Skip to main content
Log in

Are prosocially motivated employees more committed to their organization? The roles of supervisors’ prosocial motivation and perceived corporate social responsibility

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Journal of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

How to enhance prosocial employees’ commitment to their organizations is of both theoretical and practical importance. The present study argues that a high level of organizational commitment in prosocial employees is predicted by bipartite synergy between employees’ prosocial motivations and their supervisors’ prosocial motivations, between employees’ prosocial motivations and their organizations’ prosocial orientations, and tripartite synergy among all three. Polynomial regressions and hierarchical regression analyses are undertaken on data collected from a sample of 216 full-time employees in China. The results show that perceived fit between employees and supervisors’ prosocial motivations (i.e., person-supervisor [PS] fit) is positively related to employees’ organizational commitment (i.e., there is bipartite synergy between employees and supervisors’ prosocial motivations). Perceived corporate social responsibility (CSR) moderates the relationship between employees’ prosocial motivations and their organizational commitment such that when employees’ prosocial motivations and perceived CSR are both high (as opposed to when either or both are low), their organizational commitment is stronger (i.e., there is bipartite synergy between employees’ prosocial motivations and CSR). Furthermore, perceived CSR moderates the relationship between PS fit in relation to prosocial motivations and organizational commitment. Notably, organizational commitment is strongest when there is a strong alignment among employees’ prosocial motivations, supervisors’ prosocial motivations, and CSR (i.e., there is tripartite synergy among employees’ prosocial motivations, supervisors’ prosocial motivations, and CSR). The theoretical contributions and practical implications of this study are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Unlike Hypothesis 1a, we did not hypothesize a fit effect for the bipartite synergy between employee prosocial motivation and CSR, because the two constructs cannot be measured on commensurate scales. In PE fit literature, “the assessment of fit requires the use of commensurate measures of the person and situation variables. That is, the person and situation must be measured on common dimension using a compatible metric such that it is clear when a match has been achieved.” (Meyer, Irving, & Allen, 1998).

  2. Including or excluding materialism in the analysis did not change the results in a significant way.

  3. In PE fit literature, P is commonly used to denote employee(s) and S to denote supervisor(s). Adopting the approach of previous research, P was used to indicate employees’ prosocial motivations, and S was used to indicate supervisors’ prosocial motivations.

  4. See a detailed guide on how to test moderated polynomial regression on the website of Professor Jeffrey R. Edwards (http://public.kenan-flagler.unc.edu/faculty/edwardsj/ModeratedPolynomialRegression.htm).

References

  • Adam, H., & Shirako, A. 2013. Not all anger is created equal: The impact of expresser’s culture on the social effects of anger in negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(5): 785–798.

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. 1989. Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1): 20–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashkanasy, N. M., & O’Connor, C. 1997. Value congruence in leader-member exchange. Journal of Social Psychology, 137(5): 647–662.

  • Baron, R. A., Franklin, R. J., & Hmieleski, K. M. 2013. Why entrepreneurs often experience low, not high, levels of stress: The joint effects of selection and psychological capital. Journal of Management, 42(3): 742–768.

  • Batson, C. D. 1987. Prosocial motivation: Is it ever truly altruistic?. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology: 65–122. New York: Academic.

  • Baston, C. D., Ahmad, N., Powell, A. A., & Stocks, E. L. 2008. Prosocial motivation. In J. Y. Shah, & W. L. Gardner (Eds.). Handbook of motivation science: 135–149. New York: Guilford.

  • Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. 2010. Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica, 77(305): 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, J. W., & Scott, D. K. 2000. An examination of organizational and team commitment in a self-directed team environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3): 439–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. 2007. The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(10): 1701–1719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bretz, R. D., & Judge, T. A. 1994. Person–organization fit and the theory of work adjustment: Implications for satisfaction, tenure, and career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 44(1): 32–54.

  • Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. 1996. Person–organization fit, job choice decisions, and organizational entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(3): 294–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, R. D. 1987. Person-environment fit theory and organizations: Commensurate dimensions, time perspectives, and mechanisms. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31(3): 248–267.

  • Carroll, A. B. 1979. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4): 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cha, J., Chang, Y., & Kim, T.-Y. 2014. Person-organization fit on prosocial identity: Implications on employee outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 123: 57–69.

  • Chan, D. 2009. So why ask me? Are self-report data really that bad. In C. E. Lance, & R. J. Vandenberg (Eds.). Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in the organizational and social sciences: 311–338. New York: Routledge.

  • Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. 1983. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

  • Crampton, S. M., & Wagner, J. A., III. 1994. Percept-percept inflation in microorganizational research: An investigation of prevalence and effect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1): 67–76.

  • Cullen, J. B., Parboteeah, K. P., & Victor, B. 2003. The effects of ethical climates on organizational commitment: A two-study analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 46(2): 127–141.

  • Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. 2002. Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4): 611–628.

  • Dulac, T., Coyle-Shapiro, J. A., Henderson, D. J., & Wayne, S. J. 2008. Not all responses to breach are the same: The interconnection of social exchange and psychological contract processes in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6): 1079–1098.

  • Edwards, J. R., & Cable, D. A. 2009. The value of value congruence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3): 654–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. R., & Parry, M. E. 1993. On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6): 1577–1613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. 1999. Work and family stress and well-being: An examination of person-environment fit in the work and family domains. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77(2): 85–129.

  • Endler, N. S., & Magnusson, D. 1976. Toward an interactional psychology of personality. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farh, J. L., Hackett, R. D., & Liang, J. 2007. Individual-level cultural values as moderators of perceived organizational support-employee outcome relationships in China: Comparing the effects of power distance and traditionality. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3): 715–729.

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1): 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E., & Mele, D. N. 2004. Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1–2): 51–71.

  • Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. 1997. Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(6): 827–844.

  • Goll, I., & Zeitz, G. 1991. Conceptualizing and measuring corporate ideology. Organization Studies, 12(2): 191–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M. 2007. Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, 32(2): 393–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M. 2008. Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1): 48–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M., & Berg, J. M. 2010. Prosocial motivation at work: When, why, and how making a difference makes a difference. In K. Cameron, & G. Spreitzer (Eds.). Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship: 28–44. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Grant, A. M., Dutton, J. E., & Rosso, B. D. 2008. Giving commitment: Employee support programs and the prosocial sensemaking process. Academy of Management Journal, 51(5): 898–918.

  • Grant, A. M., & Mayer, D. M. 2009. Good soldiers and good actors: Prosocial and impression management motives as interactive predictors of affiliative citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4): 900–912.

  • Grant, A. M., & Sumanth, J. J. 2009. Mission possible? The performance of prosocially motivated employees depends on manager trustworthiness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4): 927–944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofman, P. S., & Newman, A. 2014. The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on organizational commitment and the moderating role of collectivism and masculinity: Evidence from China. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(5): 631–652.

  • Hou, M., Liu, H., Fan, P., & Wei, Z. 2016. Does CSR practice pay off in east Asian firms? A meta-analytic investigation. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 33(1): 195–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houghton, S. M., Gabel, J. T. A., & Williams, D. W. 2008. Connecting the two faces of CSR: Does employee volunteerism improve compliance?. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(4): 477–494.

  • Hurst, M., Dittmar, H., Bond, R., & Kasser, T. 2013. The relationship between materialistic values and environmental attitudes and behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36: 257–269.

  • Iverson, R. D., & Maguire, C. 2000. The relationship between job and life satisfaction: Evidence from a remote mining community. Human Relations, 53(6): 807–839.

  • Jacquart, P., & Antonakis, J. 2015. When does charisma matter for top-level leaders? Effect of attributional ambiguity. Academy of Management Journal, 58(4): 1051–1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilbourne, W., & Pickett, G. 2008. How materialism affects environmental beliefs, concern, and environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Business Research, 61(9): 885–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H.-R., Lee, M., Lee, H.-T., & Kim, N.-M. 2010. Corporate social responsibility and employee–company identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(4): 557–569.

  • Kim, T.-Y., & Kim, M. 2013. Leaders’ moral competence and employee outcomes: The effects of psychological empowerment and person–supervisor fit. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(1): 155–166.

  • Kolodinsky, R. W., Madden, T. M., Zisk, D. S., & Henkel, E. T. 2010. Attitudes about corporate social responsibility: Business student predictors. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2): 167–181.

  • Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. 2005. Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58(2): 281–342.

  • Kuvaas, B., & Dysvik, A. 2010. Exploring alternative relationships between perceived investment in employee development, perceived supervisor support and employee outcomes. Human Resource Management Journal, 20(2): 138–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C. P., Lyau, N. M., Tsai, Y. H., Chen, W. Y., & Chiu, C. K. 2010. Modeling corporate citizenship and its relationship with organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(3): 357–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C., & Hult, G. T. M. 1999. Corporate citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4): 455–469.

  • Marcus, B., Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. 2007. Personality dimensions explaining relationships between integrity tests and counterproductive behavior: Big five, or one in addition?. Personnel Psychology, 60(1): 1–34.

