Impact of Employer Branding on Employee Retention During COVID-19: An Empirical Study on Private Academic Institutions

Abstract

In the present scenario of COVID-19 pandemic, where employability and job security are at stake, employees are interested to work in an organisation with high brand value so that their future is secured enough to deal with the economic situation of the country. Be it in India or any other country, employee always want to get attached to a brand so that their self-market value increases. It is believed that employee attached to a bigger brand is in more demand when it comes to recruiting candidates for an organisation. Likewise, bigger brands having diversified businesses are less prone to fluctuate economically in adverse situations like COVID-19. Employer branding is an important element when it comes to retaining employees. Employees retain themselves with a brand to increase their market value. So employer branding along with its dimensions is believed to affect employee retention to a greater extent during this pandemic. The authors have found out number of dimensions related to employer branding and tied to link those dimensions with the employee retention to find out if there exists any relation between them. The authors have conducted this study in private organisations especially academic firms in India. The basic objective of the study is to identify the dimensions of Employer Branding during COVID-19. The main objective is to identify the impact of Employer Branding on Employee Retention during this pandemic. A structured questionnaire was designed to collect data on the dimensions related to Employer Branding. The sample size of the study is 450. The convenient sample technique was used for data collection. Correlation, Regression and ANOVA technique is used for hypothesis testing. It is found that there exists positive relationship between various dimensions of Employer Branding and Employee Retention & there is a positive impact of Employer Branding on Employee Retention during COVID-19.

JEL Classification: E24, J24

Introduction

Employee Retention

In today’s era of the customer-centric world, almost all the sectors are actively involved in the race of increasing productivity and at the same time, they also want to be top priority while coming to their preferred workplace. India is always known for its talent pool, and being a part of the Indian educational industry, companies are trying their hands on pulling the most suitable talent into their organisation. Whichever sector it is, might it be the corporate sector or academics, competition is everywhere between employees and also between the employers. Gone were those days when employees were treated as machines to produce services and products; now the market demands retention and commitment of the employees who are now renamed Human Capital. Committed employees bring great ideas to the table and also support executing those ideas into action. So, companies are now involved in the new race of gaining engaged employees for a long-run sustainability in the market. In India, academic sector is no less in this race. They are also equally involved in employee engagement practices so that talented academicians can be engaged and can showcase their expertise to the market and ultimately the goal of employee retention can be achieved. As competitions are going on, students have also increased their expectations from the institute where they are taking studies. Institutions are also equally enhancing their capabilities by adding new and demanding courses day by day so that they will attract the market. In the Indian education industry, institutes are keenly working on their employee turnover rates so that they can be minimised and hence can create a good image for the institution. Students also play a major part in retaining employees by giving their feedback in market about their expert teachers.

Employer Branding

Employer branding can be understood as good image of the organisation in the mind of employees and all potential candidates. Employer branding is not a work of single day, it needs to be cultivated every single day so that it can be maintained and enhanced throughout. A good organisation policy, good employee retention and good employee engagement strategy always pull back employees to your organisation. It is found in a study that 95% of job seekers are attracted to an employer’s reputation before applying for a job (O’Donnell, 2017). Another survey says that more than 66% of the candidates look for the employer’s culture and values before switching jobs (Burgess, 2016). All of these depict how employer branding is necessary to keep organisation going at pace. Because if we cannot attract the talent pool then we cannot think of a productive firm, and also future of the firm is at stake.

COVID-19

COVID-19 is a respiratory disease first spotted in Wuhan, China, in 2019, and then got spread all over the world causing severe health issues including causalities. According to the WHO reports, India reached 30,585,229 confirmed COVID-19 cases and 402,728 deaths by 5th July 2021 (https://covid19.who.int/). Due to its quick spread, international travel was completely stopped. It also affected so many sectors in the world. In India, we underwent two stringent lockdowns for such a long period, one in 2020 and one in 2021, and also few short-term lockdowns. Students started taking their online classes as schools and colleges were closed due to pandemic. Likewise, corporates declared work from home until 2021 for all the employees and operated from home themselves. It drastically affected our Indian economy as shops and almost all sorts of businesses were put on hold. Talking about employment, 100 million jobs were lost during the nationwide April–May 2020 lockdown, and during the month of May 2021, 15.3 million jobs were lost. This has resulted in an 18% jobless rate in urban areas of India, which is an additional burden on unemployed educated youth (Lingamurthy & Gunda, 2021).

Employment Situation During COVID-19

The unemployment rate rose to 4.4% by March 2020 (US Bureau of Labor Statistics) and it rose to 6.7% by December 2020. By March 2021, the unemployment rate edged down to 6% (US Bureau of Labor Statistics). According to the report submitted by Azim Premji University, the first wave of COVID-19 pushed 23 crore people below the poverty line. On 3rd June 2021, the unemployment rate stood at 12.4%, urban 15.1% and rural 11.2% (Roy, 2021). This study is intended to do a research on private academic institutions and the impact of their branding on employee retention during COVID-19. Figure 1 shows unemployment rate in urban areas for the year 2019 and 2020

Figure 1.

Source: Kumar and Srivastava (2021).

Rationale of the Study

Employer branding is a well-known ever-growing practice among employers as it is also one of the main aspects of employee retention. There is very few research done on relationship between employer branding and employee retention, and it seems that this relationship isw not much explored especially during the pandemic, which gives strength to explore more on their dimensions. There are very few literature reviews found on this topic which show the path for further research in different industries. Our study will focus on academic sector. The proposed model from this research is targeted to give a clear understanding of various factors of employer branding (EB) and also it will show the impact of EB on employee retention (ER). This research will also help institutions to understand how employer branding can be used to nourish organisation’s competency matrix and management of a healthy EB. Further, this study can be a base for further research on the aspect of EB and ER and their linkage.

Objective

Taking into consideration the above concepts and objectives of the research during COVID-19 are summarised below:

To identify the dimensions of employer branding.

To identify the relationship between employer branding and employee retention.

To measure the impact of employer branding on employee retention.

Literature Review

Researchers have gone through intensive literature reading and have gathered information on different dimensions of employer branding.

Author	Year	Title of Research	Dimensions
U. K. Thalgaspitiya	2020	Employer branding as a predictor of employee retention	Employee growth need strength, psychological contracts, perceptions of organisational support and organisational identification
H. Mouton and M. Bussin	2019	Effectiveness of employer branding on staff retention and compensation expectations	Work atmosphere, employee development, work–life balance, ethics & CSR and compensation & benefits
Noor Ul Hadi and Shahjehan Ahmed	2018	Role of employer branding dimensions on employee retention: evidence from educational sector	Interest value, social value, application value, economic value, development value
Ritika Gupta, Saroj Kumar Sahoo and Tushar Ranjan Sahoo	2018	Employer branding: A tool for employee retention	Employer culture, supportive work environment, employer image, wealth & benefits, company reputation, employer job attributes, work satisfaction
Hasan Gilani, Lucy Cunningham	2017	Employer branding and its influence on employee retention: A literature review	Brand communication, brand-centred hr activities, brand leadership, brand perception, corporate culture, brand citizenship behaviour, brand commitment
S. Vasantha and Kanchana Vinoth	2017	The key factors of employer brand an empirical analysis with special reference to IT industry	Economic value, development value, psychological value, social value, functional value
Karnica Tanwar and Asha Prasad	2016	Exploring the relationship between employer branding and employee retention	Work environment, corporate social responsibility, work–life balance, training & development
Germano Glufke Reis and Beatriz Maria Braga	2016	Employer attractiveness from a generational perspective: Implications for employer branding	Interest value, social value, application value, economic value, development value
Nor Adibah Ahmada and Salina Dauda	2016	Engaging people with employer branding	Interest value, social value, application value, economic value, development value
Neeti Leekha Chhabra and Sanjeev Sharma	2014	Employer branding: Strategy for improving employer attractiveness	Brand association and brand loyalty, organisation attributes
Mukesh Biswas and Damodar Suar,	2013	Which employees’ values matter most in the creation of employer branding?	Social value, developmental value, interest value and economic value
M. V. S Mendis and W. M. S. K Wanigasekera	2013	Impact of employer branding on job satisfaction: with special reference to insurance company	Economic value, development value, social value
N. Malati, P. Tiwari and R. Sharma	2011	An empirical study of employer branding in information technology companies	Financial strength, career or growth opportunity, competitive compensation, proper management and leadership style
B. J. Arachchige and A. Robertson	2011	Business student perceptions of a preferred employer: A study identifying determinants of employer branding	Good association with superiors, innovative products, values creativity, supportive colleagues, exciting environment fun environment, promotes self-esteem, gaining career experience innovative, develops confidence and offers range of experience
Helle Kryger Aggerholm, Sophie Esmann Andersen and Christa Thomsen	2011	Conceptualising employer branding in sustainable organisations	Co-created processes, sustainable employer–employee relationships.
Ralf Wilden, Siegfried Gudergan & Ian Lings	2010	Employer branding: Strategic implications for staff recruitment	Consistency in employment, clarity, consistency of the potential employers’ brand signals; perceptions of the employers’ brand investments; and perceptions of the employers’ product or service brand portfolio.
Martin R. Edwards	2010	An integrative review of employer branding and OB theory	Clarification and management of an organisation’s tangible and intangible employment offering, managing aspects of the organisation’s image and identity
N. Kimpakorn and N. Dimmitt	2007	Employer branding: The perspective of hotel management in the Thai luxury hotel industry	Reliability, added value generated, competence, friendliness, accessibility, reaction speed time, flexibility, service, customisation, transparency in services offered, cost benefit rationale and cost transparency.
Kristin Backhaus and Surinder Tikoo	2004	Conceptualising and researching employer branding	Value proposition, external marketing, internal marketing
R. S. Schuler, P. J. Dowling and H. De Cieri	1993	An integrative framework of strategic international human resource management	Organisation’s formal policies and procedures, vision, marketing media communication activities & the culture

Research Gap

From studies conducted by various researchers, we have found number of dimensions supporting our study. Based on the above-mentioned table, the researchers have pointed out some dimensions to continue the study as these dimensions are not covered specifically for any in-depth study which claims to be a gap in the research. The authors have tried to find out the relationship between these dimensions with employee branding and employee retention, and they are as follows:

Corporate social responsibility: CSR is understood as an external business strategy as it influences the organisation’s financial aspect positively, and hence it increases positive relationship with the external stakeholders. In the context of CSR activities, employees may have a positive image of their organisation if it is concerned about the activities that could positively impact the community (Rupp et al., 2006), as it enhances an organisation’s reputational value and financial performance (Gonzalez-Rodríguez et al., 2019; Liu & Lu, 2019; Maqbool & Zameer, 2018). According to research, the relationship between companies and society is based on a social contract that evolves with social changes and resulting expectations of the society. In this way, a company legitimises its existence, recognises its activities and obligations, as well as establishes legal limits for its performance (Mahmood & Bashir, 2020).

Organisation culture: Backhaus and Tikoo (2004) in their research have proposed a framework and named it ‘Employer Branding Framework’ which suggests that when employees’ beliefs, attitudes and values match with that of organisation’s and also they are properly aligned with the organisation’s core values, employee retention is greater. Researchers have also studied organisational culture which suggests that organisation culture motivates employees to adopt citizenship behaviours (Dukerich et al., 2002; Tyler & Blader, 2000) which again is reflected in organisation’s culture, thus leading the employees to become committed and to ‘live the brand’ (Haslam et al., 2000). By creating a great culture, a company is guaranteed that employees will be in a position to respond to customer goals and develop awareness on how to portray a great company image through shared values and also builds a highly motivated team (SmartMinds, 2021).

Work environment: A healthy work environment always motivates employees to work with full enthusiasm. Employees are motivated to work 24×7 in a good and healthy environment. But if it is unfriendly, then they look for new opportunities to switch. According to some studies, employee based brand equity that employee having a clear knowledge about their work environment leads to positive employees retention results (King, 2009).

Brand & reputation: Corporate reputation enables organisation to attract superior talents that deliver on critical corporate capabilities such as innovation, effective internal processes and innovation (LIGS University, 2019).

Career path: Employees when they get their skills improved are less likely to detach from an organisation. Employer branding can be enhanced by keeping talented resources in their organisation and equally they should provide employee space for enhancing their career graph. They should be given proper training and should always give environment of opportunities and innovations. Employees getting facilities for self-development and opportunity to support in the decision-making process are more connected to the organisation.

Work–life balance: Today as both male and female are contributing their skills to corporates, work–life balance is a much-needed concept to take care of. Employers providing facilities to the employees are the preferred choice for the new talents. May it be providing facilities for day boarding of kids, flexi timings for the employees, a day off without many difficulties as and when needed, job sharing, compressed work week can contribute enhancing quality of work–life balance for the employees. Companies that focus on the factors which fulfil the employee’s needs and wants, their employees are more likely to be engaged and active in the workplace, and with this, companies are able to achieve the targets set by them in the specific period (Khurana, 2021).

Compensation: A good pap Package always attracts talent pool to an organisation. It also becomes a biggest key factor to get attached to an organisation. Fair-employee compensation is a positive factor toward employer branding. Incentive compensation is considered to be a major asset in terms of company appeal and talent retention and can increase employer brand, as they feel the Maslow’s need hierarchy is fulfilled (Primeum, 2020).

Employer attributes: Organisations which offer employee-friendly policies, monetary satisfaction, follow a simple hierarchy and functional areas, give employees freedom of expression, positive ambience, and trustworthy and healthy work environment are successful in retaining the talented resources and also gain a good employer branding in the market (Management Study Guide, 2021).

Job security: Hewlett et al. (2009) found that 45% of employees expect to work with their current employer for the rest of their work–life. If employees feel secure at their job, they will be committed to organisation and will dedicate their energy to the organisation. There are subjects such as job changes, losing job and lack of availability of suitable job in the concept of job security (Khoshnevis & Gholipour, 2017).

Authority: Autocratic leadership is believed to give temporary results towards productivity. So, employers giving free rein authority or democratic authority pull employees to an organisation. It increases productivity in long run. Employees in an organisation where they get an opportunity for sharing their opinion and get authority in the decision-making process are more engaged with an organisation.

Hypotheses

• H₀: There is no significant relationship between dimensions of employer branding & employee retention.

• H₁: There is significant relationship between corporate social responsibility & employee Retention.

• H₁₁: There is significant relationship between organisational culture & employee retention.

• H₁₂: There is significant relationship between work environment & employee retention.

• H₁₃: There is significant relationship between brand & reputation & employee retention.

• H₁₄: There is significant relationship between career path & employee retention.

• H₁₅: There is significant relationship between work–life balance & employee retention.

• H₁₆: There is significant relationship between compensation & employee retention.

• H₁₇: There is significant relationship between employer attributes & employee retention.

• H₁₈: There is significant relationship between job security & employee retention.

• H₁₉: There is significant relationship between authority & employee retention.

• H₂: There is no significant impact of employer branding on employee retention.

• H₂₁: There is significant impact of employer branding on employee retention.

Research Methodology

Area of Study	Respondents are taken from Private Academic Institutions in India (engineering, pharmacy, management)
Research design	Causal Research Design is preferred
Sample size	450 (385 is the standard sample size according to Cochran at 95% Confidence Level). Total responses received from respondents are 435.
Sampling technique	Convenient sampling
Data collection	Primary data are collected through a structured questionnaire. Researchers have used the Likert Scale to conduct the survey. Secondary data are collected through various sources such as journals, white papers, web references and articles.
Tools used for analysis	Correlation, regression & ANOVA Analysis

Data Analysis

Descriptive Analysis

Table 1 represents the descriptive analysis of the dimensions of employer branding.

Table 1.

Descriptive Analysis.

Items	Mean	SD
Corporate social responsibility	1.98	1.125
Organisational culture	1.92	1.061
Work environment	1.93	1.095
Brand & reputation	1.95	1.098
Career path	1.95	1.099
Work–life balance	1.93	1.077
Compensation	1.91	1.052
Employer attributes	1.95	1.106
Job security	1.93	1.079
Authority	1.89	1.028

Note: Represents the demographic analysis of the respondents.

Reliability Analysis

For reliability of the data, we have used Cronbach Alpha.

Table 2 represents the reliability analysis of dimensions of employer branding. The value of Cronbach’s Alpha for all the items used in our research is more than 0.700 which clearly indicates that the data are reliable for study.

Table 2.

Reliability Analysis.

Items	No. in Items	Cronbach’s Alpha
Corporate social responsibility	03	.989
Organisational culture	03	.993
Work environment	03	.995
Brand & reputation	03	.991
Career path	03	.992
Work–life balance	03	.989
Compensation	03	.996
Employer attributes	06	.997
Job security	04	.994
Authority	03	.992

Note: Cronbach’s Alpha measured is above 0.90 for all the variables.

Testing of Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1

• H₀: There is no significant relationship between dimensions of employer branding & employee retention.

• H₁: There is significant relationship between corporate social responsibility & employee Retention.

• H₁₁: There is significant relationship between organisational culture & employee retention.

• H₁₂: There is significant relationship between work environment & employee retention.

• H₁₃: There is significant relationship between brand & reputation & employee retention.

• H₁₄: There is significant relationship between career path & employee retention.

• H₁₅: There is significant relationship between work–life balance & employee retention.

• H₁₆: There is significant relationship between compensation & employee retention.

• H₁₇: There is significant relationship between employer attributes & employee retention.

• H₁₈: There is significant relationship between job security & employee retention.

• H₁₉: There is significant relationship between authority & employee retention.

Correlation Results

Table 3 explains the correlation analysis which shows that there is a positive relation between dimensions of employer branding and employee retention. The research analysis shows that the dimensions that could affect the employee retention are corporate social responsibility (r = .722), organisational culture (r = .720), work environment (r = .711), brand & reputation (r = .721), career path (r = .719), work–life balance (r = .714), compensation (r = .717), employer attributes (r = .716), job security (r = .717) and authority (r = .717). The analysis has shown that all the 10 dimensions are positively correlated to employee retention. The result indicates that all the dimensions are statistically significant at (p < .05).

Table 3.

Correlation Analysis.

		ER	CSR	CO	WE	BR	CD	WLB	COM	EA	JS	AUTH
ER	Pearson Correlation	1	.722**	.720**	.711**	.721**	.719**	.714**	.717**	.716**	.717**	.717**
	Sig. (2-tailed)		.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000
CSR	Pearson Correlation	.722**	1	.976**	.980**	.987**	.986**	.979**	.974**	.988**	.978**	.965**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000		.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000
OC	Pearson Correlation	.720**	.976**	1	.991**	.987**	.988**	.994**	.996**	.986**	.996**	.986**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000		.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000
WE	Pearson Correlation	.711**	.980**	.991**	1	.991**	.991**	.994**	.989**	.991**	.994**	.982**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000		.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000
BR	Pearson Correlation	.721**	.987**	.987**	.991**	1	.997**	.991**	.986**	.994**	.991**	.975**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000	.000		.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000
CP	Pearson Correlation	.719**	.986**	.988**	.991**	.997**	1	.992**	.986**	.997**	.992**	.976**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000		.000	.000	.000	.000	.000
WLB	Pearson Correlation	.714**	.979**	.994**	.994**	.991**	.992**	1	.994**	.989**	.998**	.983**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000		.000	.000	.000	.000
COM	Pearson Correlation	.717**	.974**	.996**	.989**	.986**	.986**	.994**	1	.984**	.992**	.988**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000		.000	.000	.000
EA	Pearson Correlation	.716**	.988**	.986**	.991**	.994**	.997**	.989**	.984**	1	.989**	.974**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000		.000	.000
JS	Pearson Correlation	.717**	.978**	.996**	.994**	.991**	.992**	.998**	.992**	.989**	1	.983**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000		.000
AUTH	Pearson Correlation	.717**	.965**	.986**	.982**	.975**	.976**	.983**	.988**	.974**	.983**	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000

Note: **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Factor Analysis

Table 4 shows the KMO test for the data. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy is an index used to examine the appropriateness of factor analysis. A high value which comes between 0.5 and 1.0 implies that factor analysis is appropriate. A low value which comes below 0.5 implies that factor analysis may not be appropriate. The value of KMO in our study is 0.962, which is an indication of sampling adequacy and thus the appropriateness of the factor analysis.

Table 4.

KMO and Bartlett’s Test.

Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy		0.962
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity	Approx. Chi-square	62128.1
	df	561
	Sig.	0.00

Note: From the table it is apparent that the factor analysis is appropriate. Here KMO value is 0.962 which should be between 0.5 to 1.0 and the result is excellent here. Approximate chi square is 62128.1 with degree of freedom 561 which is significant at level 0.05. This analysis gives us a result that the factors are most important to the study.

Rotated Component Matrix

From Table 5, only 2 factors have been extracted as because their eigen values are more than 1.00 that indicates the adequacy of the analysis using derived factors. The research could be more logical if the researchers used a rotated component matrix. The rotated component matrix avoids the limitation of the component matrix including the variable under a specified factor. In the rotated factor matrix, Factor 1 indicates organisational factors which contains six variables (CSR, organisational culture, work environment, brand & reputation, career path and work–life balance) where the first three questions are used to indicate corporate social responsibility, the next three questions are used to indicate organisation culture, the next three are to indicate work environment, next three were for indicating brand & reputation and the next three for career path. Questions 16–18 are used to indicate variable Work–life balance. In this way, 18 questions are created. The next 16 questions are used to indicate other 4 variables (compensation, employer attributes, job security and authority) which again define Factor 2 named psychological factor. Compensation is indicated by using Questions 19 to 21, employer attributes contain Questions 22–27, job security is indicated by using Questions 28 to 31 and authority is indicated by using Questions 32 to 34. Table 6 depicts the principal component analysis of the data clearly segregating the items into particular variables.

Table 5.

Total Variance Explained.

Component	Initial Eigenvalues			Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative %	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative %
1	27.076	79.635	79.635	27.076	79.635	79.635
2	6.243	18.362	97.996	6.243	18.362	97.996
3	.170	.500	98.497
4	.114	.336	98.833
5	.064	.189	99.022
6	.050	.146	99.168
7	.041	.121	99.289
8	.035	.103	99.393
9	.026	.076	99.469
10	.020	.058	99.527
11	.018	.052	99.579
12	.017	.049	99.629
13	.015	.043	99.672
14	.013	.039	99.710
15	.013	.038	99.748
16	.012	.035	99.783
17	.008	.023	99.806
18	.008	.022	99.828
19	.007	.020	99.849
20	.007	.020	99.869
21	.007	.019	99.888
22	.006	.018	99.905
23	.005	.014	99.919
24	.004	.013	99.932
25	.004	.012	99.944
26	.004	.012	99.956
27	.003	.009	99.965
28	.003	.009	99.974
29	.002	.007	99.981
30	.002	.007	99.987
31	.002	.005	99.993		w
32	.001	.003	99.996
33	.001	.002	99.998
34	.001	.002	100.000

Note: Extraction method: Principal component analysis.

Table 6.

Component Matrix^a.

	Component
	1	2
Q.1	.892	.376
Q.2	.913	.371
Q.3	.914	.386
Q.4	.902	.401
Q.5	.905	.404
Q.6	.912	.394
Q.7	.908	.404
Q.8	.904	.409
Q.9	.896	.418
Q.10	.911	.392
Q.11	.912	.385
Q.12	.903	.404
Q.13	.897	.417
Q.14	.912	.390
Q.15	.912	.394
Q.16	.896	.405
Q.17	.898	.415
Q.18	.914	.380
Q.19	–.881	.462
Q.20	–.875	.464
Q.21	–.879	.466
Q.22	–.882	.455
Q.23	–.879	.461
Q.24	–.875	.471
Q.25	–.872	.473
Q.26	–.882	.445
Q.27	–.881	.454
Q.28	–.876	.465
Q.29	–.868	.476
Q.30	–.880	.450
Q.31	–.884	.453
Q.32	–.870	.468
Q.33	–.883	.457
Q.34	–.868	.459

Note: Extraction method: Principal component analysis. ^a The predictor.

Researchers have proposed the below-given model as the outcome of this research where all the 10 variables are converted into two factors, that is, organisational factors and psychological factors, and these two factors have a great impact on employer branding which again leads to employee retention.

1. Organisational factor: Researchers have categorised some of the studied dimensions under this factor and they are organisation culture, corporate social responsibility, work environment, brand and reputation, career path and work–life balance. An organisation where a good CSR is practised and has a friendly work environment and where employees can get a better career path and can balance their work and professional life are assumed to be more satisfied, and hence they try to work for the organisation for a longer tenure.

2. Psychological factor: In this category, authors have put compensation, employer attributes, job security and authority as the major dimension. From this study, it is identified that all these dimensions psychologically affect employees’ retention in an organisation. A fair compensation policy attracts employees and a supportive employer environment with confirmed job security enhances a positive ambience in an organisation and keeps its employees happy.

Hypothesis 2

• H₂: There is no significant impact of employer branding on employee retention.

• H₂₁: There is significant impact of employer branding on employee retention.

Regression & ANOVA Analysis

Table 7 shows summary of items and factors and Table 8 shows the multiple regression analysis. Table 9 shows the ANOVA model. In this study, the level of significance is 0.000. The value of r² = .638 (almost 63.8.%). The results are justified (i.e., the null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis accepted), which means there is a positive significant impact of employer branding on employee retention. The figure shows that the points spread around the diagonal line are in the direction of regression (Figure 2).

Table 7.

Items & Factors.

Items	Factors
Corporate social responsibility	Organisational factor
Organisational culture
Work environment
Brand & reputation
Career path
Work–life balance
Compensation	Psychological factor
Employer attributes
Job security
Authority

Table 8.

Model Summary (Regression Analysis)^a,b.

Model	R	R2	Adjusted R2	SE of the Estimate	Sig. F Change
1	.799a	0.638	0.638	0.3018	0.00

Notes: ^aPredictors: (Constant), organisational factor, psychological factor.

^bDependent variable: Employee retention.

Table 9.

ANOVA.

Model		SS	df	MS	F	Sig.
1	Regression	69.402	2	34.701	380.985	.000b
	Residual	39.348	432	0.091
	Total	108.75	434

Notes: ^aDependent variable: Employee retention.

^bPredictors: (Constant), organisational factor, psychological factor.

Figure 2.

Findings and Conclusion

From the above research, it is clearly shown that there is a strong correlation between dimensions of employer branding and employee retention during COVID-19. All the dimensions under study have more than 0.700 correlation value with employee retention which signifies a strong correlation. ANOVA shows the p-value to be .00 which means the null hypothesis is rejected and our test is statistically significant. In other words, there is significant impact of employer branding on employee retention. This may happen because our dimensions under study considered during COVID-19 (CSR, organisation culture, work environment, brand & reputation, career path, work–life balance, compensation, employer attributes, job security, authority) play a key role in the talented employees to continue in an organisation for the long run. CSR increases brand value in competitive markets and hence employees like to get adhered to their current organisation. Similarly, a good organisation culture with employee-friendly policies attracts employees to stay in organisation in long run. A healthy work environment increases employer–employee interaction and employees feel free to continue working in such environment. Organisation having a good brand value in market and giving opportunities for self-development and growth also acts as major player in the market for retaining talent pool.

Employee who gets a fair remuneration will be able to manage work as well as family life and are likely to continue working with their current organisation. Similarly, good employee attributes followed by commitments to job security enhance employee commitment to the organisation, especially during this pandemic. Authority also plays a key role in retaining employees; employee feels their importance in the organisation when they are given the authority to participate in decision-making. So in that way, all dimensions under study are influencing employee retention to a great extent.