welcome to pakistan research repository: home -...
TRANSCRIPT
i
National College of Business
Administration and Economics
Lahore
EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF EMPLOYEES’ PERCEPTION OF CORPORATE SOCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY ON EMPLOYEES’ OUTCOMES: THE MEDIATING ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL
TRUST, JOB SATISFACTION AND ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION
BY
RASHID AHMAD
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN
BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
AUGUST, 2017
ii
NATIONAL COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND
ECONOMICS
EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF EMPLOYEES’ PERCEPTION OF CORPORATE SOCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY ON EMPLOYEES’ OUTCOMES: THE MEDIATING ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL
TRUST, JOB SATISFACTION AND ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION
BY
RASHID AHMAD
A dissertation submitted to School of Business Administration
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN
BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
August, 2017
iv
AUTHOR’S DECLARATION
I, Rashid Ahmad hereby state that my PhD thesis titled “Examining the
Impact of Employees’ Perception of Corporate Social Responsibility on
Employees’ Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Organizational Trust, Job
Satisfaction and Organizational Identification” is my own work and has not
been submitted previously by me for taking any degree from this university,
National College of Business Administration and Economics, Lahore or
anywhere else in the country/world.
At any time if my statement is found to be incorrect even after my
graduate the university has the right to withdraw my PhD degree.
RASHID AHMAD
August, 2017
v
PLAGIARISM UNDERTAKING
I solemnly declare that research work presented in the thesis titled
“Examining the Impact of Employees’ Perception of Corporate Social
Responsibility on Employees’ Outcomes: The Mediating Role of
Organizational Trust, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Identification”
is solely my research work with no significant contribution from any other
person. Small contribution/help whenever taken has been duly acknowledged
and that complete thesis has been written by me.
I understand the zero-tolerance policy of the HEC and National College
of Business Administration and Economics, Lahore towards plagiarism.
Therefore, I as an Author of the above titled thesis declare that no portion of my
thesis has been plagiarized and any material used as reference is properly/cited.
I undertake that if I am found guilty of any formal plagiarism in the above
title thesis even after award of PhD degree, the university reserves the right to
withdraw/revoke my PhD degree and that HEC and the University has the right
to publish my name on the HEC/University website on which names of students
are placed who submitted plagiarized thesis.
Rashid Ahmad
vi
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL This is to certify that research work presented in the thesis, entitled
“Examining the Impact of Employees’ Perception of Corporate Social
Responsibility on Employees’ Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Organizational
Trust, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Identification” was conducted by Mr.
Rashid Ahmad under the supervision of Dr. Talat Islam.
No part of this thesis has been submitted anywhere else for any other degree.
This thesis is submitted to the School of Business Administration in partial
fulfillment of requirements for the degree of requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy in the field of Business Administration, School of Business
Administration, National College of Business Administration and Economics, Lahore.
Student Name: Rashid Ahmad Signature:
Examination Committee:
a) External Examiner 1:
Dr. Muhammad Ali Asadullah Signature:
Associate Professor, Lahore Business School,
The University of Lahore, Lahore, Pakistan
b) External Examiner 2:
Dr. Muhammad Shoaib Farooq Signature:
Assistant Professor, Institute of Business and Management,
University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore,
Pakistan
c) Internal Examiner 1:
Dr. Ghulam Abid Signature:
Assistant Professor, National College of Business
Administration & Economics, Lahore, Pakistan
d) Internal Examiner 2:
Dr. Matti Ullah Signature:
Assistant Professor, National College of Business
Administration & Economics, Lahore, Pakistan
Supervisor Name: Dr. Talat Islam Signature:
Assistant Professor, Hailey College of Banking & Finance,
University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan
Name of Dean/HOD: Dr. Alia Ahmed Signature:
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am thankful to Almighty Allah who provided me the opportunity, strength and courage to complete my research work with good health and spirit.
I am highly grateful to the management of NCBA&E for providing me the
platform to nurture my abilities and skills during my studies at the College.
Indeed, the faculty and staff of the College deserve recognition for their all-out support during my stay at the College. I give special thanks to my parents who
always pray for my prosperous and successful life in this world and hereinafter.
I am indebted to my supervisor Dr. Talat Islam for his motivation, encouragement and appreciation which made it possible to achieve this
milestone in my academic career. He provided utmost support and sparked my
interest in the topic which made it possible to complete my research. One could
not wish for more kind, accessible and friendlier supervisor than him. My special thanks to Dr. Muhammad Adeel Nawab who helped me a lot throughout
my work and gave useful suggestions during this endeavor. I am thankful to my
supportive family for tolerating my unforgiving hours of sitting on computer and endless discussions especially my kids who always miss me at home; it is
an honor to be their father. I am eager to see them at the top in their professional
lives and become good human beings. It would be amiss if I could not
acknowledge the all-out support of my friends and colleagues who always reiterated the value of education which helped in raising my morale through my
long academic journey. They gave me incredible amounts of encouragement and
support during my hours of contemplation, discussion, reflection, and hard work in this arduous endeavor.
ix
SUMMARY
In the recent decades, the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR) has gained prominence and thus, has attracted the attention of researchers and practitioners. In spite of scant research on the topic of CSR, only a handful
of academic studies have explored the relationship between CSR and the
commonly neglected stakeholder i.e. employees. Previous research has
suggested that CSR contributes in attaining the competitive advantage by influencing the employees’ attitudes and behaviours. Although, the role of CSR
in influencing employees’ outcomes has received growing attention and CSR
initiatives have been found to influence employees’ attitudes and behaviours. However, most of the previous research studies have addressed the conceptual
issues of the topic of CSR. By considering the dearth of research which can
examine the impact of employees’ perception of CSR on employees’ outcome,
this study attempted to fill this gap and a theoretical model is presented to explain how employees’ perception of CSR impacts their workplace outcomes
(i.e. organizational commitment, employee engagement and organizational
citizenship behaviour). This study examines the mediation effect of organizational trust, job satisfaction and organizational identification between
the relationship of perceived CSR and employees’ workplace outcomes. Social
exchange theory and social identity theory provide the theoretical underpinning
for the predicted relationships, that the primary outcomes of employees’ perception of CSR programs are organizational trust, job satisfaction and
organizational identification, which subsequently effect employees’ attitudes
including organizational commitment, employee engagement and behaviour (i.e. extra role behaviour). Primary data was collected from faculty members of
higher education institutions of Pakistan. Based on the sample of 736 faculty
members of higher education institutions, 595 faculty members responded the
questionnaires. Multi-stage sampling technique was used to select the samples and structural equation modeling was applied to test the postulated relationships.
The results led the researcher to conclude that SEM provided acceptable fit to
the data and that most of the hypothesized relationships were supported. The findings indicate that employees’ perceptions of CSR have positive impact on
employees’ attitude and behaviour including organizational trust, job
satisfaction, organizational identification and organizational citizenship
behaviour. However, contrary to predicted relationship and priori research, it turned out from the results that employees’ perception of CSR is not predictor
and neither directly positively associated with organizational commitment and
employee engagement. In addition, organizational trust, job satisfaction and
organizational identification partially mediate the relationships between perceived CSR and employees’ workplace outcomes. Accordingly, results
revealed that CSR activities are of particular importance which reinforces the
x
efforts of the organization in maintaining strong relationship with employees
which ultimately impact positively on their attitudes and behaviours. Moreover, findings of the study also revealed that faculty members of higher education
institutions attach weight to responsible attitudes and behaviours: the higher
education institutions should recognize CSR in term of strategic importance.
This study contributes to the advancement of research on CSR by examining the impact of employees’ perception of CSR on their attitudes and behaviours. More
specifically, a small number of organizational research studies have been
conducted in the field of higher education, whereas CSR has become an important and essential concept for the survival of organizations including
universities. Hence, this empirical research supported the framework and
provided rich information for further research studies in the realm of CSR.
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Table
No. Title Page
2.1 The Corporate Social Performance (CSP) Model 27
2.2 Summary of Evolution of Academic Research Definition of CSR 30
3.1 Comparison of Current Study’ Research Design with Some of
Previous Studies
100
3.2 Represents the Value of Cronbach’s Alpha Value of the Scale
which meets the above Requirement
104
4.1 Demographic Characteristics 115
4.2 Inter Correlation Matrix among Variables 117
4.3 Standardized values for Model Fit 120
4.4 Reliability of Pretest of the Measures 128
4.5 Evaluation of Measurement Model 130
4.6 Results of Hypotheses Testing 133
4.7 Indices of Structural Models 134
4.8 Hypothesized Mediation Relations among Variables and its
Results
138
4.9 Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OT-OC 139
4.10 Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OT-EE 140
4.11 Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OT-OCB 141
4.12 Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-JS-OC 142
4.13 Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-JS-EE 143
4.14 Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-JS-OCB 144
4.15 Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OI-OC 145
4.16 Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OI-EE 146
4.17 Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OI-EE 147
4.18 Results of Hypotheses Testing 148
5.1 Hypothesized Associations of CSR 152
5.2 Hypothesized Mediation Relationship among Variables and its
Results
162
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
No. Title Page
1.1 Proposed Theoretical Research Model 87
3.1 Two-Stage SEM 102
3.2 Approaches of Uni-dimensionality 103
4.1 Residual Histogram for JS 112
4.2 P-Plot for JS 112
4.3 CFA Measurement Model for CSR 121
4.4 CFA Measurement Model for OT 122
4.5 CFA Measurement Model for JS 123
4.6 CFA Measurement Model for OI 124
4.7 CFA Measurement Model for OC 125
4.8 CFA Measurement Model for EE 126
4.9 CFA Measurement Model for OCB 127
4.10 Hypothesized Structural Model-1 132
4.11 Hypothesized Structural Model 7 – Final 135
4.12 Mediation Model 137
4.13 Mediation Analysis CSR-OT-OC 139
4.14 Mediation Analysis CSR-OT-EE 140
4.15 Mediation Analysis CSR-OT-OCB 141
4.16 Mediation Analysis CSR-JS-OC 142
4.17 Mediation Analysis CSR-JS-EE 143
4.18 Mediation Analysis CSR-JS-OCB 144
4.19 Mediation Analysis CSR-OI-OC 145
4.20 Mediation Analysis CSR-OI-EE 146
4.21 Mediation Analysis CSR-OI-OCB 147
xiii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
AUTHOR’S DECLARATION ................................................................................... iv
PLAGIARISM UNDERTAKING ............................................................................... v
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL ............................................................................... vi
DEDICATION ........................................................................................................... vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT......................................................................................... viii
SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ ix
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................... xi
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... xii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 1
1.1 Background of the study ...................................................................................... 5
1.2 Motivation for the Study ...................................................................................... 8
1.3 Problem Statement ............................................................................................... 9
1.4 Significance of the Study ................................................................................... 15
1.5 Objectives of the Study ...................................................................................... 17
1.6 Operational Definitions ...................................................................................... 20
1.7 Summary of the Chapter .................................................................................... 22
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE ................................. 23
2.1 Evolution of Conceptualization of Corporate Social Responsibility ................. 23
2.1.1 Conceptualization of CSR....................................................................... 23
2.1.2 The Business Imperative Debate and Corporate Social Responsibility ..... 32
2.1.3 Employees’ Perceptions of CSR and its Effects on Their Outcomes ....... 33
2.1.4 The Shifting of Role of Universities - CSR and Universities ................. 35
2.2 Review of Relevant Literature ........................................................................... 37
2.2.1 Theoretical Support of Employees’ Perceptions of CSR........................ 38
2.2.2 Importance of Employees’ Perceptions of CSR ..................................... 42
2.3 Organizational Trust (OT) ................................................................................. 44
2.3.1 Definitions of Organizational Trust ........................................................ 44
2.3.2 Development of Construct of Organizational Trust ............................... 45
2.3.3 Importance of Organizational Trust ........................................................ 45
2.4 Job Satisfaction (JS) ........................................................................................... 47
2.4.1 Definitions of Job Satisfaction ................................................................ 47
2.4.2 Development of Construct of Job Satisfaction ....................................... 48
2.4.3 Importance of Job Satisfaction................................................................ 48
2.5 Organizational Identitfication (OI) .................................................................... 50
2.5.1 Definitions of Organizational Identitfication .......................................... 50
2.5.2 Development of the Construct of Organizational Identitfication ........... 50
2.5.3 Importance of Organizational Identitfication ......................................... 51
2.6 Organizational Commitment (OC)..................................................................... 53
2.6.1 Definitions of Organizational Commitment ........................................... 53
2.6.2 Development of Construct of Organizational Commitment ................... 54
2.6.3 Importance of Organizational Commitment ........................................... 55
xiv
2.7 Employee Engagement (EE) .............................................................................. 56
2.7.1 Definitions of Employee Engagement .................................................... 56
2.7.2 Development of Construct of Employee Engagement ........................... 57
2.7.3 Importance of Employee Engagement .................................................... 58
2.8 Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) ................................................... 59
2.8.1 Definitions of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour ............................ 59
2.8.2 Development of Construct of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour ...... 59
2.8.3 Importance of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour ............................ 61
2.9 Development of Hypotheses .............................................................................. 62
2.9.1 Relationship between Employees’ Perception of CSR
and Organizational Trust......................................................................... 62
2.9.2 Relationship between Employees’ Perception of CSR and Job
Satisfaction (JS) ...................................................................................... 68
2.9.3 Relationship between Employees’ Perception of CSR
and Organizational Identity..................................................................... 74
2.9.4 Relationship between Employees’ Perception’ of CSR and OC ............ 81
2.9.5 Relationship between Employees’ Perception of CSR
and Employee Engagement..................................................................... 82
2.9.6 Relationship of Employees’ Perceptions of CSR and OCB ................... 84
2.10 Conceptual Framework of the Study ................................................................. 86
2.11 Summary of the Chapter .................................................................................... 87
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................... 88
3.1 Research Philosophy .......................................................................................... 88
3.2 Research Design ................................................................................................. 88
3.2.1 Research Approach ................................................................................. 90
3.2.2 Research Strategy.................................................................................... 91
3.2.3 Time Horizon of the Study ..................................................................... 91
3.2.4 Population & Sampling ........................................................................... 92
3.2.5 Data Collection Method .......................................................................... 94
3.2.6 Data Collection Procedures..................................................................... 95
3.2.7 Response Rate ......................................................................................... 95
3.3 Measuring Instruments ....................................................................................... 96
3.3.1 Pretest of the Questionnaire .................................................................... 96
3.3.2 Measurement of Independent Variable of the Study .............................. 97
3.3.2.1 Perceived CSR .......................................................................... 97
3.3.2.2 Measurement of Mediating Variables of the Study .................. 97
3.3.2.3 Organizational Trust ................................................................. 97
3.3.2.4 Job Satisfaction ......................................................................... 98
3.3.2.5 Organizational Identification .................................................... 98
3.3.2.6 Measurement of Dependent Variables of the Study ................. 98
3.3.2.7 Organizational Commitment ..................................................... 98
3.3.2.8 Employee Engagement ............................................................. 99
3.3.2.9 Organizational Citizenship Behaviour ...................................... 99
3.4 Statistical Descriptive Analysis ......................................................................... 99
3.4.1 Data Analysis Tools ................................................................................ 99
xv
3.5 Preliminary Data Analysis Techniques ............................................................ 100
3.5.1 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) ................................................... 101
3.5.2 Two-Stage SEM Technique .................................................................. 101
3.5.3 Stage-One (Measurement Model) ......................................................... 102
3.5.3.1 Assessment of uni-dimensionality .......................................... 102
3.5.3.2 Assessment of Internal Reliability of the Measures ............... 103
3.5.3.3 Assessment of Validity of the Measures ................................. 105
3.5.4 Stage-Two (Structural Model) .............................................................. 106
3.5.4.1 Assumptions for Using Structural Equation
Modeling (SEM) ..................................................................... 106
3.5.4.2 Sample Size ............................................................................. 107
3.5.4.3 Missing Values ........................................................................ 107
3.5.4.4 Data Normality ........................................................................ 107
3.5.4.5 Multivariate Outliers ............................................................... 108
3.5.4.6 Theoretical Base for Causality ................................................ 108
3.5.4.7 Model Specification ................................................................ 108
3.5.5 Control Variables .................................................................................. 108
3.6 Chapter Summary ............................................................................................ 109
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS............................................ 110
4.1 Screening of Data ............................................................................................. 110
4.2 Identification of Missing Values ...................................................................... 110
4.3 Multivariate Outliers ........................................................................................ 111
4.4 Data Normality Analysis .................................................................................. 111
4.5 Descriptive Statistics ........................................................................................ 113
4.6 Categorization of Demographical Variables .................................................... 113
4.7 Demographic Profile of the Respondents ........................................................ 114
4.8 Correlation among Variables ........................................................................... 116
4.9 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) .............................................................. 118
4.10 Stage-First-Measurement Model...................................................................... 118
4.11 Application of CFA-Assessment of Uni-Dimensionality ................................ 119
4.12 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) ........................................................... 120
4.12.1 Organizational Trust ............................................................................. 122
4.12.2 Job Satisfaction ..................................................................................... 122
4.12.3 Organizational Identity ......................................................................... 123
4.12.4 Organizational Commitment ................................................................. 124
4.12.5 Employee Engagement ......................................................................... 125
4.12.6 Organizational Citizenship Behaviour .................................................. 126
4.13 Constructs Reliability ....................................................................................... 127
4.13.1 Assessment of Reliability and Validity ................................................ 129
4.14 Hypotheses Testing (Second Stage-SEM Application) ................................... 131
4.14.1 Structural Model-1 ................................................................................ 131
4.14.2 Removal of Insignificant Paths and Fit Indices for Structural Model ...... 133
4.15 Structural Models for Mediation Analysis ....................................................... 136
4.15.1 The Relationship between CSR, OT and OC ....................................... 138
4.15.2 The Relationship between CSR, OT and EE ........................................ 139
xvi
4.15.3 The Relationship between CSR, OT and OCB ..................................... 140
4.15.4 The Relationship between CSR, JS and OC ......................................... 141
4.15.5 The Relationship between CSR, JS and EE .......................................... 142
4.15.6 The Relationship between CSR, JS and OCB ...................................... 143
4.15.7 The Relationship between CSR, OI and OC......................................... 144
4.15.8 The Relationship between CSR, OI and EE ......................................... 145
4.15.9 The Relationship between CSR, OI and OCB ...................................... 146
4.16 Results for Hypotheses Testing........................................................................ 147
4.17 Chapter Summary ............................................................................................ 148
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ........................................... 149
5.1 Summary of the Results ................................................................................... 149
5.2 Discussion on the Findings of the Study.......................................................... 151
5.2.1 Employees’ Perceptions of CSR and its Outcomes (RO1) ................... 152
5.2.2 Mediating Role of OT between Employees’ Perceptions of
CSR and OC, EE and OCB ................................................................... 161
5.2.3 Mediating Role of JS between Employees’ Perceptions of
CSR and OC, EE and OCB ................................................................... 165
5.2.4 Mediating Role of OI between Perception of CSR and
OC, EE and OCB .................................................................................. 169
5.3 Implications of the Study ................................................................................. 172
5.3.1 Theoretical Implications ....................................................................... 173
5.3.2 Practical Implications............................................................................ 176
5.3.3 Recommendations for Organizations .................................................... 178
5.3.4 Limitations of the Study........................................................................ 179
5.3.5 Future Research Directions ................................................................... 180
5.4 Conclusion........................................................................................................ 182
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 185
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................. 248
APPENDIX-A: 177- HEC Recognized Universities and Degree
Awarding Institutions ................................................................... 253
APPENDIX-B: HEC Recognized 103 Public Sector Universities ........................ 263
APPENDIX-C: HEC Recognized 74 Private Sector Universities ......................... 264
APPENDIX-D: Detail of Full Time Faculty Members IN HEIS ........................... 265
APPENDIX-E: Determining Sample Size for Finite Population ........................... 266
APPENDIX-F: HEC Recognized 74 Private Sector Universities ......................... 267
APPENDIX-G: Strata based on HEC Recognized Public Sector Universities ...... 268
APPENDIX-H: Residual Histogram and P-Plots of the Variables ........................ 270
APPENDIX-I: Skewness and Kurtosis Values for Data Normality ..................... 272
APPENDIX-J: CFA Measurement Model ............................................................ 273
APPENDIX-K: Diagrams for Structural Models of the Study............................... 276
APPENDIX-L: Mediation Models ......................................................................... 284
1
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
The concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is based on the notion that companies should involve in socially responsible activities to make
contributions for the welfare of the society. In the field of organizational
psychology, CSR has become a key area of interest with the growing amount of
organizational involvement in social responsibilities; which are beyond the lawful requirements (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001). The concept of CSR has
been gaining importance over the years (Rexhepi, Kurtishi & Bexheti, 2013)
and recently it has become an important factor to be considered by both
businesses and academics (McWilliams et al., 2006; Carroll & Shabana, 2010; Lee et al., 2013; Bolton & Mattila, 2015). This conception can be tracked back
to 50's when Bowen (1953) defined it as "corporations’ social obligation to
pursue policies, to make the decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society” (p. 6). Kotler
and Lee (2005) explained that CSR is “the commitment to improve the well-
being of the community through discretionary business practices and
contributions of corporate resources” (p. 3). According to the definition presented by World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2002),
CSR is “the commitment of business to contribute to sustainable economic
development, working with employees, their families, and the local communities”.
