Mixed-method study shows co-branding alliances impact employer branding in tourism, suggesting enhanced employee motivation.
Purpose The aim of this study is to investigate how co-branding alliances are perceived by current and potential employees of an outdoor-action-sports-service provider. Design/methodology/approach The study adopts a sequential mixed-method approach with a focus on co-branding alliances within a tourism outdoor sports company in Austria. The study conducts qualitative, semi-structured interviews with managers of the company to collect initial insights. Subsequently, it tests the proposed hypotheses using empirical quantitative data collected via a questionnaire administered to current and potential employees. Findings The findings demonstrate that co-branding alliances can serve as effective internal and external employer branding strategies. Brand fit among partner brands is particularly important in terms of potential employees' perceived job security. The results further confirm positive relationships between job security and employer recommendation for current employees and between perceived job security and intention to apply for potential employees. The findings thus underscore the potential benefits for companies to use co-branding alliances as an employer branding tool. Practical implications The findings imply that companies should collaborate with brands that share similar values and strategically leverage co-branding alliances to motivate current employees while attracting potential employees. This approach offers a promising avenue for strengthening an organization's position as an employer of choice. Originality/value This research offers original insights on co-branding alliances as a strategic employer branding tool. It examines their impact on internal and external employer branding as well as employer-related outcomes in the tourism and hospitality industry.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stadler et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: