Relationship between perceived corporate social responsibility and organizational commitment: The...

On Ethicsand SocialResponsibilityR

esea

Rc

h

EDITED BY eduardo simões

José Neves

APOIOS

RESEARCH

ON

eTh

Ics

aN

D s

Oc

IaL

Res

PO

NsI

BIL

ITY

edua

rdo

sim

ões

• Jo

sé N

eves

7 • IntroductionEduardo SimõesJosé Neves

11 • Acknowledgements

13 • A Ripple Effect. Exploring the Spread of Organizational MisconductFranziska Zuber

33 • Employees’ Perceptions of Marketing Ethics in Bosnia and HerzegovinaMuhammet Sait DincTeoman Duman

47 • Perception of Ethical Environment Among Middle Managers. Evidence from a SurveyChiara MioAlvise Favotto

65 • Perceived Companies’ Ethical Responsibilities as a Predictor of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors. The Mediating Role of the Psychological Capital and Affective CommitmentSusana Leal Arménio Rego Arnaldo Coelho

81 • The Impact of Accountability on Ethical Decision Making. The Role of Context in Judgment Formation about Ethical AcceptabilityVítor Hugo SilvaEduardo Simões

97 • The Processes and Transformation of the Corporate Code of Ethics. The “eticaedp Program” CaseHelena GonçalvesAna Roque

111 • Studying the Confrontation and Collaboration of Business and NGOsDaniel Arenas

119 • Corporate Social Responsibility and Humanitarian Work PsychologyTânia Ferraro da SilvaTeresa Rebelo

133 • The Progressive Possibilities Immanent in the Regime of Corporate Social ResponsibilityMaja Lazo Savevska

149 • Contingent Analysis of the Relationship Between Social Strategy and Social PerformanceLadislao Luna-SotorríoJosé L. Fernández-Sánchez Elisa Baraibar-Díez

163 • Relationship Between Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Commitment.The Mediating Role of Construed External ImageAna Patrícia DuarteJosé Gonçalves das Neves

Contents

Research on Ethics and Social Responsibility

Edited byEduardo Simões & José Neves

EditionBusiness Research Unit, ISCTE - IUL

Graphic DesignTeresa Olazabal Cabral

Cover design based on work by David de Almeida

Printed in Lisbon, M2-Artes Gráficas

Copyright © 2012. All rights reservedPublished in Portugal by BRU-IUL

ISBN978-989-732-030-9

Depósito Legal347472/12

Relationship Between Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility and

Organizational CommitmentThe Mediating Role of Construed External Image

Ana Patrícia DuarteISCTE/CIS-IUL, Lisbon University Institute

José Gonçalves das NevesISCTE Business School, Lisbon University Institute

This study explored how employees’ perceptions of different dimensions of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) are associated with organiza-tional commitment. The potential mediating role of construed external image within this relationship was also explored. A sample of 326 indi-viduals was surveyed regarding their perceptions of corporate engage-ment in three dimensions of CSR, how they think outsiders view the organizations and their relationship with their organizations. Findings reveal that the three dimensions of perceived CSR have dissimilar levels of association with each form of organizational commitment proposed by Meyer and Allen (1991) and construed external image performs a mediating role for some of those associations. Hence, employees’ per-ceptions of corporate engagement in CSR promote the development of positive beliefs about how outsiders view the organization, which in turn help to enhance their affective and normative relationship with the organization. So it seems that organizations can make intentional use of their CSR portfolio to promote employees’ positive job attitudes or at least affective and normative bonds with the organization.

Keywords: CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, CONSTRUED EXTERNAL IMAGE,

EMPLOYEES, ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT

ANA PATRÍCIA DUARTE & JOSÉ GONÇALVES DAS NEVES • 165

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, an increasing number of companies has been develop-ing, implementing, and reporting Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) strategies, programs and practices around the globe, thus integrating so-cial and environmental considerations into their business operations and relationship with multiple stakeholders (European Commission, 2001; KPMG, 2008). However, little is still known about the impact of such in-vestment in CSR at the individual level (Aguilera et al., 2007), particu-larly in what refers to employees’ responses (Rodrigo & Arenas, 2008). This study addresses this question, exploring the relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and organizational commitment.Organizational commitment refers to a psychological state (a) that char-acterizes the employee relationship with the organization, and (b) has implications for the decision to continue or discontinue membership in the organization. Three distinct forms of organizational commitment have been identified. Affective commitment refers to identification with, involvement in, and emotional attachment to the organization; normative commitment refers to commitment based on a sense of obligation to the organization; and, finally, continuance commitment refers to commit-ment based on the employee’s recognition of the costs associated with leaving the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Prior studies about the relationship between CSR and organizational commitment are scarce but, nevertheless, suggest a positive relationship between the variables (Kim et al., 2010) and, more interestingly, suggest that some dimensions of CSR might be more important than others for understanding and predicting employees’ bonds with companies (Bram-mer et al., 2007; Peterson, 2004; Rego et al., 2010; Turker, 2009). These studies have focused on affective commitment, disregarding the analysis of CSR’s impact on other forms of commitment. As argued by Allen and Meyer (1996) for understanding the link between employees and their companies, all three forms of commitment must be taken into account in the analysis. Considering this gap in the literature, this study aimed to further analyze the relationship between CSR perceptions and organizational commit-ment. The use of a multidimensional approach to both constructs made it possible to investigate the relative effect of employees’ perceptions of distinct CSR dimensions (CSR towards employees; towards community and environment; and at the economic level – Duarte, 2011) on each of the three forms of organizational commitment. A second aim was to explore the psychological processes that might underlie the relationship, by ex-amining the mediating role of corporate image.

ANA PATRÍCIA DUARTE & JOSÉ GONÇALVES DAS NEVES • 167166 • SYMPOSIUM ON ETHICS AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILIT Y RESEARCH

Prior literature reveals that perceptions of companies’ engagement in CSR are positively related to companies’ organizational image (Brammer & Mil-lington, 2005; Hess et al., 2002). It is known that employees identify more with work organizations that they believe are held in high regard by others outside the organization and have favorable reputations (Dutton et al., 1994; Mayer & Schoorman, 1998; Peterson, 2004). Several authors reported a positive relationship between construed external image and affective com-mitment (Carmeli & Freund, 2002; Kim et al., 2010; Herrbach et al., 2004). Carmeli and colleagues (2006) also found a positive relationship between organizational reputation and both affective and continuance commitment.

Hypotheses According to Maignan and Ferrell (2001) socially responsible activities are likely to generate employee commitment “first because they make work activities more enjoyable for employees and second because they translate into visible operations that are likely to generate a feeling of pride among employees” (p. 459). Following this rationale, the perceptions of CSR might influence not only affective commitment, as previous studies have showed, but also normative and continuance commitment.On the one hand, the improvement of work experiences and conditions resulting from the implementation of internal CSR practices might be as-sociated by employees with the recognition of the company’s investment in its members, and thus increase their feelings of loyalty and duty of re-ciprocation inherent to normative commitment. It might also increase the perceived costs of leaving the organization and/or the perception of lack of alternatives since other companies might not have such responsible prac-tices, thus being related to continuance commitment. On the other hand, the engagement in socially responsible practices might be a source of pride and thus enhance employees’ ties to companies, specially affective and nor-mative ones, but also continuance commitment, especially if companies’ external prestige is interpreted as a source of corporate distinctiveness by employees. Working for a highly regarded company might be seen as an in-tangible gain by instrumentally committed employees and enter their list of perceived costs of leaving the company. Taking into account prior research concerning the relationship between constructs, we proposed that:

H1: Perceptions of the three dimensions of CSR (economic; em-ployees; community and environment) are positively related to employees’ affective commitment.

H2: Perceptions of the three dimensions of CSR (economic; employ-ees; community and environment) are positively related to employ-ees’ normative commitment.

