The Kooku Employer Branding Score: Why we reject every 7th recruiting mandate
By Mathias Mengel, CEO Kooku Recruiting GmbH | March 12, 2026 | Reading time: approx. 10 minutes
We do not accept around 15 % of all inquiries that reach us immediately. Not because we don’t have the capacity. But because we know that a recruiting mandate is doomed to failure under certain circumstances – no matter how good our active sourcing is.
This decision is not based on a gut feeling, but on a number: the Employer Branding Score. Every company that wants to work with us undergoes a structured candidate market analysis before the project starts. The result is a score between 0 and 10, which measures how attractive an employer really is for candidates – regardless of what the image brochure says.
In this article, I explain how the score works, what the two dimensions mean and what companies can do specifically to systematically improve their fill rate. With real figures from our projects.
Table of contents
What is the Employer Branding Score?
The employer branding score is a key figure between 0 and 10 that measures how fillable a position is under current market conditions. It combines two dimensions into one overall value: the strength of the employer brand and the attractiveness of the product or company from the candidate’s perspective.
The idea behind it is simple: even the best recruiter, with the best active sourcing methods and the most accurate sourcing lists, cannot fill a position if candidates reject the company before they even get to the interview stage. This happens every day – and silently, without HR teams realizing it.
88% of all job seekers research a company’s employer brand before applying. (Source: LinkedIn) Those who fail this initial silent check simply receive fewer applications – regardless of the recruiting budget.
At Kooku, we analyze every new customer with this score before we actively source. If the result is below 5 out of 10 points, we do not start with recruiting – but first with a consulting phase in which we identify the most urgent levers and implement them together.
Why the score determines success or failure
We did not develop the Employer Branding Score from theory, but from practice. In more than 10 years and over 250 customer projects with more than 1,200 filled positions, we have recognized a clear pattern: Projects where employer branding is below a threshold have a significantly lower probability of success – even if the recruiting methods are identical.
This is not due to active sourcing. It’s because of what happens after a candidate has been contacted. They google the company. He looks at Kununu. They read the job advertisement. And they decide within minutes whether to respond – or not.
Our average active sourcing response rate is up to 43 %. The industry average is between 10 and 25 %. The difference is not only explained by better cover letters, but also by the preparatory work: we make sure that a candidate who clicks on the company finds something convincing.
According to industry analyses, companies with a strong employer brand need up to 50% less time to fill a position. And their costs per hire are almost half as high as those of employers with a weak brand. This is not a marketing theory, these are measurable recruiting KPIs.
The two dimensions of the employer branding score
The score consists of two independent parts that are weighted together. Part A measures the visible employer brand. Part B measures how attractive the product, service or company is from the candidate’s perspective – a factor that is often forgotten in traditional employer branding.
Part A: Employer brand – 9 factors, 1-5 points each
This part evaluates everything a candidate sees and experiences before the first interview with the company. Nine factors, each on a scale from 1 (non-existent / very weak) to 5 (excellent).
| # | Factor | What is valued? | Typical lever |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kununu / Glassdoor | Number and quality of employer reviews | Target: ≥ 20 reviews, ≥ 4.0 stars |
| 2 | Career page | Findability, ATS connection, process transparency | Mobile optimization, communicate SLA |
| 3 | LinkedIn / Xing presence | Activity, CI, followers, employee visibility | Posting frequency, employee advocacy |
| 4 | Job advertisements | Structure, salary range, benefits, tonality | Include salary range (+20% application rate possible with attractive salary) |
| 5 | Social Media | Reach and quality on relevant channels | LinkedIn recruiting posts, paid targeting |
| 6 | Offsite presence | Trade fairs, events, trade press, university marketing | At least 1 industry event per year |
| 7 | Vision, mission, values (EVP) | Visibility and authenticity of purpose | Integrate EVP on career page + in advertisements |
| 8 | Salary structure | Market level, transparency, progression | Benchmark check, communicate bands |
| 9 | Location & remote flexibility | Location, home office regulation, hybrid model | Communicate remote policy clearly and honestly |
Part B: Product & service attractiveness – 10 criteria, -1 to +2 points
This part is often neglected in the recruiting context – wrongly so. Candidates not only decide on an employer, but also on an industry, a technology and a product. Those who work in a segment that is considered outdated or in a company without future prospects have a much harder time – regardless of salary and career page.
Each criterion is rated on a scale from -1 (negative factor) to +2 (clearly positive factor).
| # | Criterion | Scale: -1 to +2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Quality & modernity of the product / service | -1 = Legacy, +2 = Top modern hype topic |
| 2 | Awareness of the problem that the company solves | -1 = Barely known, +2 = Urgent mass issue |
| 3 | Media attention & relevance in the industry | -1 = Negative press, +2 = High positive media interest |
| 4 | Known competition (makes the industry visible to candidates) | -1 = Monopoly, +2 = Dynamic environment |
| 5 | Reputation of company and industry in general | -1 = Negative, +2 = Highly respected |
| 6 | Social responsibility / Purpose / ESG relevance | -1 = Negative, +2 = Clear purpose |
| 7 | Financial stability / cash flow | -1 = Tense & known, +2 = Strongly growing |
| 8 | Known investors / Funding | -1 = Failed rounds, +2 = Top investors |
| 9 | Product participation / ESOP / Ownership model | -1 = No idea of ownership, +2 = Clear ESOP |
| 10 | Market position & future potential of the sector | -1 = Shrinking, +2 = Booming industry |
Practical example: Applicant market analysis of a HealthTech scale-up
In March 2026, we conducted a complete candidate market analysis for a HealthTech company from Berlin. The company is Series B-financed (€37m), employs around 100 people and works remote-first. A total of 9 positions were to be filled – five of which were prioritized for analysis.