Despite the growing importance of CSR in business and society, no
commonly accepted definition of CSR is available in the literature (Carroll, 1991; Garriga & Melé, 2004; Fu, Ye, & Law, 2014). Davis (1973) contributes
and define CSR as “the firm’s considerations and response to, issues beyond the
narrow economic, technical, and legal requirements of the firm to accomplish social (including environmental) benefits along with the traditional economic
gains which the firm seeks” (p. 312). Mukherjee and Chaturvedi (2013) also
contributed and added their views that CSR comes from the society it should go
back to the society. Similarly, Belcourt et al. (2014) claimed that CSR is “the responsibility of the firm to act in the best interest of the people and communities
affected by its activities” (p. 10). Hence, different scholars have been using
multiple approaches to define the concept of CSR, each definition has its own meanings and characteristics.
2
In this context, Carroll (1979) presented a model of social performance
of CSR and explained its different dimensions including economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic (Carroll, 1991; Geva, 2008; Trevino & Nelson, 2011).
Economic obligations of a corporation that refer to the development of
marketable goods and services which are found desirable by the consumer.
Through which an organization generates revenue to operate the business and provide some social good. Legal obligations of a corporation correspond the
view that organizations must operate within the defined guidelines by
government legislation to fulfill the society’s legal requirements. Ethical responsibilities of a corporation include all such efforts to carry out business
activities in ethical manners which are based on societal norms. Philanthropic
responsibilities address all such voluntary, positive social behaviours of
organizations which can benefit the society at large. Based on social performance model presented by Carrol (1979), a widely accepted definition
and approach was presented by Carroll (1991) and identified four dimensions of
CSR which make up a pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility. Recently, Carroll and Buchholtz (2014) reiterate that “Corporate social responsibility
includes the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations which the
society has of organizations at a given time” (p. 32).
In literature, CSR pyramid presented by Carroll is frequently used to
explain the main spheres of obligations of corporation and to take care of the
interests of its stakeholders come under its preview including maximization of
profit. In addition, Friedman (1970) argued that “the basic goal of a firm is to maximize the profit rather fulfillment of the needs of the society” (p. 1). Some
other economists have also emphasized that, attention on social responsibility
redirect business efforts to make profit, which is also beneficial for the society as a whole (Zajac & Westphal, 2004; Henderson, 2004). Organizations have
adopted CSR activities with the purpose to return a share of its profit to the
society (Reputation Institution, 2010). Although, the traditional finance theory
emphasizes that the maximization of profit is the prime purpose of the corporation; however, business dynamics by the times have been changed. Now
the firms are contributing for the welfare of the society and investing in its
employees for sustainable and long term development. In fact, to achieve sustainable development, CSR transfer back the benefit to complete the cycle.
This view of CSR is rooted in the fact that the prosperity of the business depends
upon the health of the society and its surrounding community (Boesso &
Michelon, 2010). Mozes et al. (2011) also supported this view point by asserting that corporations are aware of such needs to keep a balance between profitability
and depicting a positive public image, by adopting more social and
environmental obligation.
3
More specifically, CSR is essentially a firm’s effort to improve welfare
of the society through utilization of firm’s resources and discretionary corporate practices (Kotler & Lee, 2005). Therefore, the perception of an organization (i.e.
social performance) has become more important as compared to its performance
(i.e. actual behaviours) (Glavas & Godwin, 2013). In knowledge and service
based economies, the role of employees has become more important and valuable than before (Chen, Wang & Chu, 2010). A recent global study of
managers indicates that two-third respondents are of the view that investment in
CSR is a competitive necessity (Kiron et al., 2012). Additionally, CSR provides a path for companies to contribute to the welfare of the society, alongside it also
creates an opportunity for competitive advantage to establish positive reputation
among the business world (Porter & Kramer, 2006; Smith, 2007). In a more
recent study, Siddique, (2014) concludes that organizations that are involved in CSR practices have a great opportunity to achieve competitive advantage;
therefore, companies should pay more attention towards CSR practices.
In the 21st century, CSR has become an important issue for the
organizations that define the role of business towards society (Vilanova, Lozano
& Arenas, 2008). Accordingly, corporation’ stakeholders are categorized into
two main categories, the first internal stakeholders (i.e. employees), and the second stakeholders are recognized as external stakeholders of the corporation
(i.e. customer and society etc.). The European Commission (2011) described
that CSR is a corporate strategy and practice which integrates social and
environmental activities as well as it reveals relationship of corporation with its stakeholders, which includes shareholder, customers, suppliers, employees and
the community. Suffice to say that, organizational engagement in social
activities benefit its stakeholders. Some researchers have attempted to make it understandable to the companies that expenditure on CSR should not be
considered as cost rather it should be viewed as investment to develop a good
relationship with the stakeholders (Singh & Paithankar, 2015). While, others
opined that CSR can be costly for the firms, however, if the CSR activities are planned at strategic level they may positively affect the association between the
stakeholders and the firms (Bhattacharyya et al., 2007; Bhattacharya et al.,
2008). This argument is further supported by the stakeholder theory which was presented by Freeman (1984). The theory states that, CSR strategies of a
corporation benefit its various stakeholders by satisfying their major interests.
Hence, effects of CSR strategies on academic research tend to investigate the companies’ stakeholders’ attitude. In this context, Samy, Odemilin, and
Bampton (2010) argued that it became increasingly accepted in the corporate
settings since the start of the twenty first century that overlooking the importance of stakeholders was unrealistic which may produce negative
economic and social outcomes for organizations. Supporting this view, Cohen
4
and Greenfield (1997) emphasized that “if an organization is involved in socially
responsible activities, people want to buy from you, they want to work for you, they want to be associated with you, they feel invested in your success” (p. 29).
Similarly, Henriques and Sadorsky (1999) proposed that organizations should
work according to its stakeholders’ desires and expectations instead of the public
in general. In addition, they also proposed a classification of four groups of stakeholders, shareholders, suppliers, customers and employees. The
stakeholder-centered perspective of CSR generates many studies addressing the
relationship between CSR and potential employees (Greening & Turban, 2000; Kim & Park, 2011) studies related to CSR and current employees of the
organization (Brammer et al., 2007; Turker, 2009; Zheng, 2010; Roeck &
Delobbe, 2012; You et al., 2013).
Employees are always considered as the key stakeholders of a firm and
firm exercise CSR activities in view of the employees (Mishra & Suar, 2010),
especially in service industry (Arasli, Daskin & Saydam, 2014). In a service firm, the success of the firm depends on its employees and their welfare
determines on the basis of their job performance (Bowling, 2007), further the
quality of products and services offered to customer also depends on employees
(Lee et al., 2012). In literature, some empirical evidences indicate that organizational engagement in CSR is not a detrimental factor for the
development and survival of an organization, it is beneficial for positive
outcomes of employees in the organization (Zhang, Fan & Zhu, 2014;
Chaudhary et al., 2015; Islam et al., 2016). More specifically, Tziner (2013) indicates that CSR provides multiple benefits to corporations including
improvement in attitudes and behaviours of employees which increase their
productivity. Recently, an empirical study has been carried out by Singhapakdi et al. (2015) which indicates that consistency in CSR belief of employees
contributes positively towards employees’ workplace outcomes.
In most of the developed economies, contribution of the service sector has increased from manufacturing sector (Shuck et al., 2011; Islam, 2011), service
sector contributes 73% in developed economies whereas 53% in developing
economies in their GDP (Ahmed & Ahsan, 2011). In Pakistan, service sector contributes 54% in GDP and it contributes one third in providing employment
opportunities in the country (Islam et al., 2014). In general, the concept of CSR
is associated with business firms. In current era, the importance of social
responsibility is growing for both profit and non-profit organizations. Researchers have different perspective about the term of CSR for universities,
which is based on the universities’ objectives in different countries and cultures.
This view of CSR shifts from conventional perspective of corporate and it leads to contributing towards the welfare of the society (Carroll, 1979; Williamson et
al., 2006). Specifically, this is true for universities, in which great importance
5
is given to generation of knowledge and well-being of society (Nejati et al.,
2011). Accordingly, service sector (i.e. higher education institutions) is selected as the population of this study. The following section of this study explains the
contextual backdrop of the concepts and their relationship which finally helps
in concluding the problem statement.
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
In current business landscape, CSR has emerged as a very hot topic. In
the world, the rapid dispersal of CSR can be assumed to have a positive impact
on business which in turn enhance organization’ reputation and its performance.
These positive outcomes of the engagement of CSR encourage the organizations to adopt CSR in their businesses. Since last couple of decades, on account of
rapid technological advancement, demographic and climate changes some
considerable changes have taken place in the working environment of the organizations which has increased competition among the firms. Long and
inflexible working hours and contractual terms have increased stress levels of
the workforce, which in response affect their workplace attitudes and
behaviours. In this emerging context, the employers always desire from workforce to remain engaged in their work with enhanced levels of
psychological attachment, and contemporary organizations are getting help by
involving in CSR activities (Chawak & Dutta, 2014).
Moreover, it is true that successful organizations need CSR to shape their
public images and reputations; organizations also need CSR to stand out from
their competitors. Thus, because of the competitive environment and public awareness, corporations need to behave like socially responsible citizens to
survive and grow in a competitive environment (Ma, 2011). In view of the
importance of CSR, some researchers suggest that corporations have started to
acknowledge the strategic significance of the social responsibility of the corporations for their sustainability and operations (Porter & Kramer, 2006).
However, lack of understanding of the organizations about the impact of CSR
activities on employees may lead them to make inappropriate decisions concerning to adoption of CSR policies and its impact on internal stakeholders
i.e. employees. Similarly, Ellis (2008) concludes that some organizations may
ignore the fact which may provide support for its employees and it may have
significant influence on attitudes and behaviours of the employees.
Some researchers suggested that in order to win goodwill, non-profit
organizations or universities should be socially responsible to their respective communities (Hoffman & Woody, 2008; Haden, Oyler & Humphreys, 2009).
The question arises that what are the factors which stimulate higher education
6
institutions to adopt social responsibility practices. More particularly, when do
universities consider the social responsibilities as their core policies. This seems to be more voluntarily based which needs to be explored. In this context, Rossi
(2014) suggested that fundamental changes take place in universities and now
they act as big businesses and students are considered as their customers.
Therefore, to compete in dynamic education industry, higher education also needs to fulfil its obligation of perpetual transformation and these norms and
values can also be reflected in their own actions which they claim to represent.
In the current era, therefore, importance of CSR is growing for profit and non-profit organizations, in order to address CSR, the role of universities is twofold.
It can lead the corporate sector to attain competitive advantage by using CSR
through capacity building of human resource or it can adopt CSR activities as a
follower.
Thus, higher education institutions have three key stakeholders; students,
employees and the society in general. This indicates that CSR policies and programs are not limited to corporations, but higher education institutions are
also adopting these programs to develop human resource as employers. More
specifically, to ensure sustainability, universities need to focus on its
stakeholders, while on the other hand, progress and survival of corporation and society mainly depends on the universities. However, Ahmad (2012) suggested
that universities are considered a driver for CSR activities, and employees are
considered as key stakeholder (Rodrigo & Arenas, 2008). Therefore, in higher
education institutions, CSR activities start from employees and move on to other stakeholders. Thus, it is assumed that for effective implementation of CSR
policies and programs on other stakeholders, there is a need to focus on
employees in higher education institutions.
In 20th and early 21st centuries, higher education institutions were facing
more extensive challenges due to their global nature, which affected number of
people and institutions and particularly in 21st century, higher education has become a competitive industry (Altbach et al., 2009). Consequently, universities
are competing for their status, achieving high ranking and to get funding from
public or private sources. Although, competition has always been a challenge in the academic world and it can add value to improve the academic standards.
Thus, to support the need of diversity in higher education, effect of globalization
has always been considered as an important factor. Over the period, public
sector universities have not been able to satisfy different demands. Thus, weak existence of public sector universities and failure to achieve different
requirements have led to establishment of private institutions. Therefore,
universities can be considered as a commercial product which are essentially governed by market forces and this brings the concept of competitiveness
(Mohamedbhai, 2003). Hence, new management approach is required to higher
7
education institutions for securing of funds, collaboration, research and
enrollment of students. Supporting this view point, Kamalakanthan (2013) described it a ‘full-scale corporation’. This happens in higher education around
the globe including in Pakistan. In Pakistan, during last few years, a considerable
increase in establishment of higher education institution has taken place. The
higher education commission (HEC), the regulatory body is introducing the reforms to accredit these institutions (Asrar-ul-Haq, 2015). Therefore, it is
assumed that in Pakistan, CSR is an appropriate term for higher education
institutions (Nadeem & Kakakhel, 2012).
In the domain of CSR literature, some researchers noted that employees
have received slight attention and the element of importance of employees have
not been focused in theoretical and empirical deliberations (Boddy et al., 2010; Pinnington et al., 2007). A small number of studies have essentially investigated
the association between employees’ perceptions of CSR and their workplace
outcomes (Valentine & Fleischman, 2008; Turker, 2009b; De Roeck et al., 2014; Story & Neves, 2015). However, in recent years, a growing body of CSR
research has started to emphasis on employees and community, these
dimensional changes are occurring about the field’s perspective on CSR (Rupp
et al., 2011). In this context, Crilly et al. (2008), Ones and Dilchert (2012) also suggested that although, CSR programs are planned and implemented on behalf
of the organization, individuals are important who supports for, comply with
and contribute in CSR. Thus, it has become imperative for organizational
psychologists to only deliberate how CSR impacts employees' attitudes and behaviours (Lefkowitz, 2013).
Recognizing the importance of individuals in CSR perspective, Rupp and Mallory (2015), emphasized that there is need to further examine the
psychological effects of practicing of CSR, observing CSR and receiving CSR,
as a beneficiary of CSR initiatives. Previously, some studies were conducted in
relationship with value of perceived CSR and workplace outcomes which includes employees’ attitudes and behaviors. However, Nadeem and Kakakhel
(2012) suggested that a very few studies were conducted in the context of higher
education. More specifically, organizational commitment, employee engagement and organizational citizenship behaviours are hardly studied in
higher education context. This is a first ever study in relationship to perception
of CSR and faculty members’ attitudes and behaviours in developing countries
like Pakistan. Memon et al. (2014) indicated that Pakistan is developing country having some socioeconomic challenges such as poverty, high rate of population
growth, energy crisis, insufficient health care and education facilities. In
developing countries, the concept of CSR is newer and still confined in curriculum in developing countries (Memon et al., 2014). Therefore, in
developing countries including Pakistan, there is need to create awareness
8
among people and organizations about the practices of CSR. Therefore, the
purpose of this study is to examine the faculty members’ perception about CSR activities in Pakistani universities and its impact on their level of organization
commitment, employee engagement and organizational citizenship behaviours
with mediation role of organizational trust, job satisfaction and organizational
identification.
1.2 MOTIVATION FOR THE STUDY
Sir Winston Churchill (1943) quoted - “Responsibility is the Price of
Greatness”. This quotation reveals and describe the importance of CSR for the
corporate firms. Considering the importance of CSR, Story and Neves (2015) asserted that organizations might mislay their reputation among stakeholders if
not involved in CSR activities and this affect their long-term survival in today’s
global era. This is the reason that a growing number of studies consistently indicate that CSR initiatives of an organization can provide benefits to its
stakeholders (e.g. Kim et al., 2010; Wang et al., 2013). In addition, Fu et al.
(2014) and Lee et al. (2013) also asserted that among many stakeholders,
employees are considered key stakeholders as they play a significant role for the success of an organization. Although, some scholars examined the effects of
employees’ perceptions of CSR on their psychological states, attitudinal and
behavioural outcomes (Albdour & Altarawneh, 2012; You et al., 2013;
Brammer, He & Mellahi, 2015). In this context, Bhattacharya et al. (2008) emphasized that although planning of CSR initiatives is made at strategic level;
however, they will influence positively the relationships between corporation
and stakeholders e.g. employees.
In the 21st century, economies are considered knowledge based and
almost all developing countries including Pakistan are trying to develop their
knowledge pool to boost their economic growth. Moreover, in the current era of knowledge based economy, the role of employees has become more
important and valuable than before (Chen, Wang & Chu, 2010). Accordingly,
Waddock and Grave (1997), Margolis and Walsh (2003) asserted that in literature, a considerable number of studies have focused to examine the impact
of CSR on financial benefits to corporations such as Corporate Financial
Performance (CFP). Although, some studies have been conducted focusing on
the external stakeholders outside the organization such as customer and supplier however, less attention has been paid to carry out research focusing on internal
stakeholder of the organization i.e. employee. Therefore, there is need to focus
and to further examine the effect of CSR on employee (Hansen et al., 2011).
9
More specifically, during the last decade, the concept of CSR has
attracted researchers’ intention, specifically in the services sector (Arasli, Daskin & Saydam, 2014). Similar to other service organizations, universities
and higher education institutions are also considered not only education
providers, but also form national identity with key responsibilities broadly to the
world (Sullivan, 2003). Furthermore, universities are also facing some challenges like other corporations and struggling for establishing good
reputation and more particularly retention of talented employees. Moreover, the
emerging challenge for today’s universities is also to satisfy the requirement of different stakeholders including students, employees, associated companies and
society at large (Kunstler, 2006). In order to meet these challenges, higher
education institutions need human capital (particularly faculty) which may have
significant role in developing these institutions into a knowledge center (Mubarak et al., 2012).
In a society, universities are considered the institutions which generates the knowledge to shape up the societal norms and to create knowledge activity.
Thus, the role of faculty members who are serving in universities and higher
education institutions has become important and there is need to examine their
attitudes and behaviours at their workplace. In this context, the business leaders are increasingly realizing the importance of CSR practices to provide further
support, work culture and values of social responsibility and vice versa
(Kermani, 2006; Porter, 2006). In particular, for successful functioning of
higher education institutions largely depends on faculty members’ performance at the work. Hence, it has become important to understand and
examine the impact of faculty members’ perception of CSR on their outcomes
which may ultimately affect the performance of higher education institutions. Therefore, there is need to develop a theoretical synthesis and examining a
mechanism to know the impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on their
attitudes and behaviours. Through this study some mixed empirical evidences
were discussed and simultaneously research gap was filled by examining the impact of perceived CSR on employees’ workplace outcomes. More precisely,
the main purpose of this study is to develop a conceptual framework which
depicts that how an organization can influence employees’ positive attitudes and behaviours including organizational commitment, employee engagement and
organizational citizenship behaviour through organizational CSR activities by
focusing intervening variables as mediators i.e. organizational trust, job
satisfaction and organizational identification.
1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT
World economies have emerged as the knowledge based economies and
significant changes have also been observed especially in developing nations.
10
In the knowledge economies, acquisition and application of knowledge have become a major factor in the economic development, it is considered as an essential element for national competitive advantage (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development-OECD, 2008). The responsibilities of higher education institutions in comparison to a traditional corporation may be summarized as “transferring the knowledge to the new generations by teaching, training and doing research; determining a balance between basic and applied research and between professional training and general education; meeting the priority needs of their respective societies” (UNESCO, 1991). In this perspective, the role of higher education institutions in developing knowledge based economies have also become important. In developing countries like Pakistan, higher education institutions are particularly valued for their contribution which they can make towards their national development. In this emerging era, similar to corporations, the higher education institutions have been in process of in-depth transformations, influenced and being influenced by economic, political and socio demographical phenomena. Therefore, in order to compete and survive in the changing environment such as the globalization, privatization and competition among higher education institutions, most of the institutions are adopting business like strategies (Gioia & Thomas, 1996; Gumport, 2000; Weymans, 2010).
In present scenario, the higher education sector has also come up as highly
competitive and diversified “mature industry”, as it has become necessary for the universities to reposition themselves to face new emerging challenges and opportunities. During the course of adoption of corporate approach, some educational institutions are focusing on importance of corporate identity, building of corporate image, corporate reputation and primarily adoption of CSR as a status and strategy of advantage building (Porter & Kramer, 2006; Atakan & Eker, 2007; Stensaker, 2007). In addition to their other obligations, the higher education institutions are also engaged in multi-dimensional CSR activities which may attract the faculty members and potential faculty members’ desire to be a part of such institutions. In this context, the higher education institutions are also developing strategies and discovering opportunities to move their focus beyond classroom activities to their institutional operations which also includes their employees’ related CSR activities such as work life balance, health and safety, training and development, workplace diversity, day care centers, fee concession to employee and their siblings, special grants for employees etc. This may also include all such activities which has impact on society such as tree plantation campaign, environmental protection awareness, blood transfusion campaign and other social work related to community etc.
