Public employers struggle with recruiting talents and labor market competition. Research on the understudied topic of employer branding can help address this challenge. This study presents five large-scale, pre-registered field experiments (n = 155,634) aimed at increasing the number of individuals initially interested in a job at a public employer. In social media ads, public sector values served as signaled employer value propositions (EVPs). The results show the importance of target groups and points of difference related to public employers’ organizational type. Significantly fewer women show interest in a job, and for a municipal administration, a fair pay EVP has a negative effect. This study enhances the understanding of potential recruits’ environment- and self-processing, bridges EVPs with public values theory, and provides a missing theoretical link between publicness and recruitment. It shows the importance of testing common assumptions about what works in recruitment in field studies with high external validity.
AguinisH.JensenS. H.KrausS. (2021). Policy implications of organizational behavior and human resource management research. Academy of Management Perspectives, 36(3), 857–878. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2020.0093
2.
Alon-BarkatS. (2020). Can government public communications elicit undue trust? Exploring the interaction between symbols and substantive information in communications. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 30(1), 77–95. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muz013
3.
AlterA. L.AronsonJ.DarleyJ. M.RodriguezC.RubleD. N. (2010). Rising to the threat: Reducing stereotype threat by reframing the threat as a challenge. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(1), 166–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.09.014
4.
AndersenL. B.JørgensenT. B.KjeldsenA. M.PedersenL. H.VrangbækK. (2013). Public values and public service motivation: Conceptual and empirical relationships. American Review of Public Administration, 43(3), 292–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074012440031
5.
AndersenL. B.PedersenL. H.PetersenO. H. (2018). Motivational foundations of public service provision: Towards a theoretical synthesis. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 1(4), 283–298. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvy003
6.
AndrewsR.FerryL.SkelcherC.WegorowskiP. (2020). Corporatization in the public sector: Explaining the growth of local government companies. Public Administration Review, 80(3), 482–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13052
AralS. (2016). Networked experiments. In BramoulléY.GaleottiA.RogersB. W. (Eds.), The oxford handbook of the economics of networks (pp. 376–411). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199948277.013.2
9.
AshrafN.BandieraO.DavenportE.LeeS. S. (2020). Losing prosociality in the quest for talent? Sorting, selection, and productivity in the delivery of public services. American Economic Review, 110 (5), 1355–1394. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20180326
10.
AsseburgJ.HattkeJ.HenselD.HombergF.VogelR. (2020). The tacit dimension of public sector attraction in multi-incentive settings. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 30(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muz004
11.
AuspurgK.HinzT.SauerC. (2017). Why should women get less? Evidence on the gender pay gap from multifactorial survey experiments. American Sociological Review, 82(1), 179–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122416683393
12.
BaumM.KabstR. (2014). The effectiveness of recruitment advertisements and recruitment websites: Indirect and interactive effects on applicant attraction. Human Resource Management, 53(3), 353–378. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21571
13.
BelkR. W. (2013). Extended self in a digital world. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 477–500. https://doi.org/10.1086/671052
14.
BlomR.KruyenP. M.Van der HeijdenB. I. J. M.Van ThielS. (2020). One HRM fits all? A meta-analysis of the effects of HRM practices in the public, semipublic, and private sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40(1), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X18773492
15.
BondR. M.FarissC. J.JonesJ. J.KramerA. D. I.MarlowC.SettleJ. E.FowlerJ. H. (2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature, 489(7415), 295–298. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11421
16.
BozemanB.MoultonS. (2011). Integrative publicness: A framework for public management strategy and performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(Suppl. 3), i363–i380. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur031
17.
BrombergD. E.CharbonneauÉ. (2020). Public service motivation, personality, and the hiring decisions of public managers: An experimental study. Public Personnel Management, 49(2), 193–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026019855749
18.
BrutonG. D.PengM. W.AhlstromD.StanC.XuK. (2015). State-owned enterprises around the world as hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Perspectives, 29(1), 92–114. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2013.0069
19.
ByrnesJ. P.MillerD. C.SchaferW. D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(3), 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.3.367
20.
CarlessS. A. (2005). Person-job fit versus person-organization fit as predictors of organizational attraction and job acceptance intentions: A longitudinal study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78(3), 411–429. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317905X25995
21.