The result was an Employer Branding Score of 7.6 out of 10 points – strong enough to recommend the mandate. At the same time, we uncovered three specific levers that could significantly improve the score and thus the likelihood of being filled in the short term.
| Employer brand factor | Score (1-5) | Most important observation |
|---|---|---|
| Kununu / Glassdoor | 3 | 3.3/5 stars with only 15 reviews – 61 % recommendation |
| Career page | 4 | Modern, clearly structured, values & benefits visible, testimonials available |
| LinkedIn / Xing | 4 | Active LinkedIn presence, regular posts, team visible |
| Job advertisements | 4 | Well written, purpose-driven – salary not transparent |
| Social Media | 3 | LinkedIn strong, other channels hardly used |
| Vision / Mission / Values | 5 | Clearly defined: Visionary Experts, Empathic Mentors, Reliable Partners |
| Applicant market / competition | 3 | Strong competition for tech and sales talent in the HealthTech segment |
| Salary structure | 3 | Standard market practice, but not communicated transparently |
| Location & Remote | 5 | Remote-first + Berlin as HQ – maximum flexibility |
| TOTAL Employer brand | 34 / 45 | Ø 3.78 / 5 – solid basis, clear optimization levers visible |
The three biggest quick wins we have identified for this company:
- Launch Kununu campaign: motivate active employees to rate. Target: at least 30 reviews with Ø ≥ 4.0 stars. This significantly increases the basis of trust without costing the budget.
- Include salary bands in job advertisements: According to market data, transparent salary information increases the application rate by 20-40%. The effect is immediately measurable.
- Communicate the SLA on the careers page: Clear application process with time specifications (e.g. “feedback within 5 working days”) increases the candidate experience and reduces the drop-out rate in the application process.
Overall rating: Score 7.6/10 → Mandate recommended. Recruiting can begin – employer branding measures are implemented in parallel to further increase the probability of filling difficult positions.
Why do we reject mandates below 5/10 – and what is behind this?
The short answer is that we are protecting our customers from unnecessary time wasting and our own occupancy rate. But the real reason is different.
A candidate with three years’ experience in a sought-after role has a choice on the DACH job market in 2026. He receives several inquiries a month. If we write to him and he then comes across an outdated careers page, three revised Kununu reviews and a job advertisement with no salary – he turns it down. Not the job offer. The application.
69% of job seekers would turn down a job offer if the company had a bad reputation as an employer – even if they were currently without a job. (Source: MRINetwork)
We cannot avoid this reality through even better active sourcing. That’s why we analyze first and make sure the foundation is right before we get started.
The result: our occupancy rate is 85.9%. Over 80% of our customers work with us again after the first project. We attribute this not only to recruiting, but also to the principle of checking in advance whether the requirements are right.
What influences the employer branding score the most?
Not every measure works equally quickly. Here are the five levers that had the greatest and quickest effect on our customers’ fillability – rated according to effort and impact.
| Measure | Expenditure | Effect | Typical result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Salary ranges in job advertisements | Low | Very high | +20-40 % application rate possible |
| Kununu/Glassdoor campaign | Low | High | Trust among candidates increases measurably |
| Career page with process information & ATS | Medium | High | Dropout rate in the application process decreases |
| LinkedIn activation of employees | Medium | High | 2× higher CTR on job posts (source: LinkedIn of course :)) |
| Sharpen EVP & integrate on career page | Medium-high | Medium-high | Better cultural fit in incoming applications |
We recommend starting with the first two measures – both can be implemented within a few weeks and deliver measurable results immediately. If you’re not sure where you stand, do a score check first.
From practice: What happens when the score is right
To show what is possible when employer brand and active sourcing work together: We filled two critical sales positions for a SaaS company in the sales recruiting segment within three months – with an average time-to-hire of 6 weeks, around four candidates presented per position and an offer acceptance rate of 100%.
The key was not the volume of the sourcing, but the combination: the company had a clear purpose, a transparent remuneration structure and a fast application process. Active sourcing merely used this foundation.
What the figures make even clearer: In the same project, we had to deal with a difficult position where the salary band was originally not in line with the market. We escalated this in the briefing, the band was adjusted and the position was filled within four weeks. Without this early analysis, it would have remained open for months.
How you classify your score
| Score | Importance | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| 9-10 | Excellent conditions | Start immediately. Active sourcing will be very effective. Actively use your employer brand advantage in your approach. |
| 7-8 | Strong base | Recruiting can start. Implement small quick wins in parallel – pay particular attention to salary bands and Kununu ratings. |
| 5-6 | Sufficient | Recruiting is possible, but several levers should be pulled in parallel. We recommend the quick wins directly before the start. |
| 3-4 | Difficult environment | First strengthen employer branding, then get started. Kooku advises first – recruiting without a foundation burns up the client’s time and budget. |
| 0-2 | Critical | Recruiting will hardly be successful. Fundamental changes to the salary structure, external image and/or EVP are necessary. |
Try it out for yourself? Get the free applicant market analysis within 24 hours here
FAQ: Employer branding score, fill rate and applicant market analysis
How fillable is your vacancy really?
Simply enter your e-mail address and the job advertisement – our team will provide you with a free applicant market analysis with your employer branding score and specific quick wins within 24 hours.
No obligation. No phone call necessary. Just the job advertisement and the e-mail to which we can send the report.
Request a free applicant market analysis →
kooku.de/bewerbermarktanalyse/ | Evaluation within 24 hours | Over 1,200 vacancies filled since 2014
Related articles:
