Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Building the Theoretical Puzzle of Employees’ Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility: An Integrative Conceptual Framework and Research Agenda

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

Abstract

Research on employees’ responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) has recently accelerated and begun appearing in top-tier academic journals. However, existing findings are still largely fragmented, and this stream of research lacks theoretical consolidation. This article integrates the diffuse and multi-disciplinary literature on CSR micro-level influences in a theoretically driven conceptual framework that contributes to explain and predict when, why, and how employees might react to CSR activity in a way that influences organizations’ economic and social performance. Drawing on social identity theory and social exchange theory, we delineate the different but interdependent psychological mechanisms that explain how CSR can strengthen the employee–organization relationship and subsequently foster employee-related, micro-level outcomes. Contributions of our framework to extant literature and potential extensions for future research are then discussed.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Although we invite further research to theoretically determined where in the process a given moderator is more likely to exercise its influence, in our figure, and in line with mediated moderation best practice, we advised that the moderating impact of these factors should be tested along the whole mediational process to obtain reliable and robust results (see Edwards and Lambert 2007; Hayes 2013).

Abbreviations

CSR:

Corporate social responsibility

OCB:

Organizational citizenship behaviors

PEP:

Perceived external prestige

POS:

Perceived organizational support

References

  • Acquier, A., Gond, J.-P., & Pasquero, J. (2011). Rediscovering Howard R. Bowen’s legacy: The unachieved agenda and continuing relevance of social responsibilities of the businessman. Business and Society, 50(4), 607–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2013). Embedded versus peripheral corporate social responsibility: Psychological foundations. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 6(4), 314–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M., & Schminke, M. (2009). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 491–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angle, H. L., & Perry, J. L. (1981). An empirical assessment of organizational commitment and organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(3), 267–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Corley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34(3), 325–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholders influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 794–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, J., Pruyn, A., de Jong, M., & Joustra, I. (2007). Multiple organizational identification levels and the impact of perceived external prestige and communication climate. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(2), 173–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 349–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. B., Korschun, D., & Sen, S. (2009). Strengthening stakeholder–company relationships through mutually beneficial corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 257–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

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

    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 

  • Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), 117–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carmeli, A., Gilat, G., & Waldman, D. A. (2007). The role of perceived organizational performance in organizational identification, adjustment and job performance. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6), 972–992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 85–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun, J. S., Shin, Y., Choi, J. N., & Kim, M. S. (2013). How does corporate ethics contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of collective organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Management, 39(4), 853–877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., & Rodell, J. B. (2011). Justice, trust, and trustworthiness: A longitudinal analysis integrating three theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 54(6), 1183–1206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909–927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crilly, D., Schneider, S. C., & Zollo, M. (2008). Psychological antecedents to socially responsible behavior. European Management Review, 5(3), 175–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., Byrne, Z. S., Bobocel, D. R., & Rupp, D. E. (2001). Moral virtues, fairness heuristics, social entities, and other denizens of organizational justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58(2), 164–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., & Rupp, D. E. (2008). Social exchange theory and organizational justice: Job performance, citizenship behaviors, multiple foci, and a historical integration of two literatures. In S. W. Gilliland, D. D. Steiner, & D. P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Justice, morality, and social responsibility (pp. 63–99). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Roeck, K., & Delobbe, N. (2012). Do environmental CSR initiatives serve organizations’ legitimacy in the oil industry? Exploring employees’ reactions through organizational identification theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 397–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Roeck, K., Marique, G., Stinglhamber, F., & Swaen, V. (2014). Understanding employees’ responses to corporate social responsibility: Mediating roles of overall justice and organisational identification. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(1), 91–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M., & Burbano, V. (2011). The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Review, 54(1), 64–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du, S., Battacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 47(1), 9–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 517–554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Akremi, A., Gond, J.-P., Swaen, V., De Roeck, K. and Igalens, J. (2015). How do employees perceive corporate responsibility? Development and validation of a multidimensional corporate stakeholder responsibility scale. Journal of Management.

  • El Akremi, A., Vandenberghe, C., & Camerman, J. (2010). The role of justice and social exchange relationships in workplace deviance: Test of a mediated model. Human Relations, 63(11), 1687–1717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs. Academy of Marketing Science Journal, 34(2), 147–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 335–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdogan, B., Bauer, T. N., & Taylor, S. (2015). Management commitment to the ecological environment and employees: Implications for employee attitudes and citizenship behaviors. Human Relations, 68(11), 1669–1691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farooq, O., Payaud, M., Merunka, D., & Valette-Florence, P. (2014). The impact of corporate social responsibility on organizational commitment: Exploring multiple mediation mechanisms. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 563–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, R., Yam, K. C., & Dang, C. (2015). Moralized leadership: The construction and consequences of ethical leader perceptions. Academy of Management Review, 40(2), 182–209.