  • Meglino, B. M., & Ravlin, E. C. 1998. Individual values in organizations: Concepts, controversies, and research. Journal of Management, 24(3): 351–389.

  • Meyer, J. P., Irving, P. G., & Allen, N. J. 1998. Examination of the combined effects of work values and early work experiences on organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(1): 29–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. 2002. Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61: 20–52.

  • Morin, A. J., Meyer, J. P., McInerney, D. M., Marsh, H. W., & Ganotice, F. A., Jr. 2015. Profiles of dual commitment to the occupation and organization: Relations to well-being and turnover intentions. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(3): 717–744.

  • Mossholder, K. W., Bennett, N., Kemery, E. R., & Wesolowski, M. A. 1998. Relationships between bases of power and work reactions: The mediational role of procedural justice. Journal of Management, 24(4): 533–552.

  • Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. 1979. The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14(2): 224–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. 1991. People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3): 487–516.

  • Penner, L. A., Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., & Schroeder, D. A. 2005. Prosocial behavior: Multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56: 365–392.

  • Peterson, D. K. 2004. The relationship between perceptions of corporate citizenship and organizational commitment. Business & Society, 43: 296–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, A. S., & Bedeian, A. G. 1994. Leader-follower exchange quality: The role of personal and interpersonal attributes. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4): 990–1001.

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5): 879–903.

  • Ready, D. A., Hill, L. A., & Conger, J. A. 2008. Winning the race for talent in emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 86(11): 62–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richins, M. L., & Dawson, S. 1992. A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3): 303–316.

  • Rioux, S. M., & Penner, L. A. 2001. The causes of organizational citizenship behavior: A motivational analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6): 1306–1314.

  • Rupp, D. E., Shao, R., Thornton, M. A., & Skarlicki, D. P. 2013. Applicants’ and employees’ reactions to corporate social responsibility: The moderating effects of first-party justice perceptions and moral identity. Personnel Psychology, 66: 895–933.

  • Schaubroeck, J., & Lam, S. S. K. 2002. How similarity to peers and supervisor influences organizational advancement in different cultures. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6): 1120–1136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sekiguchi, T. 2006. How organizations promote person-environment fit: Using the case of Japanese firms to illustrate institutional and cultural influences. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(1): 47–69.

  • Seong, J. Y., Hong, D.-S., & Park, W.-W. 2012. Work status, gender, and organizational commitment among Korean workers: The mediating role of person-organization fit. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(4): 1105–1129.

  • Shanock, L., Baran, B., Gentry, W., Pattison, S., & Heggestad, E. 2010. Polynomial regression with response surface analysis: A powerful approach for examining moderation and overcoming limitations of difference scores. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(4): 543–554.

  • Strauss, J. P., Barrick, M. R., & Connerley, M. L. 2001. An investigation of personality similarity effects (relational and perceived) on peer and supervisor ratings and the role of familiarity and liking. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74: 637–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. 1985. Psychology of intergroup relations. In S. Worchel, & W. G. Austin (Eds.). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior: 7–24. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

  • Trau, R. N. C., Härtel, C. E. J., & Härtel, G. F. 2013. Reaching and hearing the invisible: Organizational research on invisible stigmatized groups via web surveys. British Journal of Management, 24(4): 532–541.

  • Turker, D. 2009. Measuring corporate social responsibility: A scale development study. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(4): 411–427.

  • Valentine, S., & Fleischman, G. 2008. Ethics programs, perceived corporate social responsibility and job satisfaction. Journal of Business Ethics, 77(2): 159–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vianen, A. E. M., De Pater, I. E., Kristof-Brown, A. L., & Johnson, E. C. 2004. Fitting in: Surface- and deep-level cultural differences and expatriates’ adjustment. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5): 697–709.

  • Witt, L. A. 1998. Enhancing organizational goal congruence: A solution to organizational politics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4): 666–674.

  • Zhang, Z., Wang, M., & Shi, J. Q. 2012. Leader-follower congruence in proactive personality and work outcomes: The mediating role of leader-member exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1): 111–130.

  • Zhu, Y., Sun, L.-Y., & Leung, A. S. M. 2014. Corporate social responsibility, firm reputation, and firm performance: The role of ethical leadership. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31(4): 925–947.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bo Shao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shao, B., Cardona, P., Ng, I. et al. Are prosocially motivated employees more committed to their organization? The roles of supervisors’ prosocial motivation and perceived corporate social responsibility. Asia Pac J Manag 34, 951–974 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-017-9512-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-017-9512-5

Keywords

Navigation