Journal of Business Ethics

, 89:189 | Cite as

How Corporate Social Responsibility Influences Organizational Commitment

Article

Abstract

A growing number of studies have investigated the various dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the literature. However, relatively few studies have considered its impacts on employees. The purpose of this study is to analyze how CSR affects the organizational commitment of employees based on the social identity theory (SIT). The proposed model was tested on a sample of 269 business professionals working in Turkey. The findings of the study revealed that CSR to social and non-social stakeholders, employees, and customers were the significant predictors of organizational commitment. However, there was no link between CSR to government and the commitment level of employees.

Key words

corporate social responsibility organizational commitment social identity theory stakeholders Turkey 

Abbreviations

CSR

Corporate social responsibility

CSR-1

CSR to social and non-social stakeholders

CSR-2

CSR to employees

CSR-3

CSR to customers

CSR-4

CSR to government

ICSR

Importance of Ethics and Social Responsibility

PRESOR

Perceived Role of Ethics and Social Responsibility

SIT

Social identity theory

Notes

Acknowledgment

This article is mainly based on the unpublished master dissertation of the author. The author is grateful to Professor Ömür N. Timurcanday Özmen in Dokuz Eylul University for her constant support and advising.

References

  1. Albinger, H. S. and S. J. Freeman: 2000, ‘Corporate Social Performance and Attractiveness as an Employer to Different Job Seeking Populations’, Journal of Business Ethics, 28(3), 243–253. doi: 10.1023/A:1006289817941 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashforth, B. E. and F. Mael: 1989, ‘Social Identity Theory and the Organization’, The Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20–39. doi: 10.2307/258189 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aupperle, K. E.: 1982, ‘An Empirical Inquiry into the Social Responsibilities as Defined by Corporations: An Examination of Various Models and Relationships’, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of GeorgiaGoogle Scholar
  4. Backhaus, K. B., B. A. Stone and K. Heiner: 2002, ‘Exploring the Relationship between Corporate Social Performance and Employer Attractiveness’, Business & Society, 41(3), 292–318. doi: 10.1177/0007650302041003003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balfour, D. L. and B. Wechsler: 1996, ‘Organizational Commitment: Antecedents and Outcomes in Public Organizations’, Public Productivity & Management Review, 19(3), 256–77. doi: 10.2307/3380574 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowen, H. R.: 1953, Social Responsibilities of the Businessman (NewYork, Harper and Row).Google Scholar
  7. Brammer, S., A. Millington and B. Rayton: 2005, ‘The Contribution of Corporate Social Responsibility to Organisational Commitment’, Working Paper, University of Bath, UKGoogle Scholar
  8. Burke, L. and J. M. Logsdon: 1996, ‘How Corporate Social Responsibility Pays Off’, Long Range Planning, 29(4), 495–502. doi: 10.1016/0024-6301(96)00041-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carroll, A. B.: 1979, ‘A Three Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505. doi: 10.2307/257850 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carroll, A. B.: 1991, ‘The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders’, Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. doi: 10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carroll, A. B.: 1999, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct’, Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295. doi: 10.1177/000765039903800303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Charkham, J.: 1994, Keeping Good Company: A Study of Corporate Governance in Five Countries (Oxford, Claredon).Google Scholar
  13. Clarkson, M. B. E.: 1994, A Risk Based Model of Stakeholder Theory. Proceedings of the Second Toronto Conference on Stakeholder Theory, Centre for Corporate Social Performance & Ethics University of Toronto, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  14. Clarkson, M. B. E.: 1995, ‘A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117. doi: 10.2307/258888 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cook, J. and T. Wall: 1980, ‘New Work Attitude Measures of Trust, organizational commitment and Personal Need Non-Fulfillment’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53(1), 39–52.Google Scholar
  16. Cortina, J. M.: 1993, ‘What is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and Applications’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98–104. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Daft, R. L.: 2003, Management (USA, Thomson South-Western).Google Scholar
  18. Davis, K.: 1960, ‘Can Business Afford to Ignore Social Responsibilities?’, California Management Review, 2(3), 70–76.Google Scholar
  19. Davis, K. and R. L. Blomstrom: 1966, Business and its Environment (New York, McGraw-Hill).Google Scholar
  20. Dunham, R. B., J. A. Grube and M. B. Castaneda: 1994, ‘Organizational Commitment: The Utility of an Integrated Definition’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3), 370–380. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.370 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dutton, J. E., J. M. Dukerich and J. M. Harquail: 1994, ‘Organizational Images and Member Identification’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2), 239–263. doi: 10.2307/2393235 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eells, R, C. Walton: 1974, Conceptual Foundations of Business (3rd ed.) (Burr Ridge, IL, Irwin).Google Scholar
