Search results

Massive shifts in the recruitment landscape, the continually changing nature of work and workers, and extraordinary technological progress have combined to enable unparalleled advances in how current and prospective employees receive and process information about organizations. Once the domain of internal organizational public relations and human resources (HR) teams, most employment branding has moved beyond organizations’ control. This chapter provides a conceptual framework pertaining to third party employment branding, defined as communications, claims, or status-based classifications generated by parties outside of direct company control that shape, enhance, and differentiate organizations’ images as favorable or unfavorable employers. Specifically, the authors first theorize about the underlying mechanisms by which third party employment branding might signal prospective and current employees. Second, the authors develop a framework whereby we comprehensively review third party employment branding sources, thus identifying the different ways that third party employment branding might manifest. Third, using prototypical examples, the authors link the various signaling mechanisms to the various third party employment branding sources identified. Finally, the authors propose an ambitious future research agenda that considers not only the positive aspects of third party employment branding but also potential “dark sides.” Thus, the authors view this chapter as contributing to the broader employment branding literature, which should enhance scholarly endeavors to study it and practitioner efforts to leverage it.

This study replicates the portion of Albrecht and Sack's “Perilous Future” monograph (AAA, 2000) that examines the knowledge, skills, and abilities desired by employers of entry-level accounting graduates. Its purpose is to determine if Albrecht and Sack's (A&S) results are sufficiently generalizable to guide curriculum development in meeting stakeholder needs at a regional state college. We administered a survey instrument similar to that used by A&S to employers of accounting graduates to determine what knowledge, general skills, and technology abilities are important to their hiring decisions.

Our findings reveal that large, national, and international employers desire knowledge and skills that are different from those required by smaller, local, and regional employers. The study also found that desired knowledge and skills differ between employer industries. Finally, significant differences also were noted in the knowledge, general skills, and technology ability requirements. These results suggest that A&S findings should be interpreted in the context of each educational institution's own unique environment.

This chapter presents findings from a recently conducted process for obtaining Accounting Advisory Board (AAB) input related to Master of Accountancy curriculum of one university. Board members represent both large and small public accounting firms as well as corporate offices of Fortune 500 companies and non-profit organizations. AAB input includes perceptions of the relative importance of over 160 candidate topics for the courses making up the program’s infrastructure, as well as written comments noting other potential topics and pedagogical approaches to consider. Comparisons of topic rankings reveal a strong level of consistency among Board member types for the traditional accounting courses with structured content, as opposed to those courses involving more systems-related topics or having a wider range of specialized topics. Furthermore, the authors compare Board perceptions regarding topic necessity to those of faculty and note faculty reactions. Specifically, the authors find that faculty ranking consistency with the Board is weak, illustrating the importance of seeking curricular Board input on an ongoing basis. To “close the loop,” faculty incorporated many curriculum changes, involving both the topics to be covered and the overall approach to the course.

It has been argued that the workplace and the labor market in general, by processes of education, mobility and competition, have become the main forces behind the individualization and atomization in societies and in people’s lives. This paper inquires into the tensions between solidarity, identity, and individualism among workers in their efforts to organize collective struggles to improve their workplaces and their lives. Drawing on the dilemmas of increased diversity in the new workplace, the paper delineates three models of organized labor: (1) The Universalist-Individualist model of organized labor, peaking at the New Deal crisis and embedded in National Labor Relations Act, as an attempt to establish universal solidarity, which suppressed differences and presented a unified worker voice; (2) The Separatist model, which emerges as a reaction to intragroup exclusion and involves fragmentation of workers into identity groups, each representing the interests of its members; (3) The Coalitionist-Altruist model, envisioned in the paper as a middle ground between solidarity and self-interest, through interrelated moves: a move from totalizing universal solidarity to coalitionist solidarity through continuous dialogue and “rotation of centers” and a move from rights-based identity politics and the dominance of employment antidiscrimination claims to a fuller substantive theory for social reform.

We examine how different neutral sources and third-party neutral qualification differences relate to mediation and arbitration usage at large US firms. Neutral sourcing is controversial, particularly in employment arbitration, where many have expressed concern that unregulated sourcing arrangements may bias outcomes in favor of employers. We use agency and structure theories to hypothesize that firms will be less likely to use mediation when the neutral is sourced as a result of court-annexed mediation, but that firms may be more likely to use arbitration when the neutral is sourced from a private third-party provider. Utilizing human capital theory, we also hypothesize that organizations will use both mediation and arbitration more frequently when neutrals are perceived to be more highly qualified. Empirically, we rely on data gathered from a survey of US Fortune 1000 corporations to test these hypotheses and find support for each of them. Our results suggest that, while firms uniformly value professionalization in their neutrals, employers may impose structures on themselves in high-stakes circumstances like arbitration to ensure standardized and consistent processes, but prefer agency in lower-stakes circumstances like mediation.

Purpose: The main aim is to explore and recognize productive ways to create human-centred designs (HCDs) for employee experience (EX). HCD is a concept that prioritizes the needs, preferences, and behaviours of humans using the product or service. EX refers to all interactions an employee has with their employment lifespan – from recruitment to retirement. By taking the HCD approach to EX design, companies can create a work environment tailored to their employees’ needs and preferences.

Design / Methodology: The explorative research design to apply journey maps. By mapping out the employee journey, designers can identify pain points and areas for improvement.

Findings: The findings highlight that artificial intelligence and robotics are core components of designing HCD and can be applied to EX design. By prioritizing EX, companies can attract and retain top talent, increase employee engagement and productivity, and gain a competitive advantage.

Research Limitations: The study is developing and involves detailed insights from different companies, making it difficult and time-consuming to prepare a comprehensive report.

Practical Implications: The findings of the study will add value to other organizations to follow and develop policies and practices that make the employees cherish their work.

Originality: The chapter’s originality lies in providing a comprehensive understanding of HCD and EX. It emphasizes leveraging the strengths of both humans and bots for enhanced workforce experience and business growth. Exploring future automation and technology integration trends adds depth to the chapter’s contribution.

The popularity of research into categories has grown in recent decades and shows no sign of abating. This introductory article takes stock of the research into two facets of categorization, addressing it both as a cognitive and a social process. We advocate a rebalance toward the social process of categorization, paying more heed to the entity to be categorized, the actors involved, their acts, and the context and timing, which informs these activities. We summarize the contributions to the volume in relation to these dimensions and briefly discuss avenues for future research.