H3: Perceptions of the three dimensions of CSR (economic; em-ployees; community and environment) are positively related to employees’ continuance commitment.

Prior studies have essentially analyzed the direct relationship between CSR and commitment. The study by Kim and colleagues (2010) con-stitutes one exception, establishing that perceived CSR enhances per-ceived external prestige, which increases organizational identification and ultimately affective commitment. Although corporate image and or-ganizational identification have been proposed to underlie and motivate the impact of perceived CSR on job attitudes (Dutton & Dukerich, 1991; Maignan et al., 1999; Peterson, 2004; Rego et al., 2010), this has rarely been empirically tested. Based on previous literature, we proposed that:

H4: Employees’ construed external image mediates the relation-ship between perceptions of the three dimensions of corporate so-cial responsibility (economic; employees; community and environ-ment) and affective commitment.

H5: Employees’ construed external image mediates the relation-ship between perceptions of the three dimensions of corporate so-cial responsibility (economic; employees; community and environ-ment) and normative commitment.

H6: Employees’ construed external image mediates the relation-ship between perceptions of the three dimensions of corporate so-cial responsibility (economic; employees; community and environ-ment) and continuance commitment.

METHOD

Sample The sample includes 326 employees from six organizations. Respond-ents were aged between 19 and 65 years (M=40.6; SD=11.4) and 54.0% were female. The educational level of the sample is as follows: 61.9% have completed nine years or less of schooling, 38.9% have completed the 12th year of schooling, and 14.3% have a higher education qualification. All respondents had been working for the company for at least one year, and had an average tenure of 13.3 years (SD=11.8 years; max. 44 years). Respondents perform jobs without management responsibilities (100%) and most of them have a permanent employment contract (87.3%).

Procedure and MeasuresData were collected using a questionnaire designed for the study. An en-velope with the questionnaire was delivered to employees by internal mail.


Employees were instructed to fill in the questionnaire and return it by internal mail to the Head of Sustainability Department or to the Head of Human Resources Management within a week. An additional envelope was provided for this effect. The questionnaire included the following measures:Perceived CSR (predictor variables): Perceptions of the three dimen-sions of CSR were measured using 16 items from PCSR-Scale (Duarte, 2011). All dimensions revealed adequate levels of reliability (perceived CSR towards employees α = .89, e.g., “This company invests in the promotion of work-family balance”; perceived CSR towards commu-nity and environment α = .86, e.g., “This company gives support to social causes; perceived economic CSR α = .66, e.g., “This company strives to be one of the best organizations in the sector”).Construed external image (mediator variable): Riordan and col-leagues’ scale (1997) was used to evaluate respondents’ image of their companies (e.g., “Generally, I think this company has a good reputa-tion in the community”; α = .76). Organizational commitment (criterion variable): Employees’ commit-ment to their companies was assessed using nine items taken from Meyer and colleagues (1993). Three items measured affective commit-ment (e.g., “I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization”; α = .76); three items measured normative commit-ment (e.g., “Even if it were to my advantage, I do not feel it would be right to leave my organization now”; α = .71); and the remaining three items measured continuance commitment (e.g., “Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to leave my organiza-tion now”; α = .62). Respondents were asked to express their level of agreement with the different measures on a five-point Likert scale (1-“Totally disagree” to 5-“Totally agree”).A group of variables was set as control variables (gender, age, school-ing, tenure, type of employment contract, and type of job), in spite of previous studies reporting a weak and inconsistent relationship be-tween organizational commitment and demographic variables. We performed Harman’s single-factor test before testing the hypothe-ses (Podsakoff et al., 2003). An exploratory factor analysis (unrotated solution) including all items of the measures used in the present study revealed seven factors, the first factor accounting for only 31.548% of covariance between the items (KMO = .913, p < .001; total variance explained = 62.77%). This suggests that common method bias is not a serious problem in our data and is therefore not a serious threat to the validity of the study.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed using SPSS 17.0. Table 1 presents means, standard-deviations, inter-correlations and reliabilities. Results of Spearman’s correlations revealed that variables are significantly inter-correlated. Correlations between respondents’ socio-demographic variables and the main variable of the study were also analyzed. Only gender and tenure revealed a significant relationship with organizational com-mitment. Respondents’ age, schooling, type of employment contract were not significantly correlated with the three forms of organiza-tional commitment (all p > .05). Since gender and tenure were related to organizational commitment, we decided to include and control for them in subsequent analyses to rule out alternative explanations for the finding.

TABLE 1. Means, standard-deviations, intercorrelations and reliabilitiesM SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Gender - - -

2. Tenure 13.28 11.83 .32** -

3. PCSR Employees 3.80 0.71 .14* .21** (.89)

4. PCSR Community and Environment 3.66 0.64 .16** .25** .63** (.86)

5. PCSR Economic 4.22 0.52 .09* .15** .53** .45** (.66)

6. Construed External Image 3.94 0.55 .07 .15** .36** .33** .40** (.76)

7. Affective Commitment 3.59 0.88 .25** .46** .38** .37** .33** .53** (.76)

8. Normative Commitment 3.20 0.87 .19** .28** .36** .34** .29** .46** .69** (.71)

9. Continuance Commitment 3.32 0.87 -.15** .10* .16** .18** .18** .19** .19** .27** (.62)

NOTE: Five-point response scale; ** p< 0.01; * p <.05 one-tailed; Cronbach’s alphas in parentheses; Gender was coded as a dummy variable: 0 = Women;1 = Men.

Hypotheses were tested using hierarchical regression analyses. To determine whether construed external image is a mediator of the re-lationship between employees’ perceptions of corporate engagement in the three dimensions of CSR and the three forms of organizational commitment, we followed Baron and Kenny’s procedure (1986; Kenny, 2009) and used Sobel test. Thus, we first regressed each criterion variable on the three predic-tor variables (step 1). We then regressed construed external image on the three predictor variables (step 2). Finally, we regressed each commitment variable on the mediator variable, including the predic-tor variables (step 3). Gender and tenure were controlled in all equa-tions. Before proceeding with regression analyses and considering the inter-correlations between the variables, we used tolerance values to


evaluate the degree of multicollinearity. All values were higher than .47, thus exceeding the cut-off point of .10 (Cohen et al., 2003). Regarding affective commitment, two hypotheses were placed. Hy-pothesis 1 predicted that employees’ perceptions of companies’ en-gagement in the three dimensions of CSR would be positively related to their identification and emotional attachment to their workplaces. As can be seen in Table 2, respondents’ levels of affective commit-ment are explained by their perceptions of companies’ engagement in socially responsible practices towards employees (β=.18, p < .01) and at the economic level (β=.15, p < .01) but not in practices towards community and environment (β=.07, p > .05; step 1, model 2). Thus, hypothesis 1 was only partially supported. Employees’ perceptions of companies’ engagement in CSR practices explain 10% of variance in reported affective commitment. If respondents’ gender and tenure are considered, the variance explained increases up to 30%. Hypothesis 4 predicted that construed external image would medi-ate the relationship between employees’ perceptions of companies’ engagement in the three dimensions of CSR and their levels of affec-tive commitment. Comparing findings obtained in model 3 (step 3) with those obtained in model 2 (step 1) showed that respondents’ con-strued external image totally mediates the relationship between affec-tive commitment and both perceptions of companies’ engagement in CSR activities towards employees (β=.10, p > .05, Z = 2.56, p < .001) and perceived economic CSR (β=.05, p > .05, Z=3.52, p < .001). Both gender and tenure maintain a significant effect over affective commit-ment. This model of mediation explains 43% of unique variance of af-fective commitment. Results partially support hypothesis 4.Similar hypotheses were placed concerning normative and continu-ance commitment. As regards normative commitment, respondents’ loyalty and sense of duty to their companies are explained by their perceptions of companies’ engagement in socially responsible practic-es towards employees (β=.22, p < .01) and at the economic level (β=.12, p < .05) but not in practices towards community and environment (β=.10, p > .05; step 1, model 2). Thus, hypothesis 2 was only partially supported. Employees’ perceptions of companies’ engagement in CSR practices explain 11% of variance in reported normative commitment. If respondents’ tenure is considered, the variance explained increases up to 20%. Hypothesis 5 predicted that construed external image would mediate the relationship between employees’ perceptions of companies’ en-gagement in the three dimensions of CSR and their levels of normative commitment. Comparing findings obtained in model 3 (step 3) with