  23. Epstein, E. M.: 1987, ‘The Corporate Social Policy Process: Beyond Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Corporate Social Responsiveness’, California Management Review, 29(3), 99–114.Google Scholar
  24. Etheredge, J. M.: 1999, ‘The Perceived Role of Ethics and Social Responsibility: An Alternative Scale Structure’, Journal of Business Ethics, 18(1), 51–64. doi: 10.1023/A:1006077708197 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fitch, H. G.: 1976, ‘Achieving Corporate Social Responsibility’, Academy of Management Review, 1(1), 38–46. doi: 10.2307/257357 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Frederick, W. C.: 1960, ‘The Growing Concern over Business Responsibility’, California Management Review, 2(4), 54–61.Google Scholar
  27. Freeman, R. E.: 1984, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Boston: Pitman).Google Scholar
  28. Greening, D. W. and D. B. Turban: 2000, Corporate Social Performance as a Competitive Advantage in Attracting a Quality Work Force’, Business & Society, 39(3), 254–280. doi: 10.1177/000765030003900302 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hair, J. F., W. C. Black, R. E. Anderson and R. L. Tatham: 2006, Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed. (Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey).Google Scholar
  30. Hewstone, M. and J. M. F. Jaspars: 1984, ‘Social Dimensions of Attribution’. In: H. Tajfel (ed.), The Social Dimension: European Developments in Social Psychology (Cambridge, UK, Cambridge Univ. Press), pp. 379–404.Google Scholar
  31. Hogg, M. A., D. J. Terry and K. M. White: 1995, ‘A Tale of Two Theories : A Critical Comparison of Identity Theory with Social Identity Theory’, Social Psychology Quarterly, 58(4), 255–269. doi: 10.2307/2787127 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Huselid, M. and N. Day: 1991, ‘Organizational Commitment, Job Involvement, and Turnover: A Substantive and Methodological Analysis’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(3), 380–39. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.76.3.380 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Johnson, H. H.: 2003, ‘Does it Pay to Be Good? Social Responsibility and Financial Performance’, Business Horizons, 46, 34–40. doi: 10.1016/S0007-6813(03)00086-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jones, T. M.: 1980, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility Revisited, Redefined’, California Management Review, 22(3), 59–67.Google Scholar
  35. Kanter, R. M.: 1968, ‘Commitment and Social Organization: A Study of Commitment Mechanisms in Utopian Communities’, American Sociological Review, 33(4), 499–517. doi: 10.2307/2092438 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mahon, J. F.: 2002, ‘Corporate Reputation: A Research Agenda Using Strategy and Stakeholder Literature’, Business & Society, 41(4), 415–445. doi: 10.1177/0007650302238776 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Maignan, I. and O. C. Ferrell: 2000, ‘Measuring corporate citizenship in two countries: The case of the United States and France’, Journal of Business Ethics,23(3), 283–297. doi: 10.1023/A:1006262325211 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Maignan, I., O. C. Ferrell: 2001, ‘Corporate Citizenship as a Marketing Instrument’, European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 457–484. doi: 10.1108/03090560110382110 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Maignan, I., O. C. Ferrell and G. T. Hult: 1999, ‘Corporate Citizenship: Cultural Antecedents and Business Benefits’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27, 455–469. doi: 10.1177/0092070399274005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Marsden, P. V., A. L. Kallenberg and C. R. Cook: 1993, ‘Gender Differences in Organizational Commitment: Influences of Work Positions and Family Roles’, Work and Occupations, 20(3), 368–390. doi: 10.1177/0730888493020003005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McGuire, J. W.: 1963, Business and Society (New York, McGraw-Hill).Google Scholar
  42. McGuire, J. B., A. Sundgren, T. Schnrrweis: 1988, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance’, Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 854–872. doi: 10.2307/256342 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Meyer, J. P., N. J. Allen: 1991, ‘A Three Component Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment’, Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89. doi: 10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Meyer, J. P. and N. J. Allen: 1997, Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and Application (Thousands Oaks, CA, Sage).Google Scholar
  45. Mowday, R. T., L. W. Porter, and R. M. Steers: 1982, Employee Organization Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover (New York, Academic Press).Google Scholar
  46. Mowday, R. T., R. M. Steers and L. W. Porter: 1979, ‘The Measurement of Organizational Commitment’, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224–247. doi: 10.1016/0001-8791(79)90072-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Naess, A.: 2001, in D. Rothenberg (trans. and ed.) Ecology, Community and Life-Style: Outline of an Ecosophy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)Google Scholar
  48. Pava, M. L. and J. Krausz: 1996, ‘The Association between Corporate Social-Responsibility and Financial Performance: The Paradox of Social Cost’, Journal of Business Ethics, 15(3), 321–357. doi: 10.1007/BF00382958 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Peterson, D. K.: 2004, ‘The Relationship between Perceptions of Corporate Citizenship and Organizational Commitment’, Business and Societ, 43(3), 296–319. doi: 10.1177/0007650304268065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Porter, M. E. and M. R. Kramer: 2002, ‘The Competitive Advantage of Corporate Philanthropy’, Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–65.Google Scholar
