組織品牌與企業網站對組織吸引力之影響探討

全文

(1)The Effect of Organization Brand and Website Contents on Organizational Attractiveness. By. Min, Fang. A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirement for the Degree of. MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Major: International Human Resource Development. Advisor: C. Rosa Yeh, Ph.D National Taiwan Normal University Taipei, Taiwan July, 2016.

(2) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I appreciate everyone who had helped me and encouraged me during the process of completing my thesis. Without you, I cannot finish this most important task in graduate school during these two years. First of all, I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Yeh, who is always nice and patient to us. During these two years, you have been our mentor who given me practical advice and inspiration. I really enjoy the time I discuss my thesis and chat with you. For me, you are not only a professor but more like our friend who concerns about us. I also learned a lot from you during the time I worked with you. Thank you for making my idea came true and guiding me to complete my thesis. Second, I would like to thank my friends, including my old friends and friends in IHRD who always encouraged me, helped me and shared my feelings. With your companies, the process of writing thesis became not so pressured. I really appreciated the time that we worked and had fun together. In addition, I would like to thank all the professors in IHRD who had helped me and guided me to complete my thesis. Especially, thanks to Dr. Huang, you are really a nice and passionate professor who always concerns about us. Thank you for helping me to collect my samples and making it possible for me to continue completing my research. Last but not least, I want to thank my family who always give me the greatest support. Thank you for letting me pursue my goal and encouraging me all the time. No matter what I decide to do, you are always with me and be my strongest backup in my life.

(3) ABSTRACT This study aims to examine the relationships among organization brand, organizational attractiveness and organization website contents. More importantly, it aims to investigate the moderating effect of website content on the relationship between organization brand and organizational attractiveness. The target sample were 266 under-graduate junior and senior students and graduate students studying in colleges in Taiwan because they are more likely to reflect the intentions of job seekers of the new generation. The analysis was conducted using SPSS and AMOS. The result showed that organization brand was positively correlated with organizational attractiveness. However, website content showed no moderating effect on the relationship between organization brand and organizational attractiveness. Instead, it has more a direct impact on organizational attractiveness. Keywords: Organizational Attractiveness, Organization Brand, Organization Website, Webbased Recruitment. I.

(4) TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................ I TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................... II LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................... IV LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................V CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 1 Background of the Study ............................................................................................ 1 Problem Statement ..................................................................................................... 3 Research Purposes ...................................................................................................... 4 Research Questions .................................................................................................... 5 Limitations and Delimitations .................................................................................... 5 Definition of Key Terms ............................................................................................ 6. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................ 7 Organizational Attractiveness .................................................................................... 7 Organization Brand .................................................................................................... 8 Organization Brand and Organizational Attractiveness ........................................... 12 Website Content: Job and Organization Information ............................................... 13 Effect of Website Content on the Relationship between Organization Brand and Organizational Attractiveness .................................................................................. 15. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY ....................................................... 18 Research Framework ................................................................................................ 18 Research Hypothesis ................................................................................................ 19 Research Procedure .................................................................................................. 19 Sampling and Data Collection.................................................................................. 20 Measurement ............................................................................................................ 25 Method of Data Analysis.......................................................................................... 30 Reliability and Validity Analysis ............................................................................. 31 II.

(5) CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ................................. 41 Pearson’s Correlation Analysis ................................................................................ 41 Paired-Samples T-test .............................................................................................. 43 Hierarchical Regression Analysis ............................................................................ 43 Summary of Analyses Results ................................................................................. 45. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ..................... 47 Conclusions .............................................................................................................. 47 Research Implications .............................................................................................. 48 Practical Implications ............................................................................................... 50 Research Limitations ................................................................................................ 51 Suggestions for Future Research .............................................................................. 51. REFERENCES......................................................................................... 53 APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE (CHINESE VERSION) ................ 58 APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE (ENGLISH VERSION) ................ 62 APPENDIX C: DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ON SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS: SCHOOL ........................................................... 67. III.

(6) LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1. Descriptive Statistics on Sample Characteristics .................................................. 22 Table 3.2. Results of Independent-Samples T-test (N=266) .................................................. 24 Table 3.3. Items of Organizational Familiarity ...................................................................... 26 Table 3.4. Sub-Dimensions and Items of Organizational Image ........................................... 26 Table 3.5. Measurement of Website Content: Types of Job and Organization Information and Operational Definitions .................................................................................................. 27 Table 3.6. Dimensions and Items of Organizational Attractiveness ...................................... 28 Table 3.7. Levels of Suggested SEM Model Fit Indices ....................................................... 31 Table 3.8. Descriptive Statistics on Sample Characteristics of Pilot Study .......................... 32 Table 3.9. Factor Structure of Exploratory Factor Analysis (N=40) ..................................... 34 Table 3.10. Organization Brand Model Fit Summary (N=266) ............................................ 35 Table 3.11. Multi-Group Comparison Result for Cross Validation of Measurement Model (OB) ....................................................................................................................................... 35 Table 3.12. Organization Brand Variable Items..................................................................... 37 Table 3.13. Organizational Attractiveness (Posttest) Model Fit Summary (N=266)............. 37 Table 3.14. Multi-Group Comparison Result for Cross Validation of Measurement Model (POA) .................................................................................................................................... 38 Table 3.15. Organizational Attractiveness (Posttest) Variable Items ..................................... 39 Table 3.16. Cronbach’s Alpha of Study Variables (N=266) .................................................. 40 Table 4.1. Means, Standard Deviations, Reliabilities and Correlations among Variables .... 42 Table 4.2. Results of Paired-Samples T-Test for Organizational Attractiveness in Pretest and Posttest (N=266) .................................................................................................................... 43 Table 4.3. Result of Hierarchical Regression Analysis (N=266)........................................... 44 Table 4.4. Hypothesis Testing Results Summary .................................................................. 46 IV.

(7) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1. Research framework .......................................................................................... 19 Figure 3.2. Research procedure ........................................................................................... 20 Figure 3.3. Organizational attractiveness CFA measurement model (modified) ................. 36 Figure 3.4. Organizational attractiveness (posttest) CFA measurement model (modified).. 38. V.

(8) CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. This Chapter describes the background of the study, problem statement, research purposes and research questions. First, background of the study describes the importance of organizational attractiveness and the growing trend of web-based recruitment. Then, the problem statement, research purposes and research questions are addressed. The definition of key terms are presented in the final part of this section.. Background of the Study During the last few decades, organization recruitment emerged as a significant topic in both academic and practical field. According to a recent review, “research interest in the topic of employee recruitment has increased substantially over the last thirty years” (Breaugh & Starke, 2000). Recruiting activities help organization to enlarge the applicant pool and access potential applicants (Aiman-Smith, Bauer, & Cable, 2001; Rynes & Barber, 1990). Moreover, scholars suggested that because of economic and demographic reasons, it will be more and more difficult to recruit qualified talents. How to attract qualified applicants becomes a crucial and emergent issue for organizations to learn (Chapman, Uggerslev, Carroll, Piasentin & Jones, 2005). Barber (1998) stressed three stages of recruitment: to generate applicants, to maintain applicants’ interest, and to influence applicants’ job choice decision. Among the stages, the initial stage is the most important because subsequent recruitment activities will not happen if applicants are not attracted at first (Rynes, 1991). In the first stage of recruitment, organizational attractiveness plays a significant role. Therefore, this study focuses on the first stage with discussion on variables which are possible in affecting applicant attraction to organizations. Scholars indicated that attracting and maintaining qualified applicants can be the decisive 1.

