I

THE PROCEEDINGS OF

10th

INTERNATIONAL

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT

CONFERENCE

VOLUME I

Rethinking Strategies for SMEs in order to be Successful in the Global Environment

June 19-21, 2014, Rome-Italy

II

10th

INTERNATIONAL STRATEGIC

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Rethinking Strategies for SMEs in order to be Successful in the

Global Environment

June 19-21, 2014 Rome, Italy

Honorary Presidents

Orhan ŞAHİN (Ph.D.) İsmail YÜKSEK (Ph.D.) M. Niyazi Eruslu (Ph.D.)

Şule Kut (Ph.D.)

Chairman

Lütfihak Alpkan (Ph.D.)

Co-Chairs

Oya ERDİL (Ph.D.) Mehtap ÖZŞAHİN (Ph.D.)

Cemal ZEHİR (Ph.D.)

Editor

Mehtap ÖZŞAHİN

ISBN 978-605-86554-2-3

Organizing Institutions

Gebze Institute of Technology Yıldız Technical University

University of Yalova Okan University

Statements of facts or opinions appearing in Proceedings of the 10th International Strategic Management Conference are solely those of the authors and do not imply endorsement by the Organization Committee or publisher

III

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CURRENT ISSUES IN SMES

Challenges of Internationalization for SMEs and Overcoming these Challenges: A case study from Turkey (MÜJDELEN YENER, BARIŞ DOĞRUOĞLU, SINEM ERGUN)

3

Determining the Antecedents of Marketing Competencies of SMEs for International Market Performance (REHA SAYDAN, HUSEYIN KANIBIR,SIMA NART)

13

The effect of intangible resources and competitive strategies on the export performance of small and medium sized manufacturing enterprises (ÖMER KUMLU)

23

The Potential of E-commerce for SMEs in a Globalizing Business Environment (AHMET İNCEKARA, MESUT SAVRUL, SEFER ŞENER)

35

Uncertainties in Entrepreneurship Climate: A Study on Start-ups in India (SUSMITA GHOSH, BHASKAR BHOWMICK)

45

Strategic Sensemaking: Challenges Faced By A New Leader Of An SME (STEVEN J. DEKREY, EDWIN J. PORTUGAL)

55

Business growth versus organizational development reflected in strategic management of Polish small, medium and large enterprises (ANNA WITEK-CRABB)

63

An Alternative Forms Of Organizing Business Model: A Model Of Value Creater Networks (ELA OZKAN-CANBOLAT, ABDULLAH BAS, REYHAN CAFRI)

73

Problems of data collection, processing and use of informal venture capital (ANATOLIJS PROHOROVS, LEVS FAINGLOZS)

83

Venture capital in Latvia: the peculiarities, contradictions, and accessibility for SMEs (IRINA KUZMINA-MERLINO, SANDRA KUBLINA)

93

The Impact Of Foreign Direct Investments On SMEs’ Development (NADIDE SEVIL TÜLÜCE, İBRAHIM DOĞAN

101

Financing In SMEs: Case Of The Baltic States (RAMONA RUPEIKA-APOGA)

111

Financing Smes In Vlora, Albania: Between Game Theory And Lack Of Information (FJONA ZENELI, LAVDOSH ZAHO)

121

The Role Of Net Interest Margin In Improving Banks’ Asset Structure And Assessing The Stability And Efficiency Of Their Operations (SVETLANA SAKSONOVA)

127

Strategical Financial Indicators Concerning The Interests Of The Workers (GAREEV BULAT RAFAELEVICH)

137

Financial Literacy Training As A Strategic Management Tool Among Small – Medium Sized Businesses Operating In Turkey (ALI BAYRAKDAROĞLU, FIRAT BOTAN ŞAN)

143

Effects of Foreign Acquisitions on the Performance: Evidence from Securities Firms in Turkey (NIZAMETTIN BAYYURT, AHMET AKIN)

151

Comparison of public and non-public SMEs’ corporate governance strategies in Turkey (GULSEVIM YUMUK GUNAY, SUDI APAK)

157

The Debt Maturity Of Portuguese Smes – The Aftermath Of The 2008 Financial Crisis (SÉRGIO COSTA, LUIS LAUREANO, RAUL LAUREANO)

167

Determinants of capital structure and the 2008 financial crisis: evidence from Portuguese SMEs (PEDRO PROENÇA, RAUL LAUREANO, LUIS LAUREANO)

175

What Makes SMEs to Be Successful in Global Markets? (M.ŞEBNEM ENSARI, MELISA ERDILEK KARABAY)

183

IV

A Research on Determining Innovation Factors for SMEs (EBRU BEYZA BAYARÇELIK, FULYA TAŞEL, SINAN APAK)

193

Structure of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Turkish Economy and Global Competitiveness Strategies (SEFER ŞENER, LEVENT DALYANCI, ORHAN AYDIN)

203

STRATEGY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

The Relationship Between Structural Characteristics Of Organization And Followed Business Strategy: An Application In Denizli (ÖZLEM ÇETINKAYA BOZKURT, ADNAN KALKAN, MUTLU ARMAN)

213

Developing Strategies For The Future Of Healthcare In Turkey By Benchmarking And SWOT Analysis (IMRAN ASLAN, ORHAN ÇINAR, ÜSTÜN ÖZEN)

221

Do organizational politics and organizational commitment affect budgetary slack creation in public organizations? (EMINE YILMAZ, GÖKHAN ÖZER, MEHMET GÜNLÜK)

233

Adopting Vision And Mission Statements By Employees: The Case Of TAV Airports (GAMZE ORHAN, DILEK ERDOĞAN, VILDAN DURMAZ)

243

Linking the main obstacles to the strategy implementation with the company’s performance (JOANNA RADOMSKA)

253

Competitive advantage: the courage in formulating objectives and expansiveness of a strategy (LETYCJA SOLODUCHO-PELC)

261

Employee’s Perception Of Change Effect As A Competitive Advantage On Nigeria Banking Industry: An Empirical Analysis (OJI-OKORO IZUCHUKWU, WEI LONG, ABBA ABUBAKAR SHEHU, EDUN ADETUNJI OLUFEMI)

271

Pathos rhetoric in vision statements of organizations: Findings from Turkey (MEHMET EYMEN ERYILMAZ)

279

Industry forces, competitive and functional strategies and organizational performance: Evidence from restaurants in Istanbul, Turkey (GÜLTEKIN ALTUNTAŞ, FATIH SEMERCIÖZ, ASLI MERT, ÇAĞLAR PEHLIVAN)

289

A Strategic Environmental Management Model: Salt Lake Case (ORKUN GÖKTEPE, EMEL ALTIN, MURAT KASIMOĞLU)

299

STRATEGIC HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Human Resources in European Market in the Past Decade - A Sociological overview (AHMET ECIRLI, EDITH-MIHAELA DOBRE, EMILIAN M. DOBRESCU, MIHAELA IOANA DANETIU)

311

Current tendencies of the development of service of human resources management (FEODOR MIKHAYLOV, KOLESNIKOVA JULIA, SALYAKHOV ELDAR)

321

Attracting Talented Employees to the Company: Do We Need Different Employer Branding Strategies in Different Cultures? (ESRA ALNIAÇIK, SERHAT ERAT, KÜLTIGIN AKÇIN, ÜMIT ALNIAÇIK)

327

A Study On Cultural Difference Management Strategies At Multinational Organizations (HASAN TUTAR, MEHMET ALTINOZ, DEMET CAKIROGLU)

337

The Soft Element Of Strategic Human Resource Management: The Employee’s Perception Of Diversity Climate (HAKAN SEZEREL, H. ZUMRUT TONUS)

345

Firm Size and Labour Market Segmentation Theory:Evidence from Turkish Micro Data (HANDAN KUMAŞ, ATALAY ÇAĞLAR, HACER SIMAY KARAALP)

353

Modelling of the Strategic Recruitment Process by Axiomatic Design Principles(PELIN VARDARLIER, YALÇIN VURAL, SEMRA BIRGÜN)

367

Establishment Of Individual Performance Evaluation System In A Health Business And A Pilot Practice (FADIME ÇINAR, PELIN VARDARLIER)

377

Strategic Importance of Human Resource Practices on Job Satisfaction in Private Hospitals(DIDEM PAŞAOĞLU, H. ZÜMRÜT TONUS)

387

V

Organization-Based Self-Esteem As A Moderator Of The Relationship Between Employee Dissent And Turnover Intention (TUNA CENKCI, AYŞE BEGÜM ÖTKEN)

397

Effects Of Perceived Psychological Contract Breach On Turnover Intention: Intermediary Role Of Loneliness Perception Of Employees (EBRU AYKAN)

407

Team Effectiveness in Sport Teams: The Effects of Team Cohesion, Team Norms, Intra Team Communication on Team Member Satisfaction and Intent to Remain (ZEYNEP ONAĞ, MUSTAFA TEPECI)

415

The relationships among Organizational Cynicism, Job Insecurity and Turnover Intention: A Survey Study in Erzurum/Turkey (ORHAN ÇINAR, FATIH KARCIOĞLU, İMRAN ASLAN)

425

The Moderating Effects Of Motivating Job Characteristics On The Relationship Between Burnout And Turnover Intention (GÖNÜL KAYA ÖZBAĞ, GÖKÇE ÇICEK CEYHUN, HÜLYA GÜNDÜZ ÇEKMECELIOĞLU)

433

The Effects of Envy on Job Engagement and Turnover Intention (OYA ERDIL, BÜŞRA MÜCELDILI)

441

The Role of Mobbing as the Mediator of the Organizational Silence and Turnover Intention Relation (MERAL ELÇI, MELISA ERDILEK KARABAY, LÜTFIHAK ALPKAN, İRGE ŞENER)

449

STRATEGIC MARKETING

Getting Strategic Advantage by Measuring Resistance Developed against E-Prescription in Turkey (IMRAN ASLAN, USTÜN ÖZEN)

463

The Effect of Hedonistic and Utilitarian Consumer Behavior on Brand Equity: Turkey - UK Comparison on Coca Cola (BETÜL ÇAL, RICHARD ADAMS)

473

Brand Attitudes Of Entrepreneurs As A Stakeholder Towards A City (FUNDA KAYA, MEHMET MARANGOZ)

483

Impact Of Country-Of-Origin Image On Brand Equity: A Study On Durable Products In India (RAJEEV KUMAR PANDA, SIDDHARTH MISRA)

493

Experiential Marketing and Vacation Experience : The Sample of Turkish Airlines (SELDA BAŞARAN ALAGÖZ, NEZAHAT EKICI)

501

Exploring the role of social media for SMEs: as a new marketing strategy tool for the firm performance perspective (DILHAN ÖZTAMUR, IBRAHIM SARPER KARAKADILAR)

513

The Dimensions of Tour Experience, Emotional Arousal, And Post-Experience Behaviors: A Research On Pamukkale In Turkey (F. OZLEM GUZEL)

523

Bridging Organizational Learning Capability and Firm Performance through Customer Relationship Management (ALI EKBER AKGÜN, SALIH ZEKI İMAMOĞLU, İPEK KOÇOĞLU, HÜSEYIN İNCE, HALIT KESKIN)

531

The Impact of Personality on Technology Acceptance: A Study on Smart Phone Users (VOLKAN ÖZBEK, ÜMIT ALNIAÇIK , FATIH KOÇ, M. EMIN AKKILIÇ, EDA KAŞ)

541

The E-Pharmacy Customer Segmentation Based On The Perceived Importance Of The Retention Support Tools (MICHAL PATAK, HANA LOSTAKOVA, MARKETA CURDOVA, VLADIMIRA VLCKOVA)

551

The Role Of Partnership And Flexibility In Strengthening Customer Relationships In The B2B Market (HANA LOSTAKOVA, ZUZANA PECINOVA)

561

Usefulness Of Tools To Enhance Retention And Loyalty In Purchasing OTC Drugs From The Perspective Of Clients Of B&M Pharmacies (HANA LOSTAKOVA, VERA HORAKOVA)

571

An investigation of the perceptions of engineering and architecture students on university brand equity: Implications for building sustainable university brands in an emerging market – Turkey (TANSES GÜLSOY)

583

Intercultural Communication Competence as a Key Activator of Purchase Intention (ALI IHTIYAR, FAUZIAH SH. AHMAD)

595

The role of foreign intermediary relationship quality on export performance: A survey on Turkish firms (T. SABRI ERDİL)

605

VI

Standardization and Adaptation of International Marketing Mix Activities: A Case Study (ALI EKBER AKGÜN, HALIT KESKIN, HAYAT AYAR)

615

Quality antecedents of brand trust and behavioral intention (ALEV KOÇAK ALAN, EBRU TÜMER KABADAYI)

625

KNOWLEDGE & INNOVATION MANAGEMENT Knowledge Strategy: Key Player Or Relict Of The Past?( LUDMILA MLÁDKOVÁ)

635

Dynamics Of Changes Towards Knowledge-Based Economy In Slovak SMEs (LUBICA BAJZIKOVA, HELENA SAJGALIKOVA, EMIL WOJCAK, MICHAELA POLAKOVA)

645

The new way of knowledge creation and sharing with web 2.0 for teaching and learning roles in University 2.0 (ATIK KULAKLI, SIMON MAHONY)

657

Knowledge management processes in international joint ventures: A case of an airport operator firm (MURAT ATALAY, FULYA SARVAN)

667

Comparison Of Analysis Performed By Classical Approach And Bayesian Approach In Auditors’ Decision Making Process (NURTEN ERDOĞAN, SEZEN ULUDAĞ)

677

Project Management And Its Tools In Practice In The Czech Republic (JANA KOSTALOVA, LIBENA TETREVOVA)

687

An outline of innovation management process: building a framework for managers to implement innovation (ZEYNEP TUĞÇE ŞIMŞIT, ÖZALP VAYVAY, ÖZGEN ÖZTÜRK)

697

The Impacts Of Intellectual Capital, Innovation And Organizational Strategy On Firm Performance (ADNAN KALKAN, ÖZLEM ÇETINKAYA BOZKURT, MUTLU ARMAN)

707

Organizational Learning Capability and its Impact on Firm Innovativeness (A. OZAN ONAĞ, MUSTAFA TEPECI, A. AYÇE BAŞALP)

715

Environmental Factors Affecting Innovation Strategies Of Companies: Customers’ And Suppliers’ Effect (AHU GENIS-GRUBER, HULUSI ÖĞÜT)

725

An Investigation of The Characteristics of Learning Organizations in Turkish Companies: Scale Validation (M.MURAT YAŞLIOĞLU, ÖMER ŞAP, DUYGU TOPLU)

733

A research on innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises in tourism industry: case of travel agencies operating in Antalya (NEDIM YÜZBAŞIOĞLU, PINAR ÇELIK, YUNUS TOPSAKAL)

743

The Effect Of Process Development And Information Technology On Time-Based Supply Chain Performance: Furniture Industry Case (A.ZAFER ACAR, M.BORA UZUNLAR)

751

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

Implementing of Balanced Scorecard: Sample of Turkish Republic Ministry of Youth and Sport (YETER AYTÜL DAĞLI EKMEKÇI)

763

R&D project performance evaluation using an integrated DEMATEL and ANP method for balanced scorecard (ÖMER GÜNDÜZ, GÜLÇIN BÜYÜKÖZKAN)

771

Effects Of The Pre-Show, At-Show And Post-Show Firm Activities On Trade Show Performance Measurement (EMINE ÇOBANOĞLU, VENERA TURAEVA)

781

Performance of SMEs stocks portfolios at Bucharest Stock Exchange (CRISTIANA TUDOR, MARIA TUDOR, ANDREI ANGHEL)

793

Effect of Strategic Leadership Styles on Firm Performance: A study in a Turkish SME (FUNDA ÖZER, CIHAN TINAZTEPE)

799

The effect of leadership and innovativeness on business performance (SEBAHATTIN YILDIZ, FARUK BAŞTÜRK, İLKNUR TAŞTAN BOZ)

807

VII

Enabling More Objective Performance Appraisals: A Training Program Model Of Pinpointing (DUYSAL AŞKUN ÇELIK)

817

Performance Measurement: A Conceptual Framework for Supply Chain Practices (KHAN RAI WAQAS AZFAR, NAWAR KHAN, HAMZA FAROOQ GABRIEL)

825

Inter-organizational performance in the automotive supply networks: The role of environmental uncertainty, specific investments and formal contracts (TUGBA GURCAYLILAR-YENIDOGAN, JOSEF WINDSPERGER)

833

How Entrepreneurial climate effects firm performance? (EBRU BEYZA BAYARÇELIK, MEHTAP ÖZŞAHIN)

841

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

Job Stress And Performance: The Mediating Effect Of Emotional Intelligence (SEMIH SORAN, M.ONUR BALKAN, M.EMIN SERIN)

855

The effect of the level of self-monitoring on work engagement and emotional exhaustion: A Research on Small and Medium Size Enterprises (SMEs) (İLKNUR TAŞTAN BOZ, ALTAN AYAN, ILKNUR ESKIN, GÜNER KAHRAMAN)

863

Emotional Intelligence: Reassessing the construct validity (M.GÖKHAN BITMIŞ, AZIZE ERGENELI)

871

The Impact of Organizational Communication on Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Research Findings (OSMAN YILDIRIM)

877

The effects of employees’ perceptions of competency models on employability outcomes and organizational citizenship behavior and the moderating role of social exchange in this effect (HANDE SERIM, ORKUN DEMIRBAĞ, UĞUR YOZGAT)

881

Can dissimilar be congruent as well as the similar? A study on the supplementary and complementary fit (ÖZGE MEHTAP, ESRA ALNIAÇIK)

889

The Relationship Between Internal Branding And Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating Role Of Person-Organization Fit (GAYE ÖZÇELIK, MINE AFACAN FINDIKLI)

997

Exploring The Effects Of Perceived Organizational Impediments And Role Stress On Job Performance (GÖNÜL KAYA ÖZBAĞ, HÜLYA GÜNDÜZ ÇEKMECELIOĞLU , GÖKÇE ÇICEK CEYHUN)

907

The Effects Of Managerial Coaching Behaviors On The Employees’ Perception Of Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, And Job Performance: Case Study On Insurance Industry In Turkey (ALEV KATRİNLİ, SELMA KALKAVAN)

915

Exploring The Moderating Effect Of Psychological Capital On The Relationship Between Narcissism And Psychological Well-Being (HAKAN ERKUTLU)

927

Managing Absenteeism In The Workplace:The Case Of An Italian Multiutility Company (FEDERICA CUCCHIELLA, MASSIMO GASTALDI, LUIGI RANIERI)

935

Strategies for employee job satisfaction: A case of service sector (KAMIL ERKAN KABAK, ASIM ŞEN, KENAN GÖÇER, SEÇIL KÜÇÜKSÖYLEMEZ, GÜNGÖR TUNCER)

945

Analysis of Unethical Behaviors in Social Networks:An Application in the Medical Sector (DUYGU TÜRKER, CEREN ALTUNTAŞ)

953

The Effects of Organizational Justice and Ethical Climate on Perceived Work Related Stress (ARZU SERT, MERAL ELÇI, TANYERI USLU, İRGE ŞENER)

963

Wisdom and management: a conceptual study on wisdom management (ASLI KÜÇÜKASLAN EKMEKÇI, SERAY BEGÜM SAMUR TERAMAN, PINAR ACAR)

973

Spirituality at work: comparison analysis (VILMANTĖ KUMPIKAITĖ – VALIŪNIENĖ)

979

Some Considerations On Emotional Intelligence (SELIM AREN, SIBEL DINÇ AYDEMIR)

987

VIII

GLOBAL MARKETS AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENTS

Development of “New Silk Road” northern branch through seaport of Riga in Latvia (ALDIS BULIS, ROBERTS SKAPARS)

997

Get off to a good start. International Relationship Marketing in emerging markets (FEDERICA BRESSAN, PAOLA SIGNORI)

1003

An estimation of Turkey’s export loss to Iraq (AHMET DEMIR, ÖZGÜR ÖZMEN, AREEJ RASHID)

1011

International recession and MINTs development: An investment opportunity to relaunch Italian companies? (FRANCESCO SCALERA, SYLVA ŽÁKOVÁ TALPOVÁ)

1021

Global Innovation and Knowledge Management Practice in Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Turkey and the Balkans (SUDI APAK, ERHAN ATAY)

1033

The Relationship between Globalization and E-Commerce: Turkish Case (ERDAL AYDIN, BURCU KILINÇ SAVRUL)

1041

Are Clusters Efficient For The Relation Between Milk Production And Value Added Per Capita In Regional Level? An Empirical Assessment (ERGÜL SÖYLEMEZOĞLU, ÖMER TUĞSAL DORUK)

1049

GVCs Participation as Development Strategy (BILGIN ORHAN ÖRGÜN)

1057

European Union Regional Policy With Particular Emphasis On The Area Of Innovation (IZABELA POPIEL, MAŁGORZATA JABŁOŃSKA)

1067

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND LEADERSHIP

Willingness To Take Risk And Entrepreneurial Intention Of University Students: An Empirical Study Comparing Private And State Universities (E. SERRA YURTKORU, PINAR ACAR, BEGÜM SERAY TERAMAN)

1077

Exploring The Antecedents Of Entrepreneurial Intention On Turkish University Students (E. SERRA YURTKORU, ZEYNEP KABADAYI KUŞCU, AHMET DOĞANAY)

1085

Entrepreneurship In A Cultural Context: A Research On Turks In Bulgaria (TEZCAN KAŞMER ŞAHIN, TUNCER ASUNAKUTLU)

1093

Explaining intrapreneurial behaviors of employees with perceived organizational climate and testing the mediating role of organizational identification: A research study among employees of Turkish innovative firms (SEÇIL BAL TAŞTAN, CEM GÜÇEL)

1103

Moderating Effects Of Job Embeddedness On The Relationship Between Paternalistic Leadership And In-Role Job Performance (GAYE ÖZÇELIK, TUNA CENKCI)

1113

Effect Of Leadership Style On Perceived Organizational Performance And Innovation: The Role Of Transformational Leadership Beyond The Impact Of Transactional Leadership -An Application Among Turkish SME’s (ÖMER FARUK İŞCAN, GÖKNUR ERSARI, ATILHAN NAKTIYOK)

1121

Participation to decision making: Does manager choose opportunity rather than threat? (ERTAN GÜNDÜZ)

1127

Is an Unskilled Really Unaware of it?( SELVA STAUB, RAMAZAN KAYNAK)

1135

Relationship between Uncertainty Avoidance Culture, Entrepreneurial Activity and Economic Development (YASEMIN HANCIOĞLU, ÜLKÜHAN BIKE DOĞAN, ŞÜKRAN SIRKINTIOĞLU YILDIRIM)

1143

The influence of mechanism of strategic management on the formation of the intimate environment of the enterprises (evidenced from petrochemical cluster in the Republic of Tatarstan) (TSERTSEIL JULIA SERGEEVNA)

1151

IX

MANAGEMENT OF CONSTRAINTS- CONTINGENCIES &

SUSTAINABILITY

If Your Company Is Considering The Theory Of Constraints (AZAR IZMAILOV)

1159

Theory Of Constraints: A Literature Review (ZEYNEP TUĞÇE ŞIMŞIT, NOYAN SEBLA GÜNAY, ÖZALP VAYVAY)

1165

Delegation, Accountability And Organizational Reliability. Coordination Mechanisms And Training Models For Contingency Management (FILIPPO FERRARI)

1171

The Constraints of Innovation in Developing Countries: Is it too many barriers to start ups? (ÖMER TUĞSAL DORUK, ERGÜL SÖYLEMEZOĞLU)

1179

Bridging political, managerial and legislative components of sustainability strategy with business demands (BIRUTĖ PITRĖNAITĖ-ŽILĖNIENĖ, BIRUTĖ MIKULSKIENĖ)

1185

The impact of organizational learning on corporate sustainability and strategy formulation with the moderating effect of industry type (ÜLKÜ DICLE, CAHIT KÖSE)

1193

Role Of Tourism Enterprises On Destination Sustainability: Case Of Antalya, Turkey (NEDIM YÜZBAŞIOĞLU, YUNUS TOPSAKAL, PINAR ÇELIK)

1201

Structure and Sustainability of Current Account Deficit in Turkish Economy (SEDAT MURAT, ELIF HAYKIR HOBIKOĞLU, LEVENT DALYANCI)

1209

OTHER ISSUES

Stock Price Reaction for Scoring on Corporate Governance (SUAT TEKER, AHMET HAKAN YÜKSEL)

1217

Corporate foundations in Poland and their role in the management of the company (KRYSTYNA KIETLIŃSKA, BOŻENA MIKOŁAJCZYK)

1225

Board Gender Diversity: Comparison of Turkish and Nigerian Companies (İRGE ŞENER, ABUBAKAR BALARABE KARAYE)

1233

Agility And Responsiveness Managing Fashion Supply Chain (RAMUNĖ ČIARNIENĖ, MILITA VIENAŽINDIENĖ)

1241

Managerial Role in Strategic Supply Chain Management (ASUMAN AKDOGAN, OZGUR DEMIRTAS)

1249

An Analytic Study On Organic Food Industry As Part Of Healthy Eating Habit In The Turkey: Market Growth, Challenges And Prospect (YASEMIN ORAMAN)

1259

Components Of Experiential Value: Case Of Hospitality Industry (GUREL CETIN, ORHAN AKOVA, FAZIL KAYA)

1267

Financial crisis and disclosure requirements in Italy: The “Consob blacklist”(ALESSANDRO DANOVI)

1275

The Determinants And Effects Of Corporate Governance Level: Evidence From Istanbul Stock Exchange (SELIM AREN, SÜLEYMAN ÖZKAN KAYAGIL, SIBEL DINÇ AYDEMIR)

1285

E-S-Quality, Perceived Value And Loyalty Intentions Association In Internet Retailers (CEMAL ZEHIR, YASIN SEHITOGLU, ELIF NARCIKARA, SONGÜL ZEHIR)

1293

X

ORGANIZING COMMITTEE

• EROL EREN (FOUNDER PRESIDENT, OKAN UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • LUTFIHAK ALPKAN (CHAIRMAN, GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • OYA ERDIL ( CO-CHAIR, GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • MEHTAP OZSAHIN ( CO-CHAIR,YALOVA UNIVERSITY, YALOVA-TURKEY) • CEMAL ZEHIR ( CO-CHAIR,YILDIZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • ALI AKDEMIR (AREL UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • ASIM SEN (BEYKENT UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • ASUMAN AKDOGAN (ERCIYES UNIVERSITY, KAYSERI-TURKEY) • ADEM OGUT (SELCUK UNIVERSITY,KONYA, TURKEY) • BELLA BUTLER (CURTIN UNIVERSITY, PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA) • DABABRATA N.CHOWDHURY (UNIVERSITY CAMPUS SUFFOLK, IPSWICH UK • DZINETA DIMANTE (UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA, LATVIA) • EDWARD A. WARD (ST. CLOUD STATE UNIVERSITY, USA) • ERDAL AYDIN (CANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY, CANAKKALE-TURKEY) • FRANCESCO SCALERA (UNIVERSITY OF BARI "ALDO MORO", BARI-ITALY) • IREM ERDOGMUS (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • IRGE SENER (CANKAYA UNIVERSITY, ANKARA-TURKEY) • JAMALUDDIN H. HUSAIN (PURDUE UNIVERSITY CALUMET, USA) • JANIS PRIEDE (UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA,- LATVIA) • LONNIE STRICKLAND (THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA ,TUSCALOOSA,ALABAMA,USA) • MERAL ELCI (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • RICHARD LYNCH (MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY, LONDON, UK) • SELIM ZAIM (ISTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • SERHAT ERAT (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • SONJA PETROVIC-LAZAREVIC (MONASH UNIVERSITY, AUSTRALIA • TANSES YASEMIN GÜLSOY (BEYKENT UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • UGUR YOZGAT (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL, TURKEY) • ZAFER ACAR (OKAN UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • ZOLTAN VERES (BUDAPEST BUSINESS SCHOOL, HUNGARY) • EBRU BEYZA BAYARCELIK (GELISIM UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY)