  51. Quazi, A. M. and D. O’Brien 2000 An Empirical Test of a cross-national model of Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(1), 33–51. doi: 10.1023/A:1006305111122 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Reichers, A. E.: 1986, ‘Conflict and Organizational Commitments’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 508–514. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.508 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Riordan, C. M., R. D. Gatewood and J. B. Bill: 1997, ‘Corporate Image: Employee Reactions and Implications for Managing Corporate Social Performance’, Journal of Business Ethics, 16(4), 401–412. doi: 10.1023/A:1017989205184 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rupp, D. E., J. Ganapathi, R. V. Aguilera and C. A. Williams: 2006, ‘Employee Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility: An Organizational Justice Framework’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(4), 537–543. doi: 10.1002/job.380 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sethi, S. P.: 1975, ‘Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: An Analytic Framework’, California Management Review,17(3), 258–64.Google Scholar
  56. Sims, R. R.: 2003, Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility: Why Giants Fall (USA, Praeger Publishers).Google Scholar
  57. Singhapakdi, A., S. J. Vitell, and K. L. Kraft: 1996, ‘The Perceived Role of Ethics and Social Responsibility: A Scale Development’, Journal of Business Ethics, 36, 245–255.Google Scholar
  58. Smith, W. J., R. E. Wokutch, K. V. Harrington and B. S. Dennis: 2001, ‘An Examination of the Influence of Diversity and Stakeholder Role on Corporate Social Orientation’, Business and Society, 40(3), 266–294. doi: 10.1177/000765030104000303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Snider, J., R. P. Hill and D. Martin: 2003, Corporate Social Responsibility in the 21st Century: A View from the World’s Most Successful Firms’, Journal of Business Ethics, 48(2), 175–187. doi: 10.1023/B:BUSI.0000004606.29523.db CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stanwick, P. A. and S. D. Stanwick: 1998, ‘The Determinants of Corporate Social Performance: An Empirical Examination’, American Business Review, 16(1), 86–93.Google Scholar
  61. Stone, E. F. and L.W. Porter: 1975, ‘Job Characteristics and Job Attitude: A Multivariate Study’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(1), 57–64. doi: 10.1037/h0076357 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tajfel, H., J. C. Turner: 1985 The Social Identity Theory of Group Behavior. In: H. Tajfel (ed.), The Social Dimension: European Developments in Social Psychology (Cambridge, UK, Cambridge Univ. Press), pp.15–40.Google Scholar
  63. Turban, D. B. and D. W. Greening: 1996, ‘Corporate Social Performance and Organizational Attractiveness to Prospective Employees’, Academy of Management Journal, 40, 658–72. doi: 10.2307/257057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Turker, D.: 2006, ‘The Impact of Employee Perception of Corporate Social Responsibility on Organizational Commitment: A Scale Development Study’, Unpublished Master Dissertation, Dokuz Eylul UniversityGoogle Scholar
  65. Vakola, M. and I. Nikolaou: 2005, ‘Attitudes towards Organizational Change: What is the Role of Employees’ Stress and Commitment?’, Employee Relation, 25(2), 160–174. doi: 10.1108/01425450510572685 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Verdeyen, V., J. Put, and B·V. Buggenhout: 2004, ‘A Social Stakeholder Model’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 13(4), 325–331. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2397.2004.00328.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Viswesvaran, C., S. P. Deshpande and C. Milman: 1998, ‘The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Employee Counterproductive Behaviour’, Cross Cultural Management, 5(4), 5–12. doi: 10.1108/13527609810796835 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Welsch, H. P. and H. LaVan: 1981, ‘Inter-relationships between organizational commitment and Job Characteristics, Professional Behavior, and Organizational Climate’, Human Relations, 34(12), 1079–1089. doi: 10.1177/001872678103401205 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Werther, W. B. and D. Chandler: 2006, Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment, (USA, Sage Publications).Google Scholar
  70. Wheeler, D. and M. Sillanpaa: 1997, The Stakeholder Corporation: A Blueprint for Maximazing Stakeholder Value. (London, Pitman).Google Scholar
  71. Whetten, D. A. and A. A. Mackey: 2002, ‘Social Actor Conception of Organizational Identity and its Implications for the Study of Organizational Reputation’, Business & Society, 41(4), 393–414. doi: 10.1177/0007650302238775 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wiener, Y. 1982 Commitment in Organization: A Normative View. Academy of Management Review 7(3): 418–428. doi: 10.2307/257334 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wood, D. J. and R. E. Jones: 1995, ‘Stakeholder Mismatching: A Theoretical Problem in Empirical Research on Corporate Social Performance’, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3(3), 229–267. doi: 10.1108/eb028831 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vocational School, Yasar UniversityBornova, IzmirTurkey

Personalised recommendations