(9) point of the success of an organization in the increasingly competitive environment. (Jackson & Schuler, 1990; Offermann & Gowing, 1990; Turban & Greening, 1997). Moreover, retaining a relevant quality of human resource helps organization to increase competitive advantage (Lado & Wilson, 1994; Turban & Greening, 1997). Organization with larger talent pool will have more alternatives and generate greater utility of recruitment practices (Lado & Wilson, 1994). Organization websites on the Internet possess dynamic and multimedia characteristics, which serve as an ideal platform for recruitment (Cober, Brown, Blumental, Doverspike, & Levy, 2000; Cober, Brown & Levy, 2004; Dineen, Ash & Noe, 2002). To date, in organization recruitment activities, website is the most commonly used and essential device to access potential applicants. According to Lee (2005), all Fortune 100 companies have used web-based recruiting method at the time of research. The research from Greenspan (2003) indicates that 94% of Global 500 companies have been recruiting through websites. Moreover, recent studies suggested that recruiting on the Internet has become a growing trend during the decade (Braddy, et al., 2008; Thompson, Braddy & Wuensch, 2008). The uprising popularity of web-based recruiting is probably because of its convenience and reduction of cost (Thompson et al., 2008). In addition, Internet has changed the nature of recruitment from a “batch mode” to a more efficient “continuous mode” (Lee, 2005). Websites is the most possible way to access potential applicants in the early stage of recruitment (Allen, Mahto & Otondo, 2007). The significant difference between recruitment websites and traditional recruitment method is that websites allows “more information available, using more communication channels, and having potentially greater reach and interactivity” (Allen et al., 2007, p. 1697). Among the predictors of organizational attractiveness, job and organization information appeared to be the most significant ones. There has been broad research about job and organization attributes in 2.

(10) recruitment studies (e.g., Power & Aldag, 1985; Rynes & Lawler, 1983; Vroom, 1966). Studies suggested that revealed job and organization information would positively predict applicant attraction and pursuit intention of job seeker (Barber, 1998; Rynes, Bretz, & Gerhart, 1991). In addition, a recent meta-analysis conducted by Chapman et al. (2005) showed that information of job and organization characteristics emerged to be strong predictors of applicant attraction. The existent literature suggested the significant of job and organization information and their essential roles in leading to successful recruitment. Also, it is possible to change applicants’ original attitudes and impressions toward the organizations. Therefore, job and organization information provided on organization websites is proposed to be the moderator named “website content” in this study, testing if it will influence job seekers’ attitude toward the organization.. Problem Statement There were a large amount of studies researching the relationship between organization brand and organizational attractiveness during recruiting process. For instance, existent research explored the relationships among organization image, recruiting image and of job choice intension (Gatewood, Gowan & Lautenschlager, 1993). Also there were research investigating the impact of corporate reputation on applicant attraction (Turban, Forret, & Hendrickson, 1998). Moreover, some recent studies investigated the relationship among corporate image, corporate employment image and pursuit intentions (Lemmink, Schuijf, Streukens, 2003), also some studies investigated about the relationships between organization image and applicant attraction (Van Hoye & Saks, 2011). During the last decade, there has been an increasing concern and a stream of studies about web-based recruitment, indicating that it has become the mainstream in organization recruitment (e.g., Allen, Mahto & Otondo, 2007; Cober, Brown, Keeping & Levy, 2004; Cober, Brown, Levy, Cober & Keeping, 2003; Thompsom et al., 2008). Due to the growing popularity 3.

(11) of web-based recruitment, developing and maintaining a qualified corporate website appeared to be an essential factor in organization recruitment. Although there has been quite a large amount of research about how organizational image and organizational websites influence applicant attraction respectively, few studies examined organization website contents in an experimental design to see its impact on organizational attractiveness. In addition, few studies investigated the moderating effect of organizational website on the relationship of organization brand and organizational attractiveness. It is unclear whether job and organization information presented on organization website will change the applicant’s original attitude toward the organization as a potential employer. Previous research indicated that general impressions about the organization are originally the fundamental predictor of applicant attraction. However, the key factors of applicant attraction may now include the perceptions toward the organization websites (Cober et al., 2004; Turban & Greening, 1997). The previous literature inspired this study to test whether website content of the organization will change job seekers attitudes and applicant attraction toward the organizations.. Research Purposes The first purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships between organization brand and organizational attractiveness. More importantly, the study mainly aims to compare the differences of organizational attractiveness before and after the participants examined the organization website contents. It also aims to examine the moderation effect of organization website on the relationship between organization brand and organizational attractiveness. The organization brand, including the organization’s reputation and the impressions job seekers have toward an organization, has been an important factor in affecting applicant attraction. However, due to the growing trend and common use of web-based recruitment, the quality of organization websites has become another criterion when evaluating the organizations. 4.

(12) Therefore, based on the previous research, the organization brand is proposed as an independent variable which positively predicts organizational attractiveness. In addition, this study compared the level of perceived organizational attractiveness before and after examining the website content to see if website content would affect job seekers’ perceptions toward the organization. Furthermore, it investigated if website content has a moderating effect on the relationship of perceived organization brand and organizational attractiveness. The results of this study may help organizations figure out whether websites with good quality will help attract more applicants and lead to successful recruitment practices.. Research Questions Based on the problem statement and research purpose, this study seeks to answer the following research questions: 1. What is the relationship between organization brand and organizational attractiveness in Taiwan? 2. Is there a significant difference between pretest and posttest of organizational attractiveness after job seekers examine the website contents. 3. Is there a moderating effect of website contents on the relationship between organization brand and organizational attractiveness?. Limitations and Delimitations There are delimitations and limitations of this study. First, this study is delimited to job seekers of new generation in Taiwan. In addition, the variable website content focuses on the amount of job and organization information. The sample population is limited to all the junior and senior students and graduate students majoring in business schools in colleges in Taiwan. It is expected to apply the result to all the job seekers of new generation in Taiwan. All the data reflects job seekers’ perceived attitude to the organization brand and organizational attractiveness. Therefore, the findings about these two variables can be only applicable to the 5.

(13) perceptions toward organizations from job seekers.. Definition of Key Terms Organizational Attractiveness This study derived the definition of organizational attractiveness from Turban & Greening (1997). It refers to the degree of applicant attraction toward a certain organization which is also the operation definition in this study.. Organization Brand This study derived the definition from Kotler (1979). Organization brand refers to a component of a name, term, sign, symbol, design, or either combination of them. Its purpose is to be identified by consumers and also to be differentiated from other competitors. The operational definition including two dimensions in this study, including organizational familiarity and organizational image (Allen, Mahto, & Otondo, 2007; Collins & Stevens, 2002; Keller, 1993).. Website Content This study adapted the idea from Allen et al. (2007). Website content refers to the amount of job and organizational information provided on business website which is also the operation definition in this study.. 6.

