Glassdoor Reputation: How to Manage Employee Reviews and Protect Your Employer Brand
A few months ago, the head of recruiting at a midsize company called me with a complaint I hear all the time: "Gloria, I don't understand why I can't fill these positions. The salary is competitive, the project is interesting, but candidates vanish after the first interview." The first thing I did was look up the company on Glassdoor. Three minutes later, I had the answer. A 2.8-star rating, 47 unanswered reviews, and the top comments describing a toxic environment and leadership that was "out of touch with reality."
Glassdoor is no longer a niche platform that only recent grads check. It's the first research stop for any experienced professional before accepting a job offer. And at many companies, it's still the big blind spot in their corporate communication strategy. Executives invest thousands of euros in product branding but completely ignore what's being said about them as employers. That mistake comes with a very specific price tag.
What Glassdoor really is today
With more than 55 million company reviews worldwide and over 67 million unique visitors a month, Glassdoor is the largest employee review database on the planet. In Spain, adoption has grown 340% over the past five years. If your company is on Glassdoor (and it almost certainly is), what shows up there is influencing your hiring, whether you know it or not.
1 The hidden power of Glassdoor: why executives ignore it and what it costs them
There's a structural disconnect at many organizations: marketing teams obsessively track social media mentions and Google reviews, but nobody (or almost nobody) is assigned to monitor Glassdoor. The outcome is predictable.
Why does this happen? Partly because Glassdoor has historically been seen as a place where disgruntled former employees go to vent, a sort of complaint box for the working world. That perception, while understandable, is deeply mistaken and dangerous. High-value candidates don't read Glassdoor to confirm their biases: they read it to make decisions.
Here's what happens when a company ignores its Glassdoor profile for 12 months:
- Negative reviews pile up unanswered, giving the impression that the company doesn't listen or care
- Qualified candidates (the ones who have options) rule the company out before they even get to the interview
- Current employees themselves see the company ignoring problems that have been called out publicly
- Time-to-fill increases, driving recruiting costs through the roof
- In-house recruiters lose credibility when candidates bring up the reviews
The case nobody wants to be
In 2024, a midsize Spanish tech company lost its top choice for director of engineering (an internal candidate who had already verbally accepted a promotion) because she checked Glassdoor before signing. She found six reviews describing extreme micromanagement and a total lack of recognition. The company had never responded to a single one. She turned down the offer in writing, citing "organizational culture factors." That Glassdoor profile cost them 18 months of searching and the equivalent of a full year's salary in headhunter fees.
The irony is that most companies with a Glassdoor problem could fix it in 90 days with a coherent strategy. It's not magic, and it's not manipulation: it's professional reputation management applied to the workplace.
2 The real business impact of Glassdoor: recruiting, employer branding and publicly traded companies
Quantifying Glassdoor's impact on the business is easier than it looks. The data is unequivocal and, if you present it correctly to a leadership committee, it usually triggers an immediate shift in priorities.
2.1. The impact on recruiting
The channel hit hardest by your Glassdoor reputation is active recruiting. When a candidate gets an outreach from a recruiter or sees a job posting, the first thing they do (before even reading the job description) is look up the company on Glassdoor. If what they find raises doubts, they simply ignore the offer. No fuss, no explanation. They just disappear.
This creates an invisible but devastating effect: your response rate to job offers drops, your recruiters work twice as hard to fill the same opening, and average time-to-fill skyrockets. For technical and executive roles, where competition for talent is fierce, a Glassdoor rating below 3.0 can shrink your pool of eligible candidates by up to 60%.
2.2. The impact on employer branding
Your employer brand is the set of perceptions potential employees have about your company as a place to work. Glassdoor is, right now, the main external barometer of that brand. A company can invest hundreds of thousands of euros in employer branding campaigns (corporate videos, career fair presence, storytelling on LinkedIn) and see it all wiped out by a Glassdoor page with a mediocre rating and unanswered reviews.
The stat that hits CEOs hardest: according to LinkedIn, companies with a strong employer brand have up to 50% lower cost per hire and 28% lower turnover. Glassdoor is one of the pillars of that employer brand. Neglecting it is like building an impressive house and leaving the facade unpainted.
2.3. The impact on publicly traded companies
For publicly traded companies, Glassdoor risk has an additional dimension. Several academic studies (including one published in the Journal of Financial Economics) have shown statistically significant correlations between employee satisfaction as measured on platforms like Glassdoor and long-term stock performance.