ADVISORY BOARD & PEER-REVIEW COMMITTEE

• ASUMAN AKDOGAN (ERCIYES UNIVERSITY, KAYSERI-TURKEY) • A.ZAFER ACAR (OKAN UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • A.A. BULGAK (CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY-CANADA) • AARON J. SHENHAR (STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY-USA) • ADEM OGUT (SELCUK UNIVERSITY, KONYA-TURKEY) • ADNAN CEYLAN (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • ADNAN CELIK (SELCUK UNIVERSITY, KONYA-TURKEY) • ALAIN CROCHET (UNIVERSITY OF SORBONNE NOUVELLE , PARIS- FRANCE) • ALAN GARCIA LIRA (UNIVERSIDAD AUTONOMA DE YUCATAN-MEXICO) • ALASTAIR J. WRIGHT (STENDEN UNIVERSITY-NETHERLANDS) • ALBA ROBERT DUMI (ISMAIL QEMALI VLORA UNIVERSITY, ALBANIA) • ALBERT SCHRAM (MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY-NETHERLANDS) • ALEXANDER EGORSHIN (THE NIZHNY NOVGOROD INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUSINESS, RUSSIA) • ALEXI DANCHEY (FATIH UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL, TURKEY) • ALI AKDEMIR (AREL UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • ALI EKBER AKGUN (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • ALI HALICI (BASKENT UNIVERSITY, ANKARA-TURKEY) • ALISTAIR M BROWN (CURTIN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, WESTERN AUSTRALIA) • AMAR KJN NAYAK (XAVIER INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, ORRISSA-INDIA) • ANDREI BURENIN (IRKUTSK STATE UNIVERSITY, RUSSIA) • ANDREY DASHKOV (MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY, RUSSIA) • ANTONIO MINGUEZ VERA (UNIVERSIDAD DE MURCIA, SPAIN) • ANUKRATI SHARMA (UNIVERSITY OF KOTA, INDIA) • ASIM ERDILEK (CASE WESTERN REVERSE UNIVERSITY, USA) • ASIM SEN (ST. JOHN FISHER COLLEGE, USA) • ATIK KULAKLI (BEYKENT UNIVERSITY, TURKEY)

XI

• ATILLA DICLE (YEDITEPE UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • AUREA HELENA PUGA RIBEIRO (FUNDACAO DOM CABRAL, BRAZIL) • AYSE GUNSEL (KOCAELI UNIVERSITY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • AYSEN HIC GENCER (BEYKENT UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • AYTEN AKATAY (CANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • BAHADIR AKIN (SELCUK UNIVERSITY, KONYA-TURKEY) • BAHRI GOKCEBAY (KASTAMONU UNIVERSITY-TURKEY) • BERND MARTIN (DUALE HOCHSCHULE-GERMANY) • BEYZA KOCAPINAR BAYARCELIK (GELISIM UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • BIGE ASKUN (MARMARA UNIVERSITY-TURKEY) • BINALI DOGAN (MARMARA UNIVERSITY-TURKEY) • BIROL BUMIN (GAZI UNIVERSITY, ANKARA-TURKEY) • BORISAS MELNIKAS (VILNIUS GEDIMINAS TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, LITHUANIA) • BRANKO BUCAR (PACE UNIVERSITY, USA) • BULENT SEZEN (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • CANAN CETIN (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • CELSO CLAUDIOHILDEBRAND GRISI (UNIVERSITY OF SAO PAULO-BRAZIL) • CEMAL ZEHIR (YILDIZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • CENGIZ MANGENCI (YALOVA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • CENGIZ YILMAZ (MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSIY, ANKARA-TURKEY) • CEVAT GERNI (BEYKENT UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • CEVDET KIZIL (YALOVA UNIVERSITY, YALOVA-TURKEY) • CEYHAN ALDEMIR (DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY, IZMIR-TURKEY) • CHIEN-CHUNG NIEH (TAMKANG UNIVERSITY, TAIPEI COUNTRY- TAIWAN) • CON KORKOFINGAS (MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY, SYDNEY-AUSTRALIA) • DABABRATA N.CHOWDHURY (UNIVERSITY CAMPUS SUFFOLK , IPSWICH UK) • DENIZHAN KALKAN (YALOVA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • DURSUN BINGOL (ATATURK UNIVERSITY, ERZURUM-TURKEY) • DZINETA DIMANTE (UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA, LATVIA) • EBRU KABADAYI (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • EKREM TATOGLU (BAHCESEHIR UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • ENVER OZKALP (ANADOLU UNIVERSITY, BOGAZICI-TURKEY) • ERDAL AYDIN (CANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • ERDOGAN KOC (BALIKESIR UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • ERIKA SUMILO (UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA OF RIGA - LATVIA) • ERKAN KABAK (BEYKENT UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • ERKUT ALTINDAG (BEYKENT UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • ERNST NEULAND (INSTITUTE FOR BUSINESS INNOVATION-SOUTH AFRICA) • EROL EREN (OKAN UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY)) • ESIN CAN (YILDIZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • ESIN SADIKOGLU (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • EYUP AKTEPE (GAZI UNIVERSITY, ANKARA-TURKEY) • FAHRI KARAKAYA (UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS, DARTMOUTH-USA) • FEYZULLAH EROGLU (PAMUKKALE UNIVERSITY,DENIZLI-TURKEY) • FULYA TASEL (MALTEPE UNIVERSITY,ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • GARRY L. ADAMS (AUBURN UNIVERSITY, USA) • GILBERT LEVINE (CORNELL UNIVERSITY-USA) • GOKHAN OZER (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • GONUL BUDAK (DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY, IZMIR-TURKEY) • GURAM CHIKOVANI (FREE UNIVERSITY, TBLISI-GEORGIA) • GULDEN TURHAN (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • GULTEKIN YILDIZ (SAKARYA UNIVERSITY, SAKARYA-TURKEY) • GUNES ZEYTINOGLU (ANADOLU UNIVERSITY, ESKISEHIR-TURKEY) • GURCAN PAPATYA (SULEYMAN DEMIREL UNIVERSITY, ISPARTA-TURKEY) • GUVEN ALPAY (BOGAZICI UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • GUVEN MURAT (BULENT ECEVIT UNIVERSITY, ZONGULDAK-TURKEY) • HAKAN KITAPCI (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • HAKKI ERASLAN (DUZCE UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • HALIL CIVI (INONU UNIVERSITY, MALATYA-TURKEY) • HALIL ZAIM (FATIH UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • HALIM KAZAN (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • HALIS KALMIS (CANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY, CANAKKALE-TURKEY) • HALIT KESKIN (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • HA-NGUYEN (VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, VIETNAM) • HANS ZWART (STENDEN UNIVERSITY-NETHERLANDS) • HARUN DEMIRKAYA, (KOCAELI UNIVERSITY, KOCAELI, TURKEY) • HASAN IBICIOGLU (SULEYMAN DEMIREL UNIVERSITY, ISPARTA-TURKEY)

