Reducing employer branding only to employee benefits is wrong

As an industry, we have reduced the set of values we offer to employees to a collection of material benefits and activities unrelated to the mission and vision of the company.

Employer branding, at its core, is branding. Like any other type of branding, it should provide a recognizable set of values that distinguishes the company from others. We, as an industry, have narrowed these values to mere material benefits for employees and activities that do not align with the company's mission and vision. This approach has likely led to the recruitment process resembling a bidding war more than a process of identifying shared values and visions.

At the onset of what we know today as the 4th Industrial Revolution, Google was among the companies that revolutionized the workplace, not only through office design and job descriptions but through what the company symbolized. Tech enthusiasts didn't dream of working at Google just because of its offices, but because of the values associated with the company. Those values established Google as a brand. The way the stationery was arranged reflected the brand's established values, not as a value in itself or a foundation upon which values are built.

Therefore, employer branding should first and foremost offer a clear mission and vision before listing material benefits.

It is a fact that material benefits remain the primary criterion for choosing a company in any economically underdeveloped society, as they offer employees significant personal and social capital advantages within that context. Also, it is true that making a better financial offer and a larger benefits package is the easiest way to become the first choice for talent. However, this approach does not make you a brand.