those obtained in model 2 (step 1) showed that respondents’ construed external image partially mediates the relationship between normative commitment and perceptions of companies’ engagement in CSR ac-tivities towards employees (β=.13, p = .05, Z = 2.49, p < .01) and totally mediates their relationship with perceived economic CSR (β=.03, p > .05, Z = 3.35, p < .01). Tenure maintains a significant effect over nor-mative commitment. This model of mediation explains 31% of unique variance of normative commitment. Results partially support hypoth-esis 5.Finally, with regard to continuance commitment, respondents’ recog-nition of the costs associated with leaving their organizations is ex-plained only by their perceptions of companies’ engagement in social-ly responsible practices at the economic level (β=.15, p < .05). Neither perceptions of practices towards employees nor practices towards community and environment help to explain this form of commitment (both β=.05, p > .05; step 1, model 2). Thus, hypothesis 3 was only partially supported. Employees’ perceptions of companies’ engage-ment in economic CSR practices explain 4% of variance in reported continuance commitment. If respondents’ gender and tenure are con-sidered, the variance explained increases up to 7%.Hypothesis 6 predicted that construed external image would mediate the relationship between employees’ perceptions of companies’ en-gagement in the three dimensions of CSR and their levels of continu-ance commitment. Comparing findings obtained in model 3 (step 3) with those obtained in model 2 (step 1) showed that respondents’ con-strued external image does not mediate the relationship between con-tinuance commitment and perceptions of companies’ engagement in economic CSR practices (β=.10, p = .05, Z = 1.46, p = .07). Gender and tenure maintain a significant effect over continuance commitment. The overall model explains 7% of unique variance of normative com-mitment. Results do not support hypothesis 6.Taken together findings suggest that perceived engagement in CSR towards employees and at the economic level foster a positive con-strued external image and, subsequently, reinforce employees’ emo-tional attachment to organizations as well as their loyalty and sense of obligation to them. Their sense of continuance commitment is also influenced by perceptions of corporate social performance but appar-ently only those concerning the economic responsibility dimension. This is not necessarily surprising since one practice included in this dimension is the payment of salaries and benefits, and this is the cor-porate behavior usually more valued by instrumentally committed em-ployees.


TABL

E 2.

Med

iate

d re

gres

sion

ana

lysi

s fo

r org

aniz

atio

nal c

omm

itmen

tSt

ep 2

Cons

true

d ex

tern

al im

age β .0

5

.14*

.01

.05

.20**

.08

.24**

*

NOT

E: +

p <

.07;

* p

< .0

5; **

p <

.01;

*** p

< .0

01 o

ne-t

aile

d; G

ende

r was

cod

ed a

s du

mm

y va

riabl

e (0

= w

omen

; 1 =

men

).