Similar to employees in a firm, faculty members in educational
institutions are considered important stakeholder. In higher education institutions, faculty members’ performance contributes significantly in
11
successful functioning of the institutions. Conversely, previous studies were inappropriately developed to examine the impact of CSR practices on stakeholders’ attitudes and behaviours about their organization (Lindgreen et al., 2009). In literature, the empirical investigations on CSR and employees job related outcomes are limited (You et al., 2013; Zheng, 2010; Valentine & Fleischman, 2008) and there is a need to shed light on this aspect of CSR (Islam et al., 2016; Ahmad, Islam & Saleem, 2017; Haq, Kuchinke & Iqbal, 2017).
Thus, from the organizational and managerial perspective, it is important
to identify and recognize the factors which may have influence on faculty members’ attitudes and behaviours at their workplace such as CSR. Therefore, in higher education institutions, CSR can be a useful strategy for efficient management of faculty members by enhancing their work attitudes i.e. organizational trust, job satisfaction and organizational identification which can impact positively on their workplace outcomes. Therefore, there is need to have a clear picture about how and why employees’ perception of CSR affected perceived corporate performance and attachment level of employees with their firm (Lee et al., 2013). Although, faculty members’ performance is an essential and important factor through which the institutions can attain competitive advantage. However, despite the importance of the faculty members in higher education institutions’ hardly a study is carried out which can examine the impact of faculty members’ perceptions of CSR on their attitude and behaviours. Hence, there is need to examine the phenomenon with alternative perspectives which might provide more clear understanding and richer body of knowledge in the domain.
In organizational perspective, CSR is considered as an obligation of a
corporation beyond its traditional responsibilities which complies with legal obligations and practicing voluntary actions which has overall positive impact on the society. Employees’ perception of CSR is developed on the basis of an organization’s engagement in CSR practices (Vlachos, Panagopoulos & Rapp, 2014). However, employees’ perception of CSR relates to their cognitive aspect, which means it differs from their actual CSR program. CSR perception reflects the personal evaluations and interpretations of organizational programs at the individual level, while the later indicates the actual business activities related to CSR at the organizational level. Some researchers suggested that the formation of employees’ attitude and behaviours is derived from such cognition process (Crites et al., 1994). Similarly, Rupp et al. (2006) suggested that firms’ initiatives related to responsibility or irresponsibility influence employees’ attitudes and behaviours which in turn affects employees’ perceptions of CSR which further trigger their emotional, attitudinal, and behavioural responses. In the literature, some researchers indicated that there is need to further examine the employees’ CSR perceptions and its impact on employees’ attitudes and behaviours because organizations’ CSR initiatives have positive influence on
12
employees’ perception of CSR (Lee et al., 2012). In addition, Lee et al. (2013) also suggested in another study that “researchers and managers to move toward more sophisticated assessments concerning how and why employee perceptions affect perceived corporate performance and employee attachment toward the company”. Considering above referred call for studies, this study aims to examine the impact of faculty members’ perception of CSR on their attitudes and behaviours at their workplace i.e. organizational commitment (OC) and employee engagement (EE) and behaviours i.e. extra-role behaviours (OCB). This study also considers the attitudinal constructs which perform their role as mediators between the relationship of perceived CSR and employees’ attitudes and behaviours at their workplace (i.e. organizational trust, job satisfaction and organizational identification). Thus, this issue examines by investigating the following research question: RQ1: Does employees’ perceptions of CSR have impact on employees’
psychological (Organizational Identification), attitudinal (Organizational Trust, Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment and Employees Engagement) and behavioural (Organizational Citizenship Behaviour) outcomes? A feeling of trust is derived from considerable exchange of shared values
between firm and its stakeholders (Morgan & Hunt, 1994). In other words, trust is a sense of confidence in reliability and integrity on exchange of partners and eventually, trust influences the parties’ commitment level and their future behaviours. In this context, Mayer et al. (1995) suggest that trust is “the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party” (p. 712). Similarly, Bhattacharya et al. (1998) explained that trust as the “expectancy of positive (or non-negative) outcomes that one can receive based on the expected action of another party in an interaction characterized by uncertainty” (p. 462). Considering the importance of trust, some researcher indicated that in order to maintain a successful and long term relationship, trust has been considered as an essential element (Dwyer et al., 1987; Morgan & Hunt, 1994; Berry, 1995).
Hence, trust seems to be an important factor when it comes to employees’
perceptions of organization’ CSR practices. Conversely, element of trust may
have impact negatively if employees perceive that their organization’s efforts
about its engagement in CSR deviates from socially responsible programs and consequently organization may damage its reputation and lose its credibility.
Advancing the debate, Bell and Patterson (2011) described that “in case of
employees having high level of trust and feel hopefulness in their work, they feel more freedom and empowerment, which would help them to step outside
their formal role and serve a higher purpose” (p. 30). More specifically, if the
13
level of trust of employees’ is high which may affect their performance and
ultimately influence their attitudes and behaviours including organizational commitment, employee engagement and organizational citizenship behaviours.
In this context, some scholars investigated that organizational CSR practices
influence employees’ commitment towards their organization (Ali et al., 2010).
In organizational perspective, some researchers have also investigated that organizational trust is an important factor to enhance cooperation within the
organization which improve the employees’ behavioural and performance
outcomes (Kramer, 1999; Dirks & Ferrin, 2001). In particular, researchers stressed upon the need to further examine the role of trust as a mediating variable
between employees’ perceptions of CSR and employees’ workplace outcomes
as so much has not been examined in this regards (Hansen et al., 2011; Lee et
al., 2012). This shows that some psychological or cognition process involves which influence the employees’ perception about their organization, such as its
involvement in CSR activities which needs to be further examined. Lee et al.
(2012) suggested that in order to achieve relationship commitment, it is important to earn employees’ trust to keep them satisfied though CSR activities.
It means that developing a sound relationship with employees and controlling
and monitoring the relationship are important for sustaining relationship
commitment. In addition, Farooq et al. (2014) suggested that organizational trust and organizational identification seem relevant in the case of employees’ related
CSR actions and in future other variables may also consider within social
exchange relationships. Based on above referred calls, in this study, it is
predicted that organizational trust mediates between the relationship of employees’ perceptions of CSR and their attitudes and behaviours, which is
examined by the following research question:
RQ2: Does Organizational Trust mediate the relationship between employees’
perception of CSR and, Organizational Commitment, Employees
Engagement and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour?
The concept of job satisfaction first time originated by Viteles in 1932
and afterwards analyzed from different perspectives to explore its possible and
potential antecedents and consequences. Locke (1976) defines that “job satisfaction is a positive emotional state resulting from one’s evaluation of
experience of work” (p. 1300). This experience of work includes all features of
job and environment at working place. It means that if employees are satisfied
with their organization it is likely they would be more committed to it. The construct of job satisfaction has been widely explored which relates to the
subject of organizational psychology. Evidences of some empirical studies
indicate that job satisfaction relates to the employees’ perceptions of organization performance (Koh & Boo, 2001; Valentine & Fleischman, 2008)
and employees’ behaviours at their work place (Gonzalez & Garazo, 2006;
14
Maharaj & Schlechter, 2007). The underlying principle behind phenomenon is
that the actions of an organization have direct impact on attitudes and behaviours of its members who may response on the basis of their perception and appraisal
of their organization (Aguilera et al., 2007). In literature, a study was carried out
by Farooq et al. (2014) they called for study and suggested that in future research
may well achieve a more comprehensive account of CSR activities' effectiveness and efficiency by incorporating additional variables. In addition,
Lee et al. (2013) also suggested that examining the usefulness and efficiency of
CSR, more variables need to incorporate to carry out a study in this area of research. Based on the above referred calls, in this study, it is assumed that
attitudinal construct (i.e. job satisfaction) may be investigated to know its
influence as mediator between perceived CSR and employees’ workplace
outcomes. Thus, following research question is predicted:
RQ3: Does Job Satisfaction mediate the relationship between employees’
perception of CSR and Organizational Commitment, Employees Engagement and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour?
Ashforth and Mael (1989) asserted that “organizational identification is a
specific form of social identification where the individual defines himself or herself in terms of their membership in a particular organization” (p. 34). The
theoretical model also depicts, organizational identity assumed as a mediator
between employees’ perception of CSR and employees’ important work related
attitudes and behaviours. Bhattacharya et al. (2008) suggested that organizational engagement in CSR activities can play a significant role in
organizational attractiveness. When employees feel that their organization is
categorized as a “good citizen” among the public, it may develop feelings of pride and attachment in the employees with their organization. In literature, a
small body of research have examined the relationship of employees’ perception
of CSR and its impact on their attitudes and behaviours. For instance, Rupp et
al. (2006) indicated that employees’ perceptions about CSR activities can generate emotional, attitudinal and behavioural reactions which are helpful to
the organization. For example, CSR activities have positive effects on
employees’ work performance including satisfaction (Devinney, 2009), commitment (Peterson, 2004), and identification (Kim et al, 2010). Recently,
Farooq et al. (2014) concluded that organizational identity is an important
construct which plays its role in exchange relationship as a mediator between
perceived CSR and commitment. In addition, Barrantes (2012) suggest that “future studies could consider examining the impact of employees’ perceptions
of CSR and it is necessary to conduct more empirical organizational studies
which can examine the impact of CSR on employees’ attitudes and behaviours (e.g. organizational identification)” (p. 128). Thus, based on above referred call,
it can be assumed and following research question is investigated to understand
15
the mediating role of organizational identification between employees’
perception of CSR and employees’ workplace outcomes:
RQ4: Does Organizational Identification mediate the relationship between
employees’ perception of CSR and Organizational Commitment,
Employees Engagement and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour?
Examining the perceptions of CSR from the employees’ perspective, it is
proposed that CSR has positive influence on employees’ attitudes and behaviours. It is argued that in most of the previous studies mediating role of
employees’ concerning attitudes was ignored which may lead to certain work
attitudes and behaviours. In previous research studies, it does not appear to apply
a strong theoretical framework to examine the essential and basic mechanism through which CSR influence employee’ attitude and behaviour, demanding
further research to fill this research gap. More specifically, the objective of this
study is to examine how employees’ perceptions of CSR impacts employees’ psychological states (i.e. organizational identification), attitudes (i.e. job
satisfaction, organizational trust, organizational commitment and employee’
engagement) and behaviours (i.e. organizational citizenship behaviour), less
investigated areas from the perspective of employees’ workplace outcomes.
1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
During the last few decades, corporate social responsibility has gaining
the importance and it has been considered as an important factor by the
businessmen and academicians (Rexhepi, Kurtishi & Bexheti, 2013; Lee et al., 2013). In addition, Bolton and Mattila (2015) also highlighted the importance
of CSR and stated that it has become an important construct of academic interest
and a prominent agenda item in business. Recently, a growing number of
research studies shed light and explain that how the individuals’ views the acts and subsequently reaction of CSR (e.g. Jones, 2010; Rupp et al., 2013) or
irresponsibility by the organization (Barnett, 2014). Although, in literature,
there are relatively few numbers of studies which have focused the individual level of CSR however, this scholarly research contributes to the knowledge
regarding impact of CSR on individuals. More specifically, organizational
involvement in philanthropic activities is a two-way approach; it may also
contribute in term of more dedicated workforce for an organization. It indicates that organizational contribution towards CSR may prove to be a substantial
element for maintaining a motivated, committed and dedicated workforce in the
organization.
16
Pakistan is a developing country having diversity in social and economic
challenges (Memon et al., 2014), and in developing economies, the concept of CSR is still restricted to educational curriculum (Jaseem, 2006; Memon et al.,
2014). Ellin (2006) identified that change in dynamics of economy, scope of
universities and financial benefits of faculty are some of the main factors which
have changed the role of the universities. However, some studies have been carried out to investigate the perceived value of CSR and its relationship with
employees’ attitudes and behaviours in the context of corporations, but hardly a
study is carried out which can examine the impact of faculty members’ perception of CSR. More specifically, organizational commitment, employee
engagement and organizational citizenship behaviours have not ever been
studied in the context of higher education institutions in relationship to
perception of CSR in developing economies like Pakistan.
In literature, the findings of some of previous studies indicated a potential
influence of perceived CSR on employees’ attitudes, but their findings do not illustrate the mechanisms which can explain and predict such relationships
(Bhattacharya et al., 2009; Jones, 2010). In this context, it is important to
investigate and to understand the circumstances in which organizations made
investment on society which could positively impact on employee’s attitude (Bhattacharya et al., 2009; Jones, 2010). Hence, still there is a further need to
carry out research to examine at individual level of analysis to have a profound
insight about how firm’ stakeholders view the CSR initiatives, particularly the
key stakeholders of the company i.e. employees. Similar to the findings of the most of previous studies, it is expected that there would be a positive
relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and organizational
commitment, employee engagement, organizational citizenship behaviour. Apart from theoretical contribution, this study provides practical benefits to the
managers and the academicians such as:
First, this study indicates that the management of higher education institutions should include CSR strategy and focus on CSR policies and
organizational ethics which in turn bring feeling of attachment by the employees
and positive outcomes for the organization. CSR has not only significant impact on financial performance of an organization but also have impact on individuals’
outcomes at workplace. This study examines the intangible impact of CSR on
employees’ work attitude and behaviours rather to evaluate the financial effects
of CSR. Secondly, employees play an important role in the success of an organization; therefore, organizations should not overlook the participation of
the employees in CSR initiatives and employees’ perception of CSR
subsequently influence their workplace outcomes. Thirdly, organizations should emphasize the role of the employees in CSR activities and organization would
17
get more benefits by involving and interacting the employees in CSR activities
which support organizations to achieve competitive advantage.
Theoretically, the aim of this study is to provide a framework for future
researchers in the area of organizational psychology which determines that how
the employees’ perception of CSR affects the employees’ workplace outcomes particularly in the context of higher education sector. More specifically, in this
study, it is proposed that organizational CSR practices have positive impact on
employees’ level of organizational commitment, employee engagement and organizational citizenship behaviour. This relationship is also likely mediated
by the employees’ attitudes (i.e. organizational trust, job satisfaction and
organizational identification). Similar to other organizations by adopting CSR
strategies, higher education institutions may enhance the attachment level of their faculty members which may also improve their performance at their
workplace. Thus, it expected that the proposed framework of this study add
value and broaden the understanding about the relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and employees’ attitudes and behaviours at their workplace.
1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
CSR is a newly construct in Organizational Behaviour (OB) and Human
Resource Management (HRM) research, despite its widespread diffusion and
potential relevance with employees’ perspective (Rupp, Baldwin & Bashshur, 2006). To make more substantial contribution in CSR research, this study
presents a comprehensive framework for the potential relationship between
employees’ perception of CSR, work attitudes and behaviours of employees at their workplace. The main question is whether CSR perceptions of employees
develop positive attitudes and behaviours in employees at their workplace. A
growing number of empirical studies have started to investigate the differential
effect of CSR activities directed towards various stakeholders on the work attitude of employees (Turker, 2009b; Hofman & Newman, 2014). In addition,
a few empirical evidences suggest a potential impact of CSR on favorable
attitudes of employees’ but do not explain the mechanisms to predict such relationships. In this context, psychological response of employees towards
CSR need further examination to understand why, how and under which
conditions organizational investment and contribution in social well-being may
have positive impact on employees’ attitudes (Bhattacharya et al., 2009; Jones, 2010). Similar to other organizations, CSR has become an important concept for
universities because of role of universities in shifting the society (Frederick,
2006; Jongbloed et al., 2008; Nejati et al., 2011). In addition, universities’ leadership role in society enables these institutions to influence the CSR
acceptance and practices through teaching, research and transfer into the society.
18
Thus, it has become important to investigate universities’ engagement in CSR
practices. This is a unique and a novel study in the relevant knowledge domain and findings of the study significantly contribute in the higher education sector
specifically and in other fields in general regarding CSR in the following ways:
First, it examines why CSR perceptions of employees ‘can potentially influence the employees’ attitudes and behaviours. In this regard, the proposed
model tests employees’ CSR’s perceptions and its influence on employees’
various dimensions of outcomes i.e. organizational commitment, employee engagement and organizational citizenship behaviour. In the literature, construct
of organizational commitment, employee engagement and organizational
citizenship behaviour are mostly accepted as a critical psychological process for
strengthening employees’ relationship with their organization (Riketta, 2005; Bhattacharya et al., 2009). Basically, the critical psychology is a perspective in
which employees attempt to apply their psychological understandings in some
more progressive ways at their workplace. Second, on the basis of some of previous empirical evidences, it is predicted that employees’ perceptions about
the organizational CSR initiatives should positively influence their: job
satisfaction level, improve organizational trust and strengthen their
identification which promotes employees’ performance and extra role behaviour in favor of organization (De Roeck & Delobbe, 2012; Story & Neves, 2015). By
examining such issues, this study makes a significant contribution in literature
by giving a clear understanding to enhance organizational commitment,
employee engagement and organizational citizenship behaviour through effective implementation of CSR in the organization. In this study an integrated
framework is to be developed to test how CSR perceptions of employees can
affect employees’ workplace outcomes through three potential mediating mechanisms: organizational trust, job satisfaction and organizational identity.
Social Identity Theory (SIT) and Social Exchange Theory (SET) were adopted
to provide theoretical underpinning to the proposed framework. Therefore, these
theories provide theoretical ground to explain the relationship between faculty members’ perception of CSR and their attitudes and behaviours (Blau, 1964;
Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Hogg & Terry, 2000; Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005).
Third, contingency impact or possible influence is assumed to be examined which explains such circumstances under which CSR more positively enhances
employees’ attitudes and behaviours. It is assumed that employees’ attitudes or
their aspirations about organizational CSR initiatives perform as mediators (i.e.
organizational trust, job satisfaction and organizational identification) between hypothesized relationship i.e. perception of CSR and employees’ workplace
outcome (i.e. organizational commitment, employee engagement and
organizational citizenship behaviour). Fourth, as per our knowledge, this hypothesized framework presents a first ever empirical study which predicts
19
faculty members’ attitudes and behaviours in higher education institutions on
the basis of their perception of CSR.
Moreover, this study may also provide an empirical contribution to the
literature by examining the impact of CSR initiatives on employees’ attitude and
behaviours in contrary to prior studies which usually carried out in developed countries with different set of constructs and mechanisms. In developed
countries, higher education institutions mainly focus on a wider range of CSR
activities such as protection of environment, community development, conservation of resources, and philanthropic giving (Quazi & O’Brien, 2000).
However, in developing countries, higher education institutions focus on CSR
related activities and paying close attention towards employees related issues
including risk prevention and health & safety at workplace, training and development, Equal opportunities for employees, work-life balance, promotion
and fair work relations and volunteering activities for employees. Fifth, apart
from above theoretical and empirical contributions, practically this study contributes significantly by providing guidance to the organizations for the
importance and application of different strategic CSR activities such as work-
life balance, training and development, security & protection at workplace, and
health & safety of employees. Sixth, environment of the higher education institutions could be improved by practicing the findings of the study which
would eventually affect the attachment level of faculty members with the
institutions, enhance employees’ performance and OCB for effective operations,
to accomplish the organizational goals and to secure competitive advantage. The objective of the present study is to address the research questions to have a better
understanding about the relationship through which CSR practices of an
organization enhance employees’ support to their organizational objectives in higher education sector in Pakistan. This study focused the current employees,
who may respond positively or negatively to perceive CSR policies of
corporation (Freeman, 1984; Donaldson & Preston, 1995; Wood & Jones,
1995). More specifically, during the course of study, relationship among following variables of interest is to be examined and research objectives of this
study are:
1. RO1- To examine the impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR
on employees psychological, attitudinal and behavioural outcomes
(e.g. Organizational Identification, Job Satisfaction,
Organizational Trust, Organizational Commitment, Employees Engagement, Organizational Citizenship Behaviour) (H1-H6).
2. RO2- To examine the mediating role of Organizational Trust between employees’ perceptions of CSR and, employees level of
20
Organizational Commitment, Employees Engagement and
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (H7-H9).
3. RO3- To examine the mediating role of Job Satisfaction between
employees’ perceptions of CSR and, employees level of
Organizational Commitment, Employees Engagement and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (H10-H12).
4. RO4- To examine the mediating role of Organizational Identification between employees’ perceptions of CSR and,
employees level of Organizational Commitment, Employees
Engagement and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (H13-
H15).
A significant number of studies focusses that social responsibility should
be recognized as an essential characteristic of the university and it also be imbedded in the operations of the institutions (Parsons, 2014). This perceptive
is often shared that higher education institutions should promote as well
represent a sense of social responsibility through its functions. Although, faculty
members play key role for the success of higher education institutions, therefore, there is need to examine the impact of faculty members’ perception of CSR on
their important dimensions of outcomes (i.e. Organizational Commitment,
Employees Engagement and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour which
ultimately affect the performance of the institutions. Similar to other countries, in Pakistan, the higher education institutions have been involved in different
CSR concerning activities which ultimately may have positive impact on society
in general and faculty members’ attitudes and behaviours in particular. In the domain of CSR literature, a number of studies focusing influence of CSR on
employees’ outcomes have been carried out but no study has so far been carried
out which could examine the impact of faculty members’ perception of CSR on
their outcomes in higher education institutions. Hence, this study may provide a better understanding about the mechanism through which CSR initiatives may
have positive influence on faculty members’ attitudes and behaviours with
meditation influence of organizational trust, job satisfaction and organizational identification which may ultimately provide support to higher education
institutions to achieve their goals.
1.6 OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS
In order to understand the topic of the dissertation, this section explains the key operational terms which relates to review of the literature, research
design, and qualitative inquiry.
21
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). “Corporates social responsibility includes the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary
expectations which the society has of organizations at a given time” (Carroll &
Buchholtz, 2014 p. 32).
Perception of CSR. Perception of CSR can be defined that it is
employees own internal cognition about their organization, this cognition of
employees about organizational involvement in CSR activities serves the reference point of evaluation of organization by the employees.
Organizational Trust. Organizational trust is acknowledged as
employees’ readiness to be vulnerable to the actions of the organization because they assume that the decisions of the organization will be made and implement
in consideration of the interest of employees.
Job Satisfaction. “it is a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting
from the appraisal of one’s job experiences, this experience of job satisfaction
includes all characteristics of the job and workplace environment” (Locke, 1976
p. 1300).
Organizational Identification. Identification is considered as an active
process through which individuals link themselves with elements in a social
scene and these factors of identifications provide support to make sense and these considerations provide support to make decisions (Cheney, 1983).
Organizational Commitment. An employee who is committed with his organization (a) has a firm belief in the goals and objectives of the organization
(b) has a strong desire to attach and keep continue relationship with the
organization (c) willingness to make great contribution to the organization
(Meyer & Allen, 1997).
Employee Engagement. “employee engagement is a condition of
employee who feels involved, committed, passionate, and empowered and demonstrates those feelings in work behaviour” (Mone & London, 2014 p. 4).
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. “it is individual behaviour that
is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the
organization” (Organ, 1988 p. 4).
22
1.7 SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER
In this chapter, the background, motivation and the statement of problem
of this study is presented. In addition, it introduces the research questions and
explained the study’s significance within the domain of CSR literature. In
conclusion, this chapter also offers important terms and expressions which provides in depth contextual understanding of the study’s main variables which
are to be discussed at length in the next chapter. The next chapter also includes
its prominence, assumptions and limitations.
23
CHAPTER 2:
REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE
In the light of the relevant literature, the main objective of this chapter is to discuss the observed variables i.e. Perceived CSR, Organizational Trust (OT),
Job Satisfaction (JS), Organizational Identification (OT), Organizational
Commitment (OC), Employee Engagement (EE) and Organizational
Citizenship Behaviour (OCB). This chapter is bifurcated into two sections. In first section, definitions, theoretical grounds, development and importance of
the observed variables is presented whereas the second section addresses the
development of research & theoretical model and development of hypotheses of
the study.
2.1 EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPT OF CORPORATE SOCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY
Over a period of decades, considerable changes have been noticed in the
development of the concept of CSR. In the beginning, this concept was initiated from a single business-oriented context to multi-dimensional orientation. To
have a clear understanding about the concept of CSR and to recognize its
footprints, there is a need to have a thorough review of the related theories and research which will lead to in depth understanding about the concept. The
theoretical evolution and development of concept of CSR, the notion of social
responsibility demands similar attention and thoughtfulness. This effort may
provide further better understanding and new paths in entirely in a new context (i.e. higher education sector) in CSR research.
2.1.1 Conceptualization of CSR
Since long, the researchers have been making efforts to develop a
consensus to be agreed upon a comprehensive definition of CSR. However, in literature no single and common definition of CSR is available (Carroll, 1999).
The roots of this concept can be tracked back from 1920’s when business
practitioners started to identify the concept of responsible practices in their businesses (Sheldon, 1923). The business practitioners of that era were of the
view that basic norms and ethical practices should be emphasized to be
considered necessary in the business settings. During this period, a spirit was
considered as corporate philanthropy and welfare, because fewer formal ethical
24
business rules and regulations were established. However, the definition of CSR
was first presented in Bowen’s (1953) book titled “Social Responsibilities of the Businessman”. He clarified that “CSR as the obligations of businessmen to
pursue those policies, to make those decisions, or to follow those line of actions
which are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society” (Bowen,
1953 p. 44). In the academic literature, first time Bowen attempted to establish a relationship between corporation and community. He is commonly known the
“Father of CSR” (Carroll, 1979; Preston, 1975; Wartick & Cochran, 1985).
In 1954, Drucker talked about the eight key areas, working on an
organization may be able to accomplish its goals and amongst those CSR was
given the highest importance. Moreover, he further defined that the first
responsibility of a manager is to make profit, the management must think about the effect of organizational policies and actions which may have impact on
society (Joyner & Payne, 2002). Similarly, Lantos (2001) opined that in 1960s,
the discussion and importance of business ethics reached at its exceptional level. As a general category of ethical principles, business ethics have been developed, such
as care, honesty, promises, serving and respecting others rights (Post, Lawrence
& Weber, 2002). Business ethics consist of moral principle, ethical notions, and
value-driven rules equally as CSR. Lantos (2001) further asserted that in mid 1970s, the universities started to teach the concept of CSR and the significance
of ethical behaviour of business augmented which in turn developed the interest
in the topic of social responsibility. He further clarified that the concept of social
responsibility of business came under discussion in 1950s but the concept of business ethics got popularity in 1960s.
Advancing the debate, Carroll (1999) declared that the concept of CSR grew significant attention in 1960s and some scholars such as Davis, Frederick
and McGuire emphasized to establish the meaning of CSR more precisely. In
this context, in an early stage Davis (1960) described about CSR that “some
socially responsible business decisions can be justified by having a good chance of bringing long-run economic gain to the firm, thus paying it back
for its socially responsible outlook” (p. 70). Subsequently, Davis (1967)
emphasized about CSR that “the substance of social responsibility arises for the concern of ethical consequence of one’s acts as they might affect the
interests of others” (p. 46), which defined the concept of business ethics to
CSR (Thomas & Nowak, 2006). Finally, Davis (1960) defined CSR “as
decisions and actions taken for reasons at least partially beyond the firm’s direct economic or technical interest” (p. 70). In this era, Frederick (1960)
also defines that social responsibility finally shows voluntarily public
position towards economic conditions of the society and situation of its human resources to use these resources for broader interest of the society
rather private use for persons and organizations. Similarly, McGuire
25
(1963) asserted that organizations apart from their economic interests and legal
responsibilities must contribute towards the well-being of the society, employees’ education and happiness. There is an agreement that CSR
addresses the organization’s responsibilities towards the society, however,
CSR may be defined in multiple ways and CSR practices may also address
some other concerns, beyond economic interests and legal obligations.
A considerable shift was made in 1962, when Milton Friedman presented
his argument about CSR and stated that the business has the only social responsibility by utilizing its resources and get involved in all activities to
enhance the profit of the firm on complying with government rules, in open and
free competitions without involving in any fraudulent activity. However, in
literature, this view was not considered overwhelmingly and some researcher contested this view by putting their arguments that “Today, many will not be
comfortable with such a profit-oriented statement” (McAleer, 2003 p. 450;
Oketch, 2004 p. 5). Similarly, in the year, 1975, Sethi described about CSR that “social responsibility implies bringing corporate behaviour up to a level, where
it is congruent with the prevailing social norms, values, and expectations of
performance” (p. 70). Supporting the Sethi’ arguments about CSR, Carroll
(1979) asserted that CSR is expectations of the society at a certain point, which relates to organizational ethics, legal obligations, actions based on discretion,
and profitability can be included by their social responsibilities. In literature, this
CSR model has been frequently used to explain the CSR construct and is widely
accepted by the researchers.
In the 1980s, the principles of sustainable development as a major social
expectation has been associated to the CSR practices. This stage was started in 1980 when Jones pronounced that CSR should be voluntary. Jones (1980) stated
that the focus of CSR activities was converted from shareholders to social
groups such as employees, customers, suppliers, and society. He further asserted
that to discharge social responsibility is not an outcome but a process (Jones, 1980). Thus, the perception of CSR denotes that how a corporation is perceived
when it engages in the process of CSR. Primarily, the concept of CSR was based
on the notion of philanthropy which has now changed and stakeholder concept is being focused. In the development of CSR, stakeholder theory (Freeman,
1984) contributed significantly and strengthened the concept of CSR. According
to stakeholder theory, a firm should be responsible for the welfare of all
stakeholders including employees. Hence, Freeman (1984) presented his point of view about CSR that in order to meet the shareholders’ needs, organizations
started to adopt more responsible approach in their corporate strategies which is
an important element for their value adding process. Moreover, Carroll (1999, p. 284) stated that “in 1980s, development of new definitions of CSR initiated a
number of studies on CSR for example corporate social responsiveness,
26
corporate social performance, public policy, business ethics, and stakeholder
theory”. Consequently, in 1980s the scholars were interested to have explored whether implementation of CSR could be profitable for corporations.
Accordingly, Aupperle, Carroll and Hatfield (1985), examined “the link
between CSR and profitability, which in result prioritized four components of
CSR: economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary” (Carroll 1999, p. 287).
In the literature, Wood (1991) made a significant contribution by
developing a new perspective and placed CSR in a wider context which was based on outcomes and performance. He presented a corporate social
performance model which was mostly considered a complete framework, it
includes the principles, processes and outcomes of socially responsible
behaviours.
27
Table 2.1
The Corporate Social Performance Model (CSP)
Principles of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
PRINCIPLES OF
SOCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY
PROCESSES OF
SOCIAL
RESPONSIVENESS
OUTCOMES &
IMPACTS OF
PERFORMANCE
Institutional
Principle: Legitimacy (Origin: Davis, 1973):
businesses that abuse
the power society grants them will lose
that power.
Environmental
Scanning: gather the information needed to
understand and analyze
the firm’s social, political, legal, and
ethical environments
Effects on
people and
rganizations.
Organizational
Principle: Public
Responsibility (Origin: Preston & Post, 1975):
Businesses are
responsible for
outcomes related to their primary and
secondary areas of
involvement with society.
Stakeholder
Management: active and constructive
engagement in
relationships with
stakeholders.
Effects on the natural and
physical
environments.
Individual Principal:
Managerial
Discretion: (Origin:
Carroll, 1979; Wood, 1990) Managers and
other employees are
moral actors and have a
duty to exercise discretion toward
socially responsible,
ethical outcomes.
Issues/Public Affairs
Management: a set of
processes that allow a
company to identify, analyze, and act on the
social or political
issues that may affect it
significantly.
Effects on social
systems and
institutions.
28
Carroll’ Model (1991)
More precisely, principles refer to basic obligations of an organization
which includes social legality (institutional principle), public obligation
(organization principle) and discretion of management (individual principle). Processes are primarily related to organizational capacity to address social
pressures. To assess the corporations’ performance on social issues, outcomes
of corporate behaviours are used to decide whether the social performance of the corporation impacts the social relationship (Wood, 1991). This framework
explained the corporations’ responsibility towards the society, it presents a
comprehensive view of socially responsible performance. Based on Wood’s
model, Carroll designed the pyramid of CSR responsibilities which is represented below:
In this pyramid, he placed the economic responsibilities as the basis of pyramid model and philanthropic practices at the top (Carroll, 1999; Windsor,
2001). Carroll (1999) asserted that as a dynamic part of an organizational
activities, CSR would continue, because it is congruent with public aspirations
and it provides essential foundation to various other theories and concepts such as “CSP, stake holder-theory, business ethics theory, and corporate citizenship”
(Carroll, 1999 p. 288). In addition, CSR’s role in business continued to be
debated in 21st century with the assertion that multinational corporations should exercise more efforts to improve social and environmental conditions on the
globe (Scherer & Smid, 2000; Lee, 2008).
29
In the beginning of 21st century, persistent efforts were made by the
researchers which provided a new insight about CSR. The scholars could be able to extend CSR studies to the global level but due to lack of model, CSR
has been considered in a diverse environment, social culture and different
market settings. Addressing this issue, Quazi and O’Brien (2000) presented a
CSR framework in cross cultural perspective with two general dimensions i.e. extent of corporate responsibility of the firm (narrow-wide) and variety of
outcomes of the firm with respect to its social commitments (cost-profits).
McWilliams and Siegel (2001) declared that CSR is a situation in which organizations go beyond from the compliance of the regulations and they
involve in all such practices which provides benefits to the society. In addition,
McGuire asserted that organizations apart from their economic and legal
responsibilities must contribute towards the well-being of the community and employees’ education and happiness. In this perspective, McGuire (1963),
McWilliams & Siegel (2001) and Smith (2003) further supported that it is
agreed that CSR addresses the obligations of the organization towards the society, however, CSR may be defined in multiple ways and CSR practices
may also address some other concerns, beyond economic interests and legal
obligations.
Apart from above illustrated progresses in evolution of CSR, some
significant International developments occurred which also influenced CSR’s
evolution including the Minister’s appointment in British government to
corporate social responsibility; Green paper’s publication and release by the European Commission titled “Promoting a European Framework for Corporate
Social Responsibility”; release a report on Global Compact by the United
Nations addressing the issues pertaining to human rights, labor practices and the global environment (Gail & Nowak, 2006; Lee, 2008). In 2007, Hopkins
contributed in CSR literature and outlined the CSR that it relates to treatment
of stakeholders (internal and external) in a civilized society in a responsible
manner, social responsibility demands better living standards for internal and external stakeholders with the profitability of the firm. Social obligations of a
firm include its economic and environmental responsibilities. In addition, Nord
and Fuller (2009) also conclude that scholars and writers both have dominant paradigm in the development of CSR literature, however, there is need to have
an alternative model which can provide a strategic view of CSR. They
suggested that to understand and align the organization with current and
dynamic environments, employees focused perspective is gaining attention in the recent years. In this context, Moura-Leite and Padgett (2011) suggested
that starting from the 21st century, the attention of CSR studies has shifted into
integration of CSR practices towards corporate strategies which further moved from macro-social level to corporation level.
30
Hopkins (2007) concluded that in 1950s, the concept of CSR developed
and the CSR definitions has also been changed according to the different approaches of CSR. These CSR approaches were related to: (i) business
obligations towards society to fulfil the community values and objectives
(Bowen, 1953); (ii) corporations’ public posture towards economic and human
resources of the society (Frederick, 1960); (iii) maximization of profit (Friedman, 1962); (iv) effects of actions and decisions of the corporation on the
societal system of the community (Davis & Blomstrom, 1966); (v) corporate
behaviour of an organization in accordance with values, social norms and performance expectations (Sethi, 1975); (vi) economic, legal, ethical and
philanthropic needs of the society (Carroll, 1979); (vii) responsibility to
establish groups in the community (Jones, 1980); (viii) interactions of business
and community (wood, 1991); (x) CSR is related with the treatment of the stakeholders in a responsible and ethical manner by the company (Hopkins,
2007); (xi) strategic perspective of CSR to understand and to align the
organization with current and dynamic environments (Nord & Fuller, 2009). To have a glance, following table summarizes different academic research
definitions of CSR presented by different scholars.
Table 2.2
Summary of Evolution of Academic Research Definition of CSR
Authors CSR definition
Bowen (1953) “CSR is the responsibility of businessmen to follow those policies, practices and decisions, or to follow
those guidelines which are desirable in the society in
terms of the values and objectives” (p. 44).
Frederick (1960) Social responsibility finally shows voluntarily public
position towards economic conditions of the society and situation of its human resources to use these
resources for broader interest of the society rather
private use for persons and organizations.
Friedman (1962) Business have the only social responsibility by
utilizing its resources and get involved in all activities to enhance the profit of the firm on complying with
government rules, in open and free competitions
without involving in any fraudulent activity.
Davis and
Blomstrom (1966)
Social obligation is basically an individual’s
responsibility to be aware about the consequences of his actions and decisions on the overall social system.
31
Authors CSR definition
Sethi (1975) Social obligation indicates to bring corporate behaviour of an organization in accordance with
existing social norms, ethics and performance
expectations.
Carroll (1979) Corporate Social responsibility refers to expectations
of the society at a certain point, which relates to organizational ethics, legal obligations, actions based
on discretion, and profitability can be included by
their social responsibilities.
Jones (1980) Social responsibility is the concept in which
organizations have the responsibility to establish groups other than its stockholders and in addition to
that suggested by law and union contract in the
community.
Wood (1991) The basic concept is that society have the expectations
from the businesses to perform in a responsible manner for the benefit of both businesses & society,
both are intertwined and not separate entities.
Quazi and O’Brien
(2000)
Presented a CSR framework in cross culture
perspective with two general dimensions i.e. extent
of responsibility of the corporation (narrow-wide) and variety of results of corporation’ social
commitments (cost-profits).
Hopkins (2007) CSR relates to treatment of stakeholders in a civilized
society in a responsible manner, social responsibility
demands better living standards for both internal and external stakeholders with the profitability of the firm.
Nord and Fuller
(2009)
There is need to have an alternative model which can
provide alternative for strategic view of CSR to
understand and to align the organization with current
and dynamic environments.
Note: Author’s work
32
After comprehensive view of the available literature on the concept of
CSR, the definition presented in the Business Dictionary seems appropriate which covers the broad range of CSR concept, it identifies that CSR is “a
company's sense of responsibility towards the community and environment (both
ecological and social) in which it operates”.
2.1.2 The Business Imperative Debate and Corporate Social Responsibility
In the 1950s, CSR practices appeared after the Supreme Court’s decision
which empowered the corporations to identify all such philanthropic activities
and record in their financial statements which could be directly benefited to the
society. In the decade of 1970s, Milton Friedman, the well-known economist was one of the most candid challengers who strongly opposed the growing
attention of the topic of CSR. He advocated that the purpose of CSR programs
is to earn profit, therefore, goal to implement the CSR programs in a firm is to improve the firms’ performance, so management must implement CSR
programs. According to Friedman (1962) “there is one and only one social
responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage in activities to
increase its profits” (p. 98). In mid 1990s, considerable changes took place in business settings such as shifting to knowledge and service based industries and
new employment opportunities and corporate interests have been renewed to
integrate CSR in business related policies (Greenfield, 2005; Porter & Kramer,
2006; Maxfield, 2008). In the 21st century, the debate continued about the role of CSR with the assertion that multinational corporations need to exert more
efforts to improve environmental and social conditions around the globe. Some
scholars described that multinational companies such as Nike, Nestle, and Shell Oil have initiated CSR practices to face unfavorable public relations and press
related to non-compliance of international environment and labor standards
(Knight, 2002; Guarnieri & Kao, 2007).
However, some scholars have the opinion that social responsibility diverts
the focus of the business from earning of profitability which as a whole benefits
the society (Zajac & Westphal, 2004; Henderson, 2004). In comparison to Friedman, Drucker (1997) suggested that profit maximization theory is
worthless and it could be harmful to the community by asserting that “profit is
not the explanation, cause, or rationale of business behaviour and business
decisions, but rather the test of their validity” (Drucker, 2001). Thus, profit making is not an ultimate object, it is just required outcomes to make sure that
business remain continue to achieve its substantive goal. Similarly, some other
scholars highlighted that business is one of many social means and it must accept its responsibility which relates to its impact on society during pursuance of its
primary object (Pinkston & Carroll, 1996; Kreps, 2003; Guarnieri & Kao, 2007).
33
Therefore, CSR has become an important factor for corporations and it
considered as an appropriate strategy to achieve public trust and management of the corporation may organize the CSR initiatives in way to improve their
credibility.
2.1.3 Employees’ Perceptions of CSR and its Effects on Their Outcomes
A number of theoretical and empirical evidences are available which show that corporation’s social responsibility has importance to stakeholders
including consumers, shareholders and employees. Moreover, sufficient
literature is available on organizational CSR activities and its performance
(Davidson & Worrell, 1988; Aupperle, Carroll & Hatfield, 1985; McGuire, Sundgren & Schnrrweis, 1988; Waddock & Graves, 1997; Maignan, Ferrell &
Hult, 1999). Thus, it is obvious that CSR has borne value addition and it also
reflects that CSR activities