Opportunities
Manager Quality
Manager Quality
Ethics
Diversity
JobInterests
Alignment
Innovation
Risk Taking
Coworker
Quality
Senior Leadership
Reputation
Recognition
Future Career
Opportunities
Empowerment
Innovation
Product Quality
Development
Opportunities
Future Career
Opportunities
Empowerment
Ethics
Ethics
Meritocracy
Environmental
Responsibility
Development
Opportunities
Informal
Environment
Diversity
Manager Quality
Recognition
Great Employer
Recognition
10
Development
Opportunities
Collegial Work
Environment
Customer
Reputation
Ethics
Great Place to
Ethics
Work Recognition
People
Management
Development
Opportunities
Meritocracy

91
92
Senior Executives Want a Great Team and High Impact

Position the Executive EVP Around Success and Impact to Attract Talent
Segmenting the EVP for Senior Executives
Compared to other employees, U.S. senior executives are willing to trade off
compensation, stability, and worklife balance to work with a great team, in a
high impact role, and for a competitively positioned organization.
Accordingly, organizations should augment the developed economy core EVP

to also leverage job impact, senior leadership reputation, innovation, market
position, organizational stability, and worklife balance to better attract and
commit senior executives in the United States
Leverage Organizational Stability and Work-Life Balance to Drive

Commitment
While the above attributes attract senior executives to organizations, they do
not necessarily guarantee their commitment. Though senior executives may
prefer to join successful, well-led organizations where they can have significant
job-impact, as employees it is stability and worklife balance that have higherthan-average impact at driving their commitment.

EVP Segmentation: Senior Executives
Attracted to Impact and Success but Stay for Stability

Senior executives seek to lead a successful business, but stability and worklife drive their commitment
U.S. Senior Executives Versus U.S. Non-Senior Executives
U.S. Senior Executives Versus U.S. Non-Senior Executives

U.S. Non-Senior Executives
Senior executives are attracted to high-impact

competitively advantaged organizations led by
well-respected leadership teams
U.S. Senior Executives
but once attracted, drivers of senior

executive commitment shift to organizational
stability, and worklife balance.
60%
70%
63%
58%
44%
39%
35%
32%
Maximum
Impact on 30%
Commitment
Percentage of
Respondents 35%
Rating in
Top Five
20%
18%
31% 32%
32%
30%
28%
23%
18%
16%
17%
13%
7%
io
Note: For this segment, the Council assessed the relative importance of all the EVP attributes for driving attraction and
commitment compared to the benchmark to determine which attributes are most important to include in EVP
segmentation strategies. The most important deviations from the benchmark are shown above.
Inn
ov
at
io
n
n
os
itio
ar
ke
Re
or
W
rg
ad
tP
lan
kLif
e
lS
na
iza
tio
Co
m
an
ip
rsh
io
at
t
pu
Ba
ta
pe
ns
at
bil
ce
it y
n
io
n
itio
n
io
at
ov
a
Le
e
rL
de
Re
ke
tP
os
b
Jo
rs
hip
Inn
pa
c
Im
sa
pe
n
Co
a
ut
n
Se
0%
tio
tio
n
0%
5%
ar
4%
4%
nio
Se


93
The Senior Executive EVP

Developing the U.S. Senior Executive EVP
To determine the optimum EVP for U.S. senior executives, organizations
should add attributes to the developed economy core EVP which are relatively
more important for the senior executive labor market and which are unique to
the senior executive labor market.
Core attributes which are relatively more important to senior executives are
compensation, organizational stability, and worklife balance.
Additional, non-core attributes that are important to U.S. senior executives are
job impact, senior leadership reputation, innovation, and market position.
Together with the developed economy EVP, these attributes constitute the
U.S. EVP for senior executives.

94
From the Core to the Segment: Senior Executives

Building the EVP for Senior Executives in the United States
The U.S. Senior

Executive EVP*
The U.S. EVP

Compensation
Empowerment
Ethics
Health Benefits
Location
Manager Quality
Meritocracy
People Management
Respect
Retirement Benefits
WorkLife Balance
That Are Also
Important for Senior
Executives in the United States
Innovation
Job Impact
Market Position

Compensation
Empowerment
Ethics
Health Benefits
Innovation
Job Impact
Job Interests Alignment
Location
Manager Quality
Market Position
Meritocracy
People Management
Respect
Retirement Benefits
WorkLife Balance

95
96
Executive Talent Most Commonly

Courted Through Personal Contact
Proactive Outreach Is the Dominant Communication Channel for U.S.
Executives
Proactive outreach by someone connected to the organizationis by far the
most common channel through which executive talent learns about a potential
employer. In fact, nearly one in every three senior executives used proactive,
personal communication when learning about his/her current position. This is
nearly twice the number of senior executives who used external search firms to
find their current employer.

The Importance of Personal Networks

The prominence of proactive outreach highlights the importance of personal
networks, a trend that Chapter III will explore in greater detail. Direct personto-person interaction is not only a commonly used information channel for
U.S. senior executives and other segments, but one which carries greater
trust. Organizations that more effectively leverage these personal networks
within their talent attraction strategies will gain a competitive edge in the
marketplace, successfully (and credibly) reaching a greater number of potential
candidates.
EVP Communication: Senior Executives
Informally Network to Reach Executives

Proactive outreach is the most common method of connecting with potential senior executive talent
U.S. Senior Executives Channel Usage
50%
Most senior executives are sourced

by proactive outreach by someone
knowledgeable of the organization
34%
Percentage
of U.S. Senior
25%
Executives
Using Channel
which is twice as common

as using search firms.
20%
19%
18%
17%
17%
Organization
Web Site
Friends/Family
0%
Someone Who
Knew About the
Organization
Proactively Reached
Out to Me
Job Advertisements
in Magazines or
Newspapers
Current Employees
of the Organization
Note: For this segment, the Council assessed the usage and credibility of all communication channels compared
to the benchmark to determine whether any segment-specific differences warrant segment-level EVP
communication strategies. The most important deviations from the benchmark are shown above.

(Recruitment Agency
or Headhunter)


97
98
Differences Across Generations

Career Opportunities Attract Generation Y
Self Interest and Broader Social Responsibility Drive Commitment
Differences between generations have always been of significant interest to

employers, and the differences between the baby boom generation and
Generation Y in the United States have not been an exception. Despite other
differences between these two generations, Generation Y is surprisingly not
that much different from their parents when evaluating potential employers.
When evaluating organizations as employers, younger candidates place the
most value on compensation, with 55% of respondents ranking it among their
top five most important attributes. Nor do attributes such as camaraderie,
social responsibility, and environmental responsibility play a greater role in
employer selection when comparing the two generations.
While camaraderie, social responsibility, and environmental responsibility

do not necessarily attract Generation Y to organizations, how effectively
an organization delivers these attributes will have a significant impact on
the commitment levels of younger employees once they have joined the
organization. These attributes have potential impacts on commitment
ranging from 38% to 45%. In the same spirit, ethics also plays a vital role
in Generation Ys commitment, with a 52% potential impact. Future career
opportunities, vital for attracting Generation Y, will also pay dividends
through increased employee commitment, with a maximum potential impact
of 51%.
The younger generation considers how the opportunities an employer

provides can help them establish their careers to a much greater extent than
their parents: 47%, as compared to 20%. To effectively access the Generation
Y labor pool, organizations must effectively highlight the future career
opportunities available as part of their EVP.

Segmenting the EVP for Generation Y

Accordingly, organizations should position the EVP to leverage future career
opportunities, ethics, environmental responsibility, social responsibility, and
camaraderie to better attract and commit Generation Y in the United States.
EVP Segmentation: Age 2329 and 5059
Gen X
Rational Candidates, Conscientious Employees

Opportunities drive attraction, but social responsibility and social networking drive commitment
Difference in Attraction, by Attribute
Difference in Commitment, by Attribute
U.S. Age 2329 Versus U.S. Age 5059
U.S. Age 2329 Versus U.S. Age 5059

U.S. Age 5059
Career opportunities are

much more likely to attract
younger employees
60%
57%
while ethics, environmental

responsibility and social networks are
more likely to drive commitment levels.
U.S. Age 2329
60%
55%
52%
51%
47%
45%
43%
40%
37%
Percentage of
Respondents 30%
Rating in
Top Five
38%
35%
34%
Maximum
Impact on 30%
25%
Commitment
25%
30%
24%
20%
16%
r
tu
Fu
2% 2%
iro
en
Note: For this segment, the Council assessed the relative importance of all the EVP attributes for driving attraction
and commitment compared to the benchmark to determine which attributes are most important to include in
EVP segmentation strategies. The most important deviations from the benchmark are shown above.
ur
t
Fu
en
nm
ad
er
ie
lity
m
ar
ibi
Ca
R
al
po
ns
hic
io
Et
e
re
Ca
s
on
es
rO
lity
ibi
n
rtu
pp
pe
ns
at
itie
0%
lR
es
ta
sp
So
cia
cia
v
En
nm
e
lR
s
on
lit
ibi
Co
lR
es
po
n
sib
ilit
er
ie
ad
So
m
Co
re
Ca
ar
pp
rO
Ca
m
tio
n
pe
n
sa
rtu
ie
nit
Et
hic
0%
3% 3%
y
5%
2%
vir
En
Source: Corporate Leadership Council, Employment Value Proposition

99
The Generation Y EVP

Developing the U.S. Generation Y EVP
To determine the optimum EVP for Generation Y employees, organizations
must add attributes to the developed world core EVP which are relatively more
important for this age demographic and which are unique to this demographic.
Core attributes which are relatively more important to Generation Y are future
career opportunities, compensation, and ethics.
Additional, non-core attributes that are important to Generation Y are
environmental responsibility, social responsibility, and camaraderie.
Together with the developed economy EVP, these attributes constitute the U.S.
Generation Y EVP.

100
Gen X
From the Core to the Segment: Generation Y

Building the EVP for Generation Y in the United States
The U.S. Generation Y EVP
The U.S. EVP

Compensation
Empowerment
Ethics
Health Benefits
Location
Manager Quality
Meritocracy
People Management
Respect
Retirement Benefits
WorkLife Balance
That Are Also Important
for Generation Y
in the United States
Camaraderie
Camaraderie
Compensation
Empowerment
Ethics
Health Benefits
Location
Manager Quality
Meritocracy
People Management
Respect
Retirement Benefits
WorkLife Balance

101
Older Employees Trust People,

Younger Employees Trust Consumable Media
Generation Y Consumes Information to Make Their Own Judgments
Baby-boomers Trust Their Networks
Though generational differences in EVP preferences are more subtle than

popularly asserted, there are substantial generational differences in the
information channels that they trust. Generation Y in the United States places
greater trust in consumable media which they can use to form their own
assessment of the EVP, such as recruiting events, job advertisements, news
media, and the organizations Web site. Generation Y trusts these information
sources 5% to 15% more than their parents.
The baby-boom generation, on the other hand, places greater trust in

the information they receive from their more developed personal networks
of coworkers, clients, and professional and academic relationships. As an
example, these candidates place 26% more trust in their coworkers than
Generation Y, and 23% more trust in former employees of the organization.
Accordingly, organizations must take these preferences in to account when

designing attraction strategies for Generation Y employees. The use of
consumable media presents an opportunity for the organization to carefully
craft its presentation of the EVP, but also presents significant risks that the
information will be lost amid the large volumes of content available in
todays media.

The increased trust placed in these personal networks by the baby-boom

generation presents an opportunity for organizations to more effectively
recruit them. By successfully leveraging these networks HR will be able to
increase the credibility of the EVP, thereby increasing the organizations
attractiveness and reaching a broader segment of the talent pool.
102
Gen X
Clear Channel Preferences Between Generations

Focus communication efforts on media
and online channels for younger labor pools
and leverage personal networks

to reach older employees
Relative Difference in Channel Trust

2329 Year-Olds Trust More
5059 Year-Olds Trust More

26%
Coworkers
Former Employees
of the Organization
23%
21%
Clients/Customers
Trust in Consumable Information

Young
Professional
Back
Forward
Stop
Refresh
Professional or Trade
Associations
16%
Current Employees
of the Organization
Address:
14%
9%
Alumni Network
Younger job candidates place greater

trust in consumable media through
which they can form their own
assessment of the EVP.
Trust in Networks
7%
11%
15%
5%
Organization
Web Site/Intranet
5%
Best Employer Award List

Job Ads, Niche or Targeted
8%
Articles in Magazines
or Newspapers
8%
Job Ads, Nontargeted, ThirdParty Online

Job Ads, Television or Radio
Older job candidates prefer and

trust personal connections when
learning about organizations, turning
to coworkers, current and former
employees of the prospective employer,
clients, and professional networks.
Recruiting Event/Career Fair
Note: The Council assessed the usage and credibility of all communication channels for 2329 year olds and compared them to 5059 year old respondents to
determine any age-based differences that would influence EVP communication strategies. The most important differences in channel trust are shown above,
where bars on the left of the vertical line are more trusted by 2329 year olds and bars on the right of the vertical line are more trusted by 5059 year olds.

103
104
Other Segments: Many Similarities,

a Few Key Differences in Attraction
Minimal Differences in EVP Preferences Exist Across Segments
Additional Differences of Note
The table below displays the top ten most important attributes for attracting
employees in several key function segments: in-store employees, engineering,
IT, manufacturing, R&D, call centers, and for the public sector. More so than
across geographies, there is significant overlap in the top 10 attributes across
functional talent segments, though the relative ordering changes slightly.
Other notable deviations by function include:
InStore Employees Prioritize Respect

The most notable difference is for in-store retail employees, who rank respect
for employees as the most important of all 38 attributes when evaluating a
potential employer; 38% rank it in their top five most important attributes
when evaluating a potential employer. Compensation still ranks high, with
37% of respondents ranking it in their top five of most important attributes.