t

80.2

0

.92

2.39

8.73 .15 .91

2.70 1.2

1

3.87

B 3.83 .06

.01

2.02 .0

1

.01

.15 .07

.26

R2 Adj

.03**

.20**

*

Step

s 1 a

nd 3

Cont

inua

nce

com

mit

men

t β -.18**

.16**

-.20**

.12*

.05

.05

.15**

-.20**

.11*

.03

.05

.13*

.10*

t

43.19

-3.0

0

2.72

4.42

-3.4

3

1.97

.66

.76

2.25

3.25

-3.4

6

1.89

.41

.65

1.86

1.64

B 3.31 -.3

1

.01

1.77

-.35

.01

.06

.07

.26

1.45

-.35

.01

.04

.06

.22

.16

R2 Adj

.03

.07

.07

Nor

mat

ive

com

mit

men

t

β .11*

.26**

*

.07

.18**

.22**

.10+

.12*

.07

.16**

.13*

.07

.03

.36**

*

t

38.5

3

1.88

4.48 1.7

9

1.32

3.20

2.78

1.47

1.94

-1.3

4

1.35

3.07 1.9

1

1.11

.56

6.93

B 2.86 .19 .02

.66 .12 .01

.25 .13 .21

-.52

.12 .01

.16 .09

.06

.59

R2 Adj

.09

.20 .31

Aff

ecti

ve c

omm

itm

ent

β .12*

.39**

*

.08*

.32**

*

.18**

.07

.15**

.08*

.30**

*

.10+

.04

.05

.42**

*

t

44.10

2.22

7.33

2.69 1.6

6

6.22

2.65 1.1

2

2.48

-1.2

0

1.78

6.48

1.59

.66

.83

8.80

B 3.11 .21

.03

.95

.15 .02

.23

.10 .25

-.42

.14 .02

.12 .05

.08

.68

R2 Adj

.20

.30

.43

Varia

bles

Mod

el 1

(con

stan

t)

Gend

er

Tenu

re

Mod

el 2

(con

stan

t)

Gend

er

Tenu

re

PCSR

em

ploy

ees

PCSR

com

mun

ity a

nd e

nviro

mm

ent

PCSR

eco

nom

ic

Mod

el 3

(con

stan

t)

Gend

er

Tenu

re

PCSR

em

ploy

ees

PCSR

com

mun

ity a

nd e

nviro

mm

ent

PCSR

eco

nom

ic

Cons

true

d ex

tern

al im

age

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The present study explored the relationship between employees’ percep-tions of CSR and organizational commitment. The role performed by

construed external image within this relationship was also examined. In so doing, it responds to a call for more research on the individual-level impacts of CSR (Aguilera et al., 2007; Rodrigo & Arenas, 2008). By ex-amining the relationship between CSR and three forms of commitment, it contributed to overcome a gap in the existing literature that has so far focused on the relationship between CSR and affective commitment. An-other contribution is the identification of one psychological process that helps understand the relationship between variables. The findings reveal that the three dimensions of perceived CSR have dissimilar levels of association with each form of organizational com-mitment, and like has been reported by previous studies, some di-mensions are more important than others for predicting employees’ commitment (Brammer et al., 2007; Peterson, 2004; Rego et al., 2010; Turker, 2009).Hence, the higher the companies’ perceived engagement in socially responsible practices towards their human resources and at the eco-nomic level, the higher the respondent reported emotional attachment and sense of obligation to the company. CSR towards employees has been identified by prior studies as one important predictor of affective commitment (Brammer et al., 2007; Rego et al., 2010; Turker, 2009). Improvements in the work situation resulting from the implementa-tion of socially responsible practices towards employees, e.g. the im-plementation of a work-family balance policy or employee services, provide a plausible explanation for this finding. As argued before, this type of corporate practices provides employees with positive work ex-periences, more comfort and well-being in the workplace and probably enhances the recognition of corporate investment in its members. As a result, it most probably favors the development of emotional bonds with the organizations and also a sense of obligation to the company. Economic CSR emerged as one important predictor. As argued by Rego and colleagues (2010), the feeling of working in an organization that has a good economic performance may increase the feelings of job security and consequently enhance affective commitment. Given the usual high association between affective and normative commit-ment, it probably influences employees’ feelings of loyalty and elicits reciprocity behaviors. Employees’ perceptions of socially responsible practices in the eco-nomic domain have also an effect on employees’ continuance commit-ment. Albeit smaller, this effect shows that the higher the companies’ perceived engagement in socially responsible practices at the econom-ic level, the higher the respondent reported continuance commitment to the company. This is not surprising since this dimension includes


practices such as the timely payment of salaries and benefits.The perceptions of companies’ engagement in socially responsible practices towards the community and environment show no effect on employees’ organizational commitment. Given that these practices address social issues that are of concern for society in general and therefore also for employees (Maignan et al., 1999; Maignan, 2001), it was expected that employees’ perceptions of social performance in this domain had an effect on their relationship with the organiza-tion. Additionally, Brammer and colleagues (2007) and Turker (2009) have reported such an effect regarding affective commitment. Rego and colleagues (2010) also found that discretionary activities towards community do not significantly predict employees’ commitment. Giv-en the inconsistency between the results of existing studies, the im-pact of CSR towards community and environment on organizational commitment deserves further analysis.Regarding construed external image, findings show that perceptions of socially responsible practices towards employees and at the eco-nomic level help predict respondents’ image of their organization. Therefore, the greater the company’s perceived engagement in these types of practice, the more positive the corporate image among re-spondents. Perceptions of engagement in practices towards commu-nity and environment show no effect on the corporate image among employees. Respondents’ perceptions of company actions regarding this dimension did not seem decisive to their beliefs about how oth-ers see the company. This was an unexpected result given that prior research established a positive relationship between corporate social performance and a positive corporate image (Dutton & Dukerich, 1991; Fombrum & Van Riel, 1997; Hess et al., 2002).Finally, results reveal that employees’ construed external image has a positive effect on their organizational commitment, and plays a me-diating role between perceptions of engagement in practices towards employees and at the economic level and both affective and norma-tive commitment. Hence, employees’ perceptions of corporate en-gagement in these two dimensions of CSR promote the development of positive beliefs about how outsiders see the organization, which in turn helps enhance their positive affectivity and loyalty to the organi-zation. Results regarding affective commitment are in line with those of several authors reporting a positive relationship between perceived external prestige and this form of commitment (e.g., Carmeli et al., 2006). Results concerning the relationship between normative com-mitment and construed external image are innovative as this relation-ship was yet to examine.

It must be noted that the relationship between perceived economic CSR and continuance commitment was not mediated by construed ex-ternal image. It therefore seems that perceived engagement in this di-mension of CSR has a positive effect on respondents’ reported contin-uance commitment regardless of the image they think that outsiders have of the organization. This might be explained by the transactional nature of the relationship that instrumentally committed employees maintain with the organization.

Limitations and suggestions for future research Some limitations should be noted regarding the current study. First, data were collected from a single source raising the possibility of com-mon method bias in the relationships between variables (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Harman’s one-dimension test suggests that common method bias is not a serious threat to the validity of the study. Still, data from different sources and/or at least at different times should be collected in future research. Second, our results are based on the underlying hypothesis that the perceptions of CSR precede organiza-tional commitment. An inverse relationship could also be argued, by which organizational commitment would lead to an increase in per-ceived CSR. The methodology used in this research does not provide an unequivocal ruling on the causal direction. Since the study has a correlational research design, firm conclusions cannot be drawn about causality among variables. We therefore encourage subsequent researchers studying this subject to use more sophisticated research designs (e.g., longitudinal, experimental designs) in order to better explore this issue and empirically demonstrate the theoretical direc-tions proposed herein. Future research might explore other mediator variables that help pre-dict the relationship between CSR and organizational commitment (e.g., organizational trust, perceived justice). The inclusion of other criterion variables in the model, both attitudinal (e.g., work engage-ment, subjective well-being) and behavioral (e.g., organizational citi-zenship behavior) would also be of added value.Altogether, the findings of the current study highlight the importance of perceived corporate investment in socially responsible manage-ment practices. Besides the impact that such practices have on the attitudes and behaviors of external stakeholders, they also seem to have a positive effect on employees’ beliefs about corporate image and their relationship with the company. This will most probably influence and enhance employees’ attitudes, behaviors and performance in the workplace.


• Aguilera, R., Rupp, D., Williams, C., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 836-863.• Allen, N., & Meyer, J. (1996). Af-fective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 49, 252 - 276.• Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Concep-tual, strategic and statistical considera-tions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.• Brammer, S. & Millington, A. (2005). Corporate reputation and philan-thropy: An empirical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 29-41. • Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. (2007). The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organi-sational commitment. International Jour-nal of Human Resource Management, 18 (10), 1701-1719.• Carmeli, A., & Freund, A. (2002). The relationship between workplace attitudes and perceived external prestige. Corporate Reputation Review, 5 (1), 51-70.• Carmeli, A., Gilat, G., & Weisberg, J. (2006). Perceived external prestige, or-ganizational identification and affective commitment: A stakeholder approach.

Corporate Reputation Review, 9 (1), 92-104.• Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S., & Ai-ken, L. (2003). Applied multiple regres-sion/correlation analysis for behavioural sciences. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.• Duarte, A. (2011). Corporate social responsibility from an employees’ perspec-tive: Contributes for understanding job attitudes. Non-published doctoral thesis. ISCTE- Lisbon University Institute. • Dutton, J., & Dukerich, J. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 517-554.• Dutton, J., Dukerich, J., & Har-quail, C. (1994). Organizational images and member identification. Administra-tive Science Quarterly, 39 (2), 239-263.• European Commission. (2001). Green paper: Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsi-bility. Brussels: EU Commission. • Fombrun, C., & Van Riel, C. (1997). The reputational landscape. Corporate Reputation Review, 1 (1/2), 5-13.• Herrbach, O., Mignonac, K. & Gatignon, A. (2004). Exploring the role of perceived external prestige in manag-ers’ turnover intentions. The Internation-al Journal of Human Resource Manage-ment, 15 (8), 1390-1407.• Hess, D., Rogovsky, N., & Dunfree, T. (2002). The next wave of corporate community involvement: Corporate social

initiatives. California Management Review, 44, 110-125.• Kenny, D. A. (2009). Homepage. http://davidakenny.net/cm/mediate.htm.• Kim, H., Lee, M., Lee, H., & Kim, N. (2010). Corporate social responsibility and Employee-Company identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 557-569. • KPMG. (2008). International Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2008. KMPG International. • Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. (2001). Corporate citizenship as a marketing in-strument. European Journal of Market-ing, 35, 457-484.• Maignan, I., Ferrell, O., & Hult, M. (1999). Corporate citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27, 455-430.• Mayer, R., & Schoorman, F. (1992). Predicting participation and production outcomes through a two-dimensional model of organizational commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 671-684.• Meyer, J., & Allen, N. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organi-zational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1 (1), 61-89. • Meyer, J., Allen, N., & Smith, C. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-

component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538-551.• Peterson, D. (2004). The relationship between perceptions of corporate citizen-ship and organisational commitment. Business & Society, 43, 296-319.• Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J, & Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and rec-ommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903.• Rego, A., Leal, S., Cunha, M., Faria, J., & Pinho, C. (2010). How the perceptions of five dimensions of corporate citizenship and their inter-inconsistencies predict affective commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 107-127.• Riordan, C., Gatewood, R. & Bill, J. (1997). Corporate image: Employee reactions and implications for managing corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 401-412.• Rodrigo, P., & Arenas, D. (2008). Do employees care about CSR programs? A typology of employees according to their attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 265-283. • Turker, D. (2009). How corporate social responsibility influences organiza-tional commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 189-204.

AUTHORS’ CONTACT INFORMATION

Ana Patrícia Duarte, CIS-IUL/Edifício ISCTE-IUL, Room 0W4, Avenida das Forças Armadas, 1649-026 Lisboa, Portugal, [email protected].

José Gonçalves das Neves, Departamento de Recursos Humanos e Com-portamento Organizacional Edifício ISCTE-IUL, Office D411, Avenida das Forças Armadas, 1649-026 Lisboa, Portugal, [email protected]

Note This study is part of a doctoral project supported by a scholarship from the National Research Council (FCT) (BD/2006/30241).

REFERENCES

Relationship between perceived corporate social responsibility and organizational commitment: The...

Documents

Transcript of Relationship between perceived corporate social responsibility and organizational commitment: The...