Glassdoor and institutional investors
ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) investment funds increasingly use Glassdoor data as an indicator of the "S" (Social) component of their analysis. A sharp drop in a company's Glassdoor rating can set off alerts in institutional analytics systems and, in extreme cases, prompt uncomfortable questions at shareholder meetings. Executive reputation is measured here too: Glassdoor publishes annual rankings of CEOs as rated by their own employees.
3 Types of problematic reviews: resentful former employees, fake reviews and organized campaigns
Not all negative reviews have the same origin or call for the same response. Correctly identifying the type of problematic review is the first step to handling it effectively.
3.1. The genuinely dissatisfied former employee
This is the most common type and, paradoxically, the least dangerous if handled well. This person leaves a review after a contentious exit, whether they were let go, resigned after a conflict or simply had a bad experience at the company. Their criticism usually has a kernel of truth mixed with emotional subjectivity.
The fatal mistake here is getting defensive or trying to discredit the author publicly. A genuine review, however harsh, is an opportunity to demonstrate organizational maturity in your response.
3.2. The fake or malicious review
These are the most frustrating. They include:
- Reviews from people who never worked at the company (not even as candidates)
- Reviews created by unscrupulous competitors to damage your image
- Reviews from people with clearly inaccurate information about the company
- Fake accounts created for the sole purpose of causing harm
- Reviews that mix in details from another company (wrong name, different industry)
These reviews can be disputed with Glassdoor, although the process has its own quirks, which we explain below.
3.3. The organized campaign
The most serious scenario. It happens when a coordinated group of people (usually former employees who left at the same time after a restructuring, or members of a team that went through a collective dispute) agrees to post negative reviews simultaneously or within a short window of time.
Warning signs of an organized campaign
- 5 or more negative reviews in less than 2 weeks
- Reviews that share the same phrasing or mention the same specific incidents
- Every review giving the lowest possible rating (1 star)
- Timing that coincides with mass layoffs, an ERTE (Spain's temporary layoff scheme) or a recent labor dispute
- Reviewer profiles with newly created accounts and no history
An organized campaign requires a broader strategic response that goes beyond managing Glassdoor: it includes legal analysis, stepped-up internal communication and, in some cases, coordination with the legal department.
3.4. The rejected candidate's review
Glassdoor also lets candidates who went through a hiring process share their opinion of the experience. A poorly managed hiring process (no feedback, long response times, unprepared interviewers) can generate reviews that do as much damage as those from former employees.
4 How Glassdoor's content policy works and what can be disputed
Glassdoor positions itself as a workplace transparency platform and actively defends the right of employees and former employees to share their experiences. Its content policy is more permissive than Google's or Trustpilot's. It does, however, have clear limits.
4.1. What Glassdoor allows
Glassdoor allows subjective opinions about company culture, leadership, work environment, pay perceived as unfair and internal processes. It even allows harsh criticism as long as it's framed as personal experience. Phrases like "my boss was a tyrant" or "the atmosphere was unbearable" are perfectly acceptable under its policies.
4.2. What Glassdoor does NOT allow and can be disputed
| Content type | Grounds for dispute | Likelihood of success |
|---|---|---|
| Verifiably false information (incorrect facts about the company) | Factual inaccuracy | High |
| Personal data of identifiable employees | Privacy violation | Very high |
| Confidential information or trade secrets | Confidentiality | High |
| Discriminatory language, threats or insults | Terms of use violation | Very high |
| A review from someone who never worked at the company (provable) | Fraud / manipulation | Medium-high |
| Covert advertising for a competitor | Conflict of interest | Medium |
| Exact duplicate content (the same review posted repeatedly) | Spam | High |
What CAN'T be disputed, even if it's unfair
A negative subjective opinion that reflects a real experience (even if it seems exaggerated, one-sided or unfair to you) can't be disputed with Glassdoor. Trying to get these reviews removed through pressure or baseless complaints just eats up time and gets you nowhere. Your energy should go into responding intelligently and generating positive reviews that balance the overall perception.
5 Step-by-step process to report and request removal of reviews
When a review violates Glassdoor's policies, you have the right to report it. The process is more bureaucratic than you'd like, but with persistence and proper documentation, it works.
- Document the review before reporting it: Take screenshots with the date and time. Save the review's exact URL. If it contains false or identifying information, note it in detail.
