But to start with, let me first share some numbers with you so you can get a sense of the scale we ’ re working with … 1,200 restaurants across the UK 87,500 employees … three-quarters of our people are under-21 … and for around 10,000 we are their first employer … Over 2.5-million customers a day Over 60% of our restaurants are owned by Franchisees – local entrepreneurs running, effectively, small to medium sized businesses. This means that: 1. All initiatives need to be able to deliver scale – but also need to be implemented in an SME context 2. We can only influence the franchisees, we cannot tell them what to do – so any initiative we create has to have a clear and compelling business case , and we have to be able to demonstrate a clear return on investment. So, that ’ s the business … what about the way we ’ re perceived as an employer?…>
We ’ ll when employment “ experts ” take close look at our business – very often conducting research and interviewing our people in the process – they are impressed by what they see. For example, we ’ ve been on the Great Place to Work Institutes' Top 50 UK Employers list for the past 5 years … on their Best European Employers list for 2 years … and last year were recognised as one of the World ’ s Best Multinational Workplaces. Investors In People have awarded us their Gold award … something which only 2% of UK employers have achieved. And we ’ ve been one of The Times ’ Top 100 Graduate Employers for over 10 years. However … and here is the basis of our challenge … Unlike these awarding organisations, most people don ’ t look closely at our business, conduct research, and talk to our people in an objective way about the jobs that they do…>
Instead, they see thousands of people doing “ McJobs ” The term McJob was initially coined by Douglas Coupland in his 1991 book “ Generation X ” … And has been formally recognised by the Oxford English Dictionary and defined as … … an unstimulating, low-paid job with few prospects, esp. one created by the expansion of the service sector . So, that, in a nutshell, was … and still continues to be … our challenge… to bridge the perception gap between the positive employment experience the vast majority of our people experience when they come to work for us… and the negative preconceptions many people still hold about us. It ’ s this journey I want to share with you this morning. And along the way I ’ d like to address a couple of important questions ….
The first is the key question you are thinking about today… Is there a difference between Brand and Employer Brand? …
And the second – and I think equally as important a question … Is there a difference between an organisation ’ s People Strategy and its Brand? And I think this is important because, for me, the notion of a “ Brand ” has moved way beyond the literal meaning of the word … “ a mark of ownership ” (like the brand mark on cattle)… to become something more like a “ Bond ” … a solemn promise … a commitment to deliver something of value. And if an organisation is going to deliver something, then surely that needs to be part of the core strategy.
So what I ’ d like to do this morning is start by sharing with you our People Strategy … and don ’ t worry, it ’ ll be a high-level look – I won ’ t be sharing details of our Comp and Ben plans with you! I ’ ll then look at how the communication of this strategy became central to our employer reputation campaign , and how we set about developing and executing that campaign. I ’ ll look at the impact on our business … and finally reflect on those two key questions… Is there a difference between Brand and Employer Brand ? … and Is there a difference between an organisation ’ s People Strategy and its Brand ?
… so let ’ s start with our People Strategy. A strategy which is – as I believe all People Strategies should be – is rooted in two simple things: What does our business need from its People? and … What does the business deliver in return that its People value? Simple stuff … but we realised that is we could make the very act of delivering want our business needs something that simultaneously created value for the people who were doing that delivery, then we would create a virtuous and powerful reaction … [CLICK] Great delivery for the business … means… valuable outcome for the individual … means … that the individual wants more of that outcome … means … more great delivery … and so on. So, to make this process work we need to get under the bonnet and find out what makes the business and its people tick …
Let ’ s start with what our people need … And here our approach isn ’ t rocket science: we simply asked our people two questions … What do you love most about working for McDonald ’ s? … and What do you love least? No tick boxes or multiple choice … just freeform answers. Some gave us a short sentence – others took pages – but based on all of their responses we created an “ Employee Value Proposition ” … in essence, a statement of what our people value. And what they value are three key things: Family : working in an enjoyable, energising environment where everyone feels part of the team Flexibility : a challenging, varied job that fits into a busy, modern lifestyle. Future : the opportunity to grow and progress within the business, whilst acquiring skills which will last a lifetime – whatever the individual chooses to do. Important to note that this is what our people told us that they value – this is a bottom-up EVP.
So, what does our business need? … Our business model is a simple People-Profit chain … a sequence of value-creating behaviours and interactions that starts with the individual employee and ends with the shareholders . And the important thing from our perspective is that it all starts with our people … … and the more Committed, Competent and Confident our people are, the harder and faster the process works. So the business needs Commitment, Competence and Confidence … “ Three Cs ” And our people value Family, Flexibility and Future … “ Three Fs ” So, what happens when you bring the 3Cs and the 3Fs together?…
Fusion! … and when you start to work the Fusion model in detail, you suddenly realise that there are an enormous range of possibilities … For example: The business needs a cohesive, focused team; while employees value a sense of belonging The business needs a flexible workforce; while employees value flexible working The business needs well-trained staff; while employees value transferable skills and qualifications … and so on. A very clear demonstration of this is our ‘ learning ladder ’ …
Over the last five years we have also put in place a structured ‘ learning ladder ’ mapped against nationally recognised qualifications. These qualifications start with a Level 2 BTEC Certificate in Work Skills for 14-19 year olds in full-time education gained through a structured work experience programme and continue with a Level 1 and 2 Certificates in Adult Numeracy and Literacy for those employees who need to brush up on their basic skills. These are followed by a Level 2 Apprenticeship in Hospitality and Catering (equivalent to 5 GCSEs of A*-C grade) and a Level 3 Diploma in Shift Management. And finally, a Foundation Degree in Managing Business Operations for our Restaurant Managers. The business needs Competent people – people who undertake training programmes, who work hard to learn, and who apply what they ’ ve learned in the workplace. In doing so, our people get a recognised qualification and skills which will last a lifetime – whatever the individual chooses to do … the very definition of the Future element of our EVP
So that ’ s our People Strategy. Now let ’ s look at how the communication of this strategy became central to our employer reputation campaign , how we set about developing and executing that campaign, and the results we achieved.
To ensure that we achieved the maximum impact for our campaign it was clear from the outset that we would need to take a multi-disciplinary approach. Consequently, we created a team which included: Internal specialists from HR, Training, Education, Marketing, Internal Communications, and Public Affairs and External specialists from Advertising, HR Consulting, PR, and Digital Marketing This team first came together in 2005 and continues to meet via teleconference on a weekly basis, and face-to-face every 8-10 weeks.
The team ’ s first challenge was to develop a campaign strategy, and there are two key features of that strategy which have remained constant since the beginning: FIRST: That our messages will be aligned to the ‘ 3Fs ’ of our EVP – these are, after all, the things our People value most about working for us … the “ what ’ s in it for me ” that has to be at the heart of any successful campaign. SECOND: That we will only speak about what we are actually delivering for our people – this is a campaign where we are looking to challenge the myth of the “ McJob ” by presenting the public with the straight, unvarnished facts.
So, following extensive pre-launch testing, our first campaign execution appeared in April 2006 as a series of in-store posters. With the strap-line “ Not bad for a McJob ” we simply presented the facts about what we deliver for our people … and let the reader decide for themselves. You can also see how the content of the posters reflected the 3Fs of our EVP – Family and Friends; Flexibility; and Future. It was also supported by an intensive PR campaign which generated 50-million Opportunities To See (OTS) including coverage in the Daily Mirror, Guardian and Financial Times . Broadcast coverage included eight minutes on Newsnight including a film, interview and studio debate around the McDonald's brand, as well as an in-depth interview on BBC Radio Five Live .
To create a second wave of coverage in June 2006 we launched a report by Professor Adrian Furnham of UCL into the psychological impact on young people of working in jobs in the hospitality sector. This launch was timed to coincide with the first appearance of the “ Not Bad ” campaign on McDonald ’ s electronic hording at Piccadilly Circus – the first time this globally iconic location had been used for an employer brand message . The story generated 40-million OTS across national, trade and broadcast media. BBC News Online coverage sparked a debate on the message board – with 75% of these agreeing with McDonald's viewpoint
This was followed in mid-2007 with a petition “ road-show ” which collected 105,000 signatures demanding that the OED change it ’ s definition of McJob As well as being a great way to involve our people in the campaign …
… the tour also featured a “ digi-van ” which showed a film highlighting the reality of working for McDonald's … And once again, you ’ ll see that the key messages reflected the themes of our EVP … The “ pure energy ” of a Family environment where everyone feels part of the team … the Flexibility which creates the “ freedom to live my lifestyle ” … and the chance to be “ going places ” in the Future We also brought the idea of the petition itself right up to date by enabling online signatures, and by texting “ Change ” to “ McJob ” … “ 62562 ” The tour generated an enormous 387-million OTS with 503 pieces of media coverage in 26 countries.