IT employees place greater weight on the organizations

technology level,
R&D employees place more value on innovation,
Health benefits are particularly important for call-center
employees and,
Public sector employees place more value on work-life balance.
The Core and Developed Economy Core EVPs Meet Most Segment
Preferences
The minimal variations seen in preferences from one segment to the next
highlight the strength of the universal core and developed economy EVPs.
By using these EVPs, organizations can effectively attract and retain critical
talent across these segments. Furthermore, organizations can deploy the same
fundamental EVP across multiple talent needs with minimal variation,
cutting down on the costs incurred through creating and managing multiple,
complex EVPs.
EVP Segmentation: Attracting Retail,

Technical, Call Center, and Public Sector Talent
Rank Order of EVP Attraction Attributes, U.S. Employees
Top 10 by Function
In-Store Employees
1
Respect
Compensation
Future Career
Opportunities
WorkLife Balance
Health Benefits
Location
Development
Opportunities
JobInterests
Alignment
Recognition
9
10
Engineering
Compensation
Organizational
Stability
Future Career
Opportunities
IT
Compensation
WorkLife Balance
JobInterests
Alignment
Development
Opportunities
Organizational
Stability
Future Career
Opportunities
JobInterests
Alignment
Development
Opportunities
Location
Location
Health Benefits
Technology Level
Respect
Respect
Retirement Benefits
Health Benefits
WorkLife Balance
Respect and stability

are more important
than compensation.
Manufacturing
R&D
Call Center Employees
Public Sector
Compensation
Compensation
Compensation
Compensation
Organizational
Stability
Future Career
Opportunities
Future Career
Opportunities
Health Benefits
WorkLife Balance
Future Career
Opportunities
Organizational
Stability
Organizational
Stability
Future Career
Opportunities
Respect
Respect
WorkLife Balance
JobInterests
Alignment
Innovation
Location
Location
Location
Vacation
Health Benefits
Respect
Ethics
Development
Opportunities
Meritocracy
Retirement Benefits
Retirement Benefits
Respect
WorkLife Balance
Location
Health Benefits
Development
Opportunities
JobInterests
Alignment
Retirement Benefits
Technical functions are most

attracted to compensation.
WorkLife Balance
Development
Opportunities
Organizational
Stability
JobInterests
Alignment
Compensation and health

benefits are most important
for call center employees.
Preferences of public sector

employees are not fundamentally
different from the private sector.

105
Deutsche Bank: Global Employment Brand Management

practice identified through the Councils research for managing a segmented
EVP, from Deutsche Bank. The practice, entitled Global Employment Brand
Management, provides a strategy for creating and managing a consistent
global brand while allowing for regional customization. For the full case,
please see Volume II of this study.
Company Profiled
Industry: Financial Services

Revenues: 1,035 billion
Employees: 63,427
Action
Deutsche Bank creates a global employment
value proposition based on insights from
regional talent markets, and creates a
global employment brand management
infrastructure that allows for trade-offs
between global consistency and regional
customization.

Significant rise in employer of choice
ratings
Increased candidate yield from target
recruitment markets
Headquarters: Frankfurt, Germany

Situation
Deutsche Banks uncoordinated positioning
of its EVP across the global graduate labor
market fails to sufficiently impact candidates
awareness of the bank as a top employer,
leading to difficulties in attracting the
necessary number of high quality graduate
hires.
Key Teachings
Create global EVP based insights into
regional labor market preferences and
competitive pressures.
Create global brand management
infrastructure that ensures consistent
execution while allowing for local
customization where needed.

106
Practice Driver
Global EVP Management

Deutsche Banks global brand management infrastructure allows regional recruiting teams to manage
for global consistency while sensing local market issues and providing opportunities for local variation
HR Infrastructure to Balance Global Versus Local Positioning of the EVP
Global HR Management Tools to Balance

Global Consistency with Local Positioning
Shared virtual workspace for HR marketing team with suite of
global EVP materials and recruiting templates
Corporate brand management portal
Weekly HR Marketing Conference Call
HR Resourcing
Head of Employer
Brand and Marketing
Weekly HR Marketing and Recruiting

Conference Call Agenda
Discussion and alignment of global EVP
communication initiatives, for example:
New recruiting event stand
Global careers Web site revisions
M.B.A. attraction strategy
Creation of global templates for EVP positioning
Inputs from regional focus groups
Insights about how to create recruiting materials
that will work in all locations
Resolution of EVP positioning conflicts
Discussion of global impact from regional
positioning needs
United
States
HR Marketing
Manager
United
Kingdom
HR Marketing Germany
Manager HR Marketing
Manager
Deutsche Banks Global EVP Message

Deutsche Bank offers unparalleled opportunities and is an
aspirational employer with the platform to lift your career
to the next level.
Hong
Kong
India
HR Marketing HR Marketing
Manager
Manager
Weakness in U.S. Positioning:

The bank is viewed as a back-up option
for candidates due to its relatively new
positioning in the U.S. market.
Weakness in German Positioning:

The bank is perceived as an unreliable
employer, low expectations of career
development.
Local EVP Positioning Objective:

Build brand image of size through global
strength and high performance (versus
United States Banks).
Local EVP Positioning Objective: Build

trust by emphasizing training and career
opportunities (versus consultancies).
Employer Brand and Marketing Team Success Factors

1. Full integration with HR resourcing team
2. Close relationships with the line in the regional hubs
Appendix page 50 HR Marketing Manger Job Description
Source: Deutsche Bank; Corporate Leadership Council research.

107
108
Key Findings
1. Customizing the EVP can improve attraction and commitment outcomes for certain talent
segments, but is probably not worthwhile for others: The consistency of the core EVP means that
segmentation is valuable only if the talent segment is important to the organizations strategy and if
the customized EVP can improve significantly on the performance of the core EVP.
2. Geographic differences in the EVP matter much more than differences by age, level, gender,
function, or industry: With a few exceptions (such as retail employees, generation Y, and senior
executives in the United States) the most important variations in EVP preferences occur across
geographic boundaries. Organizations with multinational operations will need to consider varying
their EVP (in either design or communication) to meet the needs of employees in their different
geographies.
3. Beyond the core, the competitive EVP in India should focus on the companys market position,
a culture of innovation, and organizational growth: Additionally, in communicating the EVP,
organizations should leverage channels that are highly trusted by the Indian labor market, including
printed media and the organizations own Web site.
4. Beyond the core, the competitive EVP in China should focus on health benefits and development
opportunities: Additionally, in marketing the EVP, organizations should leverage channels that are
highly trusted by the Chinese labor market. In contrast to India, this means less focus on printed
communication and greater use of interpersonal channels and networks.

5. Beyond the core EVP, senior executives in the U.S. are attracted to high-quality leadership teams
and the opportunity to have a significant impact in their jobs; however, post-hire, they value
worklife balance: The most effective communication channel for reaching these candidates is
proactive outreach from personal contacts within the organization.
6. Beyond the core EVP, Generation Y is attracted to career opportunities, and their ongoing
commitment can be greatly strengthened by an organizations ethics and social responsibility:
Contrary to what is commonly thought, ethics and social/environmental responsibility play much
less of a role in attracting Generation Y candidates. But once in the organization, their commitment
levels are highly dependent on their perceptions of the organizations performance against these
attributes.
7. Retail employees are one of the very few segments for which compensation is not the primary
driver of attraction: Instead, retail employees strongly desire to work for a stable organization with a
culture of respect for employees.
8. Segmented EVPs require active management: Organizations with too many segment-level
employment value propositions risk being perceived as inconsistent in their delivery of the EVP.
Successful organizations develop a brand management infrastructure to guide trade-offs between
global consistency and segment-specific customization.

109

110
Chapter III
Ensuring EVP Credibility in the Labor Market

111
112
Candidates Do Not Believe Us

Low Trust Within Labor Market of Common Communication Channels
Use of High-Trust Sources Promotes New-Hire Commitment
Once the EVP and any segmented variations on the EVP have been designed,
the organization must credibly relay the EVP to the labor market. As shown
by the left-hand graph below, the percentage of the labor market which places
high trust in different communication channels varies significantly, from 22%
for online forums to 81% for current employees of the organization that the
candidate is evaluating.
This has important ramifications for organizations beyond simple recruiting

efficiency. Candidates who use the most trusted channels to gather
information about potential employers have notably higher commitment levels
than those who use less credible channels, with differences as great as 21%.
Focusing resources on credible communication channels will not only enhance
the overall effectiveness of an organizations EVP message, but increase the
commitment levels of the organizations new hires.
Unfortunately, the traditional channels that many organizations rely on are

not highly trusted by candidates. These traditional channelssuch as job
advertisements in magazines and newspapers and third-party job boardsare
typically trusted by less than half of the labor market. Only the organizations
Web site has notable credibility, with 63% of candidates placing strong trust
in its content. These low levels of trust limit the organizations ability to
effectively communicate the EVP and ultimately risk the potential returns
realizable through labor market communication investments.

Current Employees Are a Source of Competitive Advantage

Accordingly, organizations have a strong interest in leveraging high-trust
channels. But the channels with the highest credibility are not under the
organizations control: current employees, friends, and family.
While highly-trusted, the organization will certainly never be able to
consistently and effectively leverage friends and family as information
channels. Current employees, however, have a vested interest in the
organizations success, and are strongly influenced by the organization.
Low Trust of High-Use Channels

Common information channels
are generally not trusted
but the most trusted channels help

improve new hire commitment
Labor Market Credibility by Channel
Commitment Impact by Channel
Current Employees of the Organization

Friends/Family
Former Employees of the Organization
Organization Web Site
Use of the Organization's Products
Coworkers
Clients/Customers
Organization's Annual Report
Alumni Network
Recruiting Event
Information
Best Employer Award List
Channel
Help Wanted Sign
Professional or Trade Associations
Articles in Magazines or Newspapers
Third-Party Job Board
Analyst/Investor Reports
Organization Information Sessions
College Career Center
News Stories on Television or Radio
Job Ads in Newspapers
Brochures and Posters
Job Ads on Television or Radio
Online Networking Tools (e.g., LinkedIn)
Online Forums (Such as a Blog)
81%
30%
72%
65%
63%
60%
59%
53%
51%
49%
Maximum
49%
Impact on 15%
48%
Commitment
48%
44%
44%
43%
42%
41%
41%
0%
38%
35%
33%
31%
26%
Online channels are the least
26%
trusted by the labor market.
22%
27%
= 21%
6%
Job Advertisements in
Newspapers
(Less Credible Channel)
Current Employees
(Most Credible Channel)

Chapter III: Ensuring EVP Credibility in the Labor Market
113
114
Employees Underperforming as Organizational Advocates

If leveraging current employees as advocates for the organization can provide
competitive advantage within the labor market, then two questions must
be addressed: to what extent are candidates already using this channel, and
to what extent are current employees predisposed to speak favorably of the
organization?
Current Employees Are Frequently Used Information Channels
First, the good news. Current employees are one of the most frequently used
channels by candidates in the labor market, with 23% of candidates speaking
with current employees to better understand the organizations EVP. Not
surprisingly, only job ads in magazines or newspapers and third-party job
boards are used with notably more frequency than current employees.

Most Employees Are Not Advocates of the Organization

Second, the bad news. Few employees, unfortunately, are advocates of the
organization. A case in point is highlighted in the call out box below. Current
employees cannot effectively relay one of the most important EVP attributes,
future career opportunities: only 18 percent of respondents agreed that
current employees of the organization provide helpful information about the
organizations career opportunities. Even worse, only 24% of employees would
recommend their organization as a good place to work.
This situation presents cause for concern as well as an opportunity. Current
employees are already reaching out to a notable percentage of the labor
marketbut are not necessarily communicating about it effectively or
positively.
Leverage Widely Used and Most Credible Channel: Employees

Common channels not trusted; trusted channels not advocates for the organization
Channel Credibility Versus Channel Usage1
Current employees are the most

important channel; yet most current
employees do not advocate for the
organization.
100%
Current Employees Gave

Me Helpful Information About
Careers in the Organization
Current
Employees
Agree
Friends/Family
Use of the
Organizations
Products or
Services
Organizations
Annual Report
Credibility2
50%
Former Employees
of the Organization
Organization
Web Site
Coworkers
Clients/Customers
Alumni Network
82%
Neutral or
Disagree
Recruiting Event/Career Fair
Best Employer
External
Award List Analyst/ Help Wanted Sign
Search Firm
Professional/Trade Associations
Investor
Articles in
Reports
College Career Center
Magazines or
Organization
News Stories on Television or Radio Newspapers
Information
Brochures and Posters
Sessions
Job Advertisements on
Television or Radio
Online Forum
(Such as a Blog)
18%
Third-Party
Job Board
I Would Recommend
My Organization to My Friends
Agree
Job Ads in Magazines or

Newspapers
24%
Online Networking
Tools (e.g., Linked)
76%
Neutral or
Disagree
0%
0%
15%
30%
Percentage of Employees Using Channel

1
Respondents were asked to indicate which information channels they used when gathering information about potential employers. For channels
that were used, respondents were then asked to rate the extent to which they believed the information they received from each channel on a
7-point scale (1 = Strongly Doubted, 7 = Strongly Believed).
Credibility is defi ned as the percent of respondents that indicated 6 or 7 on a 7-point scale indicating that they found the channel highly credible.

115
First Mandate: Increasing Believability of Channels

Two Mandates to Build Labor Market Credibility
The previous pages highlight two critical problems HR must address to
strengthen labor market communication. First, organizations must increase
the credibility of communication channels which they regularly use to
communicate with the labor market. Second, organizations must successfully
leverage current employees as advocates of the organization.
The following pages will explore solutions for both of these challenges,
beginning with how to increase the believability of communication channels
in the labor market.

116
Ensuring Credibility: Two Mandates
I.
Increasing Believability
of Channels
II.
Making Advocates
of Employees

117
118
The Three Steps to Credibility

Three Factors Increase Credibility
Increasing the believability of traditional communication channels is
the first mandate HR and the organization must act on in order to build
credibility within the labor market. Data collected as part of the Councils
Employment Value Proposition Survey found that organizations with highly
credible EVPs observe three imperatives in their labor market and recruiting
communications: reflect reality, enable self-selection, and ensure consistency.
Factor #1: Reflect Reality
First, messages must reflect the reality of the organization. Hiring managers
and recruiters have strong incentive to favorably present the rewards,
opportunities, work, people, and other characteristics of the organization,
risking a presentation of the EVP that is excessively positive or which may even
leave out vital negative aspects. This does not mean that organizations should
be overly critical of the EVP, but must be realistic; the failure to do so will
negatively impact new hire commitment, lowering it by as much as 14%.
Factor #2: Enable Self-Selection
Second, messages must enable applicants to self-assess whether the
organization is the right place for them. Communicating critical information
that enables employees to assess whether or not they will pursue employment
at the organization has the added benefit of alleviating some of the selection
burden from the organization, since people who do not feel they would fit well
with the organization will voluntarily opt-out. Organizations should facilitate
that process by making it clear who is likely to be a good fit.