- Claim an employer account: If you haven't claimed your company's Glassdoor profile yet, do that first. Without a verified employer account, you can't access the advanced reporting tools or respond officially.
- Use the "Flag as Inappropriate" button: Every review has a flag icon. Use it to start the formal report. Choose the most specific and accurate reason (don't pick "other" if there's an applicable category).
- Submit supporting documentation: Glassdoor lets you attach evidence. If you have proof that the person didn't work at your company (e.g., they don't appear in payroll records for the period in question), include it.
- Wait for the initial decision (5-10 business days): Glassdoor will email you its decision. If they decline to remove it, don't give up.
- Appeal the decision if necessary: Glassdoor has an appeals process. In your appeal, expand on your argument and add any additional evidence you can get.
- Escalate to the premium support team (if you have a paid account): Paid employer accounts have access to a priority support channel that can speed up the process.
Real-world resolution time
In practice, removing a review that genuinely violates Glassdoor's policies takes 2 to 6 weeks, including possible appeals. Don't expect results in 48 hours. In the meantime, your best defense is to respond publicly to the review so that any candidate who reads it also sees your side of the story.
6 When legal action against employees makes sense
The question I get most often when a review really stings: "Can I sue the person who wrote this?" The honest answer: yes, in theory. In practice, doing so is almost always counterproductive.
6.1. Cases where legal action is viable
There are situations where a legal response is justified:
- Disclosure of trade secrets or contractually protected confidential information
- Defamation involving false, verifiably incorrect statements with quantifiable financial damage
- Coordinated, organized campaigns with evidence from group messaging or an explicit agreement
- Breach of signed confidentiality or non-compete clauses
- Veiled threats disguised as a review
6.2. Why you should think twice
Taking legal action against a former employee over a Glassdoor review has side effects few companies anticipate:
The Streisand effect on Glassdoor
In 2022, an American software company sued a former employee over a negative Glassdoor review. The case was picked up by tech media. Within two weeks, the company racked up 180 new negative reviews from people who had never worked there, posted simply in protest. The original review, which had 12 helpful votes, ended up with more than 4,000. In 15 days, the lawsuit destroyed what would have taken years to damage.
What's more, in Spain, labor case law tends to protect workers' freedom of expression when they criticize their employer, as long as no trade secrets are compromised and there's no proven defamation. Lawsuits over Glassdoor reviews rarely succeed, and when they do, the reputational damage from the court case far outweighs the damage from the original review.
My general recommendation: save legal action for leaks of confidential information with real, provable financial harm. For everything else, there are far more effective and less risky strategies.
7 The right response strategy: how to respond without doing more damage
Responding on Glassdoor is one of the most underrated communication skills in the corporate world. A poorly worded response can turn a moderately negative review into a reputational crisis. A well-executed one can turn that same review into a public demonstration of a mature organizational culture.
These are the non-negotiable principles of any response to a Glassdoor review:
Speed
Respond within 7 days. A review left unanswered for weeks signals indifference.
A human tone
Avoid generic corporate language. Candidates immediately spot copy-and-paste template responses.
Never defend by attacking
Discrediting the author or questioning their honesty is the most common mistake and the most damaging.
Acknowledge what can improve
If the criticism has a kernel of truth, acknowledge it. Honesty builds more trust than defending yourself at all costs.
Close with action
Mention concrete steps you're taking or invite them to continue the conversation through private channels.
7.1. Who should sign the responses
Ideally, responses should be signed by someone with real responsibility: the Chief People Officer, the CEO at smaller companies, or an employer branding lead. Never a generic "HR Team" profile. A named signature gives the response authenticity and weight. When the CEO personally responds to a critical review, that gesture says more about the company's culture than any corporate video.
7.2. The response structure that works
After analyzing hundreds of Glassdoor responses, I've identified a structure that works consistently:
- Genuine thanks for taking the time to leave the review, without empty adjectives
- Acknowledgment of the specific point or points raised (it shows you actually read the review)
- Context or concrete action related to that criticism
- An invitation to continue the dialogue through a private channel, if appropriate
8 Response templates for the 5 most common types of criticism
These templates are starting points, not text to copy word for word. Always customize them with specific details about your company and the review in question.
Type 1: Criticism of leadership / management style
"Thank you for sharing your experience. Leadership is the single biggest factor in what day-to-day life feels like at any organization, and we take this kind of feedback very seriously. Over the past few months, we've launched a leadership development program for all of our team leads, precisely because we believe there's room for improvement there. If you'd like to tell us more about your specific experience so we can learn from it, you can reach us at [email]. Thank you again."
— [Name], Chief People Officer
Type 2: Criticism of work-life balance and working conditions
"We appreciate you taking the time to tell us about your experience. Work-life balance is something we genuinely care about, and we know that at times we've asked more of people than was reasonable. Since [date/quarter], we've implemented [specific measure: remote work policy, flexible hours, limits on after-hours meetings...]. We understand these changes don't make up for difficult past experiences, but we want you to know that your feedback contributes to real improvements. Thank you."
— [Name], Chief People Officer
Type 3: Criticism of internal communication and transparency
"Thank you for your feedback. A lack of clear communication is one of the things that most erodes trust within a team, and we understand the frustration you describe. We've strengthened our internal communication channels with [monthly all-hands / an internal newsletter / a direct line to leadership] specifically to address this. We know we still have work to do, and we appreciate you pointing out where we fell short."
— [Name], CEO / Managing Director
Type 4: Criticism of pay or lack of recognition
"Thank you for sharing your perspective. Competitive pay and recognition are fundamental to retaining talent, and we're aware we haven't always gotten it right. We recently completed a review of our salary bands using up-to-date market data, and we're working on a more structured recognition program. Your feedback helps us understand where we're letting people down."
— [Name], Chief People Officer
Type 5: Criticism of the hiring process (rejected candidate)
"Thank you for telling us about your experience with our hiring process. We know that how we treat candidates says a lot about our culture, and we're sorry your experience didn't live up to that standard. We're reviewing our response times and the quality of the feedback we give candidates. Your input is part of that improvement process."
— [Name], Head of Talent Acquisition
What these responses have in common
- They don't attack or question the author of the review
- They don't promise what can't be delivered
- They mention concrete actions, not vague intentions
- They're signed with a name, not "The HR Team"
- They contain no empty corporate jargon
9 How to build a strong employer brand that neutralizes criticism
Reactive Glassdoor management (responding to reviews, reporting inappropriate content) is necessary but not enough. The real winning strategy is to build an employer brand so strong that the occasional negative review doesn't carry enough weight to shift the overall perception.
This isn't communication theory: it's reputational math. A company with 200 reviews and a 4.2-star average can absorb five 1-star reviews without its rating moving more than a tenth of a point. A company with 15 reviews and a 3.4 average will see its rating plummet after two negative reviews in a row.
9.1. The pillars of a resilient employer brand
- A defined, authentic employee value proposition (EVP): Why would someone want to work at your company? If you don't have a clear, differentiated answer, candidates won't either
- A visible, consistent culture: What you post on LinkedIn about your culture has to match what people experience inside. The gap between the external message and internal reality is the source of most devastating reviews
- Visible, approachable leadership: Executives who genuinely engage with their teams generate fewer negative reviews. That's no coincidence
- Respectful offboarding processes: Most negative reviews are written in the first few days after leaving a company. A professional exit process, with an honest conversation and no hard feelings, drastically reduces the likelihood of a negative review
- A real internal feedback channel: If employees have a credible channel to voice their concerns internally, they're less likely to feel the need to do it on Glassdoor
"The best defense on Glassdoor isn't legal or technical. It's cultural. Companies that treat their employees well (and prove it with actions, not just words) don't need to manage Glassdoor: Glassdoor manages itself for them."
9.2. Consistency between internal and external messaging
A company that posts photos of happy team-building events on LinkedIn while, internally, teams work without recognition or clear prospects is racking up reputational debt that will sooner or later come due on Glassdoor. Authenticity isn't a nice-to-have in employer branding: it's a requirement for reputational survival.
Before launching any external employer branding campaign, I recommend doing an honest internal audit: ask your current employees what they'd say about the company on Glassdoor if they were completely anonymous. The answers you get are the real barometer of your employer brand.
10 Proactive strategy: how to ethically increase positive reviews
One important clarification before we get into this section: Glassdoor explicitly prohibits asking current employees for positive reviews in exchange for compensation or by pressuring them in any way. Violations of this policy can result in penalties on your profile. What I'm about to describe is completely ethical and within the platform's rules.
