To EVP or not to EVP? That is the question

The gloves were off at The Unconference 2025 as employer branding experts went head-to-head on the contentious question of EVPs. Our ringside report captures all the jabs, hooks and uppercuts from this no-holds-barred clash of titans.

Round 1: The weigh-in creating a minimum viable employer brand

Welcome to the main event of The Unconference! In the blue corner, fighting FOR the Employee Value Proposition (EVP), we have Kate Siddiqui and Ben Phillips. And in the red corner, questioning the very need for an EVP, we have David Phillips and Charu Malhotra.

For those unfamiliar with the terminology, an EVP (Employee Value Proposition) is the complete package of benefits, culture and opportunities that an organisation offers in exchange for an employee’s skills, capabilities and experience. It’s the “give and get” that defines your relationship with talent – the promise you make to your people.

Our contestants stepped into the ring not knowing which side they’d be championing until the bell rang. Talk about thinking on your feet! With Roger as our esteemed ring master and adjudicator, the stage was set for an intellectual slugfest that would have Shakespeare questioning his famous dilemma.

Round 2: The opening blows

The NAY team came out swinging, with a bold claim that ditching the EVP offers greater freedom and flexibility. A solid opening jab, but the YAY team counterpunched immediately, arguing that without an EVP, organisations are merely drifting aimlessly, lacking authenticity and struggling to secure crucial buy-in.

“An EVP will be based on real research, positioning and marketing campaigns,” landed like a sharp right hook from Team YAY.

Team NAY attempted to dodge with the retort that “people won’t look at the EVP slide deck once launched” and encouraged everyone to “fall in love with the problem” instead. A creative sidestep, but was it enough to convince the judges?

Round 3: Defining the terms

Team YAY clarified their stance with precision: “What an EVP isn’t is a slogan or brand strategy. It is your give and get – the overarching proposition that is your starting point.”

Team NAY raised valid concerns about empty slogans and messaging that fails to connect. But their comeback didn’t quite land with the same force. Some tough questions saw David and Charu taking heavy hits.

Round 4: Strategy vs identity

Team YAY landed a devastating combination: “People fail when they start with the brand identity and don’t lead with the EVP. Start with the strategy where enough people in the organisation can get behind the summary of what it is like to work at this business. You are not going to please everyone.”

The audience felt the impact. That’s going to leave a mark!

Round 5: The agility factor

Just when you thought Team NAY was against the ropes, they found their footing with a critique of static, inflexible EVPs that get stuck in time. “By not having one, you can be flexible,” they argued. “Once you have a global talent brand and every location has to follow it, it doesn’t always fit.”

But Team YAY was ready with a nimble response: “You need to have an Agile EVP. Taking 18 months to launch something that then goes out of date is pointless. You must sense check with different stakeholders, adapt and dial up or down depending on those needs.”

The crowd murmured in approval. An Agile EVP? Could this be the compromise that satisfies both camps?

Round 6: Foundation vs Flexibility

Team YAY pressed their advantage: “You have your foundation of EVP, then you flex depending on stage in career, role and what people want. Without an EVP as a foundation, people can go wayward on recruitment campaigns.”

Team NAY countered with “having the flexibility gives you employee engagement,” but their punches were beginning to lack conviction.

The ring master, Roger turned to the audience: “Is your EVP flexible enough?” The crowd’s response suggested a lean toward Team YAY’s agile approach.

Round 7: Standing the test of time

“Does your EVP stand the test of time?” asked Team YAY. “If it is a mirror to your culture rather than what the C-suite want it to look like, then it will resonate. It will stand up when true to culture.”

Team NAY landed a solid counter: “An EVP can die in a time of crisis and isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.” They cited COVID as an example, where previously “boring” values like financial stability suddenly became highly prized.

Team YAY nodded in acknowledgement before delivering a philosophical uppercut: “The employer reputation is always there, whether you like it or not. How you capture that and bring it to life is in your control.”

Round 8: Investment and simplicity

As the match neared its conclusion, both sides showed signs of fatigue but continued trading intellectual blows.

“The EVP needs to be invested in by the senior leadership team, employees, and financial resources,” asserted Team YAY.

Team NAY questioned the need for “grand manifestos” and lamented “spending 8 months fighting over words.” They advocated taking learnings from consumer marketing by acting on insights rather than spending excessive time and effort on documentation.

Team YAY countered: “The EVP has a massive influence over brand, especially in consumer brands. Without the EVP, how do you start telling a story?”

Final Round: Finding common ground

As the bell rang for the final round, both sides showed surprising alignment.

Team NAY conceded: “An environment where people can talk with pride is much better than a fixed EVP. It doesn’t matter what it’s called.”

Team YAY embraced evolution: “We are moving into a post-EVP world, but CFOs are becoming interested in EVPs as they can see it influencing production and monetary value. With the EVP, we boost the employee experience and use it as a foundation document. Perhaps ‘talent reputation’ is a better way of talking about it.”

The decision

As our fighters touched gloves at the final bell, and embraced like old friends who’d just spent twelve rounds arguing a point that may not have even been their own, the judges’ scorecards showed a swing toward Team YAY.

The verdict? There’s still a place for the EVP. But not the rigid, dusty kind. The win went to the idea of a flexible, authentic proposition, rooted in reality and built from the inside out.

Final thoughts from our contenders:

• Let’s get back to basics and promote the culture

• People can make it really complicated – keep it simple

• Fight for the EVP as it gives us the most success

  
  

The verdict is in: an agile, authentic EVP wins by technical knockout! But perhaps the real winner is the middle ground – an approach that combines strategic foundation with tactical flexibility. As employers navigate increasingly complex talent landscapes, this balancing act may prove to be the true championship belt worth fighting for.

This blow-by-blow account was brought to you by The Unconference: where employer branding gets real, uncut, and occasionally throws a few punches, originally published on Leap Create.