XII

• HIKMET TIMUR (HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY, ANKARA-TURKEY) • HISAO FUJIMOTO (OSAKA UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS, JAPON) • HOWARD CLAYTON (AUBURN UNIVERSITY, USA) • HUSEYIN INCE (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • HUSEYIN KANIBIR (BALIKESIR UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • HUSEYIN OZGEN (CUKUROVA UNIVERSITY-TURKEY) • IBRAHIM ANIL (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • INAN OZALP (ANADOLU UNIVERSITY, BOGAZICI-TURKEY) • INCI DURSUN (YALOVA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • IREM EREN ERDOGMUS (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • IRGE SENER (CANKAYA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • IRINA KUZMINA-MERLINO (TRANSPORT AND TELECOMMUNICATION INSTITUTE, LATVIA) • JAMALUDDIN H. HUSAIN (PURDUE UNIVERSITY, USA) • JANIS PRIEDE (UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA, LATVIA) • JIRI MEZULANIK (SILESIAN UNIVERSITY, OPAVA-CZECH REPUBLIC) • JOANN D. HOWKINS (HOWARD COMMUNITY COLLEGE- COLOMBIA) • JOHAN HOUGH (STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITY, SOUTH AFRICA) • JULIE BARKER LEBO (BALL STATE UNIVERSITY-USA) • JULIE BARKER LEBO (BALL STATE UNIVERSITY, MUNCIE, INDIANA, US) • JUNGWAN LEE (BANG COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, KAZAKHSTAN) • KADIR VAROGLU (BASKENT UNIVERSITY-TURKEY) • KAMIL KOZAN (ST. JOHN FISHER COLLEGE, USA) • KENNETH HOLLAND (BALL STATE UNIVERSITY-USA) • LARS EHRENGREN (STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY, SWEDEN) • LJILJANA MAUROVIC (UNIVERSITY OF RIJEKA, CROATIA) • LONNIE STRICKLAND (THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA, TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA - USA) • LUTFIHAK ALPKAN (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • M. K. SHARMA (HIMACHAL PRADESH UNIVERSITY, SHIMLA-INDIA) • M. SUKRU AKDOGAN (ERCIYES UNIVERSITY-TURKEY) • MAHIR NAKIP (AHMET YESEVI UNIVERSITY-KAZAKHSTAN) • MAHMUT OZDEVECIOGLU (MELIKSAH UNIVERSITY, KAYSERI-TURKEY) • MAHMUT PAKSOY (ISTANBUL KULTUR UNIVERSITY-TURKEY) • MARGARITA DUNSKA (UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA OF RIGA - LATVIA) • MARIA KLIMIKOVA (UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS IN BRATISLAVA-SLOVAKIA) • MARIANA DODOUROVA (UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE, UK) • MARIS PURGAILIS (UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA OF RIGA - LATVIA) • MARIUS UNGERER (STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITY, SOUTH AFRICA) • MEHMET BARCA (SAKARYA UNIVERSITY, SAKARYA-TURKEY) • MEHMET ZOR KAYA (DIYALOG AVRASYA, CHISINAU, REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA) • MEHTAP OZSAHIN (YALOVA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • MERAL ELCI (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, TURKEY) • METIN UYAR (TRAKYA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • MINE AKSOY KAVALCI (YALOVA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • MUHAMMET AKDIS (AHMET YESEVI UNIVERSITY-KAZAKHSTAN) • MUHSIN HALIS (GAZIANTEP UNIVERSITY, GAZIANTEP-TURKEY) • MURAT KASIMOGLU (CANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • MURAT KAYALAR (SULEYMAN DEMIREL UNIVERSITY, ISPARTA-TURKEY) • MUSA PINAR (VALPARAISO UNIVERSITY, INDIANA-USA) • MUSTAFA AYKAC (KIRKLARELI UNIVERSITY, KIRKLARELI-TURKEY) • MUSTAFA KOKSAL (KOCAELI UNIVERSITY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • MUSTAFA KURT (YALOVA UNIVERSITY, YALOVA-TURKEY) • MUJDELEN YENER (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • MUMIN ERTURK (ESENYURT UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • MUNEVVER CETIN (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • NAZAN YELKIKALAN(CANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • NECDET TIMUR (ANADOLU UNIVERSITY, ESKISEHIR-TURKEY) • NEIL BECHERVAISE (DIVINE WORD UNIVERSITY, MADANG - PAPUA NEW GUINEA) • NEVIN DENIZ (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • NIGAR DEMIRCAN CAKAR (DUZCE UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • NIHAN YILDIRIM (ISTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • NIZAMETTIN BAYYURT (FATIH UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • NURHAN PAPATYA (SULEYMAN DEMIREL UNIVERSITY, ISPARTA-TURKEY) • NURULLAH GENC (KOCAELI UNIVERSITY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • ORHAN ELMACI (DUMLUPINAR UNIVERSITY, KUTAHYA-TURKEY) • OYA ERDIL (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KOCAELI-TURKEY) • OMER ADIL ATASOY (OSMAN GAZI UNIVERSITY, BOGAZICI-TURKEY) • OMER TORLAK (OSMAN GAZI UNIVERSITY, BOGAZICI-TURKEY)

XIII

• OMUR OZMEN (DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY, IZMIR-TURKEY) • OZLEM OZKANLI (ANKARA UNIVERSITY, ANKARA-TURKEY) • PATRICK BEMELMANS (STENDEN UNIVERSITY-NETHERLANDS) • PAUL Z. JACKSON ( THE SOLUTIONS FOCUS, ST. ALBANS, UK) • PAULINE MAGEE-EGAN (ST. JOHN’S UNIVERSITY, USA) • PEET VENTER (UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA, PRETORIA-SOUTH AFRICA) • PERVEZ N. GHAURI (KING’S COLLEGE LONDON-UK) • RADHI EL-MABUK (UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWA-USA) • RECEP SENER (MUGLA UNIVERSITY, MUGLA-TURKEY) • REFIK CULPAN (PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, HARRISBURG-USA) • REFIKA BAKOGLU (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • RESIT OZKANCA (MELIKSAH UNIVERSITY-TURKEY) • REZAN TATLIDIL (EGE UNIVERSITY, IZMIR-TURKEY) • RIDVAN KARALAR (ANADOLU UNIVERSITY, BOGAZICI-TURKEY) • RICHARD ALAN NELSON (MANSHIP SCHOOL OF MASS COMMUNICATION-USA) • RICHARD LYNCH (MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY, LONDON-UK) • RIZA ATIQ ABDULLAH (UNIVERSITI KE BANGSAAN-MALAYSIA) • ROBERTS SKAPARS (UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA, LATVIA) • SABAHAT BAYRAK (PAMUKKALE UNIVERSITY, DENIZLI-TURKEY) • SADI CAN SARUHAN (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • SEFER SENER (ISTANBUL UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • SELAHATTIN SARI (BEYKENT UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • SELEN DOGAN (NIGDE UNIVERSITY, NIGDE-TURKEY) • SELIM AREN (GEBZE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, TURKEY) • SELIM EREN (CANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • SELIM OZDEMIR (QAFQAZ UNIVERSITY, BAKU, AZERBAIJAN) • SELIM ZAIM (ISTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • SENEM BESLER (ANADOLU UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • SERGEI MORDOVIN (INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE ST. PETERSBURG, RUSSIA) • SEVINC KOSE (CELAL BAYAR UNIVERSITY, MANISA-TURKEY) • SHAMSUL NAHAR ABDULLAH (NORTHEN UNIVERSITY OF MALAYSIA,AMANMALASIA) • SHARAN L. OSWALD (AUBURN UNIVERSITY, USA) • SHAUKAT ALI (UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON, SHROPSIRE-GREAT BRITAIN) • SIMA NART (SAKARYA UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • SONJA PETROVICH LAZAREVIC (MONASH UNIVERSITY, VICTORIA-AUSTRALIA) • STANISLAV POLOUCEK (SILESIAN UNIVERSITY, OPAVA-CZECH REPUBLIC) • STASYS VAITKEVICIUS (MYKOLAS ROMERIS UNIVERSTY-LITHUANIA) • SUBODH BHAT (SAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY,SAN FRANCISCO - USA) • SUDI APAK (BEYKENT UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • SULEYMAN TURKEL (CAG UNIVERSITY, MERSIN - TURKEY) • SERAFETTIN SEVIM (DUMLUPINAR UNIVERSITY, KUTAHYA-TURKEY) • SEVKI OZGENER (NEVSEHIR UNIVERSITY, NEVSEHIR-TURKEY) • SULE EREN (CANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • T. DIANA A. DE MACEDO- SOARES (PONTIFICAL CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL) • TANSES GULSOY (BEYKENT UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • TATIANA A. BURENINA (STATE UNIVERSITY OF MANAGEMENT, RUSSIA) • TIJEN HARCAR (IZMIR UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS, TURKEY) • TUGBA KARABULUT (ISTABUL COMMERCE UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • TUNA TANER (CELAL BAYAR UNIVERSITY, MANISA-TURKEY) • UGUR YOZGAT (MARMARA UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • UTE STOLTENBERG (UNIVERSITY OF LUNEBURG-GERMANY) • ULKU DICLE (YEDITEPE UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • UMIT ALNIACIK (KOCAELI UNIVERSITY, TURKEY) • V. DOLYATOVSKIY (THE ROSTOW STATE UNIVERSITY, RUSSIA) • VICTOR GNEVKO (ST. PETERSBURG INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMICS, RUSSIA) • VIESTURS PAULS KARNUPS (UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA OF RIGA - LATVIA) • VOJTECH MALATEK (SILESIAN UNIVERSITY, OPAVA-CZECH REPUBLIC) • WARREN J. KEEGEN (PACE UNIVERSITY, USA) • XAVIER RICHET (UNIVERSITY OF SORBONNE NOUVELLE-PARIS 3, FRANCE • YASEMIN ARBAK (DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY, IZMIR-TURKEY) • YENER PAZARCIK (CANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY, CANAKKALE-TURKEY) • YONCA GUROL (YILDIZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • YUCEL ACER (CANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY, CANAKKALE-TURKEY) • ZEYYAT HATIPOGLU (DOGUS UNIVERSITY, ISTANBUL-TURKEY) • ZOLTAN VERES (BUDAPEST BUSINESS SCHOOL, BUDAPEST, HUNGARY)

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 336 – 344

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

1877-0428 © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).Peer-review under responsibility of the International Strategic Management Conference.doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.074

ScienceDirect

10th International Strategic Management Conference

Attracting Talented Employees to the Company: Do We Need Different Employer Branding Strategies in Different Cultures?

Esra Alnıaçıka , Ümit Alnıaçıka, Serhat Eratb, Kültigin Akçinb

a,Kocaeli University, Kocaeli, 41380, Turkey

b Gebze Institute of Technology, Kocaeli, 41400, Turkey

Abstract

Attracting and retaining highly talented employees and to consolidate competitive advantage is an important issue for companies in all scales around the world. Understanding what attracts talented recruits to a company may provide important insights for human resources managers. Yet, there is another important question in today’s globalised business world: can we use standardized strategies to attract potential employees all around the world, or shall we customize our employer brand according to the cultural differences between the countries. This paper aims to identify perceptual differences concerning the importance levels of different dimensions of employer attractiveness in two different cultures. In doing so, we conducted a quantitative research among 300 university students studying in Latvia and Turkey. Our results suggest that respondents in Turkey attribute a higher importance to attractiveness of employers compared to Latvian respondents. National and cultural difference and gender are also investigated as they offer possibilities for human resources managers to understand theoretical foundations of employer brand and its application in practice. © 2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the 10th International Strategic Management Conference

Keywords: Employer Branding; Organisational Attractiveness, Human Resources, Cultural Differences

1. Introduction

Since competition for highly talented employees became almost as fierce as the competition for customers (Berthon, Ewing and Hah, 2005), companies want to be seen as attractive employers for prospective applicants and current employees (Lievens and Highhouse, 2003). The underlying reason is that human capital brings value to the firm and that organisational performance can be enhanced through skilful investment in human capital (Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004). Within this context, escalated competition for attracting best employees to the firm is named “the war for talent” (Michaels, Handfiels-Jones and Axelrod, 2001). In today’s globalised business world, companies in all scales do their utmost to win the war for talent. An important arm in this war is employer branding. In order to attract better employees, firms recently started using branding principles and practices in the area of human resources

Corresponding author. Tel. + 90-262-303-1637 fax. +90-262-303-1503 Email address: esra.alniacik@kocaeli.edu.tr

© 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).Peer-review under responsibility of the International Strategic Management Conference.

337 Esra Alnıaçık et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 336 – 344

management. The application of branding principles to human resources management has been termed as “employer branding” (Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004).

The concept of employer branding has recently become a prominent topic in the HRM field. Although there is a cornucopia of research on the issue, there still exist some questions to be answered. Are various aspects of “employer branding” or “employer attractiveness” being given equal importance in different cultures? If not, what types of differences do exist? Our paper aims to find answers for such questions. In the process of doing so, this paper identifies dimensions of attractiveness in employer branding and their relative importance in two different countries. We start by presenting the discourse around employer branding, why this is important for the organizations, what are different dimensions that compose the image of an attractive employer in the eyes of current or prospective employees. We aim to track for cross-cultural differences and to identify similarities and contrasts in dimensions of attractiveness in employer branding. In this context, the study begins with a literature review of employer branding and employer attractiveness, then will go on to development of hypotheses. Methodology, analyses and results will take place in the next section. Finally, results of the analyses will be discussed and recommendations will be provided for researchers and academicians in the last section.

2. Literature Review And Hypotheses

2.1. Employer Branding

The term 'employer brand' was first conceptualized by Ambler and Barrow (1996) in their pioneering paper. The concept of employer branding has emerged as a result of the application of the marketing principles to human resource management (i.e. internal marketing). The concept of internal marketing posits that employees are the internal customers of a company and jobs are internal products. To have satisfied customers the organization must first have satisfied employees (George, 1977; 1990). In this sense, employer branding is defined as ‘the package of functional, economic and psychological benefits provided by employment, and identified with the employing company’ (Ambler and Barrow, 1996, p. 187). According to Sullivan (2004), employer branding is a strategy to manage stakeholders’ awareness, perceptions, opinions and beliefs with regards to a particular organization. Employer branding “represents organizations’ efforts to communicate to internal and external audiences what makes it both desirable and different as an employer.” (Jenner, Taylor, 2007). It is concerned with building an image in the minds of the potential labor market that the company is a ‘great place to work’ (Ewing et al. 2002).

Several researchers pointed out that organisations with a “good” employer brand will attract more talented applicants (Cable and Graham 2000; Cable and Turban, 2003; Turban and Greening, 1996). Employer branding also helps to retain talented individuals, build trust in leadership and develop stronger bonding ties through its impact on individual, team and organisational engagement (Gittell, Seidner, and Wimbush, 2010). Favorable employer branding can reduce recruitment costs by improving the recruitment performance (Barrow and Mosley, 2005; Berthon, Ewing and Hah, 2005; Knox and Freeman, 2006), contribute to employee retention and reduce staff turnover (Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004; Barrow and Mosley, 2005; Berthon, Ewing and Hah, 2005; Knox and Freeman, 2006) and improve organizational culture (Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004). In order to develop a favorable employer brand, managers have to understand what factors are important in order to attract potential recruits to the firm.

2.2. Organisational Attractiveness

Organisational attractiveness denotes “the envisioned benefits that a potential employee sees in working for a specific organization” (Berthon, Ewing and Hah, 2005, p.156). Jiang and Iles (2011) also see it as “a power” that draws applicants’ attention to employer branding and encourages existing employees to stay loyal to a company. Organizational attractiveness is thought of as an antecedent of the more general concept of employer brand equity (Berthon, Ewing and Hah, 2005). Organisational attractiveness is regarded as a multi-dimensional construct. There are various attempts to identify the distinct dimensions of organizational attractiveness (Berthon, Ewing and Hah, 2005; Roy, 2008; Arachchige and Robertson, 2011; Bakanauskien, Bendaravien, Krikštolaitis, and Lydeka, 2011; Sivertzen, Nilsen and Olafsen, 2013) in building employer branding. Berthon et al. (2005) developed and validated a multi-item scale to identify and operationalize the components of employer attractiveness. The authors identified five distinct dimensions of employer attractiveness (such as: interest value, social value, economic value, development value and application value) and provided evidence on the validity and reliability of their scale. They also call for further research to develop and refine the scale. Lievens et al. (2007) used the instrumental–symbolic framework to

338 Esra Alnıaçık et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 336 – 344

study factors relating to both employer image and organisational identity. Kucherov and Zavyalova (2012) divided employer brand attributes into four groups (economic, psychological, functional and organizational) each of them corresponding to different aspects of employer attractiveness.

Examining further attributes of an employer brand is relevant for practitioners and researchers. Organisations need

to understand the importance given to each attribute and that these attributes may vary according to cultural difference, demographic characteristics and current employment status of an individual. As we mentioned previously, Berthon et al., (2005) call for further examination of the employer attractiveness scale in different cultures in order to track for cross-cultural differences. Roy (2008) in India, Arachchige and Robertson (2011) in Sri Lanka, and Sivertzen, Nilsen and Olafsen (2013) in Norway responded to this call. These studies revealed that different organisational features and HR practices are valued differently by potential employees. In general, monetary features were found to be less important in terms of attracting and retaining employees compared to non-monetary factors. As another response to Berthon et al., (2005), this study aims to identify similarities and contrasts in the aspects of attractiveness in employer branding in two different samples drawn from Turkey and Latvia.

Turkey is a transcontinental Eurasian country, located mostly on Anatolia in Western Asia, and on East Thrace in

Southeastern Europe, with a population of more than 75 Million people (mostly Turks, followed by Kurds and other ethnic groups). Islam is the dominant religion (99%) of Turkey. Turkey is a member of UN, NATO, OECD, European Council and G-20 Major Economies. Turkey began full membership negotiations with the European Union in 2005. Turkey has the world's 15th largest GDP-PPP and 17th largest nominal GDP. Turkish economy was affected by the global financial crisis in 2009, with a recession of 5%. As a result of continuing economic reforms, inflation dropped around 8% in 2005, and the unemployment rate to 10%. On the other hand, Latvia is a country in the Baltic region of Northern Europe with a population of 2.008.700 people (consisting of 62% Latvians, 27% Russians and the rest are other ethnic groups). The largest religion in Latvia is Christianity. Latvia is predominantly Protestant Lutheran, followed by Roman Catholics and Russian Orthodoxes. Latvia is a member of UN, NATO, and EU. For 2013, Latvia is listed 44th on the Human Development Index and as a high income country. Latvian economy was deeply affected by the 2009 global economic crisis; its economy fell 18% in the first three months of 2009, the biggest fall in the European Union. However, by 2010 its economy started to recover. The unemployment rate has receded from its peak of more than 20 percent in 2010 to around 9.3 percent in 2014.

Socio-economic condition of a country (i.e. culture, customs, economic trends or unemployment rates) may influence the level of importance given to various employer attractiveness components. Thus, we propose that Latvian and Turkish employees attribute different levels of importance to different dimensions of employer attractiveness (H1). Previous research shows that personal characteristics of potential employees (i.e. gender, age, and educational level) affect the perceived attractiveness of firms as employers (e.g. Albinger and Freeman, 2000; Backhaus, Stone and Heiner, 2002; Newburry, Gardberg, and Belkin, 2006; Froese, Vo and Garrett, 2010). Female and male respondents perceive the relevance of HR practices differently (Albinger and Freeman, 2000; Greening and Turban, 2000; Gould-Williams, 2003; Lievens, Hoye and Schreurs, 2005). Male respondents give a higher importance to compensation than their female counterparts (Batt and Valcour, 2001). Concordantly, we propose that gender of the respondents may influence the level of importance attributed to different dimensions of employer branding (H2).

3. Methodology

3.1. Research Goal

Our research objective is to identify dimensions of attractiveness in employer branding. In order to achieve this objective, our study aims to identify what is the perceived importance attributed to each dimension of attractiveness in employer branding and to examine whether there are statistically significant differences in perceptions of Latvian and Turkish respondents. Furthermore, the study aims to examine differences in perceptions amongst male and female respondents.