10.1. The right moment to ask for a review
The most effective time to ask an employee to share their experience on Glassdoor is right after a positive moment:
- After successfully completing a major project
- After a promotion or recognition
- At the end of a well-received training program
- In an internal satisfaction survey when the employee has given a high score
- During a development conversation where the employee expresses satisfaction
10.2. How to ask without pressure
- Briefly explain what Glassdoor is and why it matters to the company
- Make it clear that participation is voluntary and completely anonymous
- Don't specify what rating or kind of comment you're hoping for
- Provide a direct link to your company's review form
- Don't track individually who has left a review
The employer brand ambassador program
The companies most advanced in employer branding run an "internal ambassadors" program: employees who voluntarily take part in employer branding activities (LinkedIn posts, career fair appearances, testimonials on the corporate website). When these ambassadors are genuinely satisfied, they tend to leave Glassdoor reviews spontaneously and in richer detail. The secret isn't asking them to write: it's creating the conditions that make them want to.
10.3. The positive offboarding strategy
Paradoxically, some of the best Glassdoor reviews come from former employees who left on good terms. A well-designed offboarding process (with an honest conversation, recognition of the work they did and an open door for the future) can turn a former employee into an ambassador for your employer brand. Mentioning Glassdoor during offboarding, naturally and without pressure, is perfectly fine.
11 Monitoring: tools and recommended frequency
You can't manage what you don't measure. Brand monitoring on Glassdoor should be part of your reputational intelligence system, not something you do when someone tells you something's wrong.
11.1. Tools for monitoring Glassdoor
| Tool | Type | What it monitors | Approximate price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Glassdoor Employer Center | Native (free/paid) | Reviews, profile metrics, trends | Free / from €100/month |
| Mention | Web monitoring | Company mentions + alerts | From €29/month |
| Brand24 | Web monitoring | Mentions, sentiment, reach | From $79/month |
| Reputation.com | Reputation management | Multi-platform: Google, Glassdoor, Indeed | From $500/month |
| Google Alerts | Basic (free) | Web mentions of the company name | Free |
11.2. Recommended review frequency
- Weekly review: New reviews posted, rating changes, unanswered questions
- Monthly analysis: Rating trends, recurring themes in criticism, comparison with industry competitors
- Quarterly audit: Full profile review, company information update, analysis by category (work-life balance, culture, leadership, compensation, career opportunities)
- Annual report: Employer brand evolution, impact on recruiting metrics, industry benchmarking
The one alert you can't do without
Set up a Google Alert for your company name + "Glassdoor" to get notified when new media coverage about your profile appears. If a journalist or a LinkedIn influencer mentions your Glassdoor, you need to know right away so you can respond with the right reputational crisis management if necessary.
12 The mistake of silence: why not responding is the worst strategy
If there's one conclusion that consistently emerges from every study on candidate behavior on Glassdoor, it's this: a company that doesn't respond to its reviews signals that it doesn't care about its employees. Period.
A candidate who reads an unanswered negative review doesn't think, "What bad luck this former employee had." They think, "If something similar happened to me at this company, they wouldn't care either." Silence is read as tacit confirmation of the criticism.
There's a widespread misconception that responding to a negative review "activates" it and draws more attention. That's a myth. Reviews on Glassdoor are sorted by date and helpfulness. A response doesn't artificially amplify the negative review's visibility; on the contrary, it adds context that tempers the reader's perception.
Silence also has a second harmful effect: it discourages satisfied employees from leaving positive reviews. If a company doesn't actively manage its Glassdoor, employees who could leave good reviews assume the company doesn't pay attention to the platform, so they don't participate either. The result is a skewed perception in which only the unhappy ones have taken the initiative to write.
13 Real cases: how large and small companies managed their Glassdoor
Theory is useful, but concrete cases are what really illustrate what works and what doesn't. These are representative examples (with anonymized or publicly available data) of different approaches to managing Glassdoor.
Case A: The tech company that went from 2.8 to 4.1 in 14 months
A B2B software company with 120 employees came to us with a 2.8 Glassdoor rating, 34 reviews (26 of them negative) and a 40% job offer acceptance rate (the industry average was 68%). The diagnosis was clear: they didn't respond to a single review, they hadn't claimed their employer profile, and their internal communications were practically nonexistent.
