Showcase food industry careers
Make skills and know-how visible and attract new talent.
Why this programme
Line operator, maintenance technician, quality specialist: food industry jobs are little known, even internally. The programme showcases the know-how of each department, from farm to fork, and gives those who do these jobs a sense of pride. It can also be played at open days or recruitment fairs.
What your teams experience
- From farm to fork: put the production steps of one of your flagship products back in order.
- The mystery job: guess a job on the site from clues given by the people who do it.
- The precise gesture: a challenge on the phone reproduces a technical action from the line.
- The ambassadors: each team writes the sentence that would make people want to join the site.
Each activity opens and closes with a projected cinematic sequence, personalised for your teams. The facilitator sets the pace: nothing moves forward without them.
What the company gains
Employees proud of their work, better mutual understanding between departments, and ready-made material for your recruitment campaigns.
Staging written for you
In your client area, a form specific to this programme collects your content: it is built into the challenges and cinematic sequences, exactly as you provide it. The look uses your logo and your colours. Teams are formed on the spot or based on your organisation chart.
Follow-up, up to D+30
Your follow-up dashboard stays with the programme, from the order to the final results.
- After the session: the session report, with the gap between the opening and closing measures.
- At D+7: a reminder asks a few key questions again, and the D+7 report shows what has been retained.
- At D+30: a second reminder, and the D+30 report shows what holds over time.
The sources of this programme
The published research that this programme's games, measures and debriefs refer to. You can check every reference.
- Grant, A. M. (2008). The significance of task significance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 108-124. 10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.108
- Grant, A. M., Campbell, E. M., Chen, G., Cottone, K., Lapedis, D., & Lee, K. (2007). Impact and the art of motivation maintenance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103(1), 53-67. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.05.004
- Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250-279. 10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7
- Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(2), 103-123. 10.1002/job.4030130202
- Van Hoye, G., & Lievens, F. (2009). Tapping the grapevine: A closer look at word-of-mouth as a recruitment source. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 341-352. 10.1037/a0014066
- Premack, S. L., & Wanous, J. P. (1985). A meta-analysis of realistic job preview experiments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(4), 706-719. 10.1037/0021-9010.70.4.706
- Aronson, E., & Bridgeman, D. (1979). Jigsaw groups and the desegregated classroom. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5(4), 438-446. 10.1177/014616727900500405
- Lewis, K. (2003). Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: Scale development and validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 587-604. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.587
- Wegner, D. M. (1987). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In B. Mullen & G. R. Goethals (dir.), Theories of Group Behavior (p. 185-208). Springer. 10.1007/978-1-4612-4634-3_9
- Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-119. 10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1
- Howard, G. S. (1980). Response-shift bias: A problem in evaluating interventions with pre/post self-reports. Evaluation Review, 4(1), 93-106. 10.1177/0193841X8000400105
Further reading (2 references)
Other research we drew on to design this programme.
- Ashforth, B. E., & Kreiner, G. E. (1999). "How can you do it?": Dirty work and the challenge of constructing a positive identity. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 413-434. 10.5465/amr.1999.2202129
- Cable, D. M., & Turban, D. B. (2003). The value of organizational reputation in the recruitment context. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(11), 2244-2266. 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01883.x
Shared foundations (1 reference)
The mechanics of all our sessions (team play, the debrief, the before-and-after measure, spaced reminders) and the research that also underpins the other programmes in the same specialty or sector.
- Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249-255. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x
Before you book
How is a Corporate Solutions experience different from team building?
It starts from a business objective, not an activity: onboarding new hires, preventing a risk, bringing your commitments to life. It is staged for your company, with your content, your figures and your brand. Your teams play in person, on their phones, while a big screen tells the story and a facilitator runs the room. And it is followed up: the session report, then the D+7 and D+30 reminders in your client area.
Do we need to install an app?
No. Participants scan a QR code and play in their phone's browser. No account, no password, no installation. It works on iPhone and Android.
Is there a limit on the number of participants?
No. The platform adapts to your headcount, from a small team to the whole company, in one or several rooms.