It’s easy to get swept up in the excitement of building a strong employer brand. We hear about the magic it can perform – attracting a flood of applicants, seeing offers accepted with glee, and keeping top talent around for the long haul. It sounds almost too good to be true, like a fairy tale where everyone lives happily ever after.
But here’s the thing: sometimes, the magic beans don’t sprout. And it’s not because branding itself is a sham, but because the brand we’ve built isn’t actually… well, good. It’s a “bad brand.”
So, what exactly makes a brand go from aspirational to abysmal? For starters, it fails to stand out. Think about it: how many company taglines could be swapped out and still make sense? If your brand is so generic it could apply to thousands of other businesses, it’s not doing its job of helping someone choose you.
Then there’s the issue of trying to be everything to everyone. In reality, no company needs to appeal to more than a tiny sliver of the talent pool. Yet, bad brands often resort to platitudes, carefully avoiding anything that might ruffle feathers, even if those feathers belong to people who wouldn’t be a good fit anyway. It’s like trying to bake a cake that everyone loves – you end up with something bland.
Perhaps the most damaging aspect is the disconnect between the brand and reality. When the shiny external message doesn’t align with what current employees experience day in and day out, it’s not just inauthentic; it’s a bait-and-switch. This isn’t about being brutally honest for the sake of it, but about ensuring future employees actually get the value that was promised.
What leads us down this path of ineffective branding? Often, it’s a combination of factors. HR and talent acquisition leaders might mistakenly equate recruiting with simply hyping up how “great” the company is, without considering how their positioning might attract some while alienating others. They’re comfortable with bland positivity.
Leadership can also play a role. Facing constant market pressures and bad news, they might see the employer brand as a sanctuary to simply reinforce how wonderful the company is. This can push emerging brands, which aim to tell a complete story, into becoming glossy, unrealistic press releases.
The costs of this misstep are significant, and they start long before anyone even applies for a job. There are the development costs – the money spent on consultants, videos, and countless hours of stakeholder time. For many companies, this can easily run into six figures. The danger here is that during development, an overly positive brand feels good, like a temporary high. It’s hard to argue against more positives. The real problem hits upon launch, when the lack of differentiation becomes glaringly obvious, and the hangover sets in.
Then comes the cost of lost candidates. A good brand clarifies the value proposition, making it easy for the right people to say, “Yes, this is for me.” A bad brand, however, can attract the wrong kind of attention. It draws in those who are impressed by the superficial “greatness” without digging deeper. An “all good news, all the time” approach doesn’t just fail to attract top talent; it actively makes finding them harder. Your applicant tracking system becomes a sea of mediocrity, overwhelming recruiters and hiring managers. It’s like trying to find a needle in a haystack that you’ve deliberately made bigger without adding any more needles.
And let’s not forget the frayed relationships. A strong employer brand acts as a bridge between marketing and recruiting, fostering collaboration. But a bad brand, because it doesn’t solve real problems, often leads to frustration and a breakdown in communication. It’s a silent drain, costing time, money, and potentially, the very talent you’re trying to attract.
