What actually defines a good corporate culture? – The benefits? The mission statement? The values listed on the careers website? For
Nina Zimmermann, CEO of kununu, corporate culture emerges from a completely different source: the day-to-day experiences of employees. And that is precisely where it becomes clear whether the image an employer projects to the outside world matches the reality within the company. In this interview, we discuss why corporate culture cannot simply be manufactured, the role played by leadership and transparency, how employers should deal with critical reviews – and why cultural change always affects both people AND systems. Let’s get started: SAATKORN: Nina, what personally appealed to you about kununu and the topic of employer transparency? Nina Zimmermann:
What particularly appealed to me about kununu is the core of our platform: creating transparency and giving both sides a platform on which they can share their experiences.
Particularly in German-speaking countries, giving feedback in the workplace isn’t always easy – and, of course, nobody particularly likes to hear criticism. At the same time, choosing an employer is an extremely important decision in people’s lives. To make that decision, they need information and different perspectives.
Of course, I’m also aware of just how complex a platform like kununu is and the challenges that exist on both sides. But it’s precisely this opportunity to share experiences and thereby create greater transparency that I find hugely important.
SAATKORN: You say: ‘Employer branding should really be called employee branding.’ What do you mean by that? Nina Zimmermann:
We often think of corporate culture as far too grand a concept. Culture isn’t simply a collection of benefits or a mission statement. It emerges every day through decisions and through how people actually experience their day-to-day working lives.
If you walk through a company and ask people what it’s like to work there, you’ll get different answers depending on the department. Nevertheless, there are recurring themes that tie everything together: Is the culture open or more structured? Is there dialogue? How do people interact with one another?
That is precisely where culture emerges – in everyday life. Companies must first understand how this everyday life is actually experienced before they turn it into nice-sounding phrases or marketing messages.
Culture isn’t just a buzzword. It’s real and often more complicated than you might think.
SAATKORN: Can a large company even have *THE* one corporate culture? Nina Zimmermann:
A completely uniform culture probably doesn’t exist in large organisations. Different departments develop different cultures. Nevertheless, there are values and characteristics that bind an organisation together.
That is precisely what needs to be identified and understood – not least in order to attract the right talent. Furthermore, culture is always perceived subjectively. Two people from the same company can experience the same situation in completely different ways. Managers have a huge influence on this. That’s why I’m convinced that companies need to invest heavily in their leadership culture.
SAATKORN: What happens if employer branding and the corporate culture actually experienced by staff don’t match up? Nina Zimmermann:
That’s a typical pitfall. Managers might say,
for example: ‘We’re innovative’ or ‘We want to be innovative’. What really matters, however, is whether employees actually experience this in their day-to-day work.
If I have to go through 50 processes just to switch to a simple new tool and might even face rejection in the end, I’m unlikely to perceive my employer as particularly innovative.
Companies often know where they want to go, but aren’t there yet. If employer branding is already communicating the desired image to the outside world, a marketing bubble can quickly form.
This gap between perception and reality can be painful. But it’s also a wake-up call. Before companies put anything out there, they should take an honest look inwards.
SAATKORN: How important is transparency when it comes to such a sensitive topic as pay? Nina Zimmermann:
Employers should be able to explain why, for example, one person earns ten per cent less than another.
There may be entirely understandable reasons for this: professional experience, specific skills or other professional factors. At the same time, however, there are also subjective factors such as negotiating skills.
And that is precisely where uncomfortable questions arise. If differences cannot be attributed to experience or skills, but rather, for example, to the fact that a man negotiated better than a woman, we quickly arrive at the gender pay gap.
Salary transparency forces companies to grapple with such questions. It isn’t always pleasant, but these questions must be asked.
SAATKORN: Critical employer reviews are also uncomfortable. What should companies do if they receive negative feedback on kununu? Nina Zimmermann:
I always say: respond to reviews – especially the critical ones. Job applicants today gather information from a variety of sources. They look at career sites, review platforms or social media, and sometimes bring this information with them to the interview in a very specific way.
A company’s response to criticism can make a big difference here. Job applicants are certainly willing to change their minds, depending on how a company responds to a review.
A negative review therefore does not automatically mean damage to a company’s reputation. Perhaps a company is currently going through a difficult phase or has had to make redundancies. In that case, it can explain the context.
Ultimately, the way a company handles criticism also says something about its culture.
SAATKORN: But when companies ask their staff about their culture, that also creates expectations, doesn’t it? Nina Zimmermann:
Absolutely. Collecting data isn’t the biggest challenge. As soon as I ask staff, expectations arise. It’s not enough to collect feedback, say thank you and then get back in touch a year later. Companies need a plan for what to do with the information.
If, for example, I realise: ‘We want to be innovative, but our employees don’t perceive us as innovative at all’ – then I have to consider how we can bridge that gap.
Data can help to identify strengths and weaknesses and to derive specific actions from them. But then something actually has to happen.
Cultural change is a long-term endeavour. It’s a marathon, not a sprint.
SAATKORN: Where should companies start if they really want to change their corporate culture? Nina Zimmermann:
For me, it always starts with the question: where do we actually stand?
First, you have to ask the employees and understand how they experience their day-to-day work. Do they understand the strategy? How do they perceive leadership? What works well and what doesn’t? There should also be scope for honest answers.
After that, you need to define where you want to go. This is particularly important right now, especially when it comes to AI: what sort of company do we want to be – and need to be – in the future? What people, skills, processes and structures do we need to achieve that?
It is not enough simply to look at individual employees and say: ‘You need to change.’ The system must change too. Processes and organisational structures must evolve alongside it. Cultural change therefore always means working on both people and the system at the same time.
SAATKORN: Nina, thank you very much for the interview!