Employer review: Glassdoor Job Search | You deserve a job that loves you back

Employer Review Sites | PeopleScout

An organization’s employer brand is often in the hands of its candidates and employees. And, when it comes to employer review sites, the fate of your employer brand is – quite literally – at their fingertips. In fact, according to data from Workplace Trends, 72% of job-seekers share their experience on online employer review sites like Glassdoor. What’s more, recent research from Deloitte found that 80% of candidates who experience an unsatisfactory recruitment process will openly tell people about their experience, and one-third of those candidates will do so proactively.

But, what does this mean for your organization? Unfortunately, negative reviews from both candidates and employees can have a huge influence on your bottom line. For example, per CareerArc, 62% of consumers have stopped buying from an organization that treats its employees poorly. Plus, an Indeed survey found that 95% of workers said that if they were considering a new job opportunity, insight into the company’s employer reputation would be somewhat (33%) or extremely (62%) important. As a result, a poor employer brand reputation could cost your organization millions as productivity decreases due to a reduced candidate pool and consumers stop supporting your business.

So, how can organizations take control of their employer brand and overall online reputation? Well, recent studies from HRO Today and PeopleScout show that organizations globally are planning to invest more heavily in social networking, consistent monitoring of employer review sites, and a greater use of employees as brand advocates.

However, while these steps are important to improve your employer brand, many organizations are unsure of where to start; they may also lack knowledge of best practices for these strategies.

Therefore, in this article, we’ll help you improve your employer brand by outlining how to establish ownership of your organization’s presence on employer review sites like Glassdoor and Indeed; offer best practices for responding to reviews; share tips on how to effectively leverage employee brand advocates; and highlight some popular employer review sites that organizations should be familiar with.

Establish Ownership & Claim Your Employer Review Site Profiles

The first step in establishing an employer brand plan for review sites is to establish who in your organization will own the initiative. Specifically, it may make sense to have your HR team manage the employer review site accounts because they are likely familiar with sites like Indeed and Glassdoor that offer job-posting functionality, in addition to candidate and employee reviews.

However, it can also be beneficial to form partnerships across departments to holistically manage your organization’s employer brand. For example, your communications team can assist HR in crafting responses to reviews that align with your brand standards for tone and voice, as well as provide up-to-date information on awards and accolades. In addition, HR can lean on the marketing team to maintain an active social media presence for your company, as well as work to optimize search results by managing SEO and creating content to combat potentially negative reviews and keywords.

After establishing who will take ownership of the management of employer review sites, claim your profiles. This can be done at no cost by verifying the profile as an employer and creating an employer account to edit and manage the profile.

Plus, with an employer account, you can add valuable information to your profile for candidates to view, such as:

• Salary and compensation details
• Explanation of benefits offerings
• Company mission, vision and values
• Overview of company culture
• Logistical information (location, total number of employees, revenue, competitors, etc.)
• Unique initiatives
• Remote and flexible work policies
• Diversity, equity and inclusion programs
• Photos of employees, events and offices
• Industry awards and accolades

It’s worth noting that, according to Glassdoor, 75% of active job-seekers are likely to apply to a job if the employer actively manages its employer brand. You can do this by responding to reviews, updating your business profile, and sharing updates on the culture and work environment. Furthermore, building a robust profile on the employer review site will allow candidates to gain a better understanding of who your company is, what you stand for and what it would be like to work for you.

Respond to Reviews – Both Positive & Negative

Responding to reviews is perhaps the most important method in creating a strong brand presence on employer review sites. And, while both types of reviews can be easy to view and dismiss, leaving thoughtful replies is a guaranteed way to show candidates and employees that you care – regardless of whether the feedback is positive or negative. In fact, 80% of job-seekers who read reviews on Glassdoor say their perception of a company improves after seeing an employer respond to a review.

Some best practices to keep in mind when responding to reviews:

• Address the reviewer by name (for non-anonymous reviews) to establish a personal connection
• Thank the reviewer for their feedback
• Acknowledge positive feedback
• Address any concerns mentioned
• Offer advice on any relevant next steps

Here are some examples of how to reply to common types of reviews:

Leverage Employee Brand Advocates

While organizations have little control over who will leave reviews – especially reviews with primarily negative feedback – they can proactively build up a strong body of positive reviews by leveraging employee brand advocates. These are employees who advocate for an organization and generate a positive image of the brand via online and offline channels. It’s important to note here that, when encouraging employees to leave reviews, you should emphasize the value of honest, candid reviews; employees should not feel pressured to paint a certain image of your organization.

Consider the following ideas to encourage employees to leave truthful, positive reviews that will help improve your employer brand:

New Hires

New hires are a great place to start when gathering positive reviews. That’s because the application, interviewing, and onboarding process is still fresh in their minds and they recently chose your organization as their new employer. So, ask new hires to leave a review on their hiring experience when they first start, and encourage them to update it after their first 90 days.

HR, PR & Marketing

Another good place to start is by requesting that members of your HR and marketing teams write reviews. Members of these departments already have a good understanding of the importance of employer review sites and are likely willing to leave honest reviews that highlight your organization’s strong points.

Promoted & Awarded Employees

If your organization recognizes employees for outstanding work with awards or honors, these workers can also be an excellent source of positive reviews. The same can be said for employees who have recently been promoted. A good practice is to establish a system that reaches out to these employees with a congratulatory message alongside a call to action to post online about their experience working at your company.

Employee Resource Groups

Employees who voluntarily join employee resource groups in addition to their daily responsibilities are already likely to be highly engaged within your organization. So, tap into these groups of employees and request that they leave reviews based on your organization’s culture and commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion – something Glassdoor provides ratings on and many candidates are interested in.

Regular Requests

Finally, managers should be empowered to regularly encourage their team members to leave reviews. This can become a regular practice during performance meetings, as well as after the completion of a big project or when hiring season is afoot. Likewise, if your organization offers flexible work arrangements or other unique perks, employees should be encouraged to share emotive experiences of how these benefits have affected their lives.

Employer Review Sites to Consider

Because there are a variety of employer review sites out there, it can be hard to keep track of them all. So, we compiled this list of the top 10 you should monitor to improve your employer brand for long-term success.

• Glassdoor: Current and former employees can anonymously review companies; submit and view salaries; as well as search and apply for jobs.
• Indeed: Candidates can upload a résumé and browse reviews and salaries, while employers can post jobs, search résumés and more.
• Comparably: Includes information on employers, brands, salaries and company culture.
• FairyGodBoss: Women’s career community for career advice, job openings and company reviews.
• Kununu: Employer reviews, salary data and culture reviews from those who know best: employees and applicants.
• Google Reviews: Business reviews appear next to your company’s listing in Maps and Search. These can help your business stand out on Google, which is the leading search engine.
• InHerSight: Here, candidates can find company reviews and ratings; get matched to jobs; and connect with a community of women navigating the workplace.
• Vault: Known for its influential rankings, ratings, and reviews on thousands of top employers and hundreds of internship programs.
• CareerBliss: Candidates can find jobs, research salaries and read reviews with a focus on company culture.
• TheJobCrowd: This UK-based employer review site is focused on helping recent graduates in their early careers.

As recruitment processes and the world of work continue to take digital shifts, employer review sites will become increasingly important in making or breaking a candidate’s decision to join your organization. And, while you certainly can’t control every review, you can be proactive in taking charge of your employer review site presence by regularly responding to reviews, leveraging employee advocates, and monitoring what candidates and employees are saying about your organization online. In doing so, you’ll improve your employer brand by creating a strong employer brand and a positive presence where it counts – and where it makes a difference.

1910.38 – Emergency action plans.

1. By Standard Number
2. 1910.38 – Emergency action plans.

1910. 38(a)

Application. An employer must have an emergency action plan whenever an OSHA standard in this part requires one. The requirements in this section apply to each such emergency action plan.

1910.38(b)

Written and oral emergency action plans. An emergency action plan must be in writing, kept in the workplace, and available to employees for review. However, an employer with 10 or fewer employees may communicate the plan orally to employees.