This trait is connected with the first trait, accurately reflecting reality. Simply
promoting positive aspects of the organization will have a minimal impact
on commitment once the candidate is employed. Presenting a more holistic
picture of the EVP which allows the candidate to accurately assess fit, however,
has as great as a 16% impact on new hire commitment.
Factor #3: Ensure Consistency
Finally, the organization must ensure that the information candidates receive
from different sources is consistent. As information sources used by candidates
proliferate this becomes an increasingly complex task, but ensuring consistency
provides returns through a notable impact on new hire commitment: as much
as 26%.
Three Factors Increase Believability of Traditional Channels

Reflect Reality
Accuracy of Recruiting Experience

27%
30%
Maximum
Impact on
Commitment
Enable Self-Selection
Communication Emphasis in Recruiting Experience
20%
16%
Maximum
Impact on 10%
Commitment
0%
2%
(14%)
(30%)
0%
The Recruiting Process
Covered Up the Negative
Aspects of the Organization
The Recruiting Process

Accurately Reflected
the Organization
Points Out Relative

Strengths of
Organization
Allows Candidates
to Assess Fit with
Organization
Ensure Consistency
Channel Consistency Impact on Commitment

30%
30
26%
Maximum
15%
Impact on 15
Commitment
<1%
00%
Information Was
Consistent Across
Sources
Information Was
Highly Inconsistent
Across Sources
119
Poor Message Management

Labor Market Messaging Is Not Handled Effectively
Strong EVPs at Risk from Ineffective Communication
While the three factors for delivering credible messages to the labor market
reflecting reality, enabling self-selection, and ensuring consistencymay
appear obvious, organizations do not effectively adhere to them.
This data highlights the risk that suboptimal labor market communication
presents to strong EVPs. From the labor markets perspective, a strong EVP
will only provide returns to the organization if the labor market perceives it
as strong. Effectively attracting talent and ensuring new-hire commitment
will largely depend on the extent to which the organization can credibly
communicate the EVP to the labor market.
As shown by the data below, only a third of respondents believed that

the recruiting process accurately reflected the reality of the organization.
Furthermore, fewer than a third agreed that the information they received
during the recruiting process enabled them to assess their fit with the
organization, a state likely exacerbated by the fact that only 36% of
respondents agreed that the information they received was consistent.

120
Presenting an Un-Believable EVP?

Most organizations do not effectively support the credibility of the EVP
The Information I Received Let Me
Assess My Fit with the Organization
The Recruiting Process Accurately

Reflected the Organization
Agree
Agree
30%
36%
70%
64%
Neutral or
Disagree
Neutral or
Disagree
The Information I Received Was Consistent
Agree
36%
64%
Neutral or
Disagree

121
Philips: Life Cycle-Based EVP Delivery

practice identified through the Councils research for managing EVP messages
to candidates, from Philips. The practice, entitled Life Cycle-Based EVP
Delivery, provides a strategy for managing candidate experiences consistently
across all attraction, recruitment, and early career experiences to ensure that
candidate perceptions of the organization align with core EVP messages. For
the full case, please see Volume II of this study.
Company Profiled
Industry: Health-care Lifestyle and

Technology Solutions
Sales (2005): 30.4 Billion
Action
Philips identifies the points in the candidate
attraction and recruiting life cycle that most
critically impact candidate perceptions of
the organization and aligns candidates
experiences at each touchpoint with the
employment value proposition.

Improvement in labor market ratings
Increase in employee referral rates
Improved offer-to-hire ratios
Improved new-hire retention
Employees: 160,000
Headquarters: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Situation
Inconsistent employment brand positioning
and recruiting processes across Philips
multiple business units leads to negative
candidate experiences of the EVP and failure
to meet recruiting goals.
Key Teachings
Identify major touchpoints across the
attraction recruiting life cycle that impact
candidates perceptions of the EVP.
Align candidates experience of the EVP
across all major touchpoints.

122
Practice in Context
The End-to-End Candidate Experience

Philips Employment Value Proposition guides all stages of the attraction,
recruiting, and onboarding life cycle, ensuring consistent candidate experience throughout
Critical Candidate Decisions and Alignment of Experience Across the Candidate Life Cycle
Attraction Experience
Candidate
Decisions
Organizational
Challenge
Philips Action to Build

Critical Candidate
Experiences
Recruitment Experience
Early Employment Experience
Candidates build awareness and

form first perceptions about the
employment value proposition.
Candidates use recruiting experiences

to test the employment value
proposition.
Candidates embark on the

employment life cycle, and reevaluate
the value proposition over time.
No consistent message about

the EVP.
No alignment between candidate

recruiting experience and the EVP
message.
Failure to align early employment

experience with the EVP.
Philips establishes baseline candidate

awareness through integrated
corporate and employment branding
campaign.
Philips aligns hiring manager behaviors

with EVP.
Philips aligns onboarding experience

with core EVP messages.
Experience IS Reality
Each candidate or employee touchpoint with the organization leaves an impression and is an opportunity to have a positive impact. Remember
perception is reality. During each touchpoint this perception is build, can be maintained and/or changed.
Philips HR Guidelines for EVP Deployment
Source: Royal Philips Electronics N.V.; Corporate Leadership Council research.
123
Second Mandate: Making Advocates of Employees

Two Mandates to Address to Build Labor Market Credibility
The beginning of this chapter highlighted two critical problems for HR
to address in order to strengthen labor market communication. First,
organizations must increase the credibility of communication channels which
it regularly uses to communicate with the labor market. Second, organizations
must successfully leverage current employees as advocates of the organization.
The following pages will explore solutions for the second of these challenges,
how to promote advocate behavior among the organizations current
employees.

124
Ensuring Credibility: Two Mandates
I.
Increasing Believability
of Channels
II.
Making Advocates
of Employees

125
126
Wide Variation in Advocates Across Organizations

Employee Advocates Defined
Few Organizations Have High Numbers of Advocates
A statistic earlier in this chapter showed that less than one in four of the
average organizations current employees were willing to recommend the
organization as a good place to work, introducing the concept of employee
advocates. But what is advocate behavior, more specifically? To better
understand advocate behavior, the Council included a battery of questions
within the Employment Value Proposition Survey to develop a definition and
measure of employee advocate behavior.
The Councils analysis also showed that the number of employee advocates
at most organizations is low. On average, about 28% of an organizations
employees are advocates, with some organizations having less than 10% and
some having more than 50%.
Based on an analysis of these survey questions, the Council identified

advocates as employees who are personally committed to promoting their
organization and generating support for it within both the labor market and
among current employees.

These findings will have markedly different ramifications for organizations,

given the high usage of current employees as information channels within
the labor market. Those organizations with high numbers of advocates will
effectively leverage their current employees as a labor market communication
channel, while those organizations with low numbers of advocates run the
risk of their employees negatively or neutrally presenting the EVP to the labor
market.
Few Organizations Have Advocates

Few organizations have a significant population of employees who actively promote the EVP,
and the vast majority have a large percentage who do little to promote the organization
Percentage of Advocates
By Organization
70%
The number of advocates

varies substantially, with some
organizations having less than 10%
and others more than 50%.
Employee
Advocates*
Advocates are
employees who are
personally committed
to promoting their
organization and
generating support for
it within both the labor
market and among
current employees.
Percentage of
Advocates 35%
0%
Organizations
* Advocates include respondents that scored 90% and above on a factored index of champion or proactive organizational support.

127
Advocates Increase New-Hire Commitment

Employee Advocates Build Internal Commitment
Increasing the percentage of employee advocates not only enables the
organization to leverage employees as a labor market communication channel
to drive attraction, but also strengthens the commitment of new hires.
The graph below highlights the direct positive effect of advocates on new-hire
commitment: every 10% increase in the number of advocates leads to a 3%
improvement in new-hire commitment, which drives employee effort and
reduces turnover.

128
Employee Advocates: A Contagious Effect

Organizations with advocates are more likely to achieve high commitment in new hires
Percentage of Tenured Advocates Versus Commitment of New Hires
By Organization1
For every 10% increase in the number
of advocates an organization has,
average commitment of new hires
increases by 3%.
70
Commitment
Score of
New Hires
60
(Less Than
12 Months of
Tenure)
50
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Percentage of Employees That Are Advocates2

(Greater Than 12 Months of Tenure)
1
Each dot represents a unique organization.
The percent of employees that score above 90 on an index that measures proactive organizational support.

129
130
Employees Who Trust the Organization Promote the Organization

Three Imperatives for Building Employee Advocates
Imperative #2: Encourage Flexibility and Innovation
Given their high credibility and usage within the labor marketand by the
organizations current employeesa key imperative for strengthening EVP
credibility in the labor market is to increase the number of employees who
act as advocates of the organization. Doing so requires that the organization
act against three imperatives: fostering trust, encouraging flexibility and
innovation, and communicating the organizations values.
Creating an atmosphere of flexibility and innovation has the next largest

impact on advocate behavior, with a maximum potential impact of 18%.
Creating an atmosphere where employees feel a sense of empowerment
not only impacts their day-to-day work, but also creates a broader sense of
ownership that impacts their likelihood of promoting the organization to
others.
Imperative #1: Foster an Atmosphere of Trust

Trust is the foundation for building employee advocates, and has the largest
potential impact on advocate behavior (47%). Employees must feel that they
can trust the organization before they will actively promote it to others.
Imperative #3: Communicate the Organizations Values

Finally, organizationssenior executives, managers, and HRmust clearly
communicate the organizations values, which has a maximum potential
impact on advocate behavior of 17%. This enables advocacy by strengthening
the employees perception of what the organization stands for, thereby allowing
them to more effectively communicate that message to the labor market.
Organizations that enable these three conditions will have higher numbers of
employees who actively promote the organization to others both inside and
outside the organization.

Building Employee Advocates

The three keys to building advocates in the organization are trust, flexibility, and values
Foster an Atmosphere of Trust
Encourage Flexibility and Innovation
Average Impact = 47%
Fostering an
atmosphere of trust
is the most effective
thing organizations
can do to build
employee advocates.
Communicate the Organizations Values

Note: Maximum impact on advocate behavior is calculated by comparing two estimates: the predicted impact on advocate behavior
for an employee who rates high on the item and the predicted impact for an employee who rates low on the item.
Average impacts represent the results of regression analysis predicting advocates.
131
Starbucks: Employee EVP Advocates

practice identified through the Councils research for building employee
advocates, from Starbucks. The practice, entitled Employee EVP Advocates,
provides a strategy for aligning the internal working environment with the
employment value proposition and increasing the number of employees
actively promoting the organization as a best employer. For the full case, please
see Volume II of this study.
Action
Starbucks delivers its EVP to current partners*
by defining behavioral expectations of the
working environment, establishing interactive
occasions for reinforcement and feedback, and
identifying and responding to misalignments
between the EVP and partner experiences.
Company Profiled
Industry: Retail

Increased retention of employees
Increased number of employee referrals
Enhanced employee and candidate
perceptions of your organization as
a best employer
Revenues: US $6.4 Billion

Employees: 123,100
Headquarters: Seattle, Washington USA
Organizational Challenge
When organizations fail to deliver the
employment value proposition to current
employees, it negatively impacts employees
level of commitment and ultimately the
employees willingness to promote the
organization as a best employer.
Key Teachings
Determine employee behaviors in
delivering the value proposition.
Establish frequent and regular occasions
for employees to reinforce and provide
feedback on the EVP.
Engage employees in identifying and
correcting EVP misalignments.
* Starbucks refers to all employees as partners.
132
Practice in Summary: StarbucksEmployee EVP Advocates
The Partner* at the Center of EVP Delivery

Starbucks places the individual partner at the center of delivering the EVP by defining behavioral
expectations and providing every partner an opportunity to reinforce the EVP and respond to misalignments
Starbucks Partner-Centric EVP Delivery
Strategy Integrated EVP

Starbucks EVP is closely integrated with its Mission
Statement, its guiding principles, and the customer
value proposition.
Partner Self Regulation of EVP

Starbucks actively involves its partners in promoting
the value proposition and delivering it to their peers
through frequent and regular recognition and feedback
that relate to the Green Apron Book behaviors.
* Starbucks refers to all of its employees as partners.
Strategy
EVP
CVP
Green Apron
Recognition Card
Behavioral Guidelines
Starbucks defines five behaviors, and their
corresponding actions, that are critical to delivering
on the value proposition that it expects all partners
to live by.
Ongoing Control of Alignment with EVP

Starbucks gathers feedback through multiple channels
including surveys, Open Forums, and its Mission
Review program. Through its Mission Review process,
Starbucks encourages all partners to provide feedback
on areas where the company can do a better job of
living out its values.
Green Apron Book
Mission Review
Feedback Card
Source: Starbucks Corporation; Corporate Leadership Council research.

133
MITRE: Employee Recruiters

practice identified through the Councils research for enabling employee
advocate behavior, from MITRE. The practice, entitled Employee Recruiters,
provides a strategy for empowering and enabling employees to successfully
refer high numbers of quality candidates to the organization. For the full case,
please see Volume II of this study.
Company Profiled
Industry: Systems Engineering

Revenues: Not for Profit
Action
MITRE enables employees to act as promoters
of the employment value proposition by
providing them with the information and
support that they need to successfully refer
strong candidates.

Increase in employee referrals
Increase in quality of candidates
Employees: 6,399
Headquarters: Bedford, Mass.
Situation
With low unemployment among systems
engineers and facing fierce competition for
talent from bigger brand name companies,
MITRE was looking for new ways to leverage
current employees social networks to attract
and recruit needed talent.
Key Teaching
It is not the size of the referral bonus that is
important to a successful employee referral
program but the organizations ability to
provide employees with the information and
tools they need to effectively identify and
attract potential candidates from their social
networks.

134
Practice in Context: MITREEmployee Recruiters
Supporting Organizational Advocates

MITREs HR department increases the level of information and support needed
by employees to actively promote the organizations EVP
MITREs Approach to Leveraging Employee Networks to Attract Talent
1 MITRE Increases Employee Awareness About Organizational

Talent Needs and the Organizations Value Proposition
Organizational Challenges
MITRE Provides the Tools and Support Needed for

Employees to Leverage Their Networks Effectively
Organizational Challenges
Organizations are overly focused on employee

referral incentives as the driver of a successful
referral program.
Employees are too limited when thinking about

potential networks to promote the EVP.
Employees are unaware of organizational talent needs

and the organizations EVP.
Employees often lack the tools and support to

promote the EVP effectively.
Not (Only) About the Referral Bonus

We realized that our employees were committed to MITRE and actually wanted to champion the organization,
they just didnt know how. It was therefore up to us to provide the necessary insight and support in order to
leverage that commitment to attract talent.
Gary Cluff
Corporate Recruiting Director
MITRE Corporation
Source: MITRE Corporation; Corporate Leadership Council research.