    Article  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.

    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. New york Times Magazine, September 13, 122–126.

  • Glavas, A., & Godwin, L. (2013). Is the perception of ‘goodness’ good enough? Exploring the relationship between perceived corporate social responsibility and employee organizational identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(1), 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glavas, A., & Kelley, K. (2014). The effects of perceived corporate social responsibility on employees. Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(2), 165–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J.-P., & Crane, A. (2010). Corporate social performance disoriented: Saving the lost paradigm? Business and Society, 49(4), 677–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J.-P., El Akremi, A., Igalens, J., & Swaen, V. (2010). A corporate social responsibility–corporate financial performance behavioural model for employees. In C. Smith, C. B. Bhattacharya, D. Vogel, & D. Levine (Eds.), Global challenges in responsible business: Corporate responsibility and strategy (pp. 13–48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J.-P., Igalens, J., Swaen, V., & El Akremi, A. (2011). The human resources contribution to responsible leadership: An exploration of the CSR-HR interface. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(1), 115–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gong, Y., Law, K. S., Chang, S., & Xin, K. R. (2009). Human resources management and firm performance: The differential role of managerial affective and continuance commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 263–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, S., Dunford, B., Boss, A., Boss, R., & Angermeier, I. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and the benefits of employee trust: A cross-disciplinary perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 29–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillenbrand, C., Money, K., & Ghobadian, A. (2013). Unpacking the mechanism by which corporate responsibility impacts stakeholder relationships. British Journal of Management, 24(1), 127–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., & White, K. M. (1995). A tale of two theories: A critical comparison of identity theory with social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58(4), 255–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim, N. A., & Angelidis, J. P. (1994). Effect of board member’s gender on corporate social responsiveness orientation. Journal of Applied Business Research, 10(1), 35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. The Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. A. (2010). Does serving the community also serve the company? Using organizational identification and social exchange theories to understand employee responses to a volunteerism programme. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(4), 857–878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. A., Willness, C., & Madey, S. (2014). Why are job seekers attracted by corporate social performance? Experimental and field tests of three signal-based mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 383–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction–job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127(3), 376–407.

    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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konovsky, M. A., & Pugh, S. D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 656–669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause. NJ: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 56–88). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Littlepage, G. E., Schmidt, G. W., Whisler, E. W., & Frost, A. G. (1995). An input-process-output analysis of influence and performance in problem-solving groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 877–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and consequences of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallory, D., & Rupp, D. E. (2015). “Good” leadership: Using corporate social responsibility to enhance leader-member exchange. In T. N. Bauer & B. Erdogan (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of leader member exchange. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., Elfenbein, H. A., & Walsh, J. P. (2009). Does it pay to be good… and does it matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Unpublished manuscript, (March 1, 2009). SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1866371 or 10.2139/ssrn.1866371.

