Steven | verhalen | foto's | quotes

Op de Linkedin groep “Employer branding” (link) is de vraag gesteld wat de locatie van een onderneming er toe doet. Mijn visie hierop (in het Engels, want de discussies zijn in het Engels):

“I’m always very surprised about this kind of decisions/reasoning. We like to say or believe that we live in a ‘global village’ and that we all like to travel, etc.. When it’s about the talented employees (who are supposed to live in that global village), they want to work in a place nearby. Their decision to work for an employer is – apparently – not based on the employer (brand) or job, but travel time or being nearby a place ‘where things happen’.

Does this mean that private time is more important than the job? And if so, is that the kind of ‘toptalent’ an employer would like to hire? Or are the employers old-fashioned by demanding that their employees work at the office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., and thus make themselves a non-preferred employer (which means: have a bad employer brand)?

Besides all that, it might be a boardroom-impulse to move to the places where most people live, assuming that their preferred employees also live there: based on trends, feelings and marketing-talk instead of proper investigation. The consequences (e.g. traffic jams) are disqualifiers for a location, so by moving, they create their own disadvantages.

So, yes, the ”location factor” is important, because it shouldn’t be a decision making variable and that’s the job of the people in charge of the employer brand!“