The strategy we implemented:
- Claim and complete the employer profile (updated description, benefits, team photos)
- Respond to all 34 existing reviews in under 3 weeks, with personalized responses signed by the CEO
- Implement monthly pulse surveys to catch problems before they reach Glassdoor
- Launch a structured offboarding process with an honest exit conversation
- Create an internal "feedback for leadership" Slack channel where any employee could raise issues anonymously
Results after 14 months: 78 total reviews, a 4.1 rating and a 71% offer acceptance rate. Recruiting costs fell by 34%.
Case B: The retail chain hit by an organized campaign
A retail chain with 800 employees went through a restructuring that involved closing 12 stores and laying off 140 people. Over the following 30 days, they received 67 one-star reviews on Glassdoor, many with nearly identical content. Their rating dropped from 3.6 to 2.4 in three weeks.
The right response had several components:
- Reporting reviews with identical or clearly coordinated content to Glassdoor (18 were removed)
- An individual, personalized response to each remaining review, acknowledging the pain of the restructuring
- A public statement from the CEO about the decision and the reasons behind it, linked from the Glassdoor profile
- An internal campaign encouraging satisfied current employees to share their experience
Within 6 months, the rating had recovered to 3.4. Not back to its previous level, but within an acceptable range that wouldn't scare off candidates. Honestly acknowledging the pain (rather than denying it) was key to the recovery.
Case C: The mistake of the company that tried to suppress reviews through pressure
A Spanish consulting firm began including a clause in its separation agreements that made payout of variable compensation conditional on "not posting negative comments about the company on digital platforms." When several former employees shared this practice in LinkedIn discussions, the scandal went viral. Glassdoor filled up with reviews denouncing the clause, many from employees who until then would never have thought of writing one.
The lesson
Trying to suppress reviews through contractual or legal pressure isn't just of questionable effectiveness (in many countries it's flat-out illegal); it turns a manageable reputation problem into a full-blown viral crisis. Never use the economic power you hold as an employer to silence legitimate opinions.
Case D: The small business that turned Glassdoor into a recruiting tool
A 45-person agtech company decided to use its Glassdoor proactively as a recruiting tool instead of seeing it as a threat. They completed their profile with real team videos (not corporate productions, just simple videos shot on a phone), published real salaries in their job postings and encouraged their team to answer questions in Glassdoor's Q&A section.
The result: with just 28 reviews and a 4.4 rating, their response rate to job postings topped 80% and they cut their use of outside recruiting firms to zero. At a small scale, authenticity beats corporate production.
14 Conclusions: Glassdoor isn't the problem, it's the mirror
After years of working to protect both employer brands and corporate reputations, I've come to a conclusion that makes many executives uncomfortable: Glassdoor doesn't create reputation problems. It reflects them. Companies with low Glassdoor ratings, in the vast majority of cases, have real problems with culture, leadership or working conditions that their employees (current and former) are documenting publicly.
That means the most powerful solution isn't managing the platform: it's improving the real experience of the people who work at the organization. Glassdoor is just the thermometer. You treat the fever, not the thermometer.
That said, actively managing Glassdoor (responding to reviews, reporting inappropriate content, optimizing your employer profile, developing a proactive review strategy) is essential and has a real, measurable impact on recruiting and talent costs. Not doing it means leaving money on the table.
The executive summary to take to your next leadership meeting:
The 7 highest-ROI actions on Glassdoor
- Claim and complete your employer profile (immediate impact, zero cost)
- Respond to 100% of reviews within 7 days, with a named signature
- Implement a structured, professional offboarding process
- Create internal feedback channels that take pressure off external platforms
- Design an ethical program to encourage reviews from satisfied employees
- Include Glassdoor in your brand monitoring system with a weekly review
- Systematically report reviews that violate the content policies
If you apply these seven actions consistently for six months, you'll see measurable results: more quality candidates at the top of the funnel, a better offer acceptance rate and a recruiting team that doesn't have to start every interview process by undoing the negative perception created by an abandoned Glassdoor profile.
Responding to negative reviews on Glassdoor isn't just crisis management: it's top-tier corporate communication. It deserves the same strategic attention as any other channel for engaging with your stakeholders. And the sooner companies understand that, the sooner they'll be attracting the talent everyone else is losing.
Employer branding with a local team
We work on the employer brands of companies based in Valencia, Zaragoza, Asunción and Barcelona, as well as many other markets where we have an active presence.
Does your company have a Glassdoor reputation problem?
We design a personalized strategy to restore your employer brand. Free analysis, no commitment.
Request a free analysis