135
136
Key Findings
1. Organizations face two critical challenges in communicating their EVP: First, the broader
labor market generally distrusts traditional communication channels. Second, the most
trusted communication channelan organizations current employeesoften does not
actively advocate for their organization in the labor market.
2. To improve broader communications with the labor market, organizations need to
ensure that communications during the recruiting process are candid, accurate, and
consistent: Specifically, recruiting processes should accurately reflect the realities of the work
environment, be consistent in their representation of the EVP, and facilitate candidates selfassessment of their fit with the organization.
3. Target communications around high-influence moments in the recruiting cycle: While it is
obviously not possible to control every possible part of the candidates recruiting experience,
organizations can create powerful leverage by actively managing the most critical touchpoints
in that process.

4. Current employees are one of the most widely used and highly trusted sources of
organizational information for potential job candidates: More than 80% of job candidates
find current employees to be a credible source of information. Further, candidates referred by
employees have significantly higher levels of commitment to the organization.
5. Unfortunately, few employees actively advocate for their organizations in the labor market:
Less than one-quarter of employees report that they would refer a friend to work at their
organization.
6. The percentage of employee advocates in an organization is strongly correlated to employee
perceptions of trust and organizational values: Organizations looking to build greater levels
of employee advocacy should involve employees in identifying and overcoming and perceived
misalignments between the organizations stated EVP and the actual work experience.
7. Referral bonuses are less effective than process enablement in driving new hire referrals:
Organizations can make employee advocates much more effective by providing tools to
facilitate and simplify the exchange of information between employees and candidates.

137

138

Building a Competitive Employment Value Proposition
Overall Takeaways
1. The Employment Value Proposition is key to attraction of candidates and commitment
of employees.
2. A competitive EVP should begin with the seven core attributes most important
to attraction and retention and aligned with the organizations long-term strategy.
3. EVPs must be customized to address geographic and level-based variation.
4. To succeed, EVPs must be locally relevant and globally consistent.
5. EVP credibility depends on leveraging current employees as the primary communication
channel and on managing the consistency of the EVP experience.
6. Building competitive advantage in the labor market requires active management of both
the EVP and the employee experience.

139
140
Coming Soon:
The CLC Attraction and Retention EVP Design Center
Organizations will be able to segment Council data to determine the EVP attributes that most effectively match their needs
1
Determine Segment of Interest
Receive Detailed Analysis of EVP for Segment
Members are able to

select a segment
Back
Forward
Stop
Refresh
Address:
EVP for Critical Segment

The Work
The Organization
The People
50%
EVP DESIGN CENTER
44%
consistency across segments
35%
33%

variation across segments
33%
28%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
28%
25%
22%
20%19%
17%
15%
13%
10%10%
15%
9%
12%
11%11% 11%
4%
tio
th
2%
te
10% 9% 9%
5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4%
Ra
en
ign
ts
es
er
Int
Jo
d
an
ilit
tB
en
Em
n
kE
e
lR
or
ta
en
nm
iro
v
En
ial
pu
hip
Re
rs
de
ea
rL
leg
l
Co
tio
ta
vir
sp
Re
plo
at
re
er
on
on
co
Aw
uc
od
Pr
sib
gn
ar
Al
5%
n
itio
es
en
7%
3%
m
pe
n
Re He V satio
tir alt ac n
em h ati
B
en en on
t B ef
W
en its
or
ef
k
its
Lif
e
Ba
lan
ce
L
Re oca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
J
Bu ob vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
Te odu er hics
ch ct me
n Q n
M olo ua t
ar gy lit
ke L y
So
t P ev
cia
os el
itio
lR
es
n
po
n
sib
Inf
or
Ind ility
Cu ma
us
sto l E
try
m nvir
O er R onm
rg ep e
an u n
iza ta t
tio tio
n n
D Size
ive
rsi
ty
R
Pe
isk
op
Ta
le
kin
g
M Man
an ag
ag em
er e
Co
Q nt
u
wo
ali
ty
rk
e
Ca r Q
m ua
ar lit
ad y
er
ie
ac
cr
Co
ito
ab
ilit
ro
tu
iza
an
rg
ies
nit
er
na
l
elo
ev
pp
tO
tio
iza
O
rg
an
en
pm
Ca
or
pp
er
re
ur
t
Fu
ies
nit
tu
or
St
0%
14%
7% 6%
io
en
Attributes
and then receive detailed EVP

analyses for that population.

CLC Solutions
An Invitation to Partner with CLC Solutions

to Maximize Attraction Outcomes
What message do we
build around?
What is our EVP?
How do we market
the EVP
to candidates?
Measuring business
success
100
The EVP
Rewards
Opportunity
Organization
Work
Focus
Organization People Opportunity Rewards
Prioritization of attributes for

EVP
Focus group analysis of key
EVP attributes and messages
Best practices for optimizing
communication channels
Current perceptions of EVP

attributes
Alignment of recruiting
channels and EVP
communications
Peer EVP Benchmarks
Recruiting yield
New hire turnover and
commitment
Quality of hire
Sourcing channel prioritization

EVP communication plan
Interview and messaging
scripts
Best practices on channel
effectiveness
For Additional Information

For additional information on the Attraction Engagement or CLC Solutions, please contact:
Nathan Blain
Managing Director
BlainN@executiveboard.com
+1-202-777-5757
CLC Solutions
Corporate Executive Board
Telephone: +1-202-777-5000
Facsimile: +1-202-777-5100
David Morris
Practice Leader
DMorris@executiveboard.com
+1-202-587-3771

141

142
Appendix
Methodology
page 144
Demographics
page 145
The Role of the Organizations Mission in the EVP
page 146
Additional Segment Level Results from the Councils

Employment Value Proposition Survey
pages 147176

143
144
Employment Value Proposition SurveyMethodology
A Six Step Assessment of EVP Impact

The Council built a proprietary methodology to determine which attributes of the EVP are most important
Measuring Impact on Attraction

1
2
Survey respondents are shown a list of
attributes that make up the EVP of a
potential employer.
3
Respondents force rank the attributes in
terms of which are most important when
considering a potential employer using a
Q-sort methodology.
The Council determines the relative

importance of attributes across
respondents and conducts a series of
cluster analyses to group the attributes.
Percentage of Respondents Rating EVP Dimension in Top Five Most Important
Vacation
Compensation
Location
Respect
Camaraderie

= 23%
= 23%
50
The Work
= 14.9%
The Organization
= 8%
The People
= 9%
46
34
31
31
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
28
25
22
24
20
17
15
9
12 11
16
13
12 11
13 12
10 10
4
7 6 6
5 5 4 4 4
3
11
9
6 5
r Op
po
rtu
nt
Op Sta nit
po bil y
on Me rtu ity
ree
me
ati
Ca
niz
lop
Job Wor
In
ga
ve
tur
Or
De
Fu
Gr ritoc nit
ow racy
th y
Ra
Co
te
mp
Re Healt en
sat
tir
em h Be ion
en ne
t Be fi
ts
ne
k
fits
ter Lif
es e Ba
t Al lan
ign ce
me
Lo
Re ca nt
co tio
gn n
Inn itio
ov n
ati
Va on
Job catio
Bu
sin Im n
es pact
s Tr
av
el
Re
Pr
sp
od
ec
Te uc Eth t
Pr
ch t
od
no Qu ics
uc Ma log ali
t Br rke y ty
So an t Leve
cia d AwPo l
sit
l Re
ion
sp arene
Gr
on
Inf eat
sib ss
or Pla Ind ilit
ma ce
us y
Or l En to W try
En
vir
ga viron or
on
niz
me
ati me k
on nt
nta
l Re Di Siz
ve
sp rsi e
on ty
Co
Ris sib
lle Pe
k Ta ility
gia op
l W le
kin
g
or Ma
k na
Ma Envir geme
Se
Co na on nt
nio
ge
r Le wo r Qume
rke
nt
ad
er Ca r Quality
sh ma ali
ip rad ty
Re
pu erie
tat
ion
Dimensions
5
Based on a series of multivariate
regression analyses, the Council
determines how perceptions of attributes
drive employee commitment.
4
The Council asks respondents a series of
attitudinal questions and then conducts
a series of factor analyses to measure
employee commitment.
The Council asks respondents at different

points in their employee life cycle about
their perceptions of each attribute.
Impact of Employee Perceptions on Commitment
The Opportunity
= 36%
The Rewards
= 26%
The Work
= 30%
The Organization
= 33%
The People
= 38%
50%
45%
45%
42%
39%
45%
40%40%
44%43%
42%
40%39%
36%
Maximum
Impact on
Commitment
28%
26%
25%
29%
37%36%
36%35%35%
33%32%32%
30%30%29%
29%
28%
25%
23%
22%
21%
15%
15%14%
0%
Va ce
ca
Bu Lo tio
sin ca n
es tio
s Tr n
av
el
Al
ilit
itio
nt
to
are
on
sp
l Re
me
on
vir
En
Aw
an
t Br
nta
ion
tat me
pu on
Re vir
ip En
sh k
er or
ad l W
r Le gia
nio Colle
ne
sib
gn
co
k Re
or
ce
t Pla
ea
ss
Re
sp
ec
Eth t
Pr
ics
od
O uc
rga t
niz Qua
ati lity
on
Ris Siz
k Ta e
So
cia
l Re Ind king
sp us
on try
sib
ilit
y
Te
ch Di
no ve
Ma log rsi
rke y Le ty
Inf
t Po ve
or
sit l
ma
ion
l En
vir
Pe
on
op
me
le
nt
Ma
Ma na
na ge
ge me
r Q nt
ua
lity
Co
wo
rke
r
Co Qua
me lity
rad
eri
e
oc
rac
Sta y
bil
ity
me
ign
ts
es
ter
In
Job
Re
co
gn
Inn itio
ov n
or Job ati
k Im on
Lif pa
e
Ba ct
lan
rit
nt
Me
Re Co
tir mp
em en
en sat
He t Be ion
alt ne
h
Be fits
ne
fits
te
ity ity
Ra
tun tun
th
or or
pp pp
ow
O O
Gr
nt er
on
me re
ati
lop Ca
niz
ve e
rga
O
De Futur
uc
od
Pr
Se
Gr
Measuring Impact on Commitment


Employment Value Proposition SurveyDemographics
A Global Data Set

Organizational Level, Function, and Geography of Survey Participants
Level
Function
Geography
South
Africa 3% Spain 2%
Other 6%
Germany 3%
Operations
Other
Marketing/Market
France 3%
Research 3%
Administrative
11%
Japan 3%
16%
Quality Control/
9%
India 3%
Assurance 3%
9%
48%
IT/Systems
China 4%
R&D 3%
New
9%
5%
Corporate 3%
7%
Zealand 4%
5% 5% 7% 7%
9%
Customer Service/
Retail 3%
Australia
Call Center
Technical 4%
United
Finance/
Sales
Canada
Kingdom
Accounting
HR/Education/
Engineering/
Training
n = 58,024.
Design
Manufacturing/Supply
Chain-Logistics 3%
Executive
Senior
9%
Junior
5%
29%
57%
Mid
United
States
Company Size, Age, and Gender of Survey Participants

Company Size
Age
$20 Billion
or More
$1020
Billion
1829
5065
13%
14%
Gender
17%
39%
34%
$310 Billion
Less Than
$3 Billion
Female
23%
47%
27%
4049
53%
33%
Male
3039
n = 58,024.

Appendix
145
146
The Role of the Organizations Mission in the EVP
Mission Related Attributes Drive Commitment

While focusing on the mission improves commitment levels of employees,
there is a relatively minimal impact of the mission on attraction
Impact on Attraction
18%
Impact on Commitment
Mission-related attributes are relatively less

important at attracting candidates
17%
but are relatively more

important than other attributes
at driving commitment.
50%
40%
All Attribute
Average
Percentage of
Respondents
Ranking in 9%
Top Five
All Attribute
Average
36%
32%
32%
30%
Maximum
Impact on 25%
Commitment
6%
4%
0%
cia
en
ibi
ns
es
po
lR
ty
pa
Im
sp
rsi
ct
lity
ilit
ib
ns
e
lR
ta
en
on
ir
nv
ir
nv
s
Jo
on
Et
hic
ive
rsi
ty
ct
pa
Im
b
Jo
s
Re
So
cia
ta
So
sib
po
lR
es
po
n
Et
hic
sib
ilit
y
ilit
0%
ive
4%
4%
A Note on The Mission
Previous Council research on employee engagement indicates that activities associated with helping employees understand how their job is tied to
organizational outcomes, and the impact that their job has on organizational outcomes have significant impacts on improving employee commitment.
For more information, please see Driving Employee Performance and Retention Through Engagement.
Note: Based on the results of a series of factor analyses, Ethics, Social Responsibility, Environmental Responsibility,
Job Impact and Diversity all load onto a factor capturing the construct of the mission of the organization.

Survey: Corporate Leadership Council research.
EVP Attraction Drivers by Country
Most Important EVP Attributes: Australia

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
48%
37%
Percentage of
Respondents 30%
Rating in Top Five
32%
29%
33%
29%
31%
30%
21%
17%
16%
12%
11%
4%
Fu
ac
oc
r
rg
ss
ilit
en
4% 3% 3%
n
sts
er
nt
I
ta
en
s
Re
nm
Jo
e
ar
po
Al
o
vir
En
io
ne
ib
ns
m
ign
al
Co
er
it
ro
5% 5% 4%
2%
te
Ra
7% 6% 6% 6% 6%
5%
2%
13%
10%10%
7%
11%
5%
1%
t n
en io
m tat
n
u
iro ep
nv p R
E
k hi
or ers
W
ad
ial Le
g
r
lle io
Co Sen
pe
n
em V satio
en ac n
H t at
ea Be io
lth ne n
W
Be fits
or
ne
k
fit
Lif
s
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
h
o
Te du er ics
ch ct me
no Q nt
lo ua
gy lit
Le y
So Ma
ve
r
cia ke
l
Ind l R t P
us esp osi
W try on tio
or D sib n
k E es ili
nv irab ty
iro ili
O
nm ty
rg
en
an
t
iza
tio
Cu
n
Siz
sto
e
m
er D
i
v
Re e
p rs
Ri utat ity
Pe
s
k T ion
op
le
ak
ing
M Man
a
Co na age
wo ger me
rk Qu nt
er a
Q lity
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
an
io
t
iza
th
4%
Re
tir
pm
lo
e
ev
pp
tO
tio
an
rg
r
tu
ta
bil
it
na
iza
en
n
rtu
pp
rO
ee
r
Ca
lS
itie
ies
nit
rtu
To
t
0%
5%
19%
od
Pr
ye
plo
tE
a
re
e
R
ra
B
ct
co
Aw
nd
it
gn
Attributes
n = 2,455.
Note: Each bar represents the percentage of respondents reporting attributes as top fi ve in
importance when evaluating an organization as a potential employer.
Source: Corporate Leadership Council, Employment Value Proposition Survey: Corporate


Appendix
147
148
Most Important EVP Attributes: Brazil

60%
The Work
The Organization
The People
59%
46%
32%
Percentage of
Respondents 30%
Rating in Top Five
31%
31%
25%
25%
20%19%
16%
8%
19%
17%16%
14%14%
16%
6%
6%
4%
t
na
l
M Stab
er ili
ito ty
To
cr
ac
ta
y
lC
om
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h tio
en Ben n
t B ef
en its
Va efit
ca s
tio
W
R
n
or e
k co
Lif gn
e itio
B
Inn alan n
ov ce
at
io
n
Lo
Bu Job cat
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
ig
Al
e
lR
ta
en
nm
iro
En
4%
1% 1%
1%
t
n
io es
nit aren
g
co w
Re d A
r n
ye Bra
plo uct
m d
t E Pro
a
re
ib
ns
sp
er
Int
ob
n = 345.

ts
es
Em
tio
iza
an
rg
ilit
en
nm
6%
en
Et
h
po Res ics
we pe
rm ct
Pr
od
en
t
So Ma uct
cia rke Q
u
l t a
Te Res Pos lity
ch po itio
no ns n
lo ibil
gy ity
Le
W
ve
or
l
kE
O n
rg vir
an on
Cu
iza m
tio en
sto
n t
R
m
Ind e isk Siz
us r R Ta e
try ep kin
D uta g
es tio
ira n
Pe
D bility
op
ive
le
rsi
M
ty
an
ag
em
M
en
Co ana
t
wo ger
rk Qu
er a
Q lity
ua
lit y
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
0%
ies ies
te
nit unit
Ra
u
t rt
h
r
t
o o
w
pp pp
ro
O
G
O
t
r
n
en ree
tio
za
pm Ca
i
o
n
a
el e
rg
ev ur
O
D Fut
3% 2% 2% 2% 2%
1% 1%
1%
11%11%
7%
10%
9%
nm
vir
n
kE
or
e
rL
ia
leg
Re
ad
lW
Co
ip
rsh
io
at
t
pu
nio
Se
Attributes
Source: Corporate Leadership Council, Employment Value Proposition Survey:
Most Important EVP Attributes: China

The Work
The Organization
The People
59%
60%
42%
35%
Percentage of 30%
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
27%
23%
21%
21%
14%
12%
21%
15%
14%13%13%
11%
10% 9%
13%
12%11%
8%
7%
11%
7% 6%
5% 4% 4%
3% 2%
0%
5%
3% 2%
t
en
an
Al
Jo
it
gn
e
ar
nd
er
nt
I
sts
io
ne
m
ign
rg
ss
en
8% 8% 8%
iza Me
tio rit
na oc
l S rac
ta y
bil
To
ity
ta
lC
om
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h tio
en Ben n
t B ef
en its
Va efit
ca s
tio
W
n
or
k
Lif
e
B
Inn alan
Re ova ce
co tio
gn n
Lo ition
Bu Job cati
sin Im on
es pa
sT c
ra t
Ind
ve
us
l
try R
e
D sp
es e
W
ira ct
or
bil
kE
it
M nvir Et y
ar o hic
ke n m s
tP e
os nt
Te
itio
ch
no
n
Pr lo
od gy
So Em uct Lev
cia po Qu el
l R w al
es erm ity
po e
ns nt
Cu Or
ibi
lit y
s to gan
m iza
er tio
Re n S
p iz
Ri utat e
sk io
Ta n
D kin
ive g
M
an
rsi
ag
ty
er
Co
Q
ua
Pe w
lity
op ork
le er
M Q
an ua
ag lit
em y
en
Ca
t
m
ar
ad
er
ie
s s
te
itie itie
n
Ra
tr u rtun
h
t
o o
w
pp pp
ro
G
tO O
n
io
en reer
at
m
z
a
i
p
C
an
elo e
rg
ev utur
O
D F
9%
co
Aw
ye
od
n
kE
or
plo
tE
Pr
a
re
hip
Re
er
d
ea
W
ial
rL
leg
l
Co
a
ut
vir
e
R
ra
B
ct
tio
m
on
io
en
Attributes
n = 1,866.


Appendix
149
150
Most Important EVP Attributes: France

The Work
35%
34%
Percentage of
Respondents 30%
Rating in Top Five
30%
27%
26%
16%
12%
11%
9%
8%
5%
14%
11%10%
10% 8%
17%16%
15%14%
6% 6% 6%
2% 2%
t
lity ess
ibi ren
s
o
on a
ec
sp Aw
e
R
r
l R nd
ta ra
ye
lp o
en ct B
nm du
Em
iro Pro
at
v
e
r
En
en
8%
4% 4% 4%
3%
3% 3%
t
en
pe
ns
Re He V atio
tir alt ac n
em h at
en Ben ion
t B ef
W
en its
or
ef
k
its
Lif
e
B
Re ala
co nc
Inn gnit e
ov ion
Lo atio
ca n
tio
n
Bu Job
sin Im
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Pr
od R
e
Em uct spe
po Qu ct
we ali
Te
rm ty
ch
n
O o E ent
rg lo th
an g i
M iza y Lecs
ar tio ve
ke n l
So
t P Si
cia
os ze
itio
lR
es
n
po
ns
ibi
W
lit y
or
kE
nv
Cu
iro
sto
n
m
Ind e D me
us r R ive nt
try ep rs
D uta ity
es tio
Ri irab n
sk ilit
Ta y
kin
Co C
g
wo am
rk arad
Pe
er e
op
Q rie
ua
le
lity
M
M an
an ag
ag em
er e
Q nt
ua
lit y
ra
io
it
gn
nm
lig
A
sts
To
t
al
th
3%
te
Ra
Co
bil
it
er
it
n
tio
a
niz
rg
it
un
cy
oc
lS
en
el
ev
pp
tO
m
op
an
rg
ur
t
Fu
ro
tio
na
iza
rO
re
Ca
rt
it
un
rt
ies
ies
ta
0%
18%
16%
15%
11%
The People
59%
60%
pp
The Organization
er
nt
I
Jo
nm
vir
n
kE
or
hip
Re
er
d
ea
W
ial
lle
Co
tio
a
ut
rL
io
n
Se
Attributes
n = 1,512.
Note: Each bar represents the percentage of respondents reporting attributes as top fi ve
in importance when evaluating an organization as a potential employer.

Most Important EVP Attributes: Germany

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
45%
43%
31%
22%
19%18%
17%
14%
8%
5%
8%
5% 5% 4%
es
n
re
nm
ig
sts
tir
e
Al
re
te
Re
In
b-
6%
2% 2%
4%
t
n
lity ion
en
tio
a
ibi gnit
m
t
s
a
on
pu
on o
vir
sp Rec
Re
Aw
n
e
E
ip
nd
k
l R r"
ra
ta loye
rsh
or
B
e
n
e
d
t
lW
m mp
ea
uc
gia
on at E
rL
od
r
e
i
l
r
l
o
v e
P
ni
En "Gr
Co
Se
en
Co
7% 7% 6%
pe
ns
m Va atio
en c n
H t at
ea Be io
lth ne n
Be fits
ne
W
fit
s
or
k- Lo
Lif c
e ati
Ba on
lan
ce
Re
co
Inn gnit
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
So
ve
cia
l
lR
Te es Re
s
p
ch o pe
n n
Pr olo sibi ct
od gy lity
M uc Le
ar t Q ve
k
Ind Em et P ual l
u
Inf st po osi ity
or ry we tio
m D rm n
al es e
En ira n
Cu
vir bi t
sto
on lity
m
m
er
e
Re E nt
pu th
O
rta ics
rg
tio
an
n
iza
tio
n
Siz
e
ac
cr
ito
er
11%
9% 8%
3% 3%
0%
s s
te
ity ie ie
Ra
bil unit unit
a
th
St rt rt
al ppo ppo
ow
r
n
G
io
at t O r O ion
t
niz en ree
a
a
iz
rg pm a
an
O elo re C
g
r
v
e tu
O
D Fu
16%
13%
11%10%10%
9%
12%
7%
19%
Jo
D
Ri ive
sk rs
Ta ity
kin
Co
g
wo
rk
e
C rQ
Pe Ma am ua
op nag ara lity
le er de
M Q rie
an u
ag alit
em y
en
t
Percentage of
29% 29%
Respondents 30%
25%
Rating in Top Five
Attributes
n = 1,485.


Appendix
151
Most Important EVP Attributes: India

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
38%
35%
Percentage of
Respondents 30%
Rating in Top Five
29% 29%
26%
22%
20%
24%
21%20%
18%
17%16%
12%
11%
10%
8% 8% 8%
16%
10%
9%
6%
4% 4%
4%
0%
en
nm
ito
ig
er
To
6% 6% 5% 5%
9% 8%
4% 3%
6% 6%
2%
t n
ss on
ity
en tio
ne niti
bil
a
i
m
e
s
n
ut
n
ar cog
iro ep
po
v
s
R
Aw Re
En ip
Re
nd r
rk rsh
al
ra oye
t
o
B
en
t l
W ade
uc Emp
ial Le
nm
d
g
o
o t
lle ior
vir
Pr rea
Co Sen
En
G
ta
cr
Re l Co
ac
tir m
y
em pe
en nsa
H t ti
ea Be on
lth ne
Be fits
n
Va efit
ca s
tio
W
n
or
kLif
e
B
Inn alan
Re ova ce
co tio
gn n
Lo itio
Bu Job cat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
R
Te
es
ch
pe
n
M olo Et ct
ar gy hic
Pr ket Le s
od Po ve
Em uct sitio l
po Qu n
we ali
Cu
rm ty
en
sto
t
So me
cia r R
W l R ep
or esp uta
k E o tio
nv nsib n
ir
O R onmility
rg is e
an k
iza Ta nt
Ind
tio kin
us
n g
try
Siz
e
D
es
ira
Pe
D bilit
op
ive y
le
rsi
M
ty
M an
an ag
ag em
er e
Q nt
ua
lity
Co
wo
rk
e
Ca r Q
m ual
ar it y
ad
er
ie
rg
an
iza
tio
na
lS
ta
bil
it y
s es
te
itie niti
n
Ra
u
tr u rt
th
o o
w
pp pp
ro
O
O
G
n
er nt
re me
tio
a
a
iz
C p
e lo
an
ur eve
rg
t
O
Fu D
14%
sts
Al
re
te
In
b-
Jo
Attributes
n = 1,534.

152
Most Important EVP Attributes: Japan

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
55%
Percentage of
Respondents
30% 29%
Rating in Top Five
31%
27%
20%
18%17%17%
16%
19%
17%16%
12%11%
10%10%9%
18%
16%
11%
9%
5%
4%
2%
0%
4%
6%
2%
sa
em V tio
e a n
H nt cat
ea Be io
lth ne n
W
Be fits
or
ne
k
fit
Lif
s
e
Ba
l
Lo ance
ca
tio
Re
n
co
g
Inn nit
o io
J
Bu ob vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
Te
ra t
ch
ve
no
l
So Pro log
cia du y
L
l R ct ev
es Q el
po ua
ns lity
ib
Re ility
M
s
pe
Ind a
us rke E ct
try t P thi
o c
Em Des sitios
po irab n
Cu
we ilit
sto
r y
m
er D men
Re ive t
pu rsit
ta y
tio
n
O R
rg is
an k T
iza a
W
tio kin
or
n g
kE
Siz
e
nv
iro
n
M
m
an
en
ag
t
er
Q
ua
lity
C C
Pe ow am
op ork ara
le er de
M Q rie
an u
ag alit
em y
en
t
y
ac
6% 6% 5% 5%
t
n
ss
lity on
en
tio
ne
a
ibi niti
m
e
t
s
n
ar
o
pu
on og
vir
sp Rec
Re
Aw
n
e
E
d
ip
k
l R r
an
ta ye
rsh
or
Br
e
en plo
d
t
W
ea
uc
ial
nm m
rL
od
eg
iv ro at E
l
r
l
o
P
ni
En Gre
Co
Se
en
nm
ig
pe
n
ito
Re
tir
om
er
lC
To
ta
O
rg
a
niz
at
io
na
lS
ta
cr
bil
it
te ies ies
Ra unit unit
th t t
w or or
ro pp pp
G
n tO rO
tio en ree
a
iz m a
an lop C
rg eve ture
OD u
F
8% 7%
15%
11%10%
10% 8%
Al
er
nt
I
b
sts
Jo
n = 1,413.
Attributes

Appendix
153
154
Most Important EVP Attributes: Spain

The Work
The Organization
60%
The People
56%
51%
40%
36%
Percentage of
Respondents 30%
Rating in Top Five
25%
20%
21%
18%
16%
13%
11%
4% 4%
4%
0%
cr
5% 5%
2% 1%
3% 3% 2% 2%
4%
2% 2%
ss
ilit
en
nm
ig
Co
m
er
ito
To
ta
l
11%
6% 6%
Jo
Al
e
ar
sp
er
nt
I
b
sts
ne
ib
ns
e
lR
d
an
en
ta
en
nm
iro
v
En
t
uc
Br
er
Re
plo
hip
Re
er
d
ea
W
ial
rL
leg
l
Co
tio
a
ut
ir
nv
tE
a
re
m
on
E
rk
od
Pr
n
og
Aw
1%
itio
pe
ns
Re He V atio
tir alt ac n
em h ati
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
ef
W
its
or Re
k co
Lif gn
e itio
Ba n
l
Lo anc
Inn cat e
ov ion
at
Bu
io
sin
n
es
sT
Jo ra
b ve
Im l
pa
ct
Re
Pr
sp
ec
Te odu
E
ch ct th t
n Q ic
So Ma olog ual s
r
cia ke y ity
l R t P Lev
es os el
po iti
W
ns on
or
ibi
kE
lity
Cu E nv
sto m iron
m pow m
O er R er ent
rg ep me
an u n
iza ta t
tio tio
n n
Siz
e
Ind
D
us R ive
try isk rs
D Ta ity
es ki
ira ng
bil
ity
Co
wo
rk
e
Ca r Q
Pe
m ual
ar ity
op
ad
le
er
M
ie
M an
an ag
ag em
er e
Q nt
ua
lity
ac
it y
bil
ta
lS
na
tio
iza
an
rg
O
16%
10%10%
8%
8%
y y
te
nit it
Ra
tr u rtun
th
o o
w
pp pp
ro
O
O
G
t r
n
en ree
tio
m
a
a
p C
iz
an
elo re
rg
ev utu
O
D F
20%19%
18%
16%
io
en
Attributes
n = 1,259.

Most Important EVP Attributes: United Kingdom

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
45%
40%
37%
Percentage of
Respondents
30%
Rating in Top Five
35%
31% 31%
28%
24%
18%
16%
18%
15%
12%
9%
4%
an
elo
ev
5%
10%
6% 5%
2%
t
te
ito
er
n
tio
a
niz
rg
tio
rg
pm
tO
ies
it
un
8%
6%
es
en
5% 4% 4%
3% 3% 3% 2%
ilit
6% 6% 5%
th
Ra
Jo
Al
d
an
er
nt
I
b
sts
io
it
gn
n
re
ig
ro
nm
t
uc
Aw
Br
en
plo
m
on
vir
n
kE
e
lR
or
ta
en
nm
tE
a
re
ib
ns
sp
er
od
Pr
co
e
R
iro
v
En
4%
2%
To
cr
ac
ta
y
l
Re Co
tir m
em pe
en nsa
t B tio
e n
H V nef
ea a its
lth ca
W
Be tion
or
ne
k
fit
Lif
s
e
Ba
l
Lo ance
ca
tio
Re
n
co
g
Inn nit
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Em
R
Pr pow esp
od e ec
uc rm t
t Q en
ua t
lit
Et y
M
a
h
ic
T rk
Ind ech et P s
n
us ol os
try og itio
D yL n
es ev
W
ira el
or
bil
So k
ity
cia En
v
l R iro
O
e
Cu r sp nm
sto gan on en
m iza sib t
er tio ilit
Re n y
pu Siz
ta e
tio
n
D
i
v
Ri e
Pe
sk rs
op
Ta ity
le
kin
M
g
M an
a
a
Co na ge
g
wo er me
rk Qu nt
er a
Q lity
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
iza
en
rO
re
u
ut
it y
bil
na
pp
lS
pp
ee
or
it
un
or
r
Ca
ies
ta
0%
17%
12%
10% 9%
W
ial
lle
Co
hip
tio
a
ut
Re
er
d
ea
rL
io
n
Se
Attributes
n = 3,536.


Appendix
155
156
Most Important EVP Attributes: United States


60%
The Work
The Organization
The People
58%
39%
39%
39%
35%
Percentage of
30%
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
25%
24%24%
23%
20%
18%
15%
14%
10%
12%
7% 7%
6%
4% 3%
0%
5% 4%
9% 8%
5%
3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2%
ss on
ity
ne niti
bil
i
e
s
ar cog
on
sp
Aw Re
e
d
R
an er
al
Br loy
nt
e
t
m
uc mp
on
od at E
r
vir
P re
n
E
G
4%
1%
3%
t n
en io
m tat
n
u
iro ep
nv p R
E
k hi
or ers
W ad
ial Le
g
lle ior
Co Sen
cy
om
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h tio
en Ben n
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
h
o
Te du er ics
ch ct me
no Q nt
lo ua
gy lit
y
M
W ar D Lev
or ke ive el
So k t P rs
ci En o ity
Ind al R viro sitio
us esp nm n
try o e
D nsib nt
es ili
ira ty
Cu
bil
sto
it y
m
er
Re
pu
O
ta
rg
tio
an
n
iza
tio
Ri n
sk Siz
Ta e
M
a
kin
Co na
g
g
Pe w er
op ork Q
le er ua
M Q lit y
an u
ag alit
em y
en
t
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
oc
nm
lC
ig
ta
sts
Al
er
nt
I
b
To
er
it
ta
lS
tio
na
iza
an
rg
en
ra
bil
it
te
ies ies
Ra
nit unit
u
t t
th
w
or or
ro
pp pp
G
n
rO tO
tio
ee en
r
a
niz
Ca pm
e elo
ga
r
r
v
tu e
O
Fu D
10%
6% 5%
Jo
Attributes
n = 25,170.

Most Important EVP Attributes: Eastern Europe

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
44%
41%
37%
32%
Percentage of
Respondents 30%
Rating in Top Five
22%
20%20%
16%
18%
14%
10%
10%
22%
19%18%
14%
11%10%
10%
7%
7%
6% 5% 5% 5%
3%
0%
en
nm
ig
ito
er
12%
10%
7% 6% 6%
3% 3% 3% 3% 3%
n ss
ity
itio ene
bil
i
n
s
r
og a
on
ec Aw
sp
R
e
R
r" nd
al
ye ra
nt
lp o t B
e
m uc
nm
t E rod
iro
a
v
P
e
n
r
E
"G
1%
t
en
cr
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
Inn lan
ov ce
at
io
n
Lo
Bu Rec cat
sin og ion
es niti
s o
Jo Tra n
b ve
Im l
pa
Te
ct
ch
no Re
lo spe
gy c
Pr
Le t
od
v
M uc Et el
ar t Q hi
c
k
E et ua s
O mpo Pos lity
rg w iti
an e on
iza rm
tio en
Cu
n t
Siz
sto
e
m
er
Re
pu
ta
tio
n
Inf
or
I
n
m
So al E D dus
cia nv iv try
l R iro ers
es nm ity
po e
Ri nsib nt
sk ilit
Ta y
Pe
kin
op
g
le
M
M an
Co ana age
wo ger me
rk Qu nt
e
Ca r Q ality
m ual
ar it y
ad
er
ie
rg
an
iza
tio
na
lS
ta
bil
it
s
te
ies tie
Ra
nit tuni
u
t
th
w
or or
ro
pp pp
G
O
n
rO t
tio
ee men
r
a
niz
Ca p
e velo
ga
r
r
u
O
ut De
19%
Al
er
nt
I
b
sts
Jo
m
on
vir
n
kE
or
hip
Re
er
d
ea
W
ial
rL
leg
l
Co
tio
a
ut
io
en
Attributes
n = 307.
Note: Each bar represents the percentage of respondents reporting attributes as top fi ve in importance when evaluating an
organization as a potential employer. The data presented here include respondents from Bulgaria, Georgia, Hungary,
Lithuania, Poland, Serbia, Slovakia, Romania, Turkey, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Belarus, Armenia, and Albania.


Appendix
157
158
EVP Attraction Drivers by U.S. Census Region
Most Important EVP Attributes: Midwest


70%
The Work
The Organization
The People
66%
47%
Percentage of
Respondents 35%
Rating in Top Five
41%
40%
37%
27%
22% 21%
19%
22%
16%
15%
11%
3% 2%
0%
en
nm
oc
r
er
it
5% 5% 4% 4%
7% 6%
3% 2% 2% 2%
1% 1% 1% 1%
n ity
itio sibil
n
a
og n
ec espo
Aw
R
r" R
nd
ra
ye ntal
B
o
l
t
p e
uc
m nm
od
t E viro
r
a
P
re n
"G E
s
es
4% 3%
2%
t n
en tio
m
n uta
iro ep
v
n R
k E hip
or ers
W ad
ial Le
ll eg ior
Co Sen
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
od e hic
M uc rm s
Te arke t Q ent
ch t P ual
no o it y
lo siti
gy on
Le
So
D
ive vel
Inf cial
or R
r
m esp sity
al o
En ns
vir ibi
on lity
m
Ind ent
us
try
Cu Or
g
sto an
m iza
er tio
Re n S
p i
Ri uta ze
sk tio
Ta n
Pe Ma
kin
op nag
g
le er
Co M Q
wo ana ua
rk gem lity
er e
Q nt
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
bil
it
ta
lS
tio
na
iza
an
rg
10%
9%
7% 6%
5%
s ies
e
at
itie nit
R
n
u
tu rt
th
w
or po
ro
pp Op
G
n
r O nt
tio
ee me
r
a
niz
Ca p
e velo
ga
r
r
tu e
O
Fu D
20%
lig
er
nt
I
A
sts
Jo
n
re
Attributes
n = 4,296.
organization as a potential employer. Region defi ned by U.S. Census Bureau. Midwest region includes ND, SD, NE, KS,
MN, IA, MO, WI, IL, IN, MI, and OH.

Most Important EVP Attributes: Northeast

The Work
The Organization
The People
70%
60%
41%
39% 39%
36%
Percentage of
Respondents 35%
Rating in Top Five
23%
21%
23%
19%
16%
21%
17%
13%
14%
11%
8% 7%
7%
4% 3%
0%
5% 4%
3% 3% 3% 2% 2%
9% 8%
6%
4%
1% 1% 1%
2%
t n
ss on
ity
en tio
ne niti
bil
a
i
m
e
s
n
ut
n
ar cog
iro ep
po
v
s
R
Aw Re
En ip
Re
nd r"
rk rsh
al
ra oye
t
o
B
en
t pl
W ade
uc Em
ial Le
nm
d
g
o
o t
lle ior
vir
Pr rea
En
Co Sen
"G
cr
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Inn cat
Re ova ion
co tio
g
Bu Job niti n
sin Im on
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
h
o
Te du er ics
ch ct me
n Q n
M olo ua t
ar gy lit
ke L y
Inf
t P ev
or
o e
m
al D siti l
En i on
vir ver
on sit
m y
en
t
So
c
Cu ial
sto Re In
m sp du
O er R onsi stry
rg ep bi
an u lity
iza ta
ti tio
Ri on S n
sk iz
Ta e
kin
g
M
Co ana
Pe w ger
op ork Q
le er ua
M Q lity
an ua
ag lit
em y
en
t
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
en
nm
ig
ito
er
rg
an
iza
tio
na
lS
ta
bil
it
s ies
te
itie nit
Ra
n
th
tu rtu
w
or po
ro
pp Op
G
O t
n
er en
tio
e
a
r m
iz
Ca p
an
e velo
rg
r
O
tu e
Fu D
11%
7% 6%
Al
er
nt
I
b
sts
Jo
Attributes
n = 5,107.
organization as a potential employer. Region defi ned by U.S. Census Bureau. Northeast includes PA, NY, NJ, CT, RI,
MA, VT, NH, and ME.


Appendix
159
160
Most Important EVP Attributes: West

The Work
The Organization
The People
70%
56%
38%
37%36%
Percentage of
Respondents 35%
Rating in Top Five
32%
22%
26%
22%
21%
26%
23%
16%
11%
2%
lig
ro
er
nt
I
A
sts
Jo
to
th
nm
6% 5%
2%
t n
en tio
m
n uta
iro ep
v
n R
k E hip
or ers
W ad
ial Le
ll eg ior
Co Sen
try
iza
tio
m Ris n S
er k iz
Re Ta e
pu kin
ta g
Pe Ma
tio
n
op ag
n
le er
Co M Q
wo ana ua
rk gem lity
er e
Q nt
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
ss on
ity
ne niti
bil
i
e
s
ar cog
on
sp
Aw Re
e
nd r"
lR
ra oye
ta
B
n
l
e
t p
m
uc m
on
od at E
r
i
r
v
P re
En
"G
en
Ra
9% 8%
2% 1% 1% 1%
Cu
s
te
4% 4% 3% 3%
ra
cy
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Inn cat
Re ova ion
co tio
g
Bu Job niti n
sin Im on
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
h
o
e
Te du r ics
ch ct me
n Q n
M olo ua t
ar gy lit
ke L y
So
t P ev
c
o el
Inf ial
or R D sitio
m es iv n
al po er
En ns sit
vir ibi y
on lity
m
en
t
oc
er
it
tio
io
t
iza
an
rg
n
rtu
pp
tO
pm
elo
ev
D
itie
ta
bil
it
na
iza
en
rg
re
u
ut
pp
an
er
lS
or
e
ar
ies
it
un
6% 5% 5% 5%
Ind
us
4%
0%
11%
10%
7%
an
7%
rg
12%
13%
Attributes
n = 1,990.
organization as a potential employer. Region defi ned by U.S. Census Bureau. West includes WA, OR, ID, MT, WY, CO,
NM, AZ, UT, NV, and CA.

Most Important EVP Attributes: South

The Work
The Organization
The People
70%
59%
44%
Percentage of
Respondents 35%
Rating in Top Five
40%
36%
37%
28%
25%
21%
22% 22%
18%
15%
13%
14%
10%
9%
7% 6%
6%
6% 6%
3% 3%
0%
en
nm
ig
ito
er
2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1%
n ss
ity
itio ene
bil
i
n
s
og ar
on
ec Aw
sp
R
e
R
r" nd
al
ye ra
nt
lp o t B
e
m uc
nm
t E rod
iro
a
v
P
e
n
r
E
"G
8% 8%
5% 4%
2%
t n
en io
m tat
n
u
iro ep
nv p R
E
k hi
or ers
W ad
ial Le
g
lle ior
Co Sen
cr
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
h
o
Te du er ics
ch ct me
no Q nt
lo ua
gy lit
y
Inf M
or ar D Lev
m ke iv el
al t er
En Po sit
vir sit y
on ion
m
Ind ent
Cu
us
sto
try
So me
cia r R
l R ep
es ut
po ati
ns on
O
ibi
rg
lity
an
iza
tio
Ri n S
sk iz
Ta e
M
Pe a
kin
op nag
g
le er
Co M Q
wo ana ua
rk gem lity
er e
Q nt
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
rg
an
iza
tio
na
lS
ta
bil
it y
s es
te
itie niti
Ra
n
th
tu tu
w
or or
ro
pp pp
G
O
n
rO t
tio
ee men
a
r
niz
Ca p
ga
e velo
r
r
O
tu e
Fu D
4% 3% 3%
Al
er
nt
I
b
sts
Jo
Attributes
n = 8,912.
organization as a potential employer. Region defi ned by U.S. Census Bureau. South includes TX, OK, AR, LA, MS, AL,
TN, KY, WV, DC, MD, DE, VA, NC, SC, GA, and FL.


Appendix
161
162
EVP Attraction Drivers by Demographic
Most Important EVP Attributes: 2329 Year Olds

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
48%
47%
32%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
34%
30%
30%
26%
25%
20%
18%
16%
15%
11%
12%
14%
11%
8%
8%
9% 8%
8%
3% 2%
elo
ev
ta
bil
it
tO
ss
en
th
Ra
ne
nm
3%
ilit
Al
d
an
er
nt
I
b
sts
e
ar
ig
ro
te
ito
tio
a
niz
rg
er
n
en
lS
tio
rg
re
u
ut
r
Ca
iza
an
pm
ee
rO
pp
na
pp
itie
n
rtu
5% 4% 4% 4% 3%
3%
2%
t
en
ac
y
Co
m
H pe
ea n
lth sa
Re
Be tion
tir
em V nef
en ac its
t B ati
W
en on
or
ef
k
it s
Lif
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
h
o
Te du er ics
ch ct me
n Q n
M olo ua t
ar gy lit
ke L y
t P ev
os el
Inf
itio
or
m
n
a
So l E
cia nv Ind
l R iro us
es nm try
po e
ns nt
ibi
lity
Cu Or
sto gan D
m iza iver
er tio si
Re n ty
pu Siz
ta e
tio
n
Ri
s
k
Co
wo Tak
ing
r
M
Pe a ker
op nag Q
le er ua
M Q lity
an u
ag alit
em y
en
Co
t
m
ar
ad
er
ie
itie
n
rtu
cr
0%
6% 5% 5%
12%10%
10%
9% 7%
t
uc
Aw
og
Br
pl
Pr
m
tE
re
ib
ns
m
on
sp
c
Re
vir
n
kE
e
lR
or
ta
en
e
oy
od
Jo
itio
nm
iro
v
En
W
ial
leg
l
Co
hip
tio
a
ut
Re
er
d
ea
rL
io
en
Attributes
n = 10,558.

Most Important EVP Attributes: 5059 Year Olds

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
49%
37%
34%
Percentage of
Respondents
30%
Rating in Top Five
32%
29%
29%
25%
24%
23%
20%
17%
18%
12%
12%
13%
12%
9%
6%
4%
0%
4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3%
es
en
nm
6%
3% 2% 2%
3%
t
ilit
Jo
Al
Aw
d
an
er
nt
I
b
sts
io
n
re
ig
ito
er
6%
2%
11%10%
8% 8%
en
cr
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
h
o
Te du er ics
ch ct me
n Q n
M
So a olog ual t
r
cia ke y ity
l R t P Lev
es os el
po iti
ns on
Inf
ibi
or
lit y
m
al D
En i
vir ver
on sit
m y
en
t
Cu
sto
Ind
m
us
t
O er R
rg ep ry
an u
iza ta
tio tio
n
R
Pe
isk n Si
op
z
Ta e
le
kin
g
M Man
an ag
ag em
er e
Co
Q nt
ua
wo
lity
rk
er
Q
ua
lity
Co
m
ar
ad
er
ie
rg
an
iza
tio
na
lS
ta
bil
it
s
te
ies tie
Ra
nit tuni
u
t
th
w
or or
ro
pp pp
G
O
n
rO t
tio
ee men
r
a
niz
Ca p
e velo
ga
r
r
u
O
ut De
7%
t
uc
ye
plo
od
Pr
t
ea
ec
R
r
Br
Em
it
gn
m
on
sp
vir
n
kE
e
lR
or
ta
en
nm
iro
v
En
ib
ns
W
ial
lle
Co
hip
tio
a
ut
Re
er
d
ea
rL
io
n
Se
Attributes
n = 7,882.
Note: Each bar represents the percentage of respondents reporting attributes as top
fi ve in importance when evaluating an organization as a potential employer.


Appendix
163
164
EVP Attraction Drivers by Function
Most Important EVP Attributes: Sales

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
55%
40%
34%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
30%
30%
25%
21%21%
18% 17%
15%
12%
13%
13%
ev
oc
bil
ro
ta
en
rg
er
it
n
tio
a
niz
5%
6% 5%
3%
te
tO
7%
es
en
7% 7% 6%
4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3%
n
2%
4%
t n
en io
m tat
n
u
o
iro ep
sp
nv p R
e
E
k hi
lR
ta
or ers
en
W ad
ial Le
nm
g
o
lle ior
vir
Co Sen
En
y
ilit
ra
cy
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
Pr
ra t
od
ve
l
uc
tQ
u
Re ality
sp
Em
e
M pow Et ct
ar e hi
ke rm cs
tP e
Te
os nt
itio
ch
no
n
Cu
l
og
sto
y
m
er I Leve
Re ndu l
pu st
ta ry
tio
O
n
r
So ga D
n
c
i
Inf ial iza ve
or R tio rsi
m es n ty
al po S
En ns ize
vir ibi
o li
Ri nm ty
sk en
Ta t
kin
g
M
Pe a
op nag
le er
M Q
an ua
ag lit
em y
en
Co
t
wo
rk
e
Co r Q
m ual
ar i t y
ad
er
ie
rg
elo
re
u
ut
lS
tio
an
pm
ee
r
Ca
iza
rO
it
un
or
pp
na
pp
ies
it y
itie
n
rtu
14%12%
9%
9%
0%
20%
18%
17%
13%
th
Ra
nm
ig
Jo
Al
d
an
er
nt
I
b
sts
io
n
re
t
uc
Aw
ec
R
r
ye
Br
plo
od
Pr
t
ea
it
gn
ib
ns
Attributes
n = 3,697.

Most Important EVP Attributes: Finance

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
55%
44%
42%
33%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
30%
27%
25% 24%
22%
19%
15%
14%
11%
17%
13%
13%
8%
7%
5%
rg
ev
rg
es
en
th
Ra
nm
5% 5%
3% 3%
2% 1%
y
ilit
Al
d
an
er
nt
I
b
sts
io
n
re
ig
ro
tio
a
niz
te
oc
or
pp
M
er
it
en
elo
re
u
ut
ta
bil
it
lS
an
pm
na
tio
tO
iza
rO
ee
r
Ca
it
un
pp
ies
itie
n
rtu
5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4%
3%
9% 9%
t n
en io
m tat
n
u
iro ep
nv p R
E
k hi
or ers
W ad
ial Le
g
lle ior
Co Sen
ra
cy
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
l
Lo ance
ca
tio
Re
n
co
g
Inn nit
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
s
Em
pe
Pr pow Et ct
o e hi
M duc rm cs
a
Te rke t Q ent
ch t P ual
no o it y
Inf
lo siti
or
gy on
m
Le
al
ve
En
l
vir
o
O
nm
rg
an D en
iza ive t
tio rsi
n ty
So
S
Ind ize
Cu cial
u
st
sto Re
m spo ry
er n
Re sib
pu ility
ta
tio
n
Ri
Pe
sk
op
T
le
ak
ing
M Man
Co ana age
wo ger me
rk Qu nt
er a
Q lit y
ua
lity
Co
m
ar
ad
er
ie
0%
12%
10%
8% 8%
t
uc
Aw
ec
R
r
en
plo
nm
tE
Pr
a
re
iro
v
En
ib
ns
sp
e
lR
ta
ye
Br
od
Jo
it
gn
Attributes
n = 4,001.


Appendix
165
166
Most Important EVP Attributes: Managers

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
50%
35%
32%
31%
30%
27%
13%
9%
6% 5% 5%
3%
rg
elo
re
u
ut
ev
en
rg
er
n
tio
a
niz
es
en
th
Ra
nm
3%
Jo
Al
d
an
er
nt
I
b
sts
t
uc
Aw
it
gn
n t n
io en io
at nm tat
t
pu iro pu
Re Env Re
ip
ip
sh rk sh
er Wo der
d
ea ial ea
r L lleg or L
o
ni o ni
Se C Se
ilit
ec
en
plo
nm
od
tE
a
re
e
lR
ta
ye
Pr
iro
v
En
ib
ns
sp
R
r
Br
4% 5% 5%
io
n
re
ig
ro
te
cr
ta
bil
it
tO
lS
tio
an
pm
iza
rO
ee
r
Ca
or
pp
na
pp
ies
it
un
8% 7%
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
od e hic
M uc rm s
Te arke t Q ent
ch t P ual
no o it y
lo siti
gy on
Le
So
ve
Inf cial
l
or R I
m es nd
p
al o us
En ns tr
vir ibi y
on lity
Cu
m
en
sto
t
m
e
D
O r R iv
rg ep er
an u sit
iza ta y
tio tio
n n
Siz
e
Ri
sk
Ta
kin
Co Co
g
wo m
rk arad
er e
Q rie
ua
lity
itie
n
rtu
ito
0%
4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3%
ie
9% 9%
6%
er
12%
9%
9%
ad
14%
19%
17%
ar
18%
14%
14%
23%
22%
19%
Co
m
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
Attributes
n = 19,576.

Most Important EVP Attributes: R&D

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
49%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
30%
34%
30%
34%
31%30%
24%
21%
21%
16%15%
13%
9% 8%
16%
7%
13%
10%9%
12%
4% 3%
0%
4% 4% 3% 3%
6% 5%
2% 2%
t
n
n
lity ess
io
en
itio
at
ibi ren
m
t
n
s
n
o
og
pu
on a
vir
ec
sp Aw
Re
n
e
R
E
p
i
k
r
l R nd
sh
ta ra
or
ye
er
lp o
en ct B
d
W
ea
m
ial
nm du
rL
tE
leg
iv ro Pro
l
o
a
ni
re
Co
En
Se
G
en
m
ign
tio
iza
an
rg
9% 9% 9%
6% 6% 5% 5%
na
l
M Stab
er ili
ito ty
cr
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Inn
ov
Lo atio
Re ca n
co tio
g
Bu Job niti n
sin Im on
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
Te
l
ch
no Re
lo spe
gy c
Le t
Em
v
Pr pow Et el
h
o
Inf M duc ermics
or ar t Q en
m ke u t
al t a
En Po lity
vir sit
on ion
m
Ind ent
us
So
try
cia
lR
es
po
ns
i
D bility
ive
rsi
ty
Cu Or Ri
sto gan sk
T
m iza ak
er tio in
Re n S g
pu ize
ta
tio
n
M
Pe a
op nag
le e
Co M r Q
wo ana ua
rk gem lity
e
Ca r Q ent
m ual
ar ity
ad
er
ie
s s
te
itie nitie
n
Ra
tr u rtu
h
t
o o
w
pp pp
ro
O O
G
n
er nt
tio
re me
a
a
iz
C p
an
e lo
rg
ur eve
t
O
Fu D
12%
Al
er
nt
I
b
ts
es
Jo
Attributes
n = 1,587.
Source: Corporate Leadership Council, Employment Value Proposition Survey: Corporate


Appendix
167
168
Most Important EVP Attributes: HR, Education, and Training

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
44%
40%
33%
31%
29%
30%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
29%
21%
17%
20%
18%
13%
28%
15%
11%
11% 10%
6%
17%
8% 7%
5%
6% 5% 5% 5% 5%
2%
Fu
it y
oc
en
on
at
iz
an
rg
te
es
en
2% 2%
t
lity
io
en
ra
cy
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
po E ect
P
So ro w th
cia du er ics
l R ct me
e Q n
M spo ua t
Te arke nsi lity
ch t P bili
no o t y
Inf
lo siti
or
gy on
m
Le
al
ve
En
l
vir
on
m
en
t
D
ive
Ind rsity
Cu Or
us
sto gan
try
m iza
er tio
Re n
pu Siz
e
R
Pe
isk tatio
op
T
le
ak n
ing
M
M an
an ag
ag em
er e
Co
Q nt
ua
wo
lity
rk
er
Q
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
lS
tO
ies
it
un
er
it
bil
el
ev
na
tio
rg
iza
an
m
op
tu
re
pp
rO
re
Ca
rt
it
un
rt
pp
ies
ta
0%
4% 4% 3% 3%
11%11%10%
6% 6%
th
Ra
Al
nd
Aw
tB
Jo
c
du
Pr
at
re
it
gn
i
sib
on
ec
en
or
lW
nm
vir
En
n
kE
e
lR
ta
plo
Em
nm
vir
sp
R
r
ye
ra
er
nt
I
b
ts
es
n
re
ig
ro
nm
ia
leg
Co
ip
rsh
io
at
t
pu
Re
ad
e
rL
nio
Se
Attributes
n = 2,839.

Most Important EVP Attributes: Manufacturing

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
42%
35%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
30% 28%
23%
20%
16%
20%
28%
26%
24%
20%
16%
14%13%
12%
14%
11%
13%
11%
7% 7% 6% 6%
5%
2%
ev
ta
ito
G
er
i
at
iz
an
rg
on
te
en
n
lity tio
is bi gni
a
on co
Aw esp Re
nd
l R er
ra
ta loy
B
n
e p
t
m m
uc
on at E
od
r
i
r
v e
P
En Gr
4%
3% 2%
t
en
es
cr
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
l
Lo ance
ca
tio
Re
n
co
g
Inn nit
o io
J
Bu ob vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
v
Pr R el
od es
uc pe
t Q ct
ua
Em
Te p E lity
t
o
ch w hic
n e s
M olo rme
ar gy n
ke L t
t P ev
os el
itio
n
Ind
Inf
us
or
try
m
So al
E
Cu cial nvi
sto Re ron
m spo me
er n n
Re sib t
pu ility
O
t
rg
an D atio
iza ive n
ti rs
Ri on S ity
Pe
s
k T ize
op
le
ak
ing
Co M
wo ana
M rke gem
an r e
ag Q nt
er ua
Q lity
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
en
pp
tO
m
op
ies
it
un
bil
it
tio
na
lS
rt
iza
el
rg
an
Fu
tu
re
re
Ca
rt
it
un
pp
rO
ies
0%
5% 5% 5% 4% 4%
14%
11%10%
8% 7%
th
Ra
ig
ro
nm
er
nt
Jo
I
b
ts
es
Al
n
re
nm
vir
n
kE
or
lW
ia
leg
Co
ip
rsh
io
at
t
pu
Re
ad
e
rL
nio
Se
Attributes
n = 866.


Appendix
169
170
Most Important EVP Attributes: IT

60%
The Work
The Organization
The People
57%
39%
33%33%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
30%
27%
26%
25%
21% 20%
20%
15%
16%
12%
13%12%
6%
4% 4%
0%
10% 9% 9% 9%
4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3%
2% 2% 2%
4% 4%
t n
en io
m tat
n
u
iro ep
nv p R
E
k hi
or ers
W
ad
ial Le
g
r
lle io
Co Sen
ra
cy
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Inn cat
Re ova ion
co tio
g
Bu Job niti n
sin Im on
es p
s T ac
Te
ra t
ch
ve
no
l
lo
gy
L
Re eve
sp l
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
od e hic
Inf M uc rm s
or ar t Q en
m ke u t
al t a
En Po lity
vir sit
So
on ion
cia
m
lR
es Ind ent
po us
ns try
i
D bility
ive
rsi
O
ty
rg
an
Cu
iza
tio
sto
n
m
Siz
er
e
Re
pu
Ri tat
sk io
Ta n
M
Pe a
kin
op nag
g
le er
Co M Q
wo ana ua
rk gem lity
er e
Q nt
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
nm
ig
er
it
ta
lS
na
tio
iza
an
rg
7% 6% 6%
n
io ss
lity
nit ene
ibi
g
s
r
co a
on
sp
Re Aw
e
r d
lR
ye ran
ta
plo ct B
en
m u
m
t E rod
on
r
a
i
v
re P
En
G
en
oc
bil
it y
te
ies ies
Ra
nit unit
u
h
t t
t
w
or or
ro
pp pp
G
r O t O ion
t
ee en
r
a
iz
Ca pm
an
re velo
rg
u
t e
O
Fu D
14%13%
Al
er
nt
I
b
sts
Jo
Attributes
n = 4,939.