(14) CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW. Organizational Attractiveness Attracting and maintaining qualified talents has been the priority issue of organizations (Rynes & Barber, 1990). Attracting high-quality employees can help organizations efficiently increase their competitiveness (Cable & Turban, 2001). Scholars defined organizational attractiveness as the degree of applicant attraction toward the certain organization (Turban & Greening, 1997). Aiman-Smith et al. (2001) defined organizational attraction as “an attitude or expressed general positive affect toward an organization” (p. 221), whether job seekers consider the organization as a favorable place to work. In a recent study, it was defined as “an individual’s attitude toward an organization as an employer” (Van Hoye & Saks, 2011, P. 314). Beside applicants’ general attraction to the organization, a recent study concluded that the component of organizational attractiveness should also include perceived prestige (e.g., Turban et al., 1998; Turban & Greening, 1997) and intention to pursuit employment of the organization (Highhouse, Lievens, & Sinar, 2003). General prestige of the organization reflects “a social consensus on the degree to which the company’s characteristics are regarded as either positive or negative” (Highhouse, Lievens, & Sinar, 2003, p. 989). The conception of organizational attractiveness has been broadly researched in different fields. For instance, it has been studied in the field of management (e.g., Gatewood et al. 1993), applied psychology (e.g., Collins & Stevens 2002), vocational behavior, and communication (Berthon, Ewing & Hah, 2005) and marketing (e.g., Ewing, Pitt, de Bussy, & Berthon, 2002). Existence literature showed various factors which were the predictors of organizational attractiveness, such as recruiting, messages, recruitment timing, recruiter behaviors, characteristics of recruiters, applicants’ perceptions of fit and organizational image (Barber, 7.

(15) 1998; Breaugh & Starke, 2000; Chapman et al., 2005; Rynes & Barber, 1990; Turban, 2001; Turban & Greening, 1997). For instance, characteristics and behaviors of recruiters may serve as signals to predict applicant attraction to the given position. (Rynes et al., 1991). Moreover, scholars indicated that some factors appeared to be the most essential predictors of organizational attractiveness, such as recruiter behaviors, procedural justice perceptions, hiring expectations, perceived person-environment fit, and organization and job attributes (Chapman et al., 2005). Other study showed that social performance of an organization which reflected working conditions would positively relate to job seekers’ perceived attraction (Turban & Greening, 1997). Besides, results of Turban’s (2001) recent study indicated that recruitment activities, organizational familiarity and social context also have impacts on applicant attraction. Also, different stakeholders would have different perceptions toward organizational attractiveness (Lievens, Van Hoye, & Anseel, 2007). Beside the relationships between variables, scholars proposed three strategies to enhance organizational attractiveness from organizational perspective. Organizations can enhance applicant attraction by paying attention to dimensions of recruitment practices, improving the nature of the inducements offered, and shifting recruitment efforts to individuals who were thought to be less marketable by competitors (Rynes & Barber, 1990).. Organization Brand Kotler (1979) defined “brand” as a component of a name, term, sign, symbol, design, or either combination of them. It helps an organization to be identified by consumers and also to be differentiated from other competitors. Scholars suggested two dimensions of organization brand: organizational familiarity (e.g., brand recall and brand recognition) and organizational image (e.g., types of brand associations and favorability of brand associations) (Keller, 1993; Allen et al., 2007). 8.

(16) The conception of organization brand has been well studied in various fields. For instance, in the field of vocational choice research, results showed that job seekers’ impressions of organization brand would affect their preferences of employer. (Super, 1953; Tom, 1971; Dowling, 1986). In addition, scholars suggested that stakeholders belonged to different groups may possessed different images toward the same organization (Dowling, 1994) In marketing literature, Keller (1993) introduced the idea of customer-based brand equity. It is defined as the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand. Consumers’ decision can be changed by increasing their desire to buy the certain product, adding positive value to the branded product, and differentiating the product from others (Aaker, 1996; Collins & Stevens, 2002; Keller, 1993). In generalizing from the theory of customer-based brand equity, Cable and Turban (2001) applied this marketing concept to the research of recruitment field. They developed the idea about “employer knowledge” which refers to a job seeker’s belief and feeling about an organization. In addition, as later researchers confirmed in the research, Cable and Turban (2001) had extended the idea to “brand equity theory”. It is an important idea in recruitment field, because the theory suggests that organizational branding may help us understand how organizational attractiveness is affected by organizational reputation (Allen et al., 2007). Research also showed that organizational branding adds more value to their products or services than characteristics of the products or services possess (Allen et al., 2007; Keller, 1993). Based on brand equity theory, later researchers concluded two dimensions of organization brand: organizational familiarity (e.g., organizational recognition and recall) and organizational image (Collins & Stevens, 2002; Keller, 1993; Allen et al., 2007). This study derives this idea and the content of each dimension is discussed below.. 9.

(17) Organizational Familiarity Organizational familiarity was defined as the levels of ease a brand name comes to mind performed by consumers (Keller, 1993). In the recruitment context, Cable and Turban (2001) defined organizational familiarity as “the level of awareness that a job seeker has of an organization” (p.124). Marketing scholars have noted that organizational familiarity (also called organizational awareness) is a fundamental and undervalued dimension of brand knowledge (Aaker, 1996; Keller, 1993). It may strongly affect one’s perception and attitude. In Aaker’s (1996) interesting and vivid depiction, the researcher stated: it “can make peanut butter taste better and instill confidence in a retailer” (Aaker, 1996, p.114). It is also an important element in delivering information and affecting consumer’s brand choice (Cable & Turban, 2001). According to Aaker (1996), there are levels of organizational familiarity, reflecting different levels of intensity that consumers possess a brand in mind, from “recognition” to “brand opinion". In recruitment literature, the theoretical model of recruitment equity proposed that organizational familiarity is also the important fundamental of job seekers’ organization-related knowledge (Cable & Turban, 2001). Drew upon the concept above, organizational familiarity also plays an important role in affecting job seeker’s decision. Organizational familiarity is antecedent to organizational image (Cable & Turban, 2001). That is to say, job seeker will not go to the stage of organizational image before they have the fundamental idea of organizational awareness. Adapted from Aaker’s (1991) statement, scholars (Cable & Turban, 2001) suggested that organizational awareness: (1) serves as an anchor to which other associations can be attached, (2) leads to liking because people like the familiar, and (3) can serve as a signal of substance based on the logic that people assume there is a reason why a company name is familiar. (p.125). 10.

(18) Organizational Image In early literature, Tom (1971) defined organizational image as “the way the organization is perceived by individuals” (p.576). Marketing scholars suggested that organizational image refers to “people’s perceptions, attributes, and associations connected with the brand in their memories” (e.g., Aaker, 1996; Biel, 1992; Cable & Turban, 2001, p.125). Researchers (Dutton, Dukerich & Harquail, 1994) suggested that organizational image referred to one’s belief about what is distinctive, central, and enduring about the organization. It was also defined as “information about the meaning of the brand for consumers” (Cable & Turban, 2001, p.125). Beside customers’ perspective, researchers suggested that “the brand equity concept can be generalized to recruitment contexts in which job seekers confront issues similar to those faced by consumers” (Cable & Turban, 2001; Collins & Stevens, 2002, p.1122). As consumers’ believes to some products and services, job seekers establish their own believes about organizations. Barber (1998) suggested that this kind of believes serves as the basis for their employment intention (Collins & Stevens, 2002). Based on the literature, there are two important dimension of image: first, the general attitudes and reactions toward a brand. Second, the specific features of the brand in consumers’ perspective and believes which influence purchase behavior (Collin & Stevens, 2002; Keller, 1993). In terms of associated predictable outcomes of organizational image, based on the vocational choice theory, scholars suggested that individual’s job choice is one way to reflect self-image, so the preference of employee is thought to be associated with organizational image (Super, 1953; Tom, 1971). In addition, researchers proved that image is the essential part in affecting applicant attraction (Chapman et al., 2005).. 11.