CarpentierM.Van HoyeG.WeijtersB. (2019). Attracting applicants through the organization’s social media page: Signaling employer brand personality. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 115, 103326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103326
ChatmanJ. A. (1991). Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization in public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 459–484. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393204
24.
ChetkovichC. (2003). What’s in a sector? The shifting career plans of public policy students. Public Administration Review, 63(6), 660–674. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00330
25.
CinelliC.ForneyA.PearlJ. (2020). A crash course in good and bad controls. Sociological Methods & Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00491241221099552
26.
CollinsC. J.HanJ. (2004). Exploring applicant pool quantity and quality: The effects of early recruitment practice strategies, corporate advertising, and firm reputation. Personnel Psychology, 57(3), 685–717. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00004.x
27.
ConnellyB. L.CertoS. T.IrelandR. D.ReutzelC. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1), 39–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310388419
28.
CordesJ.VogelR. (2022). Comparing employer attractiveness of public sector organizations to nonprofit and private sector organizations: An experimental study in Germany and the U.S. Review of Public Personnel Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X211065349
29.
CruckeS.KluijtmansT.MeyfroodtK.DesmidtS. (2021). How does organizational sustainability foster public service motivation and job satisfaction? The mediating role of organizational support and societal impact potential. Public Management Review, 24(8), 1155–1181. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1893801
30.
Dal BóE.FinanF.RossiM. A. (2013). Strengthening state capabilities: The role of financial incentives in the call to public service. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(3), 1169–1218. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjt008
31.
DawsonC. (2017). The upside of pessimism − Biased beliefs and the paradox of the contented female worker. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 135, 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2017.02.004
ErikssonE.AnderssonT.HellströmA.GadolinC.LifvergrenS. (2020). Collaborative public management: Coordinated value propositions among public service organizations. Public Management Review, 22(6), 791–812. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1604793
36.
EshuisJ.GeestT.KlijnE. H.VoetsJ.FlorekM.GeorgeB. (2021). The effect of the EU-brand on citizens’ trust in policies: Replicating an experiment. Public Administration Review, 81(4), 776–786. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13367
37.
FayD. L.ZavattaroS. M. (2016). Branding and isomorphism: The case of higher education. Public Administration Review, 76(5), 805–815. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12626
38.
FeldmanD. C.BeardenW. O.HardestyD. M. (2006). Varying the content of job advertisements: The effects of message specificity. Journal of Advertising, 35(1), 123–141. https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367350108
39.
FestingM.KnappertL.KornauA. (2015). Gender-specific preferences in global performance management: An empirical study of male and female managers in a multinational context. Human Resource Management, 54(1), 55–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21609
40.
FowlerL.BirdsallC. (2020). Are the best and brightest joining the public service?Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40(3), 532–554. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X19836152
41.
FukumotoE.BozemanB. (2019). Public values theory: What is missing?The American Review of Public Administration, 49(6), 635–648. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074018814244
42.
GaucherD.FriesenJ.KayA. C. (2011). Evidence that gendered wording in job advertisements exists and sustains gender inequality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(1), 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022530
43.
GerberA. S.GreenD. P. (2012). Field experiments: Design, analysis, and interpretation. Norton.
44.
GötzF. M.StiegerS.ReipsU.-D. (2017). Users of the main smartphone operating systems (iOS, android) differ only little in personality. PLoS One, 12(5), e0176921. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176921
45.
GrantA. M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.48
46.
GreeningD. W.TurbanD. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business & Society, 39(3), 254–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/000765030003900302
47.
GrossiG.PapenfußU.TremblayM.-S. (2015). Corporate governance and accountability of state-owned enterprises: Relevance for science and society and interdisciplinary research perspectives. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 28(4/5), 274–285. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-09-2015-0166
48.
HansenJ. A.TummersL. (2020). A systematic review of field experiments in public administration. Public Administration Review, 80(6), 921–931. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13181
49.
HentschelT.BraunS.PeusC.FreyD. (2021). Sounds like a fit! Wording in recruitment advertisements and recruiter gender affect women’s pursuit of career development programs via anticipated belongingness. Human Resource Management, 60(4), 581–602. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22043
50.
HolmS. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6(2), 65–70.
51.
JamesO.JohnP.MoseleyA. (2017). Field experiments in public management research. In JamesO.JilkeS.Van RyzinG. G. (Eds.), Experiments in public management research: challenges and contributions (pp. 89–116). Cambridge University Press.
52.
JankowskiM.ProkopC.TepeM. (2020). Representative bureaucracy and public hiring preferences: Evidence from a conjoint experiment among German municipal civil servants and private sector employees. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 30(4), 596–618. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaa012
53.
JensenU. T.Helby PetersenO.JacobsenC. B.Jessen HansenJ. A.MaroulisS. (2022). Co-producing field experiments in public management research: A guide to enhanced research–practice collaboration. Public Management Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2083848
54.
JilkeS.LuJ.XuC.ShinoharaS. (2019). Using large-scale social media experiments in public administration: Assessing charitable consequences of government funding of nonprofits. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29(4), 627–639. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy021
55.
JonesD. A.WillnessC. R.MadeyS. (2014). Why are job seekers attracted by corporate social performance? Experimental and field tests of three signal-based mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 383–404. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0848
KeppelerF.PapenfußU. (2021). Employer branding and recruitment: Social media field experiments targeting future public employees. Public Administration Review, 81(4), 763–775. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13324
58.
KjeldsenA. M.JacobsenC. B. (2013). Public service motivation and employment sector: attraction or socialization?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(4), 899–926. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus039
59.
KoracS.LindenmeierJ.SalitererI. (2020). Attractiveness of public sector employment at the pre-entry level – a hierarchical model approach and analysis of gender effects. Public Management Review, 22(2), 206–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1582688
60.
KoracS.SalitererI.WeigandB. (2019). Factors affecting the preference for public sector employment at the pre-entry level: A systematic review. International Public Management Journal, 22(5), 797–840. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2018.1430086
61.
KougiannouN. K.RidgwayM. (2022). How is human resource management research (not) helping practice? In defence of practical implications. Human Resource Management Journal, 32(2), 470–484. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12414
62.
LazearE. P.OyerP. (2012). Personnel economics. In GibbonsR.RobertsJ. (Eds.), The handbook of organizational economics (pp. 479–519). Princeton University Press.
63.
LievensF.HighhouseS. (2003). The relation of instrumental and symbolic attributes to a company’s attractiveness as an employer. Personnel Psychology, 56(1), 75–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00144.x
64.
LievensF.SlaughterJ. E. (2016). Employer image and employer branding: What we know and what we need to know. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3(1), 407–440. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062501
65.
LinosE. (2018). More than public service: A field experiment on job advertisements and diversity in the police. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mux032
66.
LinosE.RieschN. (2020). Thick red tape and the thin blue line: A field study on reducing administrative burden in police recruitment. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 92–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13115
67.
LuanS.RebJ.GigerenzerG. (2019). Ecological rationality: Fast-and-frugal heuristics for managerial decision making under uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 62(6), 1735–1759. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.0172
68.
MahjoubA.KruyenP. M. (2021). Efficient recruitment with effective job advertisement: An exploratory literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior, 24(2), 107–125. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOTB-04-2020-0052
69.
MajorB.ForceyB. (1985). Social comparisons and pay evaluations: Preferences for same-sex and same-job wage comparisons. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21(4), 393–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(85)90038-1
70.
MaunoS.KinnunenU.RuokolainenM. (2007). Job demands and resources as antecedents of work engagement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70(1), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2006.09.002
71.
MutzD. C. (2011). Population-based survey experiments. Princeton University Press.
72.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2020). Are generational categories meaningful distinctions for workforce management?National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25796
73.
OECD. (2015). OECD guidelines on corporate governance of state-owned enterprises. OECD Publishing.
PapenfußU.KeppelerF. (2020). Does performance-related pay and public service motivation research treat state-owned enterprises like a neglected Cinderella? A systematic literature review and agenda for future research on performance effects. Public Management Review, 22(7), 1119–1145. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1740300
78.
PapenfußU.SchmidtC. A. (2021). Understanding self-regulation for political control and policymaking: Effects of governance mechanisms on accountability. Governance, 34(4), 1115–1141. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12549
79.
PiatakJ. S.SowaJ. E.JacobsonW. S.McGinnis JohnsonJ. (2020). Infusing Public Service Motivation (PSM) throughout the employment relationship: A review of PSM and the human resource management process. International Public Management Journal, 24(1), 86–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2020.1805381
80.
RaineyH. G. (1983). Public agencies and private firms: Incentive structures, goals, and individual roles. Administration & Society, 15(2), 207–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/009539978301500203
81.
RiccucciN. M.Van RyzinG. G.LiH. (2016). Representative bureaucracy and the willingness to coproduce: An experimental study. Public Administration Review, 76(1), 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12401
82.
RitzA.WeißmüllerK. S.MeynhardtT. (2022). Public value at cross points: A comparative study on employer attractiveness of public, private, and nonprofit organizations. Review of Public Personnel Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X221098153
83.
RudolphC. W.ZacherH. (2016). Considering generations from a lifespan developmental perspective. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3(2), 113–129. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waw019
84.
RyanT. J. (2012). What makes us click? Demonstrating incentives for angry discourse with digital-age field experiments. The Journal of Politics, 74(4), 1138–1152. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381612000540
SchwoererK.KeppelerF.MussagulovaA.PuelloS. (2022). CO-DESIGN-ing a more context-based, pluralistic, and participatory future for public administration. Public Administration, 100(1), 72–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12828
87.
SievertM.VogelD.FeeneyM. K. (2022). Formalization and administrative burden as obstacles to employee recruitment: Consequences for the public sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 42(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X20932997
88.
SimonH. A. (1978). Rationality as process and as product of thought. The American Economic Review, 68(2), 1–16.
89.
SivertzenA.-M.NilsenE. R.OlafsenA. H. (2013). Employer branding: Employer attractiveness and the use of social media. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 22(7), 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-09-2013-0393
SweeneyP. D.McFarlinD. B. (1997). Process and outcome: Gender differences in the assessment of justice. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(1), 83–98.
92.
TajfelH. (1978). Social categorization, social identity, and social comparison. Differentiation between social groups. Academic Press.
93.
TavaresG. M.SobralF.WrightB. E. (2021). Commitment to public values, charismatic leadership attributions, and employee turnover in street-level bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(3), 542–560. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaa057
94.
TeodoroM. P.AnS.-H. (2018). Citizen-based brand equity: A model and experimental evaluation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(3), 321–338. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mux044
95.
TheurerC. P.TumasjanA.WelpeI. M.LievensF. (2018). Employer branding: A brand equity-based literature review and research agenda: Brand equity-based employer branding. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(1), 155–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12121
96.
van den BekeromP.van der VoetJ.ChristensenJ. (2021). Are citizens more negative about failing service delivery by public than private organizations? Evidence from a large-scale survey experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(1), 128–149. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaa027
97.
Van de WalleS.SteijnB.JilkeS. (2015). Extrinsic motivation, PSM and labour market characteristics: A multilevel model of public sector employment preference in 26 countries. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 81(4), 833–855. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314563899
98.
Van ThielS. (2012). Comparing agencies across countries. In VerhoestK.Van ThielS.BouckaertG.LægreidP. (Eds.), Government agencies. Practices and lessons from 30 countries (pp. 18–26). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230359512
99.
VogelD.HombergF. (2021). P-hacking, P-curves, and the PSM–performance relationship: Is there evidential value?Public Administration Review, 81(2), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13273
100.
VogelD.WillemsJ. (2020). The effects of making public service employees aware of their prosocial and societal impact: A microintervention. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 30(3), 485–503. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muz044
101.
WeskeU.RitzA.SchottC.NeumannO. (2020). Attracting future civil servants with public values? An experimental study on employer branding. International Public Management Journal, 23(5), 677–695. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2018.1541830
102.
WildenR.GuderganS.LingsI. (2010). Employer branding: Strategic implications for staff recruitment. Journal of Marketing Management, 26(1–2), 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/02672570903577091
103.
WilleL.DerousE.WeijtersB. (2020). Differentiation is key: Should employers offer something unique or the same yet better?European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(5), 753–763. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2020.1750472
104.
WilliamsonS.ColleyL.FoleyM. (2020). Human resource devolution, decoupling and incoherence: How line managers manage gender equality reforms. Public Management Review, 22(10), 1560–1578. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1642951
105.
ZhangJ.MaoE. (2016). From online motivations to ad clicks and to behavioral intentions: An empirical study of consumer response to social media advertising. Psychology & Marketing, 33(3), 155–164. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20862
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
