Employer Branding Applied to SMEs: A Pioneering Model Proposal for Attracting and Retaining Talent

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study is promising and well written, but a series of changes are needed especially regarding the proposed methodology, the results and the paper’s contribution. Comments:

• Abstract: Clarification of the paper’s purpose is needed, while a more detailed analysis of what the final outcome will be is also needed.
• Introduction: A framework analysis is given but it is not presented “which” is the paper’s aim and its contribution. More detail is needed regarding what authors’ aim to present ant to whom the final results will be useful.
• Employer Branding and Human Resources Managing: this section should stand as a Literature Review. Please consider to change section’s title while an introduction is needed (before the sub-section 2.1) in order to explain to the reader which is the purpose of the proposed section.
• Methodology: (a) There is a sub-section numbered 3.1 but not any other subsection exists. If not any other subsection will be implemented please format properly. (b) most of the section is devoted to analyze an already existing model, while authors’ contribution seem to be established on the development of an “Employer Branding Model Questionnaire to SME’s”. Authors give no data regarding
  1. How the proposed questions arise, how it has been chosen and how is evaluated their importance for Variables / Dimensions described?
  2. Has the proposed model and questionnaire been tested for its validity and accuracy?

If none of the above has been conducted, authors should convince about the proposed questionnaire’s significance at least in a theoretical point of analysis. Current section needs enrichment and depth.

• Conclusions: How it is approved that the proposed model is valuable for SMEs? Are there any studies in accordance with the paper’s conclusions supporting authors’ result?
• Figures: Figure 1 and Figure 3 need improvement. A better analysis is acquired.
• References: Consider enriching the paper with the following references:
  1. Edwards, Martin R. 2017. Employer branding and talent management. In Oxford Handbook of Talent Management. Edited by David Collings, Wayne Cascio and Kamel Mellahi. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 233–48.
  2. Kargas, Antonios and Tsokos, Alexios 2020 “Employer Branding Implementation and Human Resource Management in Greek Telecommunication Industry”, Administrative Sciences, Vol. 10, no. 17, pp. 1-14, DOI: 10.3390/admsci10010017
  3. Russell, Stephanie, and Matthew J. Brannan. 2016. Getting the Right People on the Bus: Recruitment, selection and integration for the branded organization. European Management Journal 34: 114–24.
  4. Theurer, Christian P., Andranik Tumasjan, Isabell M. Welpe, and Filip Lievens. 2018. Employer branding: A brand equity-based literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews 20: 155–79.
  5. Tumasjan, Andranik, Florian Kunze, Heike Bruch, and Isabell M. Welpe. 2020. Linking employer branding orientation and firm performance: Testing a dual mediation route of recruitment efficiency and positive affective climate. Human Resource Management 59: 83–99.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article deals with a topic of high interest in the field of corporate intangibles: employer branding, little studied in the academic world.
The study proposes an Employer Branding applied to SME model that will help improve the employer brand of this type of company.
The authors have carried out an extensive bibliographic review on which they do a content analysis that allows them to develop the employer branding model for SMEs.
The topic is of high interest, as well as the design of the model, both from an academic and professional point of view, so its publication is recommended.

Author Response

The entire text was reviewed by a native English speaker.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

There has been significant improvement to the overall scientific novelty of the paper. Minor improvements are needed regarding the use of English language.

Another significant improvements is realted with the paper's overall results. Authors should present clearly which their contribution. The tool presented is more a theoritical framework rather than a well described and explained "tool" applicable to several cases.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf