Co-branding alliances as an employer branding strategy

Scholars are increasingly recognizing employer branding as a strategic tool for attracting and retaining top talent (Tenakwah, 2021). Employer branding, which focuses on a company's reputation as an employer, is particularly relevant to the tourism and hospitality industry, where attracting talent and maintaining a stable workforce can be a challenge as high turnover rates are common across all sectors of the industry (Innerhofer et al., 2022; Kar and Nguyen Thi Phuong, 2023; Al-Romeedy et al., 2025). Various factors are central to effective employer branding, including the company's image and brand (Kissel and Büttgen, 2015), internal and external communication strategies (Rinaldi and Sunaryo Putra, 2022), employee attraction (Ahamad, 2019), and initiatives toward corporate social responsibility (Klimkiewicz and Oltra, 2017). Research also demonstrates that current and potential employees hold different perceptions of employer branding, with Samoliuk et al. (2022) highlighting that pay is the most important value for current employees, while an employer's reputation is more important for potential employees.

However, less is known about current and potential employees' perceptions of co-branding alliances between the employer and other brands and whether these perceptions shape their attitudes toward the employer. In co-branding alliances, two or more brands collaborate to present a unified offering, which leverages synergies between the brands to create a combined value proposition (Newmeyer et al., 2018). In particular, a strong brand fit between co-branding partners may enhance perceptions of both brands. Previous research on co-branding alliances has, however, merely focused on the perspective of consumers (Paydas Turan, 2021). Thus, a first research gap exists in understanding whether and how co-branding alliances are perceived as an employer branding strategy by current and potential employees.

Second, existing studies on branding strategies and employer attractiveness focus on the company brand and its impact upon current and potential employees (Samoliuk et al., 2022; Theurer et al., 2018). The cumulative effect of all brands within a co-branding alliance and their impact on employees has not yet been investigated. Third, research on brand fit and perceptions of job security and employer attractiveness has thus far only been explored with regards to person-organization fit (Sharma and Tanwar, 2023), rather than brand fit with partnering brands and their impact upon individual employees.

This study addresses the three identified research gaps by exploring the influence of co-branding alliances and brand fit between partnering brands on the outcomes of employer branding strategies. It intends to answer the following research question: how do co-branding activities contribute to the creation of a value proposition for the current and potential employees of an outdoor-action-sports-service provider? Employing a sequential mixed-method design, the study provides novel theoretical and practical insights into the relationship between co-branding alliances and employer branding in the hospitality and outdoor leisure industries.

Co-branding, or a brand alliance, involves collaboration between two or more brands in a mutually beneficial relationship, thus enhancing one another's brand equity (Paydas Turan, 2021). A co-branding strategy leverages the core strengths of each partner, creating spillover effects that improve brand association, recall, and synergy. In the tourism and hospitality sector, co-branding gained significant traction during the 1980s. For example, in the co-branding alliance between Bulgari and Ritz-Carlton, Bulgari contributed to the interior design of Ritz-Carlton hotels, which capitalized on the shared luxury positioning of both brands and enabled them to differentiate from other high-end hotel chains (Dev et al., 2010).

Effective co-branding begins with companies carefully selecting partners to ensure that stakeholders perceive a high fit between brands. A strong brand fit is given when brands are consistent and complementary (Simonin and Ruth, 1998). Brand fit can occur at the brand personality or product category level. A high brand-personality fit indicates compatibility in meanings and values, while a high product-category fit indicates alignment in product offerings even if the brand personalities differ (Helmig et al., 2008). If a general sense of fit or cohesiveness exists between brands, then the alliance will be perceived more positively compared with instances where brands and their associations are mismatched or incompatible (Sénéchal et al., 2014). Thus, potential risks with co-branding include the adverse spillover effects of negative events that involve one partner, which can harm the reputation of other brands (Koschate-Fischer et al., 2019). Therefore, a careful selection of partners based on brand fit and quality is critical for mitigating risks and maximizing the benefits of co-branding.

In addition, a co-branding alliance entails more than a mere partnership. While traditional partnerships involve mutual cooperation for shared benefits, co-branding specifically intends to fully integrate the brand identities, equities, and values of partnering organizations. This deeper level of collaboration aims to create a distinctive and compelling value proposition by drawing on the strengths of each brand. As such, co-branding alliances represent a more complex and integrated form of partnership, involving greater degrees of brand fit and synergy than those of standard collaborations (Helmig et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2016; Simonin and Ruth, 1998). Recognizing this potential may lead current and potential employees to view the employer more positively, and shape their attitudes toward the organization. However, research that examines the specific intersection between brand alliances and employer branding from the perspective of employees warrants further attention.

Employer branding is a long-term strategy to differentiate a company as an employer, and to render it distinct from competitors. It involves highlighting unique organizational aspects, including employment benefits (material and non-material), value systems, policies, and behaviors (Collins and Stevens, 2002). The objective is to shape the perceptions of current and potential employees, thus positioning the organization as an employer of choice and enhancing organizational performance (Azhar et al., 2024). The employer brand, a concept introduced by Ambler and Barrow (1996, p. 187), is thereby defined as the “package of functional, economic, and psychological benefits” associated with employment, akin to a product brand's promise to consumers.

In the tourism and hospitality industry, employer branding is of particular relevance, because of challenges such as labor shortage and high turnover rates (Innerhofer et al., 2022). These challenges stem from negative work characteristics such as shift work, seasonal peaks, and demanding work conditions (Al-Romeedy et al., 2025). However, the industry also offers several positive attributes, including diverse work tasks, opportunities within the destination, the development of intercultural competencies and language skills, as well as the integration of work and leisure activities. Promoting these benefits using targeted employer branding strategies can help address seasonality issues and workforce shortages (Lin et al., 2018; Plaikner et al., 2023). Existing studies indicate that perceptions of employer image vary across different stakeholder groups in the hospitality industry (Schwaiger et al., 2022). Accordingly, organizations can strategically integrate internal and external employer branding initiatives.

Internal employer branding aims to strengthen the existing bond with current employees, thus maintaining their loyalty and creating positive work environments. Effective internal employer branding enhances employee understanding and identification with company values (Näppä et al., 2023), employee commitment and retention (Wang and Binti Omar, 2023), and employee loyalty, which decreases turnover (Deepa and Baral, 2019). Therefore, internal employer branding offers many advantages for organizations and helps companies attain the status of an employer of choice (Theurer et al., 2018). Furthermore, committed employees frequently act as ambassadors for their organizations, promoting them to potential recruits (Wang and Binti Omar, 2023).

Certain activities related to brand alliances, such as sponsorships, can exert a positive effect on employee engagement and commitment. For instance, Batt et al. (2021) and Karjaluoto and Paakkonen (2019) highlighted the potential of sponsorships to influence employees' perceptions of the company's brand, which enhances employee involvement and fosters greater alignment with corporate values. Riehle et al. (2023) further found that employees not only viewed clothing provided by the partner brands of the company as a work incentive but also recognized the symbolic value of the equipment provided. Indeed, employees also wore these clothes after work, which enhanced their identification with the organization.

These internal effects of brand alliances suggest a relationship between branding activities and the internalization of corporate values among employees. Corporate values are a central instrumental attribute of internal employer branding, because they contribute to the “successful internal and external transfer of business” and “to the perception of a tourism business as an attractive workplace” (Plaikner et al., 2023, p. 13). Together with corporate expertise, corporate values determine organizational identity (David et al., 2005). Batt et al. (2021) demonstrated that brand image contributes to stronger employee brand commitment and brand behavior. Examining employer branding and sport event sponsorship, Karjaluoto and Paakkonen (2019) pointed out that sponsor–event fit influences organizational identity and employer brand association. Hence, if co-branding partners share similar values and if the brand fit between them is strong, then the strengthening of the brand's credibility and perceiving the alliance as authentic, seem intuitive. However, the extent to which the brand fit of co-branding alliances influences the perceptions of current employees toward corporate values requires further investigation.

Another essential aspect of employer branding is job security. Employees who perceive stability in their jobs tend to be more motivated, productive, and committed toward their jobs and are likely to recommend their employer to others (Sun et al., 2022). Job security enhances employee loyalty and retention and decreases workplace stress (Hur, 2022), a particularly critical factor in the seasonal hospitality industry. Successful co-branding alliances can contribute to job security by strengthening the market position of a company (Ma et al., 2018; Quamina et al., 2023). The current study proposes that when employees perceive a strong brand fit between co-branding partners, they are more likely to view the alliance as beneficial, which in turn enhances their sense of job stability. Additionally, scholars have demonstrated that strong corporate values can contribute to the perception of a company as an attractive workplace and that shared values create “a sense of a stable internal environment” (Plaikner et al., 2023, p. 13). When employees identify with these values, it is assumed that they perceive higher levels of job security.

Employer branding not only influences current employees but also attracts potential future employees. Thus, external employer branding aims to differentiate a company from its competitors and increase its attractiveness to job seekers. A strong employer brand can help attract high-quality candidates whose values align with those of the organization, thus enhancing the recruitment process. However, the effectiveness of employer branding strategies varies depending on brand awareness levels. Companies with low brand visibility benefit the most from external employer branding activities (Groza et al., 2022).

Co-branding alliances, which require substantial amounts of brand synergy and fit (Helmig et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2016), can enhance external employer branding by increasing perceived credibility. Research shows that positive spillover effects are more likely when the brands share similar values (Ma et al., 2018). However, the assumption that all co-branding alliances inherently strengthen the employer image overlooks contextual variables, such as the perceived authenticity of the collaboration. In particular, the specific impact of brand fit between brand alliance partners on potential employees' perceptions of employer image requires further examination. Therefore, the current study investigates whether co-branding alliances—when built on strong brand fit—can create a favorable employer image from the perspective of potential employees.

Research demonstrates that companies with authentic brand partnerships benefit from stronger brand equity, higher trust, and financial stability (Ma et al., 2018; Ronda et al., 2018), which may contribute to employee perceptions of job security. However, the extent to which these perceived benefits result in perceived job security among potential employees remains underexplored. Additionally, a positive employer image enhances the perception of job security in organizations. When potential applicants perceive a positive employer image, they may exhibit positive expectations regarding fair treatment and long-term employment prospects toward a company. This perception is often shaped not only by brand communication but also by industry image or word-of-mouth of former employees. Studies indicate that a strong employer brand decreases employee turnover and increases trust in organizational stability (Rampl and Kenning, 2014), which enhances perceptions of job security. Thus, perceived job security is an important factor for potential employees that consider applying for a job (Jain and Bhatt, 2015; Samoliuk et al., 2022). Keppeler and Papenfuß (2021) propose that potential employees interpret the signal of job security as promising not only secure employment but also a reliable employer that desires long-term cooperation. Therefore, perceived job security may exert a positive impact on the intention of potential employees to apply. Still, it remains unclear whether this perceived job security directly stems from the perceived brand fit or is mediated by the employer image.

Figure 1 describes the proposed research model to elucidate the consequences of brand fit between brand alliance partners for current and potential employees in the context of hospitality and outdoor recreation.

The context of this study is AREA 47, the largest outdoor leisure park and outdoor-action-sports-service provider in Europe. The park spans 9.5 ha and features nearly 40 sports activities, which are organized into five distinct subareas, namely, Outdoor AREA, Climbing AREA, Water AREA, Wake AREA, and Mountainbike AREA. The park positions itself as a dynamic, immersive space that caters to teenagers and adults, and promotes self-discovery. It attracted 230,000 visitors in 2022 with 36,970 overnight stays and 63,773 activity tours. The average guest stayed 2.8 days and spent €590 with 60.1% of bookings made online (AREA 47, 2023).

AREA 47 has successfully executed several co-branding initiatives with renowned brands, including Adidas TERREX, Red Bull, and GoPro (AREA 47, n.d.). The co-branding partnership structure of AREA 47 consists of five tiers, namely, premium, gold, silver, bronze, and standard, each offering distinct benefits (Figure 2). Higher-tier partners provide financial support in exchange for advertising opportunities, including banner displays, event hosting, and promotion across the various marketing channels employed by AREA 47. For example, as the owner of AREA 47, Bergbahnen Sölden (cable car company) holds the premium partner status. In addition to financial support, other partners supply free products for AREA 47 employees and visitors (Riehle et al., 2023). For example, Adidas TERREX provides clothing, Gloryfy offers sunglasses, GoPro and Suunto supply cameras and watches, respectively, for rent, and Trek and Zanier provide equipment for the Mountainbike AREA. Moreover, Yeti contributes water bottles for staff and coolers for guest rooms, while Eco Elio provides complimentary sunscreen. Hospitality partners such as Rauch, Red Bull, Nuii, and Stiegl, offer products for AREA 47's restaurants. As part of these partnership deals, employees at AREA 47 also enjoy various benefits throughout the season, such as team clothing from Adidas TERREX, free lunches, partner discount codes, free activities, and additional employee events (AREA 47, 2023).

With 20 employees during winter and 150 to 170 employees during summer, AREA 47 can be considered a small to medium sized enterprise. Approximately 290 people apply for a job at AREA 47 each year. In the context of the current study, current employees are those currently employed at AREA 47 (at the time of the study, January–April 2024), and potential employees are individuals who are interested in and familiar with AREA 47. The company's internal values for employees are respect, honesty, openness, and tolerance. AREA 47 also maintains an open-door policy and constantly tries to improve its skills as an employer, always considering employee feedback. Employees who recommend AREA 47 as an employer are offered a monetary bonus (AREA 47, 2023, p. 30).

To investigate whether a co-branding alliance as an employer branding strategy influences employees and the outcomes of AREA 47 as an employer, the study used a mixed-method (sequential qualitative–quantitative) research design. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods enables the collection of detailed insights and verification of the qualitative findings through the quantitative results (data triangulation).

Ethical approval was granted by the institution at which all three authors are based, and the research complies with all relevant guidelines and regulations for studies involving humans. All study participants for both the qualitative and the quantitative study were informed of the following prior to participating: (1) the purpose of the study (interview participants via email; current and potential employees at the beginning of the questionnaire); (2) how their anonymity was protected (interview participants' names were changed and job roles/titles were not revealed; no demographic data was collected from current and potential employees); (3) how their data was stored and used (on a password-protected computer to which only the research team have access); and (4) that there were no risks involved when participating in the study, and that they could withdraw at any point.

In a first step, insights from management on the influence of co-branding alliances on employer branding at AREA 47 were gathered through semi-structured interviews. All interviews were conducted between January and February 2024. Five managers were selected based on their expertise (from the marketing and HR departments of AREA 47). Selecting interviewees with significant knowledge ensures depth of information even if their number is limited (Palinkas et al., 2015). Two of the interviewees were in a top management position with 10 and 14 years of experience at AREA 47. The three other interviewees were middle managers with between one and six years of experience at the company. The interviews were conducted in German; the researchers later transcribed them verbatim and translated them into English. They lasted between 34–45 minutes.

Qualitative content analysis following Mayring (2022) was then performed and five categories initially deduced from the theoretical framework, namely, co-branding alliances; internal and external employer branding; and internal and external outcomes for the employer. Subsequently, the researchers defined 14 subcategories and established coding rules and key examples. Throughout this process, the three authors worked independently in developing the codes and categories, and regularly met to discuss code duplication and reduction.

The results of the qualitative interviews with AREA 47 managers demonstrate that they select partner brands carefully to ensure strong brand fit.

According to the managers, doing so can exert a positive impact on their internal and external employer branding strategies at AREA 47, especially if the values of partner brands match those of AREA 47.

Thus, managers at AREA 47 are well aware of the importance of selecting the right partners and ensuring a strong brand fit between the values of the company and its partners' values. This notion extends into the product category and brand personality levels (Helmig et al., 2008). If a strong brand fit exists between AREA 47 and each partner, then brand fit between all partners of the brand alliance should also be strong.

With regard to internal employer branding, AREA 47 has established a strong brand essence and internal values. Especially in terms of professional equipment, working smart, and being innovative, managers believe that their co-branding partners contribute to the corporate values of AREA 47.

Current employees may feel more appreciated and taken care of and gain additional knowledge from co-branding alliance partners due to all the benefits generated by the co-branding alliance partners for employees at AREA 47. Strengthening the company through co-branding alliances is an important success factor (Ma et al., 2018; Quamina et al., 2023); at AREA 47, managers believe that this aspect may contribute to current employees' perception of the company as an attractive workplace.

Lastly, the managers conclude that if employees are satisfied with their jobs and work environment, they tend to recommend AREA 47 as an employer to family and friends.

In terms of external employer branding, managers are convinced that partner brands can help strengthen AREA 47's image for potential employees and job applicants. The co-branding alliance partners may not be the main reason for potential employees to apply, but managers believe the partners provide an additional value to the jobs offered. Indeed, the spillover effects of co-branding alliances, which were previously explored from the consumer perspective (Ma et al., 2018), may also play a role for potential employees and their perception of the employer image of AREA 47.

Authentic brand partnerships further enable partner companies to develop brand equity, trust, and financial stability (Ma et al., 2018; Ronda et al., 2018), which are important factors that also contribute to potential employees' perception of job security. Managers at AREA 47 are convinced that if brand fit within the brand alliance is strong, then the partners may also signal job security at AREA 47 to potential employees.

Moreover, perceived job security can exert a positive impact on intention to apply among potential employees (Jain and Bhatt, 2015; Samoliuk et al., 2022). Managers at AREA 47 believe that applicants recognize this concept along with other partner benefits even before applying for a job at AREA 47. Thus, being aware of the co-branding partners may have an impact on their intention to apply.

In summary, findings from the interviews suggest the following: First, brand fit is essential for AREA 47 in terms of co-branding alliances to enable the development of authentic partnerships. Second, despite the risks associated with co-branding, these partnerships can strengthen internal and external employer branding efforts. Current employees' perceptions of corporate values can potentially be enhanced, and employees may even recommend the company to others. Findings from interviews with managers thus demonstrate that it is worth further investigating employees' perspectives of these aspects in order to be able to compare and contrast employer's and employees' different perceptions of brand fit and corporate values (H1), job security (H2 and H3), as well as employer recommendation (H4). For potential employees, the partnerships are intended to enhance their positive perception of the employer image. If brand fit is strong, then the partners of the company may also play a key role in signaling job security at AREA 47 to potential employees. With regards potential employees, their perceptions of brand fit and employer image (H5), perceived job security (H6 and H7), and intention to apply (H8) should therefore also be further tested. Thus, the qualitative findings are in line with the defined hypotheses (Figure 1), which were quantitatively tested in a second step.

To test the proposed hypotheses, the researchers conducted a survey on current and potential employees of AREA 47. After administering a pretest on eight participants and slightly modifying the survey, data were collected over 13 weeks (between January and April 2024). Current employees were contacted via email. To reach potential employees, a survey link was distributed on LinkedIn and sent to applicants via e-mail. Hence, the sample was a convenience sample, which the study acknowledges as a limitation. Out of 189 participants, 138 completed the survey, of which 134 responses remained usable after data cleansing. The final sample consisted of 57 current employees (35% of the staff) and 77 potential employees (27% of the applicants).

The measurement tools for the current study were adapted from existing scales. Items were rated using a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. The authors assessed brand fit using three items developed on the basis of Simonin and Ruth (1998), and measured employer image using three items by Nguyen and Leblanc (2001). A dimension of organizational identity called corporate values was measured using a semantic differential by David et al. (2005; i.e. 1 = not trustworthy, 7 = trustworthy). Job security and perceived job security were measured using one item based on Lievens et al. (2007). The study assessed two dependent variables—intention to apply and employer recommendation—using single-item measures. Using just one item can effectively capture straightforward and concrete concepts, and in smaller samples, it can even provide more accurate results than using reflective constructs (Cheah et al., 2018). To ensure anonymity and a low participation threshold, the survey did not include any demographic questions.

Data analysis was conducted using SmartPLS 4 and SPSS 29. Skewness and kurtosis values were within acceptable ranges (between −2 and + 2), which indicates a normal distribution, except for corporate values (kurtosis: 2.235). However, this value only slightly exceeded the threshold, thus, it was retained in the model. Harman's one-factor test was conducted to check for common method variance (CMV) for the two subsamples. One factor explained 55.78% and 59.02% for current and potential employees, respectively, which exceeds the 50% threshold (Podsakoff et al., 2003). While this finding raises concerns about CMV, the slight excess in variance explained does not undermine the implications of the study (Min et al., 2016).

To test the reliability and validity of the multi-item constructs, the study performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using SmartPLS. To test the hypotheses, the authors then conducted simple linear regression analyses for each path of both groups (current and potential employees) using SPSS. Due to the small sample sizes, linear regression is an appropriate method for this dataset, while structural equation modeling would require a larger sample to ensure stable parameter estimation and prevent overfitting.

CFA was conducted to establish model fit for the two subsamples. The fit index values for the current employee group (χ²/df = 1.454, NFI = 0.909, TLI = 0.944, CFI = 0.968, RMSEA = 0.089, GFI = 0.917, AGFI = 0.814) exhibited appropriate fit. For potential employees, the fit values were also sufficient (χ²/df = 1.355, NFI = 0.918, TLI = 0.958, CFI = 0.976, RMSEA = 0.068, GFI = 0.938, AGFI = 0.861).

The study also conducted CFA to evaluate the reliability and validity of the latent variables. The values for Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability (CR) met the threshold of 0.7, which indicates reliability. Convergent validity was ensured using the values for average variance extracted (>0.5; Table 1). The factor loadings of the latent variables are >0.7, except for brand fit among potential employees (Table 1). However, the variable was retained due to the theoretical rationale and appropriate fit for the employee group. The square root values of AVE were larger than their respective correlations, which indicates discriminant validity (Table 2).

The results of the regression analyses demonstrate that, for current employees, brand fit does not significantly positively influence corporate values (B = 0.250, p = 0.056, adj. R² = 0.048) nor job security (B = 0.355, p = 0.052, adj. R² = 0.050). Hence, H1 and H2 were rejected. Corporate values significantly predict job security (B = 0.729, p < 0.001, adj. R² = 0.277), which in turn positively influences employer recommendation (B = 0.255, p = 0.004, adj. R² = 0.125), thus supporting H3 and H4.

For potential employees, brand fit positively impacts employer image (B = 0.276, p < 0.01, adj. R² = 0.078) and perceived job security (B = 0.366, p < 0.05, adj. R² = 0.053), which supports H5 and H6. Employer image significantly predicts perceived job security (B = 0.791, p < 0.001, adj. R² = 0.299), which supports H7. Finally, perceived job security positively influences intention to apply (B = 0.661, p < 0.001, adj. R² = 0.251), which confirms H8. Overall, the standardized beta coefficients β (Table 3) indicate moderate to strong effects, and the adjusted R² values suggest that the predictors explain a notable proportion of variance in the outcomes, particularly for job security and intention to apply.