3.2. Sample and Data Collection

In order to test the research hypotheses, a quantitative approach has been chosen and data was collected using a survey from September 2013 to January 2014. A convenience sample of 300 adults (150 in Latvia and 150 in Turkey)

339 Esra Alnıaçık et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 336 – 344

participated in the study. Nearly half of the respondents (n=120) were employed and the rest (n=130) were unemployed undergraduate and post-graduate university students (University of Latvia, Faculty of Social Sciences and Kocaeli University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences) at the time of data collection.

Data is collected by a self administered questionnaire which includes demographic questions and the “employer attractiveness” scale developed by Berthon, Ewing and Hah (2005). The “employer attractiveness” scale has 25 items corresponding to the functional, economic and psychological benefits outlined by Ambler and Barrow’s (1996) definition of employer branding. Respondents are asked to indicate to what extent they consider the listed items important in choosing an employer? Responses are given on a 5 point Likert type scale where 1= Not at all important and 5= Extremely important. To test the hypotheses, mean scores of responses given to the questions are compared by using independent samples t test.

3.3 Analyses and Results

A total of 300 respondents participated in the study. SPSS software is used to perform data analysis. The mean age of subjects was 21.2 years (range:18-35; sd.=1.99) and 53% were female; 93% were single. Their study fields were mainly the social sciences subjects including business administration, economics, political science, communication, public relations, journalism and international relations. Reliability of the employer attractiveness scale is examined by inter item consistency using Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient. Overall reliability of the scale is good (α = 0,91)

In general, “Recognition/appreciation from management” (Mean score= 4,13); “An above average basic salary”

(Mean score=4,15) and “Having a good relationship with colleagues” (Mean score=4,17) are the most important attributes of an employer to our respondents. On the other hand, “Opportunity to teach others what you have learned” (Mean score=3,33), “Being a customer-orientated organisation” (Mean score=3,42), and “Being a humanitarian organisation – giving back to society” (Mean score=3,47) are the least important attributes of an employer to our respondents.

In order to test the first hypothesis, we compared the mean scores of each item by respondents` nationality. Table 1

shows the mean scores and standard deviations of each item and corresponding t-test results. It is found that, except for Q21, (importance given to “an above average basic salary”) there are significant differences between the mean scores of the employer attractiveness items regarding the nationality of the respondent. Thus, H1 is supported. In general, Turkish respondents attribute higher importance to all of the employer attractiveness items compared to Latvian respondents. The highest mean differences appear to be on Q15 (“Humanitarian organisation – gives back to society”) and Q5 (“Opportunity to teach others what you have learned”). Good promotion opportunities within the organization (Q8) and above average basic salary (Q21) are the items that have the lowest mean differences among Latvian and Turkish respondents.

Table 1. Mean scores and t test results of employer attractiveness items by nationality

Country N Mean Std.

Deviation Mean

Difference t Sig (2 tailed)

Q1 A fun working environment Latvia 150 3,21 1,17 -0,847 -6,41 0,000 Turkey 149 4,06 1,11

Q2 A springboard for future employment Latvia 150 3,41 1,14 -0,933 -7,59 0,000 Turkey 150 4,35 0,98

Q3 Having a good relationship with your colleagues Latvia 149 3,97 0,96 -0,400 -3,66 0,000 Turkey 150 4,37 0,93

Q4 An attractive overall compensation package Latvia 150 3,72 1,07 -0,567 -5,00 0,000 Turkey 150 4,29 0,88

Q5 Opportunity to teach others what you have learned Latvia 150 2,71 1,23 -1,227 -9,49 0,000 Turkey 150 3,94 0,99

Q6 Feeling more self-confident as a result of working for a particular organisation

Latvia 150 3,55 1,03 -0,767 -6,91 0,000 Turkey 150 4,31 0,88

Q7 Hands-on inter-departmental experience Latvia 150 3,14 0,94 -0,860 -7,42 0,000 Turkey 150 4,00 1,06

Q8 Good promotion opportunities within the organisation Latvia 150 3,97 0,98 -0,267 -2,47 0,014 Turkey 150 4,24 0,90

Q9 Feeling good about yourself as a result of working for a particular organisation

Latvia 149 3,86 1,03 -0,534 -4,63 0,000 Turkey 150 4,39 0,96

Q10 Having a good relationship with your superiors Latvia 150 3,71 0,99 -0,587 -5,50 0,000

340 Esra Alnıaçık et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 336 – 344

Turkey 150 4,29 0,86 Q11 Gaining career-enhancing experience Latvia 150 3,67 0,92 -0,693 -6,56 0,000

Turkey 150 4,37 0,92 Q12 Acceptance and belonging Latvia 150 3,51 1,06 -0,607 -5,37 0,000

Turkey 150 4,12 0,89 Q13 The organisation both values and makes use of your creativity

Latvia 150 3,49 0,98 -0,780 -7,08 0,000 Turkey 150 4,27 0,93

Q14 Supportive and encouraging colleagues Latvia 150 3,42 0,99 -0,900 -7,97 0,000 Turkey 150 4,32 0,96

Q15 Humanitarian organisation – gives back to society Latvia 150 2,74 1,10 -1,467 -12,08 0,000 Turkey 150 4,21 1,00

Q16 Innovative employer – novel work practices/forward-thinking

Latvia 149 3,42 0,97 -0,791 -7,37 0,000 Turkey 150 4,21 0,89

Q17 Working in an exciting environment Latvia 150 3,42 0,96 -0,480 -4,12 0,000 Turkey 150 3,90 1,05

Q18 Job security within the organisation Latvia 150 3,88 1,00 -0,460 -4,11 0,000 Turkey 150 4,34 0,93

Q19 The organisation is customer-orientated Latvia 150 3,08 1,12 -0,687 -5,41 0,000 Turkey 150 3,77 1,08

Q20 Happy work environment Latvia 150 3,55 1,03 -0,813 -6,98 0,000 Turkey 150 4,37 0,99

Q21 An above average basic salary Latvia 150 4,05 0,98 -0,187 -1,64 0,102 Turkey 150 4,24 0,99

Q22 Opportunity to apply what was learned at a tertiary institution

Latvia 150 3,17 0,94 -0,827 -7,31 0,000 Turkey 150 3,99 1,02

Q23 The organisation produces innovative products and services

Latvia 150 3,17 1,02 -0,960 -8,59 0,000 Turkey 150 4,13 0,91

Q24 Recognition/appreciation from management Latvia 150 3,81 0,90 -0,653 -6,58 0,000 Turkey 150 4,46 0,82

Q25 The organisation produces high-quality products and services

Latvia 150 3,73 0,99 -0,553 -5,25 0,000 Turkey 150 4,28 0,83

Graphic 1 shows the differences between the mean scores of employer attractiveness items contrasted by the nationality of the respondents.

Graphic 1: Differences between the mean scores of employer attractiveness items by nationality

341 Esra Alnıaçık et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 336 – 344

In order to test the second hypothesis, we compared the mean scores of each item by respondents` gender. Table 2

shows the mean scores and standard deviations of each item and corresponding t-test results. It is found that, except for five items (Q1, Q2, Q14, Q20, and Q24) females attributed higher importance to all of the employer attractiveness items. However, there is not any significant difference between the perceived importance levels of employer attractiveness items regarding the gender of the respondents. Besides, level of importance attributed to Q12 (“Acceptance and belonging”) is only marginally different between male and female respondents (p=0,068). Thus, we could not find enough evidence to support H2.

Table 2. Mean scores and t test results of employer attractiveness items by gender

Gender Mean Std.

Deviation Mean

Difference t Sig (2 tailed)

Q1 A fun working environment Female 3,59 1,22 -0,09934 -0,70 0,482 Male 3,69 1,22

Q2 A springboard for future employment Female 3,82 1,16 -0,13274 -0,99 0,324 Male 3,95 1,17

Q3 Having a good relationship with your colleagues Female 4,21 0,92 0,08829 0,79 0,431 Male 4,12 1,02

Q4 An attractive overall compensation package Female 4,07 0,96 0,1401 1,19 0,236 Male 3,93 1,08

Q5 Opportunity to teach others what you have learned Female 3,36 1,30 0,08109 0,55 0,583 Male 3,28 1,25

Q6 Feeling more self-confident as a result of working for a particular organisation

Female 3,95 1,02 0,04188 0,35 0,727 Male 3,91 1,05

Q7 Hands-on inter-departmental experience Female 3,65 1,08 0,17891 1,42 0,156 Male 3,48 1,10

Q8 Good promotion opportunities within the organisation Female 4,15 0,92 0,09421 0,86 0,389 Male 4,06 0,98

Q9 Feeling good about yourself as a result of working for a particular organisation

Female 4,18 1,01 0,11971 1,00 0,317 Male 4,06 1,05

Q10 Having a good relationship with your superiors Female 4,05 0,99 0,10705 0,96 0,340 Male 3,94 0,94

Q11 Gaining career-enhancing experience Female 4,04 0,97 0,03774 0,33 0,739 Male 4,00 0,99