In January 2008 it was announced that McDonald ’ s had been granted “ awarding body ” status, … the ability to award our own qualifications in the same way a university can … an announcement which lead to 285-million OTS …
… while the launch of McDonald ’ s new staff uniform – created by Bruce Oldfield – in April 2008 generated a further 112-million OTS. So Wayne, you ’ ve got quite a media coverage target to hit when we launch the new uniform you ’ ve designed for us at the Olympic Games in July!
In August 2008 the “ Not Bad ” campaign was replaced by the “ My McJob ” series of in-store posters where we had asked our employees to describe in their own words what they loved about their “ McJob ” . Not only did this reinforce our earlier EVP research findings, but it also helped to involve our people even more closely in the campaign – shifting the emphasis from “ McDonald ’ s says … ” to “ McDonald ’ s people say … ” Again the launch of the in-store posters was supported by a PR campaign which generated an OTS of 169-million.
In January 2009 we launched our Level 2 Apprenticeship in Hospitality and Catering with a PR campaign which created 146-million opportunities to see across a wide range of publications, and which prompted a media debate about service sector Apprenticeships which was 97% positive or neutral about the McDonald ’ s apprenticeship…
The Apprenticeship launch also gave us the opportunity to build on the “ My McJob ” campaign theme of shifting our communications from a “ McDonald ’ s says … ” to a “ McDonald ’ s people say … ” positioning through the use of employees as advocates for the programme.
And finally, at the end of 2010 we launched our latest employer reputation campaign – “ Meet Our People ” which took the people-centric ethos of the “ My McJob ” campaign to the next level by giving a detailed insight into the lives and background of some of our employees. Posters and Tray Liners appeared in-store across the UK … and the following day we formally launched the campaign to the media. The campaign made significant use of digital media and on launch day people were tweeting about us continually, posting comments and likes on Facebook and over 2,200 people watched a campaign film we had placed on YouTube within the first 24 hours. There were also over 50 pieces of coverage on launch day, from the Daily Telegraph, BBC News Online and The Times to The Sun, Metro and Radio 1 Newsbeat..
So, a rolling, evolving, multi-disciplinary campaign. A campaign which delivered on a national scale – but which also involved and engaged our people and franchisees at a local level. But what return did we see on that investment?
Our “ Fusion ” strategy and the employer reputation initiatives I ’ ve described have had a significant impact on the Commitment, Competence, and Confidence of our people. We measure the 3C ’ s as part of our annual employee survey … … and I think it ’ s clear that over the past few years there has been a dramatic shift in all three. A shift which has underpinned four consecutive years of growth and an additional £265-million in annual sales. Most striking of all, however, is the shift in Confidence – and that growing Confidence is now shining through in our Customer Service scores …>
At first glance it looks terrible doesn ’t it! So let me explain to anyone who isn ’t familiar with Customer Service Opportunity scoring that this is a measure of the Customer Service Opportunities MISSED by our people. It ’s assessed by mystery shoppers who rate their experience by the number of opportunities to engage with the customer that employees fail to exploit. As a result, the perfect score is ZERO – and the growing confidence of our people has played a significant role in dramatically improving our performance in this area. But the business impact of our enhanced employee engagement goes beyond service …>
Overall staff turnover has decreased dramatically, which means that as well as reducing recruitment costs, also means we are getting a better return on our investment in staff training. And the sharp reduction in turnover within the first 90-days is a clear indication that we are attracting and hiring more of the right people in the first place.
And at the same time as staff turnover has reduced, we ’ ve seen a clear improvement in pride and overall commitment. So, great results for our business … but what ’ s been the impact on our reputation as an employer? Well, we measure that too …>
… and since we started our reputation campaign there has been a steady upward trend in our Good Employer Score. We ’ ve still got a away to go, so the journey continues, but our business results and this steady upward trend are clearly a ringing endorsement of the power of “ Fusion ” .
That ’ s the impact our People Strategy and employer reputation campaign have had on our business. So let me finally reflect on those two key questions… Is there a difference between Brand and Employer Brand? … and Is there a difference between an organisation ’ s People Strategy and its Brand?
Well, as I highlighted earlier, the team we created to develop and execute our employer reputation campaign included specialists from Marketing, Internal Communications, Public Affairs, Advertising, and PR. And the reason for this is not simply to tap into their expertise … it ’ s also because we firmly believe that there is just one brand … a single brand that has to be managed in a holistic way … a single brand that an individual will look at in different ways depending on the way they are interacting with it. To get my head around this idea, I imagine our memories are like a row of filing cabinets – and on every draw is a label – a brand So, everything we know about or have been told about McDonald ’ s believe about, say, McDonald ’ s goes into the McDonald ’ s draw. Truth and fiction. Perception and misperception. Everything. And when we are asked anything about McDonald ’ s we open the draw and trawl through what we know. Fancy a meal? Reviewing stock options? Looking for a sponsor? Thinking about becoming a supplier? Looking for a job? We make a judgement based on what ’ s in the draw. Any brand communications work we do around employment, therefore, has two objectives: To act as a stimulus for people to reappraise the material in their McDonald ’ s draw which relates to us as an employer To add hard evidence to what ’ s in the draw – hopefully balancing out the some of myths and misperceptions
1. AGENDA FOR TODAY Welcome – Simon Rogers The economic forecast – Bryan Finn, Business Economics Ltd.A comprehensive analysis of the macro economic factors currently affecting graduate recruitment. Brand – Getting it Right – Wayne Hemingway MBE Factors that affect well know brands’ ability to engage target audiences, from sustainability to design.The employer brand – An employers’ view – Carl Gilleard, CEO, AGR Carl looks at the challenges employers have faced and the success they have had promoting their employer brands on campus this season. Are you an employer of choice? – Marcus Body, Head of Research, Work Group Examination of what matters to your target audience, and what actually motivates students to choose you over a competitor. The McJob Myth – Jez Langhorn, Vice President, People at McDonald’s Restaurants UK Jez explores the key initiatives which have been implemented to date –
2. 2011 – a quality year forTARGETjobsOur 2011 marketing objectives: Improve the quality of our database to decrease thecost per hire from TARGETjobs for our recruiters.• A million more visitors to targetjobs.co.uk, a 40% increase year on year• 150,000 new active users added to the database, 50% from the top universities• Increased uptake of publications at the top universities• Employer Insights launched adding unique content to help students get hired• Fast growing graduate recruitment social sites with a 400% increase in Facebookfans• Investment in a new branding campaign resulting in the highest market sharegrowth in the industry• Sponsorship of the largest London graduate recruitment fairs from the CareersGroupHere’s to 2012!For more statistics visit gtimedia.co.uk or speak to your Account Manager.
3. UK economy: GDP growthAnnual % change 6% 4% 2% 0% -2% -4% -6%
21. How well do you understand the concept and process of employer branding?
22. Who is primarily responsible for your business’s employer brand? 74E/1(#4(!49! A$#(B1()!#(B! >3!#(B! 74EE.(12#4(5! "#$%&()! @&#E! 6,! 6,! !"#$%&()! :<&$C4(&! *+,! *D,! -./012!3&0#4(5! @8&!A4#$B! 6,! *,! 781&9!:;&2.<&! >3! 6?,! =,!
23. How highly does the organisation’s employer brand rank in terms of your role and priorities?
24. How do you communicate your employer brand to potential employees?
25. Which of the following do you recognise asbenefits that an effective employer brand can give to employers?
26. Which of these benefits are you currently receiving from your employer brand?
27. How do you measure your employer brand?
28. We asked:Which of the following elements do you thinkstudents/graduates are most likely be attractedto? 1.  Professional Development 2.  Personal Development 3.  Belief in the business 4.  Work/ Life balance 5.  Remuneration 6.  Job Security 7.  Benefits
29. To what extent do you think the followingscenarios can damage the employer brand? •  When the business does not deliver on the promise Very High •  Industry reputation High •  Negative media coverage Very High •  When the brand is confused e.g. different parts of Moderate the organisation with different brands •  Making people redundant Very High
30. A reminder from last year…
31. …with a modification Calibre
32. The graduate path Do I want290,000 a What Which c.65,000 “graduate kind? one? job” at all?
33. Let’s ask them 2,656 responses
34. Do I want a graduate job?“I didn’t apply toany graduateschemesbecause…” 45% of final year students
35. Do I want a graduate job?Are non-final yearstudents planningto apply to anygraduateschemes? Only 35% have made the decision. And that’s not all students…
36. How do I start?Most of those whoapplied began bypicking a sector, orby picking a jobrole. Current applicants: only 14% start with you
37. How do I start?Most of those whowill apply plan topick a sector first,or pick a job rolefirst. Future applicants: only 8% will start with you
38. Where will I start? 69% are going to begin in places which feature many employers, sectors and jobs.How will they answer “why a grad scheme?”, “which sector?” or “which job?”
39. Joining “a community” Graduate An careers industry No Possibly Probably Definitely A grad A employer professionFacebook groups, membership websites or other talent communities
40. Graduate retention High potentials* Male Female 1 year 92.1 % 93.4 % 92.6 % 2 years 65.4 % 72.7 % 67.0 % 3 years 42.7 % 51.4 % 43.7 % 4 years 33.4 % 43.2 % 37.5 %*Definition of High Potentials:Outstanding academic achievement (Top 20%); Extracurricular activities; Internship within thecountry
41. The graduate path Do I want290,000 a What Which c.65,000 “graduate kind? one? job” at all? Your employer brand
42. The implications: I 1.  Being an employer of choice is partly offering more than your immediate competitors. 2.  It’s also being part of a sector that offers great careers for a lifetime. 3.  It’s also being part of a community of graduate employers who offer something that competes with non-graduate jobs. Being an “employer of choice” is a tougher challenge than having a strong graduate brand; there are more choices than “which scheme?”
43. The implications: II 1.  Most of your graduate recruits are going to leave. Quite rapidly. 2.  You can “backfill” some with more graduates. What about the rest? 3.  You are almost certainly going to be hiring from competitors. “Successful” graduate recruitment isn’t just about you doing well; you need your competitors to be helping your sector grab the talent.
44. The implications: III 1.  Students are starting their decision-making journey in places where graduate employers play a minor role. 2.  Both the “graduate job” proposition and your sector proposition are defined by people who can’t do it as well as you could collectively. 3.  If that could change, more students would be interested enough to find out more. You’ll benefit, and they’ll benefit. Is the time right for graduate employers to start co-operating when it’s in their interests to do so? It’s already happening in places…
45. In conclusion Students have some very big decisions, and “which employer?” is the last one. “Employers of choice” need to help them make all those decisions.
46. Third party recognition
47. McJob n. an unstimulating,low-paid job with few prospects,esp. one created by the expansionof the service sector
48. People Strategy What What our our people business value needs
49. CompetenceCommitted Customer Sales Profits People Visits Confidence Employee Engagement Customer Loyalty Business Growth
50. Creating ‘fusion’ Cohesive, focused teams A sense of belonging Flexible workforce Flexible working Well-trained staff Recognised qualifications Controlled wage costs Negotiated staff discounts Meet emerging needs Develop emerging skills Enhanced reputation Pride in the organisation
51. McDonalds ‘learning ladder’
52. Multi-disciplinary approach
53. Overarching strategy
54. 2006: Not bad for a McJob
55. 2007: Petition road-show
56. 2008: Awarding body status
57. 2008: New uniform
58. 2008: “My McJob”
59. 2009: Apprenticeship launch
60. 2010: “Meet our People”
61. Business impact Competence 86% 95% Commitment 2004 201177% 90%2004 2011 Committed Customer Sales Profits People Visits Confidence 68% 86% 2004 2011 Employee Engagement Customer Loyalty Business Growth