(19) Organization Brand and Organizational Attractiveness Scholars suggested that organization brand has two dimensions: organizational awareness and organizational image. In recruitment literature, it is suggested that organizational awareness is the basic stage that happened before organizational image. In addition, the recruitment equity theory proposed by Cable and Turban (2001) indicates that organizational awareness is the fundamental element in affecting job seeker’s attraction to the organization. Adapted from marketing literature, scholars suggested that organizational awareness is like an anchor to attach other associations, resulting in attraction to a certain brand, and serves as a signal that leads to positive organizational image (Aaker, 1991; Cable & Turban, 2001). In extension, Cable and Turban (2001) proposed that it was the same process to attract applicant through this mechanism. It would serve as the signals leading to positive impressions and finally result in applicant attraction. Moreover, there are other theories that help to explain the positive link between organization brand and organizational attractiveness. Theory of customer-based brand equity suggested that “high levels of organizational familiarity and a positive organizational image should increase the probability of brand choice, as well as produce greater consumer (and retailer) loyalty and decrease vulnerability to competitive marketing actions” (Keller, 1993, p. 8). In other words, customers would be more attracted to the organization which they have more favorable organizational image with. Similarly, job seekers would also have higher applicant attractions to the organizations that they are more favored with (Allen et al., 2007). Signaling theory also suggested the link between organizational image and attraction to organization. First, scholars argued that organizational image was significant in recruitment because it would provide signals about its employee to the society (Dutton et al., 1994). Based on signaling theory, individuals would use such available information as signals to generate other organization attributes. Therefore, if job seekers perceived the organization with 12.

(20) favorable image, they would have more generally positive impressions of the organization and would be more likely to pursue employment. Another argument is that if one perceives organizational image as attractive or positive, it can serve as the signals in reinforcing one’s self-identity. The similarity between organizational image and self-identity would help to increase attraction to organization (Dutton et al., 1994). Based on the social identity theory, people tend to join the organization with attractiveness and popularity because it would help to increase one’s self-image. (Cable & Turban, 2003). In consistent with this idea, Dutton et al., (1994) suggested that “organizational membership can confer positive attributes on its members, and people may feel proud to belong to an organization that is believed to have socially valued characteristics” (p.240). Moreover, “organizational images begin to presocialize job seekers in terms of what to expect from the company and what would be expected of them if they joined the company as employees” (Cable & Yu, 2006, P.828). The existent theories indicated the positive relationship between organization brand and organizational attractiveness. Therefore, the first hypothesis is proposed as follows. Hypothesis 1. Job seeker’s perception of organization brand can positively predict organizational attractiveness.. Website Content: Job and Organization Information In the early stage of recruitment process, websites appear to be the most possible device to access and interact with potential applicants (Allen et al., 2007). The early stage of recruitment is the message exchange process between organization and job seekers. (Allen et al., 2004) In organization’s perspective, one of the purposes is to communicate the job (e.g., job openings, job attributes) and organization information (e.g. organization culture) to the potential applicants. For instance, the message about the internal employee endorsement may be provided to give job seekers the clue about the organization attributes and what kind of 13.

(21) people are fit with the organization (Cober, Brown, & Levy, 2004). For job seekers, it is a process of using the extent information to decrease the uncertainty and making relevant application decisions. (Allen et al., 2007). Based on the extent literature above, website content plays an important role in web-based recruitment. Scholars indicated that information of job and organization attributes would positively predict applicant attraction and pursuit intention (Allen et al., 2004; Barber, 1998; Rynes et al., 1991). More information provided helps potential applicant to know more about the organization (Allen et al., 2007). Further, Cober et al. (2004) suggested that: Organizations have a greater opportunity to brand their job opportunities with content that matters to job seekers, such as the work environment, training opportunities, and type of people a potential applicant would be working with if he or she pursued a job with the employer. (p.203) A recent meta-analysis proved that job and organization attributes to be the most significant factors to predict applicant attraction (Chapman et al., 2005). One related theory has been realistic job previews (RJPs). In Wanous’s study in 1973, he proved that an RJP received from recruiters would increase employees’ job satisfaction (Breaugh & Starke, 2000). Further, in the review of Breaugh and Starke (2000), they concluded that RJP model shows that: providing realistic information to job candidates should have beneﬁcial effects for a number of reasons (e.g., RJPs allow candidates to self-select out of consideration for jobs that would not meet their expectations, RJPs cause individuals to be more committed to their job acceptance decision). (p. 426) After reviewing the extent literature, Breaugh and Starke (2000) concluded that realistic job preview was a crucial instrument in recruitment. In addition, they believed that it is important to focus more on “the process of providing accurate job information at several points during the recruitment process” (p. 429). For instance, the realistic information about job 14.

(22) information in job postings. If recruiters offer this kind of information, it would “increase the amount of information conveyed during the initial interview by selecting recruiters who are likely to really understand the job situation” (p. 429). It would be beneficial to both sides in the recruitment process. The other related theory is called “signaling theory”. The idea of this theory is that people tend to get available information as signals to generate more inferences about the unknown area. Therefore, “recruitment messages and materials that provide more information about job and organization characteristics should positively influence applicant attraction to the organization. More information provides stronger signaling to job seekers, reducing their uncertainty and aiding in the development” (Allen et al., 2007, p. 1698). Thus, more information provided on the website would strongly predict job seeker’s attraction to organization (Allen et al., 2007).. Effect of Website Content on the Relationship between Organization Brand and Organizational Attractiveness According to the findings from early researches, the early stage of recruitment is a communication process between organization and potential applicants (Allen et al., 2007). Website is the most common way to access job seekers in this stage (Allen et al., 2007). The information provided by recruiters help the organization to attract and persuade the job seekers to apply. In this study, the researchers focus on the amount of job and organization information provided on the website. A recent meta-analysis indicated that job and organization attributes served as strong predictors of organizational attractiveness (Chapman et al., 2005). Further, the results of previous research indicated that these two types of information serve as crucial determinant of organizational attractiveness (Rynes, 1991). Objective factor theory also suggests that job seekers tend to make their job choice on the basis of their evaluation about the job or vacancy characteristics (Behling, Labovitz, & Gainer, 1968). Moreover, scholars 15.

(23) suggested that job seekers would have higher applicant attractions to the organizations which they can get more amount of job and organization information. (Barber & Roehling, 1993). In this study, the researchers proposed job seeker’s attitude will be moderated by the “website content” which refers to the amount of job and organization information. In addition, the degree of organizational attractiveness will be influenced after examining website contents. Signaling theory is the fundamental to explain this psychological process. In early stage of recruitment, job seekers only have general conceptions or impressions instead of sufficient knowledge about the organization. In this stage, websites serve as a convenient and efficient platform to communicate messages to job seekers. Signaling theory suggested that the messages would become signals to influence job seekers’ perceptions to the organization (Braddy et al., 2008; Turban, 2001). Base on the literature, it is proposed that website content with sufficient job and organization information will strengthen the relationship between organization brand and organizational attractiveness. In addition, it is proposed that job seekers’ degree of applicant attractions will increase after they examine the websites with sufficient job and organization information. For instance, if a well-known organization whose website provides relevant information, job seekers attraction to the organization will become stronger. On the other hand, the failure to provide relevant information will become signals of the lack of interest toward potential applicants (Barber & Roehling, 1993). For instance, if an originally reputable organization does not care about their website and fails to provide sufficient information which job seeker’s need on the website, the potential applicants are likely to take it as signals and generate negative impressions of this organization. They will assume that “like its website, the organization is disorganized or that the entire recruitment process will be too cumbersome to complete” (Braddy et al., 2008, p. 2993). In sum, if a well-known organization brand with poor content in the website, job seekers’ attraction to that organization will decrease after they 16.

(24) examine the website. Based on the logic, the second and third hypothesis is proposed: Hypothesis 2. There is a significant difference between pretest and posttest of organizational attractiveness after job seekers examine the website contents. Hypothesis 3. Website content have a positive moderating effect on the relationship between job seeker’s perception of organization brand and organizational attractiveness.. 17.

(25) CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY. This chapter describes the research method of the study. Research design, research framework, research hypothesis, and research procedure are described first. Then, sample, data collection procedure and measurement are described. Data analysis will be described at the last in this chapter. This study was conducted using quantitative method. Self-report questionnaires were adopted to collect data from 266 undergraduate students studying in business-related major in the colleges in Taiwan. A quasi-experimental research method was used to test the difference between pretest and posttest of organizational attractiveness before and after job seekers examine the website content. Moreover, this study also investigated the moderating effect of website content on the relationship of organization brand and organizational attractiveness.. Research Framework The research framework is developed from the literature. Organization brand is selected to be the independent variable which includes two dimensions: organizational familiarity and organizational image. It is proposed to have a positive effect on organizational attractiveness. Website contents including job and organization information is proposed to have a positive moderating effect on the relationship between organization brand and organizational attractiveness. The research framework is shown in Figure 3.1.. 18.

(26) H1 Organization Brand. Organizational Attractiveness (Pretest) H2. H3 Website Content. 2. Organizational Attractiveness (Posttest). Figure 3.1. Research framework Note. H2 refers to the difference between pretest and posttest of organizational attractiveness after job seekers examine the website contents.. Research Hypothesis The hypotheses of the study are as follows: Hypothesis 1. Job seeker’s perception of organization brand will positively predict organizational attractiveness. Hypothesis 2. There will be a significant difference between pretest and posttest of organizational attractiveness after job seekers examine the website contents. Hypothesis 3. Website content will have a positive moderating effect on the relationship between job seeker’s perception of organization brand and organizational attractiveness.. Research Procedure This section describes the eight steps for the researchers to conduct this study. The first step helped the researchers to build up background knowledge, generate and narrow down interested research topics. A specific research topic was identified following the first step. Then, the research purpose and questions were developed. Based on the research purpose and questions, the researchers developed research framework and hypothesis. Then, the instrument was developed based on the literature. Pilot test was performed to ensure the validity and 19.

(27) reliability of the instrument. Then, the data was collected and analyzed to test the hypothesis and answer the research questions. Finally, the findings were concluded based on the results and literature. The procedure is shown in figure 3.2.. Review Literature Identify Research Topic Develop Research Purpose and Questions Develop Research Framework and Hypotheses Develop Instrument for Data Collection Conduct Pilot Test Collect Data Analyze Data Conclude Research Findings Figure. 3.2. Research procedure. Sampling and Data Collection The sample population of this study were junior and senior undergraduate students and graduate students studying in departments from business schools in colleges in Taiwan. Snowball sampling were used due to the lack of the sampling frame. The participants were 20.

(28) recruited from 22 different colleges in Taiwan and the sample size was 266. Junior and senior undergraduate students and graduate students in colleges are targeted as the sample because they are about to enter the workforce soon and are more likely to reflect the intentions of job seekers of the new generation. The reason for targeting on students in departments from business schools was because they have higher opportunities to find jobs in most kinds of industries. Quasi-experimental approach was conducted in this study using survey questionnaires to collect self-report data from the samples. There were two kinds of data collection methods: via paper questionnaires and via online questionnaires. The measurement of research variables in the questionnaire were translated from previous researches such as Blau, 1994; Cober, Brown, & Levy, 2004; Highhouse, Lievens, & Sinar, 2003; Lievens, Van Hoye & Schreurs, 2005, and all of the items underwent backward translation process to ensure the validity. For the paper questionnaires, the researcher used snowball sampling by contacting the teachers of classes consisted by either junior, senior or graduate students in colleges for permission to deliver the survey questionnaires in the classes. The data were collected from 6 classes in 3 different schools with the completed questionnaires in the number of 166 (62%) of total 266 samples. For the online questionnaires, the researchers used snowball sampling by contacting friends and by sending email invitations to the secretary/assistant from departments of business schools in 32 different schools located in various areas in Taiwan. The total returned questionnaires were 100 (38%) of total 266 samples and were from 20 schools. In the data collection procedure, every participant was randomly assigned an organization name from the list of “Top 100 Most Admired Employers by the New Generation”. First, a pretest was conducted to assess participants’ perceptions of organization image and organizational attractiveness toward the assigned organization. After they finished the pretest, the students were asked to examine the website of the assigned organization from the perspective of a job 21.

(29) seeker and fill out the questionnaire on website content. Then, a post-test was conducted to assess their perceptions of organizational attractiveness after they had examined the organization website. Finally, the participants were asked to fill out the background information questions. The average time for the participants to complete the paper questionnaire was within 20 minutes. According to Allen et al., (2007), the time for examine the website would not affect the result, therefore, it was not included in the analysis.. Sample Profile The researchers collected the questionnaire from 266 participants, including 76 males (29%) and 190 females (71%). There were two types of questionnaire source: 166 paper survey (62%) and 100 online survey (38%). Age of the participants ranges from below 20, 21~25, to above 26. Most of them are in the group of 21~25 (90%). The education level includes undergraduate and graduate school with the majority in undergraduate study (79%). Their working experience ranges from “have been working less than 1 year” to “have been working more than 6 years”. The largest group is “have been working less than 1 year” (40%) and the second largest group is “have been working 1~2 years” (38%). Please refer to Table 3.1 for detailed information. Table 3.1. Descriptive Statistics on Sample Characteristics Item. Frequency. Percentage (%). Gender Male Female Total. 76 190 266. 28.6 71.4 100. Age 20 or below 21-25 26-30 Total. 24 239 3 266. 9.0 89.8 1.1 100 (continued). 22.

(30) Table 3.1. (continued) Education level college graduate school Total. 211 55 266. 79.3 20.7 100. Work experience Less than 1 year 1-2 years 3-4 years 5-6 years More than 6 years. 107 102 49 7 1. 40.2 38.3 18.4 2.6 0.4. Total. 266. 100. Major Business Administration. 108. 40.7. 1 89 3 7 1. .4 33.5 .12 2.7 .4. 2 7. .8 2.6. 26 7 13 2 266. 9.8 2.6 4.9 .8 100. Leisure Service Management International Business Marketing Finance Wealth and Taxation Management Financial Engineering and Actuarial Mathematics Statistics Accountancy Economics Information Management Applied Foreign Language Total. Independent-Samples T-test of the Samples In order to establish the validity of the samples, the researcher conducted several independent-samples t-tests. First, because almost half of the participants come from National Taipei University of Business (NTUB), they were categorized as one group, and their responses were compared with the participants from other schools. The result shows that there is no significant difference between the two groups’ answers on all the research variables. For 23.

(31) instance, on the score of organization brand, there is no significant differences between students from NTUB (M=3.20, SD=.73, n=125) and students from other schools (M=3.20, SD=.79, n=141), t(263)=.06, n.s., two-tailed. Second, the researcher tested the difference between answering by paper questionnaires and answering by online questionnaires. The result shows that scores of most of the research variables have no significant differences. Only organizational attractiveness shows significant difference between paper questionnaires (M=3.14, SD=.76, n=166) and online questionnaires (M=3.40, SD=.79, n=100), t(201)=-2.68, p=.01, two-tailed. However, it would not affect the following analysis in testing the hypotheses. Last, the researcher tested the difference between examining the website content through a computer and that through a mobile phone. The result shows that there is no significant difference on the scores of website content, t(144)=.26, n.s., two-tailed. between the former (M=.55, SD=.30, n=194) and the later (M=.54, SD=.25, n=71). Please refer to Table 3.2 for detailed results. Table 3.2. Results of Independent-Samples T-test (N=266) School Students from NTUB Students from other school OB OA WC POA. M. SD. n. M. SD. n. 95% CI for Mean Difference. 3.20 3.15, .55 3.39. .73 .76 .26 .72. 125 125 125 125. 3.20 3.30 .54 3.47,. .79 .80 .30 .67. 141 141 141 141. -.18, .19 -.34, .04 -.06, .08 -.24, .09. .06 1.6 .20 -.89. 263.40 262.60 263.79 255.17. .95 .11 .85 .38. t. df. p. -.93 -2.65 1.60 -1.38. 203.44 201.33 213.10 211.44. .35 .01 .11 .17. Questionnaire type paper questionnaires online questionnaires OB OA WC POA. M. SD. n. M. SD. n. 95% CI for Mean Difference. 3.17 3.14 .57 3.39. .75 .76 .29 .70. 166 166 166 166. 3.26 3.40 .51 3.51. .78 .79 .28 .69. 100 100 100 100. -.28, .10 -.46, -.07 -.01, .13 -.29, .05. t. df. p. (continued) 24.

(32) Table 3.2. (continued) Device to examine website content Computer Mobile phone WC. M. SD. n. M. SD. n. 95% CI for Mean Difference. .55. .30. 194. .54. .25. 71. .06, .08. t. df. p. .26. 144.39. .80. Measurement Organization Brand Organization brand is defined as component of a name, term, sign, symbol, design, or either combination of them (Kotler, 1979). This variable includes two dimensions: organizational familiarity and organizational image. Participants were asked to score organization brand of an assigned company which was chosen from the list of " Top 100 Most Admired. Employers. by. the. New. Generation”. (http://topic.cheers.com.tw/news/20150320.pdf).. The. provided. by. measurement. Cheers of. Magazine. organizational. familiarity and image is derived from Lievens et al. (2005) and Lemmink et al. (2003). A 5point Likert Scale was applied to measure the construct of the two dimensions, from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Answers to all items from the two dimensions were summed to form a total score for organization brand. Organizational familiarity. This study derived the measurement of organizational familiarity from Lievens et al., (2005). The internal consistency of this measurement was .81 (Lievens et al., 2005). This dimension includes three items. An example item of organization familiarity is “I am familiar with the organization as an employer”. Please refer to table 3.3 for details on measurement items.. 25.

(33) Table 3.3. Items of Organizational Familiarity Item description. Source. I am familiar with this organization as an employer. I have heard from others what goes on in this organization.. Lievens et al. (2005). I have already heard many things about this organization. Organizational image. Lemmink et al. (2003) tested the reliability of the first-order construct of organizational image by its composite reliability. All values surpassed the recommended cut-off level of 0.60 (Jöreskog, 1971). This dimension is operationalized into two sub-dimensions and includes totally six items. An example item is “This organization is the first choice for high quality products/services”. Please refer to table 3.4 for details on measurement sub-dimensions and items. Table 3.4. Sub-dimensions and Items of Organizational Image Organizational. Buying company stock of this organization is a good investment. management. This organization often introduces innovations Higher management is committed to this organization. Short-term experience. This organization possesses appealing advertising of products/services I heard/experienced positive things about this organization This organization is the first choice for high quality products/services. Note. Adapted from “The Role of Corporate Image and Company Employment Image in Explaining Application Intentions,” by J. Lemmink, A. Schuijf, and S. Streukens. 2003, Journal of Economic Psychology, 24(1), p. 1-15. Copyright 2005 by Elsevier.. Website Content The definition of website content in this study is the amount of job and organization information provided on the website. The measurement of this variable was derived from Cober et al. (2004). The questionnaire uses yes/no options to measure the presence or absence of job and organization information (yes=1, and no=0). Answers to all items were summed to form a 26.

(34) total score for website content. Higher score means more information are presented in the website. An example item is “Information presented regarding the culture, goals, values, or working environment of this organization”. Please refer to table 3.5 for details on measurement items. Table 3.5. Measurement of Website Content: Types of Job and Organization Information and Operational Definitions Types of job &. Operational definitions. organization information Employment-Related Information Compensation Culture Training Online Job Preview. Information found regarding salaries and/or benefits Information presented regarding the culture, goals, values, or working environment of an organization Information about training and career development included on the Web site Information describing a typical day or responsibilities of an employee, other than that found in specific job advertisements, included on Web site. Fit Messages Targeted Message. Work-Life Message Diversity Message. Employee Testimonials. Community Service. Sections of the Web site specified for navigation by specific groups of job seekers (e.g., college students, experienced workers) Information found directly referring to organizational facilitation of employee balance between work and personal life Web site contained messages promoting workforce diversity (e.g., racial, gender, sexual) beyond a statement about EEO compliance Employee statements of their work experience found on the Web site; this excludes messages from the president/CEO or customers Information about corporate philanthropy and/or employee community service found on employment Web site. Note. Adapted from “Form, Content, and Function: An Evaluative Methodology for Corporate Employment Web Sites,” by R. T. Cober, D. J. Brown, & P. E. Levy. 2004, Human Resource Management, 43(2/3), p. 201-218. Copyright 2004 by Wiley Online Library. 27.

(35) Organizational Attractiveness Organizational Attractiveness refers to the degree of applicant attraction toward a certain organization (Turban & Greening, 1997). The measurement of this variable is derived from Highhouse et al. (2003). It includes three dimensions: general attractiveness, intentions to pursue, and prestige. The internal consistency of the three scales was measured by using Cronbach’s alpha value (general attractiveness=.88, intentions to pursuit=.82, and prestige=.83). A 5-point Likert Scale will be applied to measure the construct, from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Answers to all items were summed to form a total score for organizational attractiveness. An example item is “this company is attractive to me as a place for employment”. Please refer to table 3.6 for details on measurement items. Table 3.6. Dimensions and Items of Organizational Attractiveness 1. For me, this company would be a good place to work. 2. I would not be interested in this company except as a last resort. General 3. This company is attractive to me as a place for employment. attractiveness 4. I am interested in learning more about this company. 5. A job at this company is very appealing to me. 6. I would accept a job offer from this company. 7. I would make this company one of my first choices as an employer. Intentions to 8. If this company invited me for a job interview, I would go. pursue 9. I would exert a great deal of effort to work for this company. 10. I would recommend this company to a friend looking for a job. 11. Employees are probably proud to say they work at this company. 12. This is a reputable company to work for. Prestige. 13. This company probably has a reputation as being an excellent employer. 14. I would find this company a prestigious place to work. 15. There are probably many who would like to work at this company.. Note. Adapted from “Measuring Attraction to Organizations,” by S. Highhouse, F. Lievens, and E. F. Sinar. 2003, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(6), p. 986-1001. Copyright 2003 by Sage Publications.. 28.

(36) Control variables Based on previous research, some demographic variables were controlled, such as gender, race, work experience and years in school (Cable & Judge, 1994, 1996; Turban, 2001) in the regression analysis to predict attraction. These variables are chosen as control variables because individual’s demographic characteristics, work experience, and years in school would affect their applicant attractions toward the organization as job seekers (Turban, 2001). These variables were measured by the questionnaire in the background information part. Race is already controlled in this study. Gender will be a nominal measure with two options (male/female). Years in school was measured by education level question which has five choices from (1) below high school to (5) above graduate school. Work experience was an ordinal measured with five choices from (1) less than 1 year to (5) above 6 years. In addition, job search behavior was also chosen to be the control variable because job seeker’s job search experience may also have effects on applicant attraction. Schwab et al. (1987) suggested that job search intensity was one of the factor in producing job alternatives. It referred to preparatory and active job search behavior (Blau, 1994; Schwab et al, 1987). In most cases, job seekers may experience the information collection and evaluation process when they are searching for a job. For example, if they had examined some organizations’ websites before this study, they may have different perceptions toward the organization from other participants who had never done it before. In addition, other factors in job search behavior may also affect job seekers original perceptions toward an organization. For instance, the job seeker who had an interview experience with a certain organization may have different perceptions toward the organization than others (Turban, 2001). It was also suggested that recruiter's behaviors during the interview may affect applicant attraction (Harris & Fink, 1987). Based on the literature, the researchers decided to combine these behaviors into one variable as job search behavior and add it as a control variable. The measurement of job 29.

(37) search behavior was derived from Blau (1994). Please refer to the appendix A and B for details on measurement items of the control variables.. Method of Data Analysis In this study, the researchers conducted the analyses through statistical programs SPSS version 22 and SPSS AMOS. Descriptive statistics was applied in order to get a clear understanding of the important characteristics of the sample, as well as the mean, standard deviation and distribution of data. Factor analyses were conducted to establish the construct validity. First, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed through SPSS both in pilot study and in the main study. It was used to identify the properties of measured variables, to make sure of the factor loadings and if all items loaded onto the appropriate factors. When conducting EFA, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy should be above .50 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity should be significant. Kaiser (1974) suggested when the KMO index reaches the .90s, it is “marvelous”, in the .80s is “meritorious”, in the .70s is “middling”, in the .60s is “mediocre”, and in the .50s is “miserable”. Second, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted through AMOS, a covariance-based structural equation modeling (SEM) technique to test the validity of measures. CFA is usually conducted based on established theories. It is used to observe the relationship among latent variables, and to see if it establishes goodness of fit with the original theoretical model.. Commonly interested indices to determine model fit include. chi-square divided by degree of freedom (2/df ), SRMR (standardized root mean square residual), GFI (goodness of fit), AGFI (adjusted goodness of fit), RMSEA (root mean square error or approximation). Please refer to Table 3.7 to see a summary of suggested model fit indices and their levels. In addition, researchers suggested that for appropriate construct validity, average variance extracted (AVE) should be above .50 and composite reliability (CR) should be above .80 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). 30.

(38) Table 3.7. Levels of Suggested SEM Model Fit Indices Good fit. Acceptable fit.  /df. 2-5 0≤2. <5. RMSEA. <.08 0 ≤ .05. .08-.1 .05 ≤ .08. GFI. >.95 >.95. 0-1.0 >.90. AGFI. >.90 >.90. .90 >.85. RMR. <.05 0 indicates perfect fit. ≤.08. 2. Note. Adapted from Cleveland (2015). Summary based on Hooper, Coughlan, and Mullen (2008) (top row) and Schermelleh-Engel, Moosbrugger, and Müller (2003) (bottom row) Moreover, Pearson’s Correlation Analysis was conducted to examine the linear relationship among variables and also to test the first hypothesis. T-test was used to compare the mean difference between two variables. It was used to test if there was significant difference between answers to organizational attractiveness in pretest and posttest (hypothesis 2). Lastly, multiple regression analysis was performed to test the moderating effect of website content on the relationship between organization brand and organizational attractiveness (hypothesis 3).. Reliability and Validity Analysis Validity includes content validity and construct validity. All the measurements underwent expert review to ensure the content validity. A pilot study was conducted to ensure the validity and reliability of the measurement. It also helped to improve the design of the main study. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to examine the factor structure both in the pilot test study and in the main study. Construct validity was established through the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in this study. The validity analysis, results of EFA and CFA, and also the reliability analysis, are presented in this section.. 31.

(39) Pilot Study A pilot study was conducted to ensure the validity and reliability of the measurement, and also to preliminarily understand the relationships among study variables. Samples of pilot study were 40 undergraduate senior students and graduate students from any department in colleges in Taiwan. Convenience sampling was used due to the lack of the sampling frame. The data was collected by online questionnaires from all the participants (Fang & Yeh, 2016). Pretest and posttest of organizational attractiveness were conducted to see the effect of website content on it. Please refer to Table 3.8 to see more detail of descriptive statistics on sample characteristics. Table 3.8. Descriptive Statistics on Sample Characteristics of Pilot Study Item. Frequency. Percentage Item (%). Gender Male Female. 14 26. 35 65. Total. 40. 100. Age 20 or below 21-25 26-30 Total. 35 4 1 40. 87.5 10 2.5 100. Frequency. Percentage (%). Work experience Less than 1 year 1-2 years. 22 11. 55 27.5. 3-4 years 5-6 years More than 6 years Total. 4 1 2 40. 10 2.5 5 100. 3. 7.5. 5. 12.5. 22. 55. Field of majors Field of education Field of humanities and arts Field of social, business, and laws. (continued). 32.

(40) Table 3.8. (continued) Education level college 19 graduate school 21 Total 40. 47.5 52.5 100. Field of science Field of engineering, manufacturing and construction Field of Agriculture Field of Health and. 3. 7.5. 4 1. 10 2.5. welfare Total. 2 40. 5 100. Exploratory Factor Analysis was conducted to ensure the validity (Fang & Yeh, 2016). Please refer to Table 3.9 for the factor structure. Extraction method was Principal Component Analysis. Rotation method was Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. First, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was .64 which was above the recommended value of .6. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant. The factor number was fixed to five. The accumulated variances of the five factors explained of 70.2%. Cronbach’s alpha was calculated for each study variable in order to establish the reliability. All study variables showed satisfactory internal consistency reliability which >.7: organization brand (.81), website content (.79), organizational attractiveness in pretest (.91), organizational attractiveness in posttest (.94) (Fang & Yeh, 2016).. 33.

(41) Table 3.9. Factor Structure of Exploratory Factor Analysis (N=40) Component and factor loadings of each variables 1 2 3 4 5 OA6 OA9 OA7 OA3 OA5 OA2 OA8. .824 .760 .752 .748 .746 .653 .611. OA4 OA15 OA11. .586. OA12 OA14 OA13 OB4 OB7 OB5 OB9 OB8 OB3 OB1 OB2 OA1 OA10 OB6. Communality .71 .67 .66 .74 .73 .61 .44. .465 .818 .815. .58 .89 .73. .766 .757 .693 .498. .79 .80 .68 .56 .78 .70 .76. .824 .726 .678 .597 .845 .816 .783 .774 .671 .560. .58 .78 .73 .70 .85 .70 .71. Note. Extraction Method was Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method was Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.. Confirmatory Factor Analysis CFA result of organization brand. For the independent variable, first, all 9 items measuring organization brand was run through confirmatory factor analysis in AMOS. However, the model fit was not so good. Then one item (OB8) was removed according to the 34.

(42) modified indices. As a result, the modified model showed greater fitness. The model fit summary of the models are presented in Table 3.10. Table 3.10. Organization Brand Model Fit Summary (N=266) OB Variable. 2. Full items list (9) Modified item (8). 123.77 24 .000 5.16. .06. 54.23. .05. df. P. 2/df SRMR GFI. 17 .000 3.19. .91. AGFI RMSEA AVE CR .83. .13. .60. .92. .95 .90. .09. .57. .91. As presented in the table, the modified model shows acceptable fit of all the relevant indices: 2/df (3.19), SRMR (.05), GFI (.95), AGFI (.90), RMSEA (.09), AVE (.57), CR (.91). Multi-Group Comparison was performed to establish cross-validation. All of the samples were randomly separated into two group, and then the researchers performed Multiple-Group Comparison with these two groups in AMOS. The result also showed no significance which establish cross-validation (Table 3.11). CFA measurement model (Figure 3.3) and the description of items (Table 3.12) are presented below as well. The variable has three dimensions. Each of the first and second dimension have three items, and the third dimension has two items. Table 3.11. Multi-Group Comparison Result for Cross Validation of Measurement Model (OB) Model. 2. df. P. NFI Delta-1. IFI Delta-2. RFI rho-1. TLI rho2. Measurement weights Structural weights. 5 8. 4.69 9.70. .455 .287. .004 .009. .005 .009. -.01 -.012. -.01 -.012. Measurement residuals. 19. 24.56. .176. .023. .024. -.021. -.022. 35.

(43) Figure 3.3. Organizational attractiveness CFA measurement model (modified). 36.

(44) Table 3.12. Organization Brand Variable Items Item. Description. Status. Dimension (OI): Organization image OB1 I am familiar with this organization as an employer. OB2 I have heard from others what goes on in this organization. OB3 I have already heard many things about this organization Dimension (OF1): Organization familiarity – Organizational management OB4 Buying company stock of this organization is a good investment OB5 This organization often introduces innovations OB6. Higher management is committed to this organization. Dimension (OF2): Organization familiarity – Short-term experience OB7 This organization possesses appealing advertising of products/services OB8 I heard/experienced positive things about this organization OB9 This organization is the first choice for high quality products/services. Deleted. CFA result of organizational attractiveness. For the dependent variable, organizational attractiveness (posttest), all of the 15 items were run through CFA analysis. However, the model fit was not so good. Then the researchers removed some items (POA3, POA7, POA12 and POA13) according to modified indices. After modified, the model fit became better. The results of model fit summary are presented in Table 3.13. Table 3.13. Organizational Attractiveness (Posttest) Model Fit Summary (N=266) OB Variable. 2. 2/df SRMR GFI AGFI RMSEA AVE CR. df. P. Full items list 406.90. 87. .000. 4.68. .07. .81. .73. .12. .66. .97. (15) Modified items 148.51 list (11). 41. .000. 3.62. .05. .90. .84. .09. .65. .95. 37.

(45) As presented in the table, the modified model shows better fit than the original model. All the interested indices meet satisfactory and acceptable level: 2/df (3.62), SRMR. (.05),. GFI. (.90), AGFI (.84), RMSEA (.099), AVE (.65), CR (.95). Multi-Group Comparison was conducted to establish cross-validation (Table 3.14). Moreover, CFA measurement model and all item descriptions with status are presented in Figure 3.4 and Table 3.15. Table 3.14. Multi-Group Comparison Result for Cross Validation of Measurement Model (POA) Model. 2. df. P. NFI. IFI. RFI. TLI. Delta-1. Delta-2. rho-1. rho2. Measurement weights Structural covariance. 8 11. 8.08 10.67. .426 .471. .004 .005. .004 .005. -.006 -.008. -.006 -.008. Measurement residuals. 25. 40.62. .025. .019. .019. -.008. -.008. Figure 3.4. Organizational attractiveness (posttest) CFA measurement model (modified) 38.

(46) Table 3.15. Organizational Attractiveness (Posttest) Variable Items Item. Description. Status. Dimension(POA01): General attractiveness POA1 For me, this company would be a good place to work. POA2 I would not be interested in this company except as a last resort. POA3 This company is attractive to me as a place for employment. POA4 I am interested in learning more about this company. POA5 A job at this company is very appealing to me.. Deleted. Dimension(POA02): Intentions to pursue POA6 I would accept a job offer from this company. POA7 POA8 POA9 POA10. I would make this company one of my first choices as an employer. If this company invited me for a job interview, I would go. I would exert a great deal of effort to work for this company. I would recommend this company to a friend looking for a job.. Dimension(POA03): Prestige POA11 Employees are probably proud to say they work at this company. POA12 This is a reputable company to work for. POA13 This company probably has a reputation as being an excellent employer. POA14 I would find this company a prestigious place to work.. Deleted. Deleted Deleted. POA15 There are probably many who would like to work at this company.. Alpha Coefficient Test An alpha coefficient test was conducted to ensure the internal consistency. Through the test, Cronbach’s alpha of each variable was calculated to ensure the reliability (Table 3.16). The results showed that all study variables possessed satisfactory internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s alpha>.7).. 39.

(47) Table 3.16. Cronbach’s Alpha of Study Variables (N=266) Variable name. Cronbach’s alpha. Organization brand Website content Organizational attractiveness (pretest) Organizational attractiveness (posttest). .86 .78 .92 .93. Harmon’s Single Factor Test A Harmon’s single factor test was conducted to observe the common method variance (CMV). The result showed that the largest unrotated factor explained 33.32% of the variance, which was below the suggested threshold of 50% (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). Therefore, CMV concerns in this study is minimal.. 40.