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McElroy, J. C., Morrow, P. C., & Rude, S. N. (2001). Turnover and organizational performance: A comparative analysis of the effects of voluntary, involuntary, and reduction-in-force turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6), 1294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006a). Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., Siegel, D., & Wright, P. M. (2006b). Introduction by guest editors corporate social responsibility: International perspectives. Journal of Business Strategies, 23(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minor, D., & Morgan, J. (2011). CSR as reputation insurance: Primum non nocere. California Management Review, 53(3), 40–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgeson, F. P., Aguinis, H., Waldman, D. A., & Siegel, D. S. (2013). Extending corporate social responsibility research to the human resource management and organizational behavior domains: A look to the future. Personnel Psychology, 66(4), 805–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, K., Hattrup, K., Spiess, S.-O., & Lin-Hi, N. (2012). The effects of corporate social responsibility on employees’ affective commitment: A cross-cultural investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1186–1200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behaviour. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 492–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 775–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parasuraman, S., Purohit, Y. S., Godshalk, V. M., & Beutell, N. J. (1996). Work and family variables, entrepreneurial career success, and psychological well-being. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48(3), 275–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peloza, J. (2009). The challenge of measuring financial impacts from investments in corporate social performance. Journal of Management Studies, 35(6), 1518–1541.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F., & Castaldo, S. (2008). Editorial introduction: corporate social responsibility and trust. Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(1), 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F., Castaldo, S., Misani, N., & Tencati, A. (2010). The impact of corporate social responsibility associations on trust in organic products marketed by mainstream retailers: A study of Italian consumers. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(8), 512–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, D. K. (2004). The relationship between perceptions of corporate citizenship and organizational commitment. Business and Society, 43(3), 296–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Impact of organizational citizenship behavior on organizational performance: A review and suggestion for future research. Human Performance, 10(2), 133–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, M. G. (1998). To be or not to be? Central questions in organizational identification. In D. A. Whetten & P. Godfrey (Eds.), Identity in organizations: Building theory through conversations (pp. 171–207). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment to the organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 825–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riketta, M. (2005). Organizational identification: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66(2), 358–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigo, P., & Arenas, D. (2008). Do employees care about CSR programs? A typology of employees according to their attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 265–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roman, R. M., Hayibor, S., & Agle, B. R. (1999). The relationship between social and financial performance: Repainting a portrait. Business and Society, 38(1), 109–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E. (2011). An employee-centered model of organizational justice and social responsibility. Organizational Psychology Review, 1(1), 72–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, D. E., & Mallory, D. B. (2015). Corporate social responsibility: Psychological, person-centric, and progressing. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2(1), 211–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(4), 895–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saari, L. M., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Employee attitudes and job satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 43(4), 395–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen, J., & Jiuhua Zhu, C. (2011). Effects of socially responsible human resource management on employee organizational commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(15), 3020–3035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shore, L. M., Tetrick, L. E., Lynch, P., & Barksdale, K. (2006). Social and economic exchange: Construct development and validation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(4), 837–867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smidts, A., Pruyn, A. T. H., & van Riel, C. B. M. (2001). The impact of employee communication and perceived external prestige on organizational identification. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 1051–1062.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiller, R. (2000). Ethical business and investment: A model for business and society. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1), 149–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinglhamber, F., De Cremer, D., & Mercken, L. (2006). Perceived support as a mediator of the relationship between justice and trust a multiple foci approach. Group and Organization Management, 31(4), 442–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swaen, V., & Chumpitaz, R. (2008). Impact of corporate social responsibility on consumer trust. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 23(4), 7–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity, and social comparison. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 61–76). London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trevino, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42(4), 128–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turker, D. (2009). How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(2), 189–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2003). The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behavior. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 7(4), 349–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 Dick, R., Wagner, U., Stellmacher, J., & Christ, O. (2004). The utility of a broader conceptualization of organizational identification: Which aspects really matter? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77(2), 171–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vlachos, P. A., Panagopoulos, N. G., & Rapp, A. A. (2014). Employee judgments of and behaviors toward corporate social responsibility: A multi-study investigation of direct, cascading, and moderating effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(7), 990–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vlachos, P. A., Theotokis, A., & Panagopoulos, N. G. (2010). Sales force reactions to corporate social responsibility: Attributions, outcomes, and the mediating role of organizational trust. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(7), 1207–1218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (2004). Parallel universes: Companies, academics, and the progress of corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 109(1), 5–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The Corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldman, D. A., Siegel, D. S., & Javidan, M. (2006). Components of CEO transformational leadership and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Management Studies, 43(8), 1703–1725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegge, J., Schmidt, K.-H., Parkes, C., & Van Dick, R. (2007). ‘Taking a sickie’: Job satisfaction and job involvement as interactive predictors of absenteeism in a public organization. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 80(1), 77–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wehrmeyer, W., & McNeil, M. (2000). Activists, pragmatists, technophiles and tree-huggers? Gender differences in employees’ environmental attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 28(3), 211–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

A prior version of this manuscript has been presented during the 2015 Corporate Responsibility Research Conference (CRRC). The authors thank the participants and particularly the three co-chairs of the Micro-CSR track, namely Chelsea Willness, David Jones, and Ante Glavas, for their constructive and encouraging feedback. They also wish to thank Assâad El Akremi, Jean-Pascal Gond, and Valérie Swaen for their helpful and inspiring comments on earlier versions of this manuscript. Finally, the authors greatly appreciate the insightful comments of the editorial team and of the anonymous reviewers of the manuscript, which have contributed to improve it substantially.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IESEG School of Management (LEM-CNRS UMR 9221), Lille campus: 3, rue de la Digue, 59000, Lille, France

    Kenneth De Roeck & François Maon

Authors
  1. Kenneth De Roeck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. François Maon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kenneth De Roeck.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 1 and 2.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

De Roeck, K., Maon, F. Building the Theoretical Puzzle of Employees’ Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility: An Integrative Conceptual Framework and Research Agenda. J Bus Ethics 149, 609–625 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3081-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3081-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation