Employer branding awards: Is it worth participating
Why do companies even get involved in this
The logic on the surface is simple: external validation works better than own statements like 'we have the best culture'. A candidate doesn't trust a corporate website, but trusts an independent certificate. Studies confirm the effect: 76% of candidates prefer to choose a company with Great Place to Work Certification, and the probability of choosing such a company is higher by 10 times. After announcing the certificate on Instagram, Wonolo gained 10 000 followers, and 27% of resumes directly mentioned the award.
But this is where most reviews remain silent about: the growth in attractiveness is almost always accompanied by a decline in selection accuracy. The effect of increasing the number of applications may be accompanied by a decrease in candidate selection selectivity, as the volume of incoming applications increases. Especially for well-known brands. The result — more incoming resumes, but lower quality.
How much does it actually cost
The starting price of participation is misleading. The basic tariff Great Place to Work for a company 10–99 people starts from $995 — this looks affordable. But this is only the entry. The application often requires up to 4000 words of text description per section, and companies usually participate in 2–4 awards simultaneously, which means different deadlines, different formats and a separate team coordinating the process.
- Financial costs: basic fee + certification + sometimes a separate fee for using the logo in communications
- Time costs: preparing the application, collecting data from employees, internal surveys, coordination with lawyers and PR
- Post-victory: budget for communicating the results — without it, the award becomes a line in an HRD presentation, not a recruitment tool
It is the third point that is most often forgotten. Companies allocate a budget for submitting an application, but not for what to do with the certificate after receiving it — and this is a separate campaign with no smaller budget than the application itself.
Who actually achieves ROI
The answer depends not on the industry, but on three factors: the size of the hiring funnel, brand recognition, and employee turnover. The economy works this way — the bonus pays for itself when it reduces the cost of filling vacancies by leveraging an organic flow of candidates, bypassing agencies. Ayming UK saved £173 300 over 12 months specifically on agency commissions thanks to the Great Place to Work Certification, because candidates started coming directly, mentioning the certification.
| Company profile | Probability of ROI | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown brand, high volume of hiring | High | The certificate closes the trust deficit faster than marketing |
| Well-known employer brand (Google, Sber) | Low | The bonus adds nothing to the already high recognition, only costs |
| A company with high turnover in hiring | Medium-high | Certification correlates with reduced turnover — 12% among GPTW-certified companies versus 32% average in the US |
| Niche B2B without mass hiring | Low | Few candidates, the audience of the bonus does not intersect with their job search |
| Startup aggressively hiring | High, but with risk | Rapid visibility growth, but higher risk of employees being poached by competitors |
What metrics prove ROI, and which ones are simply pretty numbers
The majority of award reports measure vanity metrics: the number of mentions in the media, likes, and reach in social networks. It's nice to show at a meeting with management, but it is not directly related to money. The real ROI metric is the share of candidates who mention the award in their first message or at an interview. The Wonolo study showed 27% mentions of the award among candidates, although this result may vary depending on the industry and scale of communication. It is this figure that correlates with reduced hiring costs, because it shows that the award really influences the decision to come to the company, rather than simply existing as a line on the website.
- Effective metrics: the share of candidates who mention the award; reduction in agency commissions; shortened time to fill a vacancy; reduced voluntary turnover
- Vanity metrics: number of subscribers (by itself, without conversion to leads); mentions in the press; position in the ranking without comparison to the previous year; total traffic to the career page without analyzing the quality of visits
What is usually overlooked when deciding to participate
Judging awards is not as objective as it seems. Most awards in practice evaluate the quality of the application writing no less than the real company culture: the winner is not the one with better working conditions, but the one who knows how to package the data into a convincing text. Competition is often lower than the award status suggests — many awards are given to those who responded to the organizers' marketing mailing, not to the best selected by a strict criterion.
There are also two risks that are almost never discussed in advance:
- Disappointment of new employees. A candidate comes to work, relying on the image of 'Best Employer of the Year', and encounters ordinary operational problems. Disappointment in the first few months of work is higher, which means higher early-stage turnover — an effect opposite to that which the whole campaign was initiated for.
- Visibility as a lure for competitors. Public recognition makes company employees an attractive target for headhunters. 'We work in a certified company' sounds good in a competitor's resume, who is poaching exactly these people.
How to choose an award, rather than participate in all in a row
Before submitting an application, it is worth screening the company through a simple screening, rather than relying on the prestige of the award name.
- Estimate the volume of hiring per year — if fewer than 20 vacancies are filled, the return on investment through reduced commissions will be insignificant
- Check brand recognition — if the company is already known in the labor market, the prize will not add trust, only expenses
- Include not only the fee, but also a communication budget for the outcome — at least equal to the cost of the application itself
- Choose one or two prizes with a real jury process (for example, RAD Awards with an annually updated expert panel), not five mass ones
- Set up tracking of the metric 'prize mention by candidate' from the first day after the results are announced — without it, ROI will remain unproven
The award is a recruitment marketing tool, not a measure of company quality. It works precisely where it addresses a specific deficit: trust, funnel volume, or recognizability. Where these deficits are absent, it makes more sense to invest the money in direct work with turnover and adaptation— the effect will be more noticeable and without ceremony in January.
Why do companies even get involved in this
The logic on the surface is simple: external validation works better than own statements like 'we have the best culture'. A candidate doesn't trust a corporate website, but trusts an independent certificate. Studies confirm the effect: 76% of candidates prefer to choose a company with Great Place to Work Certification, and the probability of choosing such a company is higher by 10 times. After announcing the certificate on Instagram, Wonolo gained 10 000 followers, and 27% of resumes directly mentioned the award.
But this is where most reviews remain silent about: the growth in attractiveness is almost always accompanied by a decline in selection accuracy. The effect of increasing the number of applications may be accompanied by a decrease in candidate selection selectivity, as the volume of incoming applications increases. Especially for well-known brands. The result — more incoming resumes, but lower quality.
How much does it actually cost
The starting price of participation is misleading. The basic tariff Great Place to Work for a company 10–99 people starts from $995 — this looks affordable. But this is only the entry. The application often requires up to 4000 words of text description per section, and companies usually participate in 2–4 awards simultaneously, which means different deadlines, different formats and a separate team coordinating the process.
- Financial costs: basic fee + certification + sometimes a separate fee for using the logo in communications
- Time costs: preparing the application, collecting data from employees, internal surveys, coordination with lawyers and PR
- Post-victory: budget for communicating the results — without it, the award becomes a line in an HRD presentation, not a recruitment tool
It is the third point that is most often forgotten. Companies allocate a budget for submitting an application, but not for what to do with the certificate after receiving it — and this is a separate campaign with no smaller budget than the application itself.
Who actually achieves ROI
The answer depends not on the industry, but on three factors: the size of the hiring funnel, brand recognition, and employee turnover. The economy works this way — the bonus pays for itself when it reduces the cost of filling vacancies by leveraging an organic flow of candidates, bypassing agencies. Ayming UK saved £173 300 over 12 months specifically on agency commissions thanks to the Great Place to Work Certification, because candidates started coming directly, mentioning the certification.
| Company profile | Probability of ROI | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown brand, high volume of hiring | High | The certificate closes the trust deficit faster than marketing |
| Well-known employer brand (Google, Sber) | Low | The bonus adds nothing to the already high recognition, only costs |
| A company with high turnover in hiring | Medium-high | Certification correlates with reduced turnover — 12% among GPTW-certified companies versus 32% average in the US |
| Niche B2B without mass hiring | Low | Few candidates, the audience of the bonus does not intersect with their job search |
| Startup aggressively hiring | High, but with risk | Rapid visibility growth, but higher risk of employees being poached by competitors |
What metrics prove ROI, and which ones are simply pretty numbers
The majority of award reports measure vanity metrics: the number of mentions in the media, likes, and reach in social networks. It's nice to show at a meeting with management, but it is not directly related to money. The real ROI metric is the share of candidates who mention the award in their first message or at an interview. The Wonolo study showed 27% mentions of the award among candidates, although this result may vary depending on the industry and scale of communication. It is this figure that correlates with reduced hiring costs, because it shows that the award really influences the decision to come to the company, rather than simply existing as a line on the website.
- Effective metrics: the share of candidates who mention the award; reduction in agency commissions; shortened time to fill a vacancy; reduced voluntary turnover
- Vanity metrics: number of subscribers (by itself, without conversion to leads); mentions in the press; position in the ranking without comparison to the previous year; total traffic to the career page without analyzing the quality of visits
What is usually overlooked when deciding to participate
Judging awards is not as objective as it seems. Most awards in practice evaluate the quality of the application writing no less than the real company culture: the winner is not the one with better working conditions, but the one who knows how to package the data into a convincing text. Competition is often lower than the award status suggests — many awards are given to those who responded to the organizers' marketing mailing, not to the best selected by a strict criterion.
There are also two risks that are almost never discussed in advance:
- Disappointment of new employees. A candidate comes to work, relying on the image of 'Best Employer of the Year', and encounters ordinary operational problems. Disappointment in the first few months of work is higher, which means higher early-stage turnover — an effect opposite to that which the whole campaign was initiated for.
- Visibility as a lure for competitors. Public recognition makes company employees an attractive target for headhunters. 'We work in a certified company' sounds good in a competitor's resume, who is poaching exactly these people.
How to choose an award, rather than participate in all in a row
Before submitting an application, it is worth screening the company through a simple screening, rather than relying on the prestige of the award name.
- Estimate the volume of hiring per year — if fewer than 20 vacancies are filled, the return on investment through reduced commissions will be insignificant
- Check brand recognition — if the company is already known in the labor market, the prize will not add trust, only expenses
- Include not only the fee, but also a communication budget for the outcome — at least equal to the cost of the application itself
- Choose one or two prizes with a real jury process (for example, RAD Awards with an annually updated expert panel), not five mass ones
- Set up tracking of the metric 'prize mention by candidate' from the first day after the results are announced — without it, ROI will remain unproven
The award is a recruitment marketing tool, not a measure of company quality. It works precisely where it addresses a specific deficit: trust, funnel volume, or recognizability. Where these deficits are absent, it makes more sense to invest the money in direct work with turnover and adaptation— the effect will be more noticeable and without ceremony in January.
Recent articles
MegaFon, BMW, VTB and more 240+ companies. See how it looks in the showcase reel:
Our branding agency is approached to order:
Branding agency services
