Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Attitudes About Corporate Social Responsibility: Business Student Predictors

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Four predictors were posited to affect business student attitudes about the social responsibilities of business, also known as corporate social responsibility (CSR). Applying Forsyth’s (1980, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39, 175–184, 1992, Journal of Business Ethics 11, 461–470) personal moral philosophy model, we found that ethical idealism had a positive relationship with CSR attitudes, and ethical relativism a negative relationship. We also found materialism to be negatively related to CSR attitudes. Spirituality among business students did not significantly predict CSR attitudes. Understanding the relationship between CSR attitudes and the significant predictors has important implications for researchers and teachers in particular.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abela, A.V. (2006). Marketing and consumerism: A response to O’shaughnessy and O’shaughnessy. European Journal of Marketing, 40(1/2), 5–16. doi:10.1108/03090560610637284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahuvia, A.C., & Wong, N.Y. (2002). Personality and values based materialism: Their relationship and origins. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(4), 389–402. doi:10.1207/15327660260382414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, T. D.: 1995, Exploring Spirituality: The Development of the Armstrong Measure of Spirituality. Paper Presented at the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, New York, NY.

  • Astin, A.W. (2004). Why spirituality deserves a central place in liberal education. Liberal Education, 90(2), 34–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Astin, A. W. and H. S. Astin: 2004, ‹Spirituality in College Students: Preliminary Findings from a National Study’, http://spirituality.ucla.edu/results/Findings_2003-11-21.pdf.

  • Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 122–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belk, R.W. (1985). Materialism: Trait aspects of living in the material world. The Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 265–280. doi:10.1086/208515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belk, R.W. 1987. Identity and the Relevance of Market, Personal, and Community Objects. In J. Sebeok (Ed.), Marketing and Semiotics: New Directions in the Study of Signs for Sale (151-164). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird, R., Hall, A.D., Momente, F., & Reggiani, F. (2007). What corporate social responsibility activities are valued by the market? Journal of Business Ethics, 76(2), 189–206. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9268-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boli, J. and D. Hartsuiker: 2001, World culture and Transnational Corporations: Sketch of a Project. International Conference on Effects of and Responses to Globalization, Istanbul.

  • Borkowski, S.C., & Ugras, Y.J. (1992). The ethical attitudes of students as a function of age, sex and experience. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(12), 961–979. doi:10.1007/BF00871962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, H.R. 1953. Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, N. (1991). New directions in corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 34(4), 56–65. doi:10.1016/0007-6813(91)90007-I.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brickson, S.L. (2007). Organizational identity orientation: The genesis of the role of the firm and distinct forms of social value. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 864–888.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkmann, J., & Sims, R.R. (2001). Stakeholder-sensitive business ethics teaching. Teaching Business Ethics, 5, 171–193. doi:10.1023/A:1011461418842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T.J., & Dacin, P.A. (1997). The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 68–84. doi:10.2307/1252190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burroughs, J.E., & Rindfleisch, A. (2002). Materialism and well-being: A conflicting values perspective. The Journal of Consumer Research, 29(3), 348–370. doi:10.1086/344429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, D. 2004. The cheating culture: Why more Americans are doing wrong to get ahead. Orlando: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A.B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505. doi:10.2307/257850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A.B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295. doi:10.1177/000765039903800303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, A., & Hunt, J.M. (1996). Self-monitoring as a personality correlate of materialism: An investigation of related cognitive orientation. Psychological Reports, 79(2), 523–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L.J., Pierce, E., Hartman, L.P., Hoffman, W.M., & Carrier, J. (2007). Ethics, CSR, and sustainability education in the financial times top 50 global business schools: Baseline data and future research directions. Journal of Business Ethics, 73(4), 347–368. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9211-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comer, D.R., & Vega, G. (2008). Using the PET assessment instrument to help students identify factors that could impede moral behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 77(2), 129–145. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9303-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, N., Wallace, J., & Tassabehji, R. (2007). An analysis of corporate social responsibility, corporate identity and ethics teaching in business schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(1), 117–135. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9271-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covey, S.R. 1992. Principle-centered leadership. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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), 421–432. doi:10.1108/07363769710185999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlsrud, A. (2006). How corporate social responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate Social-Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15(1), 1–13. doi:10.1002/csr.132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M.A., Andersen, M.G., & Curtis, M.B. (2001). Measuring ethical ideology in business ethics: A critical analysis of the ethics position questionnaire. Journal of Business Ethics, 32(1), 35–53. doi:10.1023/A:1010701417165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L.E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. doi:10.2307/258887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development. California Management Review, 36(2), 90–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, J. 1966. Situation ethics: The new morality. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C., & Shanley, M. (1990). What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33(2), 233–258. doi:10.2307/256324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D.R. (1980). A taxonomy of ethical ideologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(1), 175–184. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.39.1.175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D.R. (1992). Judging the morality of business practices: The influence of personal moral philosophies. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(5-6), 461–470. doi:10.1007/BF00870557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D.R., Nye, J.L., & Kelley, K. (1988). Idealism, relativism, and the ethic of caring. The Journal of Psychology, 122(3), 243–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E. 1984. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E., Wicks, A.C., & Parmar, B. (2004). Stakeholder theory and the corporate objective revisited. Organization Science, 15(3), 364–369. doi:10.1287/orsc.1040.0066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. 1962. Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M.: 1970, ‹The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits’, The New York Times Magazine, September 13, 1970.

  • Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giacalone, R.A. (2004). A transcendent business education for the 21st century. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(4), 415–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giacalone, R.A. (2006). Business ethics and social responsibility education: Shifting the worldview. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(3), 266–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giacalone, R.A., & Jurkiewicz, C.L. (2003a). Handbook of workplace spirituality and organizational performance. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giacalone, R.A., & Jurkiewicz, C.L. (2003b). Right from wrong: The influence of spirituality on perceptions of unethical business activities. Journal of Business Ethics, 46(1), 85–97. doi:10.1023/A:1024767511458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giacalone, R.A., Paul, K., & Jurkiewicz, C.L. (2005). A preliminary investigation into the role of positive psychology in consumer sensitivity to corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 58(4), 295–305. doi:10.1007/s10551-004-5970-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giacalone, R.A., & Thompson, K. (2006). Business ethics and social responsibility education: Shifting the worldview. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(3), 266–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C. 1982. In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings, 6thed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henle, C.A., Giacalone, R.A., & Jurkiewicz, C.L. (2005). The role of ethical ideology in workplace deviance. Journal of Business Ethics, 56(3), 219–230. doi:10.1007/s10551-004-2779-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodge, D.R. (2003). The intrinsic spirituality scale: A new six-item instrument for assessing the salience of spirituality as a motivational construct. Journal of Social Service Research, 30(1), 41–61. doi:10.1300/J079v30n01_03.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G., & Bond, M.H. (1984). Hofstede’s culture dimensions: An independent validation using Rokeach’s value survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 15, 417–433. doi:10.1177/0022002184015004003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer, L.T. 2008. The ethics of management (6th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R. 1990. Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T.M. (1980). Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined. California Management Review, 22(3), 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasser, T. 2002. The high price of materialism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasser, T., & Ahuvia, A.C. (2001). Materialistic values and well-being in business students: An empirical reply to Sagiv and Schwartz (2000). European Journal of Social Psychology, 32(1), 137–146. doi:10.1002/ejsp.85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knights, D., & O’Leary, M. (2006). Leadership, ethics and responsibility to the other. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(2), 125–137. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9008-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M.P. (2008). A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(1), 53–73. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00226.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D.L. 1976. The public image of Henry Ford: An American folk hero and his company. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, A., Mackey, T.B., & Barney, J.B. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: Investor preferences and corporate strategies. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 817–835.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marin, L., & Ruiz, S. (2007). “I need you too!” corporate identity attractiveness for consumers and the role of social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 71(3), 245–260. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9137-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maslow, A.H. (1943). A theory of motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. doi:10.1037/h0054346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKnight, R. 1984. Spirituality in the Workplace. In J. D. Adams (Ed.), Transforming work. Alexandria, VA: Miles River Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, T.R., & Scott, W.G. (1990). America’s problems and needed reforms: Confronting the ethic of personal advantage. Academy of Management Executive, 4(3), 23–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitroff, I.I., & Denton, E.A. (1999). A spiritual audit of corporate America: A hard look at spirituality, religion, and values in the workplace. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nan, X., & Heo, K. (2007). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives: Examining the role of brand-cause fit in cause-related marketing. Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 63–74. doi:10.2753/JOA0091-3367360204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Oxford English Dictionary.: 1989 (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).

  • Park, H. (2005). The role of idealism and relativism as dispositional characteristics in the socially responsible decision-making process. Journal of Business Ethics, 56, 81–98. doi:10.1007/s10551-004-3239-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H., & Stoel, L. (2005). A model of socially responsible buying/sourcing decision-making processes. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 33(4), 235–249. doi:10.1108/09590550510593176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (2005). Producing sustainable competitive advantage through the effective management of people. Academy of Management Executive, 19(4), 95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P.M., & Organ, D.W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544. doi:10.1177/014920638601200408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M.E., & Kramer, M.R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richins, M.L. 1987. Media, materialism, and human happiness. In M. Wallendorf and P. F. Anderson (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 14: 352-356). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richins, M.L., & Dawson, S. (1992). A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: Scale development and validation. The Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 303–316. doi:10.1086/209304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, L., & Dziurawiec, S. (2001). Materialism and its relationship to life satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 55(2), 185–197. doi:10.1023/A:1011002123169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlenker, B.R., & Forsyth, D.R. (1977). On the ethics of psychological research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(4), 369–396. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(77)90006-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R.R., & Felton, E.L., Jr. (2006). Designing and delivering business ethics teaching and learning. Journal of Business Ethics, 63(3), 297–312. doi:10.1007/s10551-005-3562-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singhapakdi, A., Vitell, S.J., Rallapalli, K.C., & Kraft, K.L. (1996). The perceived role of ethics and social responsibility: A scale development. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(11), 1131–1140. doi:10.1007/BF00412812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparks, J.R., & Hunt, S.D. (1998). Marketing researcher ethical sensitivity: Conceptualization, measurement, and exploratory investigation. Journal of Marketing, 62(2), 92–109. doi:10.2307/1252163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tatzel, M. (2002). “Money worlds” and well-being: An integration of money dispositions, materialism and price-related behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23(1), 103–126. doi:10.1016/S0167-4870(01)00069-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitell, S.J., Nwachukwu, S.L., & Barnes, J.H. (1993). The effects of culture on ethical decision-making: An application of Hofstede’s typology. Journal of Business Ethics, 12(10), 753–760. doi:10.1007/BF00881307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zinnbauer, B.J., Pargament, K.I., & Scott, A.B. (1999). The emerging meanings of religiousness and spirituality: Problems and prospects. Journal of Personality, 67(6), 889–919. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.00077.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia, U.S.A.

    Robert W. Kolodinsky, Daniel S. Zisk & Eric T. Henkel

  2. University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, U.S.A.

    Timothy M. Madden

Authors
  1. Robert W. Kolodinsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Timothy M. Madden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel S. Zisk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eric T. Henkel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert W. Kolodinsky.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kolodinsky, R.W., Madden, T.M., Zisk, D.S. et al. Attitudes About Corporate Social Responsibility: Business Student Predictors. J Bus Ethics 91, 167–181 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0075-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0075-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation