In: Economics
CASE CHAPTER 15: QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS: HYPOTHESIS
TESTINGPERCEPTIONS OF ORGANIZATIONAL ATTRACTIVENESSINTRODUCTION
When Song Mei Hui moved...
CASE CHAPTER 15: QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS: HYPOTHESIS
TESTINGPERCEPTIONS OF ORGANIZATIONAL ATTRACTIVENESSINTRODUCTION
When Song Mei Hui moved from being Vice President for Human
Resources at Pierce & Pierce in Shanghai to her international
assignment in New York, she was struck by the difference in
perception of Pierce & Pierce as an employer in China and the
United States. Pierce & Pierce in China stands for an
attractive and popular place to work, as opposed to its image as an
employer in the United States, which was one of an unattractive,
traditional, and uninspiring place of work. This difference in
perception was bothering Song Mei Hui, because a strong and
appealing ‘employer brand’ has the capacity to attract (and retain)
talent as denoted by the number of university graduates aspiring to
work for companies such as SAS, Google, Cisco, and the Boston
Consulting Group.According to Song Mei Hui, the drivers of employer
attractiveness have evolved into a complex and challenging set in
this day and age. Even though she believes that the success of the
organization itself is at the cornerstone of being an attractive
employer (and Pierce & Pierce is flourishing indeed), she feels
that a wide variety of factors contribute to being successful in
attracting and retaining talent. “For many employees, being a part
of a profitable, thriving corporation is a reward on its own,” she
says. “However, this is obviously not enough. Opportunities for
empowerment, a feeling of achievement, a substantial compensation
package, and a culture of grooming and development also play a
major role in the decision making process of today’s young
professionals. Job candidates are looking for a career, and not
just for a job.”Song Mei Hui has hired a graduate student in
management, Timothy Brice, to develop and test a model of employer
attraction. The results of Timothy’s study should help Pierce &
Pierce to become more popular as an employer in the United States
and hence to attract and retain talented young professionals.
Timothy has conducted a literature review and in-depth interviews
with graduate students and young professionals who have just
started their careers in order to establish the drivers of employer
attractiveness. Based on the results of the literature review and
the qualitative study, he has developed the following model.
CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND HYPOTHESESFigure 1: A conceptual model of
employer attraction EMPLOYER BRAND IMAGE From this model, Timothy
has derived the following hypotheses. The effect of Brand Image on
Employer attraction Employer brand image can be defined as the
potential applicants’ perceptions of instrumental and symbolic
attributes of an organization (cf. Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004;
Lievens and Highhouse, 2003; Lievens, 2007; Martin, Beaumont, Doig
and Pate, 2005). The instrumental dimension includes tangible
attributes related to the job and/or the organization such as ‘job
opportunities’, whereas the symbolic dimension includes (the
perception of) intangible attributes of an employer (as if it were
a person) such as ‘sincerity’ and ‘being exciting’. Both
instrumental and symbolic attributes have been found to affect
applicant attraction to an employer (Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004;
Cable and Turban, 2001; Turban and Greening, 1997). Therefore, the
following hypotheses are proposed:H1a: The more positive the
perception of instrumental attributes of an employer, the stronger
applicant attraction to the organization. H1b: The more positive
the perception of symbolic attributes of an employer, the stronger
applicant attraction to the organization. Feelings of significant
others.If significant others in someone‘s surrounding (e.g., family
and friends) tell this person that a company is a much better
employer than other employers, someone’s level of attraction to
Instrumental attributes:-Workplace atmosphere-Job
opportunities-Industry characteristicsEmployer attractionSymbolic
attributes:-Excitement-Sincerity-PrestigeSubjective normsCONCEPTUAL
MODEL AND HYPOTHESESFigure 1: A conceptual model of employer
attraction EMPLOYER BRAND IMAGE From this model, Timothy has
derived the following hypotheses. The effect of Brand Image on
Employer attraction Employer brand image can be defined as the
potential applicants’ perceptions of instrumental and symbolic
attributes of an organization (cf. Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004;
Lievens and Highhouse, 2003; Lievens, 2007; Martin, Beaumont, Doig
and Pate, 2005). The instrumental dimension includes tangible
attributes related to the job and/or the organization such as ‘job
opportunities’, whereas the symbolic dimension includes (the
perception of) intangible attributes of an employer (as if it were
a person) such as ‘sincerity’ and ‘being exciting’. Both
instrumental and symbolic attributes have been found to affect
applicant attraction to an employer (Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004;
Cable and Turban, 2001; Turban and Greening, 1997). Therefore, the
following hypotheses are proposed:H1a: The more positive the
perception of instrumental attributes of an employer, the stronger
applicant attraction to the organization. H1b: The more positive
the perception of symbolic attributes of an employer, the stronger
applicant attraction to the organization. Feelings of significant
others.If significant others in someone‘s surrounding (e.g., family
and friends) tell this person that a company is a much better
employer than other employers, someone’s level of attraction to
Instrumental attributes:-Workplace atmosphere-Job
opportunities-Industry characteristicsEmployer attractionSymbolic
attributes:-Excitement-Sincerity-PrestigeSubjective norms that
particular organization will grow. It is generally recognized that
potential applicants often consult other people (e.g., family,
friends, and/or acquaintances) about jobs and organizations(e.g.,
Van Hoye and Lievens, 2007)”. What’s more, Turban (2001) found that
university personnel’s beliefs about organizations affect students’
attraction to that organization. Kilduff (1990) also found that in
the early stages of job search, college students are heavily
influenced by the beliefs of their friends and classmates. These
findings all point at the relevance of social influences to
potential applicants in influencing the level of employer
attraction. Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed: H2: The
more positive significant others are about an organization, the
stronger applicant attraction to the organization. To test these
hypotheses, Timothy has undertaken a quantitative field study. He
has collected data using a questionnaire measuring the variables in
his model and a couple of respondent characteristics such as age,
gender, and level of education with closed-ended questions. The
results of this study are provided next. RESULTSTable 1 provides
the means and standard deviations of the variables of interest to
this studyand the results of a multiple regression analysis that
was conducted to test the hypotheses of this study. Table 1 Summary
statistics and results of the regression analysis Adjusted
R2dfFMSDBSEtpRegression.3657,
897.304-----.000aConstant--2.213.5224.238.000Instrumental
attributesWorkplace atmosphere4.32.75.088.152.577.565Job
opportunities4.73.75.390.1362.868.005Industry
characteristics4.24.74.275.1861.473.144Symbolic
attributesExcitement3.78.91.071.149.474.637Sincerity5.13.80.109.137.794.429Prestige4.05.81.146.1151.268.208Subjective
norm4.981.13.317.1003.169.002 Employer attraction3.711.23----Note.
df = degrees of freedom; F = F-statistic; M = Mean; SD = Standard
deviation; B = Unstandardized beta coefficient; SE = standard
error; t = t-statistic; p = significance level; Scale 1-7 a.
Predictors: (Constant), Workplace atmosphere, Job opportunities,
Industry characteristics, Excitement, Sincerity, Prestige,
Subjective norm.b. Dependent Variable: Employer Attraction.N= 197
(88 men and 109 women). QUESTIONS1. a. Discuss the following
statement: “One of the most important issues in regression analysis
concerns model specification (the determination of which
independent variables should be included in or excluded from a
regression equation).” b. Do you like Timothy’s model? Is it, for
example, in line with Song Mei Hui’s ideas? 2. What’s the
difference between simple regression analysis and multiple
regression analysis?3. Why can’t Timothy run a series of simple
regressions (for instance three or seven) to test the hypotheses of
his study? 4. Provide the equation of Timothy’s model. 5. Interpret
the results of the regression analysis. Discuss: a. the model fit;
b. the significance of the model; c. the constant; d. the
statistical validity of the beta coefficients; e. the face validity
of the results.6. A common problem encountered in regression
analysis is multicollinearity. a. What is multicollinearity and how
does it affect the estimates of the regression coefficients?b.
Describe two ways to test for multicollinearity. Which one do you
prefer?c. Suppose that multicollinearity is a problem in this
study. What can Timothy do about it? d. Do you expect that
multicollinearity is a problem in this study? Explain.7. Timothy
suggests that Pierce & Pierce should create more exciting jobs
to attract more employees since the mean of the independent
variable “excitement” is relatively low. Do you agree?8. What
managerial conclusions can you draw based on the results of the
regression analysis? 9. Song Mei Hui believes that the gender of
potential employees may affect the original relationship between
prestige and employer attraction. She asks Timothy to test this
idea.a. How can Timothy test this idea? b. Provide a new equation
of the model: include Song’s ideas about the moderating effect of
gender on the relationship between prestige and employer
attraction.10. Discuss the following statement: “Regression
analysis does not address the issue of causality.”