1910.38(c)

Minimum elements of an emergency action plan. An emergency action plan must include at a minimum:

1910.38(c)(1)

Procedures for reporting a fire or other emergency;

1910. 38(c)(2)

Procedures for emergency evacuation, including type of evacuation and exit route assignments;

1910.38(c)(3)

Procedures to be followed by employees who remain to operate critical plant operations before they evacuate;

1910.38(c)(4)

Procedures to account for all employees after evacuation;

1910.38(c)(5)

Procedures to be followed by employees performing rescue or medical duties; and

1910.38(c)(6)

The name or job title of every employee who may be contacted by employees who need more information about the plan or an explanation of their duties under the plan.

1910. 38(d)

Employee alarm system. An employer must have and maintain an employee alarm system. The employee alarm system must use a distinctive signal for each purpose and comply with the requirements in § 1910.165.

1910.38(e)

Training. An employer must designate and train employees to assist in a safe and orderly evacuation of other employees.

1910.38(f)

Review of emergency action plan. An employer must review the emergency action plan with each employee covered by the plan:

1910.38(f)(1)

When the plan is developed or the employee is assigned initially to a job;

1910.38(f)(2)

When the employee’s responsibilities under the plan change; and

1910. 38(f)(3)

When the plan is changed.

[45 FR 60703, Sept. 12, 1980; FR 67 67963, Nov. 7, 2002]

the nature and meaninglessness of anonymous reviews / Sudo Null IT News This is a real garbage dump of negative emotions, which, by the will of fate, I first plunged into quite recently. Intuition suggested that there should be reviews only from storekeepers, and fast food employees – i.e. from positions where the entry threshold is low and staff turnover is high. Imagine my surprise when I found a lot of slop thrown at IT companies, including those where half of the industry wants to work! Really in the market where the logic rules, this dirt is quoted?

I am a manual testing specialist with many years of experience. I don’t want to name my employer, since we will not talk about him specifically, but about the industry as a whole. But it was the company profile on one of the review sites that prompted me to reach out to the community with this text (and questions at the end).

I am generally satisfied with the working conditions. My colleagues and I have been working on an interesting project for a couple of years now, we are paid the promised salary on time, everything is fair with taxes. As in any team, there are mutual misunderstandings, but they are resolved in working order. In the worst case, someone will yell at someone, but calm down. The situation suits me so much that I recently decided to recommend a vacancy in the same company to a good friend. What was my surprise when he, studying the Internet for reviews of a potential employer (apparently to complete the picture that I described), found whole buckets of slops addressed not only to the company, but also to its leaders personally, in my opinion, quite adequate. Tellingly, these buckets were found on the site of anonymous reviews – you see, the unknown author or authors were afraid to leave their name under the above. And where registration is required to publish a review, everything is fine with the reputation of the company.

The number of people who said goodbye to the company during my time here can be counted on the fingers. And only a couple of them left with a scandal. You don’t have to be a detective here to make assumptions. But it is impossible to say for certain that this is one of them. Maybe it’s the intrigues of competitors, or so some candidate who did not pass the interview was noted? Or a bot, why not? There may be many options, but suspicion primarily falls on former employees. Apparently, this is how our brain works. True, when I talked with them personally, I could not even think that they were capable of expressing their emotions “from under the floor” like that. Not only is it anonymous, but also complete nonsense.

I’m not so “employer-oriented” as to be eager to argue and whitewash the company in the said cesspools. But it became a shame for the team, because they also walked through it in the recall, although they did not name names. And I got to figure it out – what is it, who even reads it and why anonymous reviews have a non-zero impact?

Resource motivation

To be honest, I myself did not particularly look at the reviews on the Internet when applying for a job. Much more information can be obtained from existing employees – during the interview. And in the reviews initially expect more negative. It is well known that negative experiences are described more often.

Data on reviews in general – not only for employers, but also for goods / services, source

As I began to dig, a whole universe of negativity opened up to me, which someone is probably studying.
The resources that collect this negative report proudly about the truth of employees, which is posted on their pages, ignoring the fact that an anonymous review can be left by anyone, not just an employee. And in practice, in the search, along with the sites themselves, ads are easily found offering to remove negative from them for money. Even for life.

A fragment of a screenshot of the first page of Google

An interesting model of work turns out: you spread negativity, and then you easily prove to the company that its “reputation in the labor market” has been damaged (read: normal people will not go to work here), so we need to urgently invest in its restoration.

How true these announcements are is a separate discussion. But in general, this whole system with reviews seems to “feed” a whole army of companies that supposedly work professionally with a reputation. They don’t even need to have any connection with review sites. To run a successful business, it’s enough just to promote the idea through PR that the negative needs to be handled appropriately, and they are ready to help here. No, there are probably normal tools for working with reputation, but, you see, in connection with anonymous reviews, all this looks very doubtful.

Imaginary anonymity

The degree of anonymity of the reviewer strongly depends on the size of the company.
If this is a conditional Google with offices in different cities and countries, a bunch of departments and a huge staff flow, the author of the review has a good chance of remaining unrecognized.
But if, like ours, you have enough fingers on your hands to count the employees who no longer work for the company, then by specifying the details in the review, it is quite possible to establish exactly who wrote it, even if he did not bother to sign. And the mentions of small companies on such sites are the majority.

In general, anonymity is somehow “one-sided”. Each review contains quite reliable names of the company, and often the full name of the guilty (from the point of view of the author of the review) employees, but not the data of the “accuser”. The resources themselves explain this contradiction by the fact that the authors of the reviews want to feel safe. However, this smacks of banal deception – the desire to lure a larger audience through dirt and false promises. More audience – more attention to the site, more noise, which means even more visitors. And it’s more likely that there will be someone willing to pay for the removal of the review, isn’t it?

By the way, about three years ago on Habré there was an analysis of such sites with proof that they are optimized for issuance in the search for the company name in the same Google, first of all, precisely the negative.

Anonymity also allows you to “hide your ends in the water”. You can write any implausible dirt, but a claim for the protection of business reputation from the company or the employee mentioned does not threaten either the site or the author of the text. Here you can’t even enter into a dialogue – there is simply no one with whom (technically there is an option to protect business reputation in court in this case too, but there we are talking about special proceedings – here you need to go to lawyers for advice).

In general, to get a full impression of a situation, you always want to listen to the other side of the conflict. In the format of an open dialogue with positions indicated, this would be more informative. Here we see an outpouring of the subjective, which is very reminiscent of the behavior of a cowardly schoolboy: he put the feces in a bag, set it on fire, threw it under the door and ran away so that no one would guess who did it.

It is curious that an attempt to create a mirror situation – a site for companies with reviews about employees indicating their personal data – is punishable by a whole list of laws. It turns out that the legal entity and employees who are still working in it cannot protect themselves from the dismissed?

Motivation of authors

To be honest, while researching the issue, I myself immersed myself in reading reviews in companies in my region. The general impression is that for the most part there are only emotions and a minimum of facts.
There is a separate “cauldron” for companies that do not pay the promised money, but here, in my opinion, the employees themselves are often to blame – initially you don’t have to agree to “gray” conditions, no matter what pretty personnel officers tell you. There are several legal and legitimate schemes of interaction with a legal entity (TC, copyright agreement, IP, etc.), each of which is applicable in its own situation. And in order not to be deceived, you just need to understand how they differ from each other.

If the feedback does not concern money, then it often turns into personalities. And here, in many cases, according to the description of the situation, it is clear that the problem is not so much in the company, but in the inability of the employee to control his emotions, to approach the problem from the right side, etc. This is especially noticeable to those who at least occasionally work with subordinates. I believe that a large proportion of the dissatisfied are from those who did not cope with their work and were dismissed fairly. And such a “review”, sent anonymously, allows you to take revenge on the employer for the “unfair dismissal”.

Was there an author?

I did not notice any information on any site with anonymous reviews that the reliability of these facts is being verified by someone. In the case of my employer, the facts presented in the recall alluded to a very specific employee. But where did he get all these details from? And was it really him? There is about a third of the truth. And who is the judge here? There seems to be nothing stopping you from writing a negative review about a company you’ve never worked for at all. Or launch a bot that will scribble such opuses on all the companies that come across?

It seems to me that if these reviewers really pursued some “lofty goals” about putting things in order on the labor market, they would require users to register with real, or at least passport, data and check the information – at least the basic facts ( worked from such to such, fired under the article), but simply would not show the data to employers and other visitors.

Curiously, the same sites are full of companies with a supposedly perfect reputation. This is what I have the most questions about. Is this possible: organizations with the highest ratings on sites with non-anonymous reviews have one to two points, while some little-known individual entrepreneurs, pawnshops and clinics of obscure medicine from the regions have only the highest rating? And I’m not the only one who is so distrustful … People in general do not believe in ideals.

Most trusted review score by readers, source)

What I think as a review consumer

In general, I am offended that they went through my team like that.

An acquaintance will still send his resume, but for this, in a conversation with him, I acted as a “seller” of the employer – I explained the situation to him as it looks from my side. Tellingly, my review had more weight, since we have known each other for several days. And following my example, he plans to ask questions during the interview…

To be honest, I would like to see the same thing in feedback about employers on career resources: any positive or negative must be signed by a specific employee indicating the position in which he worked. I may be stoned for this, but I tend to believe that senior developers who have worked for several years in one company are more trustworthy than junior developers who have not passed their probationary period in it. And I want to be able to contact the author of the review in order to get the details of interest, and at the same time make sure that this is a current or former employee, and not a sent “cossack” or a bot.

Sites with anonymous reviews should disappear or cease to be anonymous in order not to lose a niche in the market. And at the moment it is completely discredited garbage dumps. I doubt that a reasonable person would write a review there or look for useful information.

What do you think?

1. Do you trust anonymous employer reviews? (yes/no)
2. Would your opinion about the employer be improved if any negative response was received by the company or its current employees, as “reputation managers” advise? (yes/no)

If you believe me, please explain why in the comments.

Most Attractive Employers by Sector

Who are the top employers in the banking, industry, telecommunications, media and retail sectors?

The annual study of the job search portal CVKeskus.ee revealed that the majority of Estonian employees would like to work in companies where they can fulfill themselves in the field of information technology – many of the TOP 20 most attractive employers in Estonia operate in the IT sector. Chosen as the most attractive employer in Estonia, Eesti Energia and second-placed Telia Eesti also create many opportunities for employees to fulfill themselves in the IT sector.

“The current study has once again confirmed that the most attractive employers in Estonia are companies that offer good career and self-realization opportunities, as well as competitive salaries,” said Henri Auväert, communications manager for the Baltic region at CVKeskus.ee. According to the employees, the weakest quality of the most attractive Estonian employers is the balance between work and private life.

The study revealed that employers in different sectors have different strengths, which are highly valued by employees. Regarding enterprises operating in the information technology sector, respondents noted that employees in this sector are very well paid, while in the banking and telecommunications sectors, broad career opportunities are considered the strongest qualities. The most honest and reputable employers, according to employees, operate in the telecommunications industry.

Most attractive employers by sector:

Banking
1. Swedbank AS
2. Transferwise Ltd Eesti branch
3. AS LHV Pank
4. AS SEB Pank
5. Danske Bank A/S Eesti filiaal
Look at the vacancies in this sector »

IT
1. Skype Technologies OÜ
2. Playtech Estonia OÜ
3. Pipedrive OÜ
4. Microsoft Estonia OÜ
5. Nortal AS
Look at vacancies in this sector »

Industrial and manufacturing
1. Eesti Energia AS
2. ABB AS
3. Kalev AS
4. Cleveron AS
5. Stora Enso Eesti AS
Look at job vacancies in this sector »

Telecom/Mobile
1. Telia Eesti AS
2. Elisa Eesti AS
3. Tele2 Eesti AS
4 Starman (Elisa Eesti AS)
Look at job openings in this sector »

Large retail chains
1. Kaubamaja AS
2. Stockmann AS
3. Coop Eesti
4. Prisma Peremarket AS
5.