Abstract
This study identifies the roles of consumers’ ethical orientations and CSR (perceived corporate social responsibility) motives and the dynamics of these two variables on the subsequent consumers’ attitudinal and behavioral responses to CSR—perceived corporate authenticity and pro-firm behavioral intentions. To examine the impact of individual consumers’ ethical orientations, the authors measured consumers’ ethical orientations such as deontology and consequentialism through a Web-based survey conducted in Korea and in the USA. Further, to investigate the role of perceived CSR motives, the authors measured the perception of a company’s business-oriented motives and society-oriented motives in conducting CSR. Results demonstrate the different role of ethical orientation in impacting consumers’ responses across these countries. Consumers’ consequentialist orientation appears to be positively associated with pro-firm behavioral intention in both the Korean and the US studies. In the Korean study, Consumers’ deontological orientation reduces perceived corporate authenticity when corporate motives seem business-oriented. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alcaniz, E. B., Caceres, R. C., & Perez, R. C. (2010). Alliances between brands and social causes: The influence of company credibility on social responsibility image. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 169–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0461-x.
Alhouti, S., Johnson, C. M., & Holloway, B. B. (2016). Corporate social responsibility authenticity: Investigating its antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 69, 1242–1249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.09.007.
Arthur W. Page society. (2007). The authentic enterprise: An Arthur W. Page Society Report. Retrieved from http://www.awpagesociety.com/site/resources/white_papers/
Auger, P., & Devinney, T. M. (2007). Do what consumers say matter? The misalignment of preferences with unconstrained ethical intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(4), 361–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9287-y.
Auger, P., Devinney, T. M., & Louviere, J. J. (2007). Using best–worst scaling methodology to investigate consumer ethical beliefs across countries. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(3), 299–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9112-7.
Ban, Z. (2016). Delineating responsibility, decisions and compromises: A frame analysis of the fast food industry’s online CSR communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 44(3), 296–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2016.1192290.
Basil, D. Z., & Weber, D. (2006). Values motivation and concern for appearances: The effect of personality traits on responses to corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Marketing, 11(1), 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.38.
Beauchamp, T. L., Bowie, N. E., & Arnold, D. G. (2004). Ethical theory and business. New Jersey, NY: Prentice Hall.
Becker-Olsen, K. L., Cudmore, B. A., & Hill, R. P. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.01.001.
Beckman, T., Colwell, A., & Cunningham, P. H. (2009). The emergence of corporate social responsibility in Chile: The importance of authenticity and social networks. Journal of Business Ethics, 86, 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0190-1.
Beverland, M. (2006). The ‘real thing’: Branding authenticity in the luxury wine trade. Journal of Business Research, 59, 251–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.04.007.
Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), 9–24. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166284.
Bondy, K., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2004). The adoption of voluntary codes of conduct in MNCs: A three-country comparative study. Business & Society Review, 109(4), 449–477. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0045-3609.2004.00205.x.
Bowen, S. A. (2002). Elite executives in issues management: The role of ethical paradigms in decision making. Journal of Public Affairs, 2(4), 270–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.119.
Bowen, S. A. (2005). Practical model for ethical decision making in issues management and public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 17(3), 191–216. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr1703_1.
Broad, C. D. (2014). Five types of ethical theory. Abingdon, OX: Routledge.
Brown, S., Kozinets, R. V., & Sherry, J. F. (2003). Teaching old brands new tricks: Retro branding and the revival of brand meaning. Journal of Marketing, 67(3), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.67.3.19.18657.
Brunk, K. H. (2010). Exploring origins of ethical company/brand perceptions—A consumer perspective of corporate ethics. Journal of Business Research, 63(3), 255–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.03.011.
Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer - do ethics matter in purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560–577. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760110410263.
Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. (2009). Public relations strategy and application: Managing influence. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Creyer, E. H., & Ross, W. T. (1997). The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: Do consumers really care about business ethics? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14(6), 421–428. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363769710185999.
Donaldson, T. (1992). The ethics of international business. New York: Oxford University Press.
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Review, 12, 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x.
Eleni, P., Paparoidamis, N. G., & Chumpitaz, R. (2015). Understanding ethical consumers: A new approach towards modeling ethical consumer behaviours. L. Robinson (Ed.), Marketing dynamism & sustainability: things change, things stay the same… (pp. 223–225). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305284976.
Etheredge, J., & Erdener, C. (1999). Ethical decision patterns in four countries: Contrasting theoretical perspectives. In G. Enderle (Ed.), International business ethics: Challenges and approaches (pp. 51–66). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Forehand, M. R., & Grier, S. (2003). When is honesty the best policy? The effect of stated company intent on consumer skepticism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 349–356. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP1303_15.
Forsyth, D. R., O’Boyle, E. H., & McDaniel, M. A. (2008). East meets west: A meta-analytic investigation of cultural variations in idealism and relativism. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 813–833. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9667-6.
Freeman, R. E., & Auster, E. R. (2011). Values, authenticity, and responsible leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 98, 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1022-7.
Furaiji, F., Łatuszyńska, M., & Wawrzyniak, A. (2012). An empirical study of the factors influencing consumer behaviour in the electric appliances market. Contemporary Economics, 6(3), 76–86. https://doi.org/10.5709/ce.1897-9254.52.
Graafland, J., & Mazereeuw-Van der Duijn Schouten, C. (2012). Motives for corporate social responsibility. De Economist, 160(4), 377–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10645-012-9198-5.
Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141.
Groza, M. D., Pronschinske, M. R., & Walker, M. (2011). Perceived organizational motives and consumer responses to proactive and reactive CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(4), 639–652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0834-9.
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.108.4.814.
Heath, R. L., & Coombs, W. T. (2006). Today's public relations: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452233055.
Hunt, S. D., & Vasquez-Parraga, A. Z. (1993). Organizational consequences, marketing ethics, and salesforce supervision. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(1), 78. https://doi.org/10.2307/3172515.
Hur, W.-M., Kim, H., & Woo, J. (2014). How CSR leads to corporate brand equity: Mediating mechanisms of corporate brand credibility and reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 125, 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1910-0.
Jahdi, K. S., & Acikdilli, G. (2009). Marketing communications and corporate social responsibility (CSR): Marriage of convenience or shotgun wedding? Journal of Business Ethics, 88(1), 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0113-1.
Kant, I. (1797). The metaphysical principles of virtue, trans. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Kim, D., & Choi, M. I. (2013). A comparison of young consumers’ evaluations of corporate social responsibility practices of multinational corporations in the United States and South Korea. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(1), 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1285-7.
Kim, S., & Lee, Y.-J. (2012). The complex attribution process of CSR motives. Public Relations Review, 38(1), 168–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.09.024.
Kim, Y. (2003). Ethical standards and ideology among Korean public relations practitioners. Journal of Business Ethics, 42(3), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022281507601.
Kim, Y. J., & Lee, W. N. (2009). Overcoming consumer skepticism in cause-related marketing: The effects of corporate social responsibility and donation size claim objectivity. Journal of Promotion Management, 15(4), 465–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496490903270232.
Lewis, D., & Bridger, D. (2000). The soul of the new consumer: Authenticity-what authors buy and why in the new economy. London: Nicholas Brealey.
Maignan, I. (2001). Consumers’ perceptions of corporate social responsibilities: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 30(1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006433928640.
Mayo, M. A., & Marks, L. J. (1990). An empirical investigation of a general theory of marketing ethics. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18(2), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/009207039001800207.
McShane, L., & Cunningham, P. (2012). To thine own self be true? Employees’ judgments of the authenticity of their organizations’ corporate social responsibility program. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(1), 81–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1064-x.
Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2001.tb00102.x.
Murray, K. B., & Vogel, C. M. (1997). Using a hierarchy-of-effects approach to gauge the effectiveness of corporate social responsibility to generate goodwill toward the firm: Financial versus nonfinancial impacts. Journal of Business Research, 38(2), 141–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0148-2963(96)00061-6.
Myers, R. (1990). Classical and modern regression with applications (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Duxbury.
Napoli, J., Dickinson, S. J., Beverland, M. B., & Farrelly, F. (2014). Measuring consumer-based brand authenticity. Journal of Business Research, 67, 1090–1098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.06.001.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than authors can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231.
Pérez, R. C. (2009). Effects of perceived identity based on corporate social responsibility: The role of consumer identification with the company. Corporate Reputation Review, 12(2), 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2009.12.
