Public employers must actively engage with the labor market and establish their uniqueness compared to the private sector to succeed in the “war for talent”. Scholars frequently recommend cultivating a strong “public service brand” (Ritz et al., 2016) and employing sector-specific motivational factors as an active recruitment tool (Asseburg and Homberg, 2020). A core theme of public service motivation research, although challenged, is the assumption that sector preference is influenced by PSM (Van de Walle et al., 2015). However, PSM-related signaling often fails to attract a wider range of potential applicants, which poses significant challenges in securing qualified personnel for the public sector (Keppeler and Papenfuß, 2021).

This paper investigates the role of job advertisements in effectively communicating such a brand. Signals in job advertisements refer to organizational characteristics, which can be perceived through specific words, that employers communicate to appeal to potential applicants and convey information regarding available jobs (Rynes, 1991; Spence, 1973). Even slight differences in word choice can affect the perception of job advertisements (Linos, 2018).

Therefore, this paper answers the following research question: “What signals can be identified in public sector job advertisements and how do they differ from those in the private sector?”

We collected 5,000 public job advertisements from the job portal Interamt and 5,000 private job advertisements from the Federal Employment Agency in Germany. Then, we performed a linguistic analysis to derive significant sectoral differences in word choice and their between-sector effect sizes. Variations in word frequency distributions may indicate sector-specific recruitment messaging, which highlights deliberate or subliminal, and emergent strategies for attracting and engaging potential applicants. Moreover, we applied clustering techniques to gain further insights into structural differences between the sectors, overcoming previously identified methodological limitations (Vogel et al., 2023). The results show significant sectoral differences in word choice and content emphasis, as well as public-specific signals that predominantly align with PSM. However, formalizations and administrative burdens are noticeable (Sievert et al., 2020).

To date, the literature has not explored these signals in a natural setting and how public employers apply unique linguistic cues in job advertisements (Korac et al., 2018). Therefore, this study expands the understanding of signaling practices in the public sector and determines whether these practices differ from those of the private sector, laying the foundation for further utilization of the identified signals in research and practice.

Public organizations are grappling with a human capital crisis (Jacobsen et al., 2023), especially as younger employees increasingly hop between jobs (Steenackers & Guerry, 2016). To tackle these challenges, it is key for public HRM to foster a highly committed workforce (Hodgkinson et al., 2018), which means rethinking the psychological contract with employees (Cropanzano et al., 2017), thus increasing their contribution to achieving public service performance.

Previous research in Public Administration has, to some extent, failed to provide clear guidance to public managers on what leads to higher organizational commitment- OC (Stazyk et al., 2011). This issue may stem primarily from the presence of conflicting findings regarding differences across sectors in antecedents of OC such as different HR practices (Hansen & Kjeldsen, 2018). This phenomenon may be attributable to at least two reasons. Firstly, the focus on sector disparities might overlook variations within sectors (Steinhaus & Perry, 1996). Secondly, sector blurring (Bromley & Meyer, 2017) and the rise of hybrid organizations (Baarspul & Wilderom, 2011) have added complexity that, if not addressed explicitly, could contribute to these mixed results.

This study aims to fill these gaps by considering OC as a three-dimensional concept (Mowday et al., 1979, p. 226). By examining its antecedents, the study links OC with psychological contract theory (Rousseau, 1998). Based on these theoretical foundations, the study seeks to answer the following questions: which factors have the greatest impact on OC in the public sector, and how do they compare to other sectors (private and semi-public) and different types of public organizations, such as regulatory versus production-oriented entities (Kjeldsen, 2014)?

To achieve this goal, the study uses a large dataset covering employees from various sectors, from over 75 organizations, totaling more than 640,000 respondents across Switzerland. This extensive dataset spans five years, from 2017 to 2022, ensuring a thorough representation of the country's cultural and administrative diversity and potentially allowing for generalization to other contexts. Data analysis will encompass exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Additionally, linear regression models will be employed to examine the relationship across subsamples.

This study provides a more nuanced understanding of OC while explicitly considering the role of context (Cooke, 2018), and offering explanations for previous mixed results. In terms of practical implications, it identifies key factors of public HRM to prioritize in reshaping public organizations’ social exchange with employees, ultimately boosting commitment in times of labor shortage and amid competition for talent.

While the public sector has experienced a notable surge in rapid organizational change, scholarly attention to the impact of intense organizational change on psychological contracts of employees has been limited. This mixed-method study explores how change intensity affects psychological contract fulfillment among civil servants, while also highlighting the role of change management. Using survey data from a large Belgian public organization and focus group insights, the study finds that increased change intensity reduces psychological contract fulfillment, while positive change management perceptions enhance it. However, even effective change management strategies may not fully counteract the negative effects of intense change environments.

As governments increasingly engage in collaborative arrangements with organizations from the business and nonprofit sectors, leaders often find themselves in settings with a considerable diversity of actors, goals, and practices. While some studies have examined how leaders cope with the diversity challenge in cross-sector collaborations (CSCs), previous scholarship has not yet provided an integrative theoretical account of the elements and origins of this diversity at the sectoral macro-level and corresponding leadership responses at the individual micro-level. This study addresses this gap and theorizes diversity in CSCs as emerging from broader institutional logics of the public, business, and nonprofit sectors, giving rise to tensions and conflicts to which leaders respond with patterned behaviors. Building on a case study of a tri-sector partnership operating in the field of disaster management, we identify four categories of institutional leadership in CSC that balance the demands of the involved institutional logics: integrating, mediating, separating, and defending leadership behaviors. The study extends the theory of cross-sector leadership by developing an institutionalist framing of leadership in CSCs, adding more clarity to the importance and specifics of leadership in such settings.