Q12 Acceptance and belonging Female 3,92 1,00 0,21611 1,83 0,068 Male 3,70 1,04

Q13 The organisation both values and makes use of your creativity

Female 3,93 1,04 0,10103 0,85 0,397 Male 3,83 1,02

Q14 Supportive and encouraging colleagues Female 3,85 1,06 -0,04456 -0,36 0,721 Male 3,89 1,10

Q15 Humanitarian organisation – gives back to society Female 3,53 1,25 0,11695 0,79 0,431 Male 3,41 1,32

Q16 Innovative employer – novel work practices/forward-thinking

Female 3,84 1,03 0,04745 0,41 0,685 Male 3,79 0,99

Q17 Working in an exciting environment Female 3,68 1,04 0,04095 0,34 0,733 Male 3,64 1,04

Q18 Job security within the organisation Female 4,14 0,96 0,07373 0,64 0,522 Male 4,07 1,03

Q19 The organisation is customer-orientated Female 3,45 1,22 0,04938 0,37 0,711 Male 3,40 1,07

Q20 Happy work environment Female 3,92 1,11 -0,07547 -0,60 0,549 Male 4,00 1,06

Q21 An above average basic salary Female 4,20 0,93 0,11615 1,02 0,310 Male 4,09 1,05

Q22 Opportunity to apply what was learned at a tertiary institution

Female 3,65 1,00 0,15763 1,29 0,200 Male 3,50 1,13

Q23 The organisation produces innovative products and services

Female 3,70 1,11 0,12284 0,98 0,326 Male 3,58 1,05

Q24 Recognition/appreciation from management Female 4,12 0,87 -0,02944 -0,28 0,782 Male 4,15 0,97

Q25 The organisation produces high-quality products and services

Female 4,06 0,96 0,12672 1,15 0,251 Male 3,94 0,94

342 Esra Alnıaçık et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 336 – 344

Graphic 2 shows the differences between the mean scores of employer attractiveness items contrasted by the gender of the respondents.

Graphic 2: Differences between the mean scores of employer attractiveness items by gender 4. Conclusion

This study investigates the possible differences in the perceived levels of importance of different aspects of employer branding (i.e. functional, economic and psychological benefits provided by the employing company) in two different cultures. More specifically, it examines whether there are significant differences in cultures and nationalities on the perceptions of potential employees with regard to the employer brand. The effect of gender as an important individual characteristic is also investigated. Since competition for the best employees became almost as fierce as competition for customers (Berthon, Ewing and Hah, 2005), organizations want to be seen as attractive employers in the employee market (Lievens and Highhouse, 2003). Identifying the perceptual differences in the importance levels of employer branding offers a way for employers to gain a competitive advantage by attracting the “best” employees and retaining them in the company.

Our findings show that Turkish respondents attribute a higher importance to employer attractiveness compared to

Latvian respondents in general. Specifically, participants in Turkey perceive aspects of employer branding such as “Humanitarian organisation, gives back to society” and “Opportunity to teach others what you have learned” as being more important when compared to Latvian respondents. On the other hand, “Good promotion opportunities within the organization” and “above average basic salary” are the items that attained similar levels of importance in both cultures. There is not any significant difference between the perceptions of male and female respondents regarding the importance levels of various employer branding aspects.

These findings have some theoretical and practical implications. First of all, human resources professionals should

know that distinct aspects of an employer brand are valued differently. In general, “Recognition/appreciation from management” and “Having a good relationship with colleagues” as a social benefit; and “An above average basic

343 Esra Alnıaçık et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 336 – 344

salary” as an economic benefit are the most important attributes of an employer to our respondents. Further, we can say that attractiveness in employer branding is not a universal concept and the perceived importance of employer brand varies in different countries. Human resources specialists should first examine the most valued aspects of the employer brand by their target group and then develop their branding strategies accordingly.

This study has some limitations. First of all, using a convenient sample consisting of undergraduate students may

affect external validity and generalizability of research findings. This gives a limited understanding of attractiveness in employer branding seen through the eyes of undergraduate students studying social sciences in Latvia and Turkey. However, it should be noted that university students are the primary source of potential employees in all industries. Organisations often direct their recruitment efforts towards students, since students are likely to apply for a job in near future. Having said that, future studies might cover university students studying different subjects (engineering, medicine, arts, science etc.) as well as employed individuals who have work experience and field expertise in order to gain a wider understanding of the effect of employer branding on employee behavior.

References

Albinger, H.S., and Freeman, S.J. (2000), ‘Corporate social performance and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations’, Journal of Business Ethics, 28, 243-253.

Ambler, T., and Barrow, S. (1996), ‘The employer brand’, Journal of Brand Management, 4, 185-206. Arachchige, B.J.H. and Robertson, A. (2011), ‘Business Student Perceptions of a Preferred Employer: A Study Identifying Determinants of

Employer Branding’, IUP Journal of Brand Management, 8, 25-46. Backhaus, K. and Tikoo, S. (2004), ‘Conceptualizing and researching employer branding’, Career Development International, 9, 501-17. Backhaus, K.B., Stone, B.A., and Heiner, K. (2002), ‘Exploring the relationship between corporate social performance and employer attractiveness’,

Business & Society, 41, 292-318. Bakanauskien, I., Bendaravien, R., Krikštolaitis, R., and Lydeka, Z. (2011), ‘Discovering an Employer Branding: Identifying Dimensions of

Employer's Attractiveness in University’, Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 59, 7-22. Barrow, S., and Mosley, R. (2005), ‘The Employer Brand: Bringing the Best of Brand Management to People at Work’, Chichester: Wiley. Batt, R., and Valcour, P.M. (2001), ‘Human resource practices as predictors of work family outcomes and employee turnover’, Industrial Relations,

42, 189-220. Berthon, P., Ewing, M. and Hah, L.L. (2005), ‘Captivating company: dimensions of attractiveness in employer branding’, International Journal of

Advertising, 24, 151-72. Cable, D.M., and Graham, M. (2000), ‘The determinants of organizational reputation: a job search perspective’, Journal of Organizational Behavior,

21, 929-47. Cable, D.M., and Turban, D.B. (2003), ‘The value of organizational image in the recruitment context: a brand equity perspective’, Journal of

Applied Social Psychology, 33, 2244-66. Ewing, M.J., Pitt, L.F., deBussy, N.M., and Berthon, P. (2002), ‘Employment Branding in the Knowledge Economy’, International Journal of

Advertising, 21, 3-22. Froese, F.J., Vo, A., and Garrett, T.C. (2010), ‘Organizational attractiveness of foreign based companies: a country of origin perspective’,

International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18, 271-281. George, W. R. (1977), ‘The Retailing of Services - A Challenging Future’, Journal of Retailing, 53, 85-98. Gittell, J.H., Seidner, R., and Wimbush, J. (2010), 'A Relational Model of How High Performance Work Systems Work', Organization Science, 21,

490-506. Gould-Williams, J. (2003), ‘The importance of HR practices and workplace trust in achieving superior performance: a study of public-sector

organizations’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14, 28-54. Greening, D.W., and Turban, D.B. (2000), ‘Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce’, Business &

Society, 39, 254-280. Jenner, S., and Taylor, S. (2007), ‘Employer branding-fad or the future of HR? ’ in CIPD London, http://www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/56C8377F-

256B-4556- 8650-8408B0E07576/0/empbrandlatfad.pdf Jiang, T.T., and Iles, P. (2011), ‘Employer-brand equity, organizational attractiveness and talent management in the Zhejiang private sector China’,

Journal of Technology Management in China, 6, 97-110. Knox, S., and Freeman, C. (2006), ‘Measuring and Managing Employer Brand Image in the Service Industry’, Journal of Marketing Management,

22, 695-716. Kucherov, D., and Zavyalova, E. (2012), ‘HRD practices and talent management in the companies with the employer brand’, European Journal of

Training and Development, 36, 86-104 Lievens, F., and Highhouse, S. (2003), ‘The relation of instrumental and symbolic attributes to a company's attractiveness as an employer’,

Personnel Psychology, 56, 75-102. Lievens, F., Van Hoye, G., and Anseel, F. (2007), ‘Organizational Identity and Employer Image: Towards a Unifying Framework’, British Journal

of Management, 18, 45-59. Lievens, F., Van Hoye, G. and Schreurs, B. (2005), ‘Examining the relationship between employer knowledge dimensions and organizational

attractiveness: An application in a military context’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 553–572. Michaels, E., Handfiels-Jones, H., and Axelrod, B. (2001), ‘The War for Talents’, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

344 Esra Alnıaçık et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150 ( 2014 ) 336 – 344

Newburry, W., Gardberg, N.A., and Belkin, L.Y. (2006), ‘Organizational attractiveness is in the eye of the beholder: the interaction of demographic characteristics with foreignness’, Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 666-868.

Roy, S.K. (2008), ‘Identifying the Dimensions of Attractiveness of an Employer Brand in the Indian Context’, South Asian Journal of Management, 15, 110-130.

Sivertzen, A.M., Nilsen, E.R., and Olafsen, A.H. (2013), ‘Employer branding: employer attractiveness and the use of social media’, Journal of Product & Brand Management, 22, 473 – 483.

Sullivan, J. (2004), ‘Eight Elements of a Successful Employment Brand’, ER Daily, 23 February, http://www.ere.net/2004/02/23/the-8-elements-of-a-successfulemployment- Brand

Turban, D.B., and Greening, D.W. (1996), ‘Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees’, Academy of Management Journal, 40, 658-72.