Reidenbach, R. E., & Robin, D. P. (1988). Some initial steps toward improving the measurement of ethical evaluations of marketing activities. Journal of Business Ethics, 7(11), 871–879. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00383050.
Rim, H., & Kim, S. (2016). Dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) skepticism and their impacts on public evaluations toward CSR. Journal of Public Relations Research, 28(5–6), 248–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2016.1261702.
Schaefer, A. D., & Pettijohn, C. E. (2006). The relevance of authenticity in personal selling: Is genuineness an asset or liability? Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 14(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.2753/mtp1069-6679140102.
Schwartz, M. S., & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 503–530. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq200313435.
Schwepker, C. H., Jr., & Good, D. J. (2011). Moral judgment and its impact on business-to-business sales performance and customer relationships. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(4), 609–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0641-8.
Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225–243. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838.
Shen, H., & Kim, J.-N. (2012). The authentic enterprise: Another buzzword, or a true driver of quality relationships? Journal of Public Relations Research, 24, 371–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726x.2012.690255.
Singh, J., Sanchez, S., M. d. M. G, & Bosque, I. R. (2008). Understanding corporate social responsibility and product perceptions in consumer markets: A cross-cultural evaluation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3), 597–611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9457-6.
Sison, A. J. G. (1999). Trust and Filipino family business. In G. Enderle (Ed.), International business ethics (pp. 358–372). Notre Dame, London: University of Notre Dame Press.
Skarmeas, D., & Leonidou, C. N. (2013). When consumers doubt, watch out! The role of CSR skepticism. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1831–1838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.004.
Sprinkle, G. B., & Maines, L. A. (2010). The benefits and costs of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 53(5), 445–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2010.05.006.
Swart, W., Hall, C., Duncan, S., & Chia, R. (2005). Professionalism and work ethic among US and Asian university students in a global classroom: A multi-cultural comparison. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 7(1), 36–40.
Tanner, C., Medin, D. L., & Iliev, R. (2008). Influence of deontological versus consequentialist orientations on act choices and framing effects: When principles are more important than consequences. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(5), 757–769. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.493.
Vaidyanathan, R., & Aggarwal, P. (2005). Using commitments to drive consistency: Enhancing the effectiveness of cause-related marketing communications. Journal of Marketing Communications, 11, 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144619052000345600.
Vanhamme, J., & Grobben, B. (2009). “Too good to be true!”. The effectiveness of CSR history in countering negative publicity. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 273–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9731-2.
Wagner, T., Lutz, R. J., & Weitz, B. A. (2009). Corporate hypocrisy: Overcoming the threat of inconsistent corporate social responsibility perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 73, 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.73.6.77.
Werther, W. B., & Chandler, D. (2005). Strategic corporate social responsibility as global brand insurance. Business Horizons, 48(4), 317–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2004.11.009.
White, J. (1999). The ethic of care and the Buddhist ethic of compassion: Implications for ethical comportment in organizations. In G. Enderle (Ed.), International business ethics (pp. 174–186). Notre Dame, London: University of Notre Dame Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1. The vignette used to measure individual response to CSR
About Pfizer Pfizer is one of the largest healthcare companies, ranked first in the medicine and health care industry, operating in more than 150 countries with around 100,000 employees. Its core businesses are pharmaceuticals, vaccines, consumer health, and generics. Pfizer press releases The CSR (corporate social responsibility) approach undertaken by Pfizer Corporation uses international corporate volunteering to build capacity for service delivery in low-resource settings. An evaluation of the Pfizer Global Health CSR program found that the program has had positive effects on recipient organizations, and has enhanced the personal and professional skills of participating employees. The company has expanded its philanthropic “SECURE THE FUTURE” program by pledging an additional $15 million. This will allow it to continue developing innovative ways to prevent and treat HIV/AIDS among women and children and to help communities deal with the crisis. This initiative works with African governments and communities to bring local solutions to