While research on employer branding has demonstrated that current and potential employees hold different perceptions of employer branding (Samoliuk et al., 2022), previous research on co-branding alliances has mainly focused on the consumers' perspective (Paydas Turan, 2021). In relation to employer branding, research on brand fit and perceptions of job security and employer attractiveness has thus far only been investigated with regards to person-organization fit (Sharma and Tanwar, 2023). Existing studies have also merely focused on the company brand as a single entity and its impact upon current and potential employees (Samoliuk et al., 2022; Theurer et al., 2018), rather than assessing the cumulative effect of all brands within a co-branding alliance. This study addressed the three research gaps by applying a sequential mixed-method approach, and exploring whether and how co-branding alliances and brand fit between alliance partner brands are perceived as an employer branding strategy by current and potential employees. Specifically, it investigated whether co-branding activities contribute to the creation of a value proposition among current and potential employees of an outdoor-action-sports-service provider. It examined the effect of brand fit on corporate values, job security, and employer recommendation among current employees, and the effect of brand fit on employer image, perceived job security, and intention to apply among potential employees. Thus, the study makes significant theoretical and practical contributions.

The qualitative results demonstrated that the managers at AREA 47 are well aware of the importance of brand fit in co-branding partnerships and deliberately selected partners with a high product and/or brand personality fit. Partnering with cohesive, consistent, and complementary brands is considered essential for the success of co-branding alliances (Simonin and Ruth, 1998; Helmig et al., 2008; Sénéchal et al., 2014) and enables AREA 47 to develop authentic partnerships.

The managers also believe that internal and external employer branding efforts can be strengthened through these partnerships. Current employees' perception of corporate values and potential employees' perception of employer image can both be enhanced. Thus, the study extends Karjaluoto and Paakkonen's (2019) findings that sponsor-event fit influences corporate values, such as organizational identity and employer brand associations, and provides new insights into how authentic co-branding alliances can reinforce a positive image of the employer for current and potential employees. However, the results of the quantitative study indicate that brand fit among partner brands is specifically important for potential employees, but not for current employees' perceptions of the employer image. While Riehle et al. (2023) revealed that employees value the symbolic meaning of provided brand equipment, the current study did not find a similar effect of brand fit on employer image as perceived by current employees.

AREA 47's managers further argued that brand fit among brand alliance partners may signal job security to current and potential employees. Indeed, shared values are important for fostering a stable work environment (Plaikner et al., 2023). Moreover, when employees identify with corporate values, they may perceive higher job security. The results of the survey point to a positive relationship between brand fit and the perceived job security of potential employees, which confirms existing research (Jain and Bhatt, 2015). Nevertheless, the present study was unable to confirm this relationship for current employees. This finding indicates that although potential employees may be attracted to the company because they perceive that congruent brands signal stability, this perception does not necessarily translate into increased job security once they are employed. For current employees, other factors may dominate this influence on job security such as leadership behavior, workplace relationships, or contract terms (Hur, 2022).

Finally, according to the interview participants, perceived job security is an important factor for current employees when recommending the company to others, while potential employees may be more likely to apply due to the additional benefits and perceived job security provided by co-branding partners. Therefore, the qualitative findings are in line with those of Jain and Bhatt (2015) and Keppeler and Papenfuß (2021) and highlight the managers' understanding of the essence of co-branding alliances as a valuable tool for employer branding. The quantitative results confirm positive relationships between job security and employer recommendation for current employees and between perceived job security and intention to apply for potential employees. However, this effect is stronger for potential employees. An underlying reason could be their focus on stability when considering new jobs and their lack of experience with the company. For current employees, other factors such as commitment may play a more prominent role in employer recommendation (Fecker et al., 2023).

The study provides practical implications that can help organizations achieve internal and external employer branding goals. First, choosing the right partners for a co-branding alliance is crucial. Matching values can increase the success of co-branding alliances (Helmig et al., 2008). Thus, managers should select partners that evoke positive values not only in the minds of consumers but also of their employees (Suzuki and Kanno, 2022). This involves assessing the strategic alignment, compatibility and synergy between the company and any potential partner brands. Understanding the needs of current and potential employees through employee surveys or focus groups is also essential in determining their expectations of benefits from partner brands within the brand alliance. Finally, conducting a risk assessment and developing a crisis strategy for the co-branding alliance in case the values of a partner change, is also critical. Adverse spillover effects from negative events can harm both partners' brands (Koschate-Fischer et al., 2019). Current employees may feel betrayed, and potential employees may hesitate to apply.

Second, to effectively operationalize co-branding for internal communication with current employees and for external communication with potential employees, companies should focus on defining clear goals, establishing a shared brand identity with all partner brands, and implementing consistent communication across all channels. This should include developing a communication plan that specifies the frequency and timing of the message, as well as different communication channels, such as employee booklets, newsletters, the website, email, and social media, to effectively reach current and potential employees. Feedback from employees about the co-branding alliance should also be encouraged to foster a culture of open communication. More specifically, the findings illustrate that brand fit between brand alliance partners is important for the perception of the employer image among potential employees but not current ones. Therefore, managers should consider emphasizing co-branding alliances and partner benefits in job descriptions, as well as throughout the application and interview processes, to attract potential employees and be regarded as an employer of choice. For current employees who already appreciate the benefits provided by partner brands, more emphasis should be placed on other additional benefits received through employer and partner attributes (Ronda et al., 2018), such as variety at work, opportunities to develop intercultural competencies, or the combination of work and leisure activities (Plaikner et al., 2023). Indeed, well-chosen co-branding partners can further contribute to these benefits by providing clothing and equipment that can be used outside of work, or by offering special experiences or team-building days for all employees.

Third, managers should be aware of the positive relationships between job security and employer recommendation for current employees and between perceived job security and intention to apply for potential employees. This aspect is particularly important for industries characterized by high fluctuation, such as the hospitality industry (Innerhofer et al., 2022), and should not be underestimated. When recruiting employees, companies need to provide clear communication about job stability and use co-branding alliances to signal that potential employees will be joining companies with shared strengths and reduced risks.

The following study limitations need to be acknowledged: First, the generalizability of the results of the quantitative study is limited due to the relatively small sample size and the convenience sampling approach. Applying structural equation modeling, which could have provided more robust results, was impossible due to the small sample size. However, the mixed-method approach enabled an in-depth understanding of co-branding alliances. Future studies should investigate the effects of co-branding alliances among various organizations and across different destinations using probability sampling to ensure generalizability and valid statistical robustness. Second, the study did not collect demographic information, which limits its ability to analyze potential differences across participant characteristics. Thus, future research should integrate demographic data to develop a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the participant population. Finally, the study used cross-sectional data, which inherently carries common method bias due to simultaneous data collection. Furthermore, investigating long-term developments, such as corporate values, in a cross-sectional study is a significant limitation (Karjaluoto and Paakkonen, 2019). Therefore, a longitudinal research design should be adopted in future studies to validate causal relationships by collecting data before and after the implementation of co-branding alliances.

To conclude, attracting talent and maintaining a stable workforce can be a challenge in the tourism and hospitality industry as labor shortage and high turnover rates are common (Innerhofer et al., 2022; Kar and Nguyen Thi Phuong, 2023; Al-Romeedy et al., 2025). This study has demonstrated that internal and external employer branding is particularly relevant in the industry, and that co-branding alliances can be used as a specific tool to further increase the outcomes of employer branding strategies. When there is a strong brand fit between partnering brands, both current and prospective employees tend to perceive this alignment positively, viewing it as an additional benefit associated with the employment experience.