Most Important EVP Attributes: Engineering

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
54%
36%
34%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
30%
34%
30%
27%
27%
23%
19%
21%
16%
15%
11%
10%
7% 7%
6%
4% 3%
0%
er
it
5% 4% 4%
4% 4%
3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2%
t
en
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Inn cat
o io
R
Bu ec vat n
o
sin g ion
es niti
s o
Jo Tra n
b ve
Im l
pa
ct
Re
Te
sp
ch
ec
no
E
Em log th t
i
Pr pow y Lecs
od e ve
M uc rm l
ar t Q en
ke u t
Inf
t P al
or
os ity
m
it
So al
cia En Ind ion
l R viro us
es nm try
po e
ns nt
ibi
lity
O
rg
an D
Cu
iza ive
tio rsi
sto
n ty
m
Siz
er
e
Re
pu
Ri ta
Pe
sk tio
op
Ta n
le
kin
Co M
g
wo ana
g
r
M ke em
an r e
ag Qu nt
er a
Q lity
ua
lit y
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
ta
lS
tio
na
iza
an
rg
9% 9% 9% 8%
n
io
lity ess
nit
ibi ren
g
s
co
on a
sp Aw
Re
e
r
l R nd
ye
ta ra
plo
en ct B
Em
nm du
at
iro Pro
e
v
r
En
G
en
nm
oc
r
bil
it
s
te
ies tie
Ra
nit tuni
u
t
th
or or
w
ro
pp pp
G
O
rO t
n
io
ee men
t
r
a
Ca op
niz
ga
re vel
r
u
t e
O
Fu D
16%
14%13%
lig
er
nt
I
A
sts
Jo
nm
iro
or
W
ial
lle
Co
v
En
hip
tio
a
ut
Re
er
d
ea
rL
io
n
Se
Attributes
n = 2,929.


Appendix
171
Most Important EVP Attributes: Retail

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
37%
35%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
38%
37%
34%
30%
24%
21%
19%18%
20%
12%
9%
14%14%
11%
11%10%
5%
0%
ss
5% 5% 4% 4%
7% 7%
4%
3% 3% 3% 2%
io
ilit
en
ac
y
Co
m
H pe
ea n
lth sa
Re
Be tion
tir
em V nef
en ac its
t B ati
W
en on
or
ef
k
its
Lif
e
Ba
l
Lo anc
ca e
tio
Re
n
co
Inn gnit
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Em
R
p
e
Pr ow sp
od e ec
uc rm t
t Q en
Cu
ua t
sto
lit
m
Et y
er
hic
Re
s
pu
ta
So Ma
tio
cia rke
n
lR tP
e
T
Inf e sp osi
or chn on tio
m o si n
al lo bil
En gy ity
vir Le
on ve
m l
Ind ent
O
rg
an D ustr
iza ive y
tio rsi
n ty
Siz
e
Ri
Pe
s
kT
op
le
ak
ing
M Man
a
a
n
Co a ge
wo ger me
rk Qu nt
er a
Q lity
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
er
it
ta
lS
tio
na
iza
an
rg
7% 7% 6% 6%
3% 2%
en
e
en
m
ign
oc
r
bil
it
s es
te
itie niti
Ra
n
h
tr u rtu
t
o o
w
ro
pp pp
G
O O
n
er nt
io
re me
at
a
z
i
p
C o
an
re el
rg
tu Dev
O
u
F
18%17%17%
Jo
Al
nd
er
nt
I
sts
ar
Aw
od
Pr
at
re
ec
R
r
ye
ra
B
ct
it
gn
plo
Em
v
En
iro
nm
en
ta
s
Re
po
ib
ns
m
on
vir
n
kE
or
W
ial
leg
l
Co
hip
tio
a
ut
Re
er
d
ea
rL
io
en
Attributes
n = 1,697.

172
Most Important EVP Attributes: Call Center Employees

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
49%
44%44%
42%
34%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
31%
30%
23%
20%
17%
19%
15%
19%
18%
13%
10%
12%
9%
ur
t
Fu
en
pm
elo
ev
an
rg
te
ss
en
th
Ra
8%
5% 4%
2% 2% 1% 1%
io
e
en
nm
ar
ig
ro
io
t
iza
4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3%
ilit
Al
nd
er
t
-In
sts
ra
B
ct
Jo
Aw
od
Pr
at
re
it
gn
en
ib
ns
ec
ye
ta
plo
en
nm
Em
iro
v
En
m
on
po
R
r
2%
ra
cy
Co
H mpe
ea n
lth sa
Re
Be tion
tir
em V nef
en ac its
t B ati
W
en on
or
ef
kits
Lif
e
Ba
l
Lo ance
ca
tio
Re
n
co
g
n
Inn it
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
od e hic
uc rm s
t Q en
M
ua t
a
D
l
Cu Te rket ive ity
sto chn Po rsit
Inf m ol si y
or er og tio
m R yL n
al ep e
En u ve
vir tat l
on ion
m
en
t
So
Ind
cia
l
us
t
O Res
rg po ry
an n
iza sib
tio ilit
n y
Siz
e
Ri
sk
T
M
ak
Pe a
ing
op nag
le er
Co M Q
wo ana ua
rk gem lity
er e
Q nt
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
oc
er
ilit
tO
er
it
St
pp
pp
e
ar
ies
it
un
rt
or
ab
ies
it
un
2% 2% 1%
0%
10% 9%
7%
vir
s
Re
n
kE
or
W
ial
leg
l
Co
hip
tio
a
ut
Re
er
d
ea
rL
io
en
Attributes
n = 1,054.


Appendix
173
Most Important EVP Attributes: Male

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
54%
36%
33%
30%
32%
26%
23%
21%
cr
it y
ito
M
n
tio
a
niz
ga
pp
tO
ss
en
Ra
ilit
itio
ne
m
ign
ro
te
th
Al
d
an
er
nt
I
b
ts
es
e
ar
t
uc
Jo
Pr
Aw
Re
er
Br
plo
od
m
tE
re
ib
ns
n
og
po
es
R
al
en
m
on
vir
En
5% 5%
3% 3% 3% 3%
t n
en io
m tat
n
u
iro ep
nv p R
E
k hi
or ers
W
ad
ial Le
g
r
lle io
Co Sen
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
L
Re oca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
h
o
Te du er ics
ch ct me
n Q n
M olo ua t
ar gy lit
ke L y
t P ev
os el
Inf
itio
or
m
n
So al E
I
cia nv nd
l R iro us
es nm try
po e
ns nt
ibi
lity
O
rg
an D
Cu
iza ive
tio rsi
sto
n ty
m
Siz
er
e
Re
pu
Ri ta
Pe
sk tio
op
Ta n
le
kin
g
M Man
a
a
n
Co a ge
wo ger me
rk Qu nt
er a
Q lity
ua
lity
el
ev
bil
ta
na
tio
iza
an
rg
re
tu
Fu
en
m
op
ee
r
Ca
lS
pp
rO
itie
n
rtu
er
ies
nit
rtu
5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4%
3%
er
ie
5%
11%11%
9% 8%
ad
13%13%
10%
8%
0%
17%
15%
11%11%
9%
ar
15%
22%
20%
16%
Ca
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
Attributes
n = 27,475.

174
Most Important EVP Attributes: Female

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
45%
41%
38%
34%
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
31%
28%
30%
25%
23%
23%
19%
16%
14%
13%
14%
12%
13%
7%
12%
10%10% 9%
6%
6% 5% 5% 5% 5%
3% 2%
0%
es
4% 4%
1%
t
lity
io
en
cr
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
W
Va efit
or
ca s
tio
k
Lif
n
e
Ba
lan
ce
Lo
Re ca
co tio
Inn gnit n
o io
Bu Job vat n
sin Im ion
es p
s T ac
ra t
ve
l
Re
sp
Em
e
Pr pow Et ct
od e hic
M uc rm s
Te arke t Q ent
ch t P ual
no o ity
lo siti
gy on
Inf
Le
or
D
ve
m
i
v
l
e
So al
rsi
cia En
ty
v
l R iro
es nm
po e
ns nt
Cu
ibi
sto
lity
m
er I
Re ndu
pu st
O
ta ry
rg
tio
an
n
iza
tio
Ri n S
Pe
sk iz
op
Ta e
le
kin
g
M Man
Co ana age
wo ger me
rk Qu nt
er a
Q lity
ua
lity
Ca
m
ar
ad
er
ie
er
lS
na
rg
an
iza
tio
en
nm
Al
nd
Aw
at
Pr
re
on
en
Em
n
kE
or
lW
nm
vir
En
nm
vir
sp
e
lR
ta
plo
c
du
i
sib
ec
ye
tB
Jo
it
gn
R
r
ra
er
nt
I
b
ts
es
n
re
ig
ito
ta
bil
it
s s
te
itie nitie
Ra
n
tr u rtu
th
w
o o
ro
pp pp
G
O
O
n
er nt
tio
re e
iza
n
Ca lopm
a
re e
rg
tu ev
O
u
F D
4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3%
Co
ia
leg
ip
rsh
io
at
t
pu
Re
ad
e
rL
nio
Se
Attributes
n = 24,928.


Appendix
175
EVP Attraction Drivers by Level
Most Important EVP Attributes: Senior Executives

The Work
The Organization
The People
60%
52%
30% 28%
15%
13%
17%
15% 14%
12% 11%
8%
es
6% 5% 5%
16%
14%
10%10%
7%
4% 4% 4% 4% 4%
n
re
lig
A
sts
an
re
e
Int
r
tB
du
Jo
o
Pr
Aw
5%
n
n t
io lity
io en
at nm
nit sibi
t
g
o n
pu iro
ec spo
Re Env
R
e
ip k
r R
ye al
rsh or
e
lp o ent
ad l W
m m
Le gia
t E iron
r
a
lle
re nv
nio o
Se C
G E
na
l
M Stab
er ili
ito ty
cr
ac
y
Co
m
Re He pe
tir alt nsa
em h ti
en Ben on
t B ef
en its
Va efit
ca s
tio
W
n
or
k
Lif
e
B
Inn alan
ov ce
Lo atio
Jo cat n
b io
R
Bu ec Imp n
sin og act
es nit
s T ion
ra
ve
l
Em
po E
we th
r ics
M
ar R men
k
e
Pr et sp t
Te odu Pos ect
ch ct itio
no Q n
lo ua
gy lit
Le y
So
Ind vel
cia
lR
us
t
es
Inf
po ry
or
n
Cu ma Ri sib
sto l E sk ility
m nvir Tak
er o in
Re nm g
pu en
O
ta t
rg
an D tion
iza ive
tio rsi
n ty
Siz
e
en
nm
tio
iza
an
rg
10% 9%
4%
0%
17%17%
15%15%
9%
6%
te
ies ies
Ra
nit unit
u
t t
th
or or
w
ro
pp pp
G
rO tO
n
io
ee en
t
r
a
Ca pm
niz
ga
re velo
r
u
t e
O
Fu D
25%
23% 23%
23% 22%
Pe Ma
op nag
le e
Co M r Q
wo ana ua
rk gem lity
e
Ca r Q ent
m ual
ar it y
ad
er
ie
Percentage of
Respondents
Rating in Top Five
Attributes
n = 945.

176

ORDER FORM
Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segments: Identifying Drivers of Attraction and Commitment in the Global Labor Market is intended for broad dissemination
among senior executives and management within your organization. Members of the Corporate Leadership Council are welcome to unlimited copies without
charge. Online ordering is available at www.clc.executiveboard.com. Alternatively, you may call the Publications Department at +1-202-777-5921, e-mail your order
to orders@executiveboard.com, or fax in the order form on this page.
Additionally, members interested in reviewing any of the Councils past strategic research are encouraged to request a complete listing of our work or visit our
Web site at www.clc.executiveboard.com.
Study Requested
Quantity

Talent Segments
and Commitment in the Global Labor Market
You may order an unlimited

number of copies without
additional charge.
Catalog No.: CLC16H7961
Name and Title ___________________________________________

Institution ___________________________________________
Address ___________________________________________
___________________________________________
Telephone ___________________________________________
E-Mail ___________________________________________
Copy and Fax To:

+1-202-777-5822


Telephone: +1-202-777-5000
www.clc.executiveboard.com
177

CLC Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segments Identifying Drivers of Attraction and Commitment in The Global Labor Market

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLC Attracting and Retaining Critical Talent Segments Identifying Drivers of Attraction and Commitment in The Global Labor Market

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CEB Corporate Leadership Council

Attracting and Retaining

CEB Corporate Leadership Council Creative Solutions Group

CEB Corporate Leadership Council

Senior Graphic Design Specialist

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

Council Essay: From Talent Scarcity to Competitive Advantage 1

Order Form 177

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

Letter from the Corporate Leadership Council

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

Overview of the Competitive Employment Value Proposition Initiative

The Corporate Leadership Councils 2006 Research Series

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

Overview of the Competitive Employment Value Proposition Research Initiative

Council Series on the Competitive Employment Value Proposition

Corporate Leadership Council

Corporate Leadership Council

Attracting and Retaining

Attracting and Retaining

Attracting and Retaining

Identifying Drivers of Attraction

Best Practices for Building a Competitive

Identifying Drivers of Attraction

Attracting and Retaining Critical

Attracting and Retaining

Attracting and Retaining Critical

Identifying Drivers of Attraction and

Best Practices for Building

Identifying Drivers of Attraction

Corporate Leadership Council

Attracting and Retaining

Critical Questions Addressed in This Volume

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

Source: Corporate Leadership Council research.

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

List of Participating Organizations

With Special Thanks

Source: Corporate Leadership Council research.

List of Participating Organizations (Continued)

With Special Thanks (Continued)

Source: Corporate Leadership Council research.

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

Interpreting Study Findings

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

Note on Research Methodology

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

Council Essay: From Talent

Please note that the CEB program names referenced

2006 Corporate Executive Board. All Rights Reserved.