the epidemic. Successful performance of Pfizer • Is honored to receive numerous awards for progress in research and development, product sales and employees’ benefits and welfare. • In 2013, has received top social responsibility campaign honors from PRWeek, a leading communications trade publication. Criticism against Pfizer • High price of AIDS treatment (much more than annual income of household) and monopoly in developing countries. • Faced with pressure for compulsory licenses that allow an individual or company to use Pfizer’ intellectual property and pay a set fee in order to expand the access to AIDS treatment in poorer countries. News article on this issue While Pfizer officials announced that their generous and philanthropic plan to donate the antifungal medication “Diflucan” to government clinics in South Africa, many AIDS advocates pointed out the program, calling it a “very conditional gift,” Forbes reports... Pharmacy patients must pay the annual retail price of $3600 for Diflucan and those who cannot afford to pay this sum “could turn to the public clinics,” but those clinics are “already hugely overburdened and not equipped to handle private sector patients,” Forbes reports. Since the program was announced in 2010, only 4000 South Africans have received Diflucan in 120 of the nation’s “several thousand public clinics and hospitals,” well below the company’s projection of 50,000 recipients over 2 years. |
Appendix 2. Vignette for measurement of personal ethical orientation
Let us assume that you own about 1000 shares of stock for a consumer goods manufacturer named HUMAN-TECH. Please read the following information about the company and answer the questions. Successful market performance of HUMAN-TECH HUMAN-TECH has grown continuously over the last 10 years and the business growth allowed the stock value to increase about 30% every year due to global market demands. Because the firm’s services and products are of higher quality and more reasonably priced than competitors, the company will be likely to boast an increasing sales record in the coming 3–5 years. However, HUMAN-TECH has been criticized for making contracts with factories in developing countries with poor working conditions, exploiting cheap overseas labor. Employees in those factories have to work excessive overtime, and are forced to stand for 24 h. Also, it is claimed that the firm’s suppliers allegedly wrongly dispose of hazardous waste, and two explosions last year killed four people while injuring more than 150. |
Measurement of deontological ethics
The following statements ask about your opinion regarding the above case. Please indicate if you agree or disagree with the following statements.
- 1.
I feel the company HUMAN-TECH has little reason to worry about the critics of its management as long as it continues its success.
- 2.
I believe it is more important for a business to be concerned with successful outcomes than the means to achieve those outcomes.
- 3.
I feel that successful managerial outcomes are the most important aspect by which to judge a corporation.
- 4.
I think ethical business is mainly based on market success for the greatest good for the greatest number.
- 5.
Based on my moral standard, the company HUMAN-TECH is an ethical business.
- 6.
In order to turn profits, ethical managerial process can be compromised at times.
- 7.
I think an ethical business should not inflict a loss on investors by all means.
Measurement of consequentialist ethics
The following statement asks about your opinion regarding the above case. Please indicate if you agree or disagree with the following statements.
- 1.
I feel the company HUMAN-TECH is a bad business even though it continues its success.
- 2.
I believe the successful outcomes cannot justify the means to those outcomes.
- 3.
I believe that following moral obligations in managerial process is the most important aspect by which to judge a corporation.
- 4.
Based on my idea of fairness, the Company HUMAN-TECH is an unethical business.
- 5.
I think this company is unethical because it has little ethical concerns in labor rights.
- 6.
I think the company should abide by law in order to be an ethical company rather than to avoid penalty.
- 7.
Although the company did not directly hire the overseas labor workers, the company should be responsible for the poor working conditions.
Appendix 3. Correlations (USA)
Correlations | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SO | BO | CT | DT | AUTH | PRO | |
SO | 1 | |||||
BO | − .111 | 1 | ||||
CT | .474** | − .017 | 1 | |||
DT | − .016 | .391** | − .410** | 1 | ||
AUTH | .773** | − .045 | .477** | − .046 | 1 | |
PRO | .722** | − .192** | .519** | − .135 | .701** | 1 |
Appendix 4. Correlations (Korea)
Correlations | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SO | BO | CT | DT | AUTH | PRO | |
SO | 1 | |||||
BO | − .267** | 1 | ||||
CT | .192** | − .040 | 1 | |||
DT | − .090 | .276** | − .527** | 1 | ||
AUTH | .608** | − .286** | .303** | − .223** | 1 | |
PRO | .500** | − .093 | .349** | − .165** | .570** | 1 |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shim, K., Kim, S. Consumers’ ethical orientation and pro-firm behavioral response to CSR. Asian J Bus Ethics 8, 127–154 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-019-00091-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-019-00091-6