The moving definition of Employer Value Proposition

Does a change in langue equal less ambition?

Language evolves.

Take the word “terrific”. It’s meaning has changed from “inspiring terror”, then used to refer to anything spectacular, then to its current meaning of something especially good.

I’m detecting a bit of a shift with Employer Value Proposition (EVP).

What I’m starting to see is that Employer Value Proposition is evolving from:

·         The art/science of defining the elements that make you a distinctive and attractive place to work

And more to:

·         Evolving the proposition that you have as an employer – or making you more distinctive and attractive.

Which is great. BUT in this sense, EVP is tending to be rather one-dimensional, and about reward, benefits and conditions, rather than about something broader.

That means there are two potential issues:

1)      The terms could be used interchangeably, creating confusion

2)      This new definition – I think – lacks the right ambition

Let me expand.

Let’s start with the original meaning:

Defining the elements that make you a distinctive and attractive place to work

I’ve written about this many times. There has to be a process of insight and research to get to your proposition.

That’s because your proposition must reflect your reality. It connects to your public-facing brand. It demonstrates your culture. It reflects your heritage and your future strategy. It tells you the things that are important to the organisation and the actions it most cares about.

And alongside all of that, it gives a detailed description of the real, lived, working experience.

Not all of that is there to make everyone want to come and work for you. You don’t want everyone.

Imagine if everyone applied to all your jobs! The admin!

A lot of your proposition is there to help the right people choose you. The people that will respond to your challenges, and will accept your compromises, and will stand the best chance of working in a way that helps you and them succeed together.

Importantly, it’s loaded with a heavy dose of reality. There isn’t the risk that the external message clashes with the internal reality. You’re not writing cheques you can’t cash, or preventing your current employees from being able to get on board and to amplify your proposition.

That’s a great employer value proposition.

Then there’s the newer meaning that I am starting to detect:

Looking to evolve the proposition that you have as an employer.

What I’ve written about more recently is that the development process for of an EVP used – pretty much always – to be about a lot of upfront, in-depth research, before you produce the usable goods.

This means your EVP must be static.

It’s a function of the process, which is relatively long and therefore relatively expensive. Since it’s long and expensive, it needs to have a long shelf-life to justify this.

But the world is not a static place. Investing in something that doesn't flex with the times cannot be a smart investment.

A static EVP may not be sustainable or practical. I think a more flexible approach is required where you start, quickly, with a foundation and then add to and improve from there.

So, it’s natural that organisations should look to make their EVP more fluid.

How are EVPS being evolved?

What I feel should be happening is that an EVP should be reflecting all of the circumstances that organisations are responding to.

Right now, organisations are working out what to do with AI. They’re trying to understand what global supply chains will look like. In the UK, they’re dealing with medium-term  issues like higher employment costs, and immediate issues like their response to the Supreme Court’s ruling on trans women.

All of those affect what, how, potentially even why an organisation does the things it does. At the same time, the next batch of issues to respond to is likely just around the corner. And we can be pretty confident that those will be just as consequential and impactful.

At it’s simplest, your EVP is the sum of the reasons to work here, and not for anyone else.

What I’ve then just described is that some of those reasons change . Fundamentally in some cases, more subtly in others. But changing, and changing frequently.

A core part of an EVP – one of those reasons – is the professional challenge you have. So, as a simple example: if you developed your EVP more than 24 months ago, then responding to AI wasn’t part of the challenge. Now, it’s utterly altered some people’s jobs, it’s had an influence on many more. It’s made some roles far less secure. Your response needs to be in your EVP.

EVPs are being evolved in a different way

I’m seeing that Employer Value Proposition has been picked up with an emphasis firmly on the “value”.

It’s being used to talk about reward, benefits and – to an extent – wellbeing. (My observation being that it’s the policy side of wellbeing as opposed to the cultural aspects.)

So, it’s much less of the psychological contract, and more the contract. A simplified version of the get and the give, and very much less about how it will feel.

Is that a problem?

I started off by saying that language evolves. Is that just the way it’s going? Do we just need to lose the old association in the way we often do quite naturally?

There are two problems for me:

1.      It’s confusing. You can have two people, in different roles in the same organisation, trying to evolve their Employer Value Proposition – and that being two entirely different things. That doesn’t help – especially when the concept and benefits of EVP aren’t always so easy to explain or to justify.

2.      The newer definition is narrower, and to my mind far less ambitious. Important, of course, but far less powerful.

What do we do about it?

By nature, I am averse to strict definitions of the terms we use. I think different people and different organisations come to use terminology in a way which best fits them.

But I will put up a fight for EVP. For it to be focussed on value, sure, but for that to be the entire value you gain from working for an employer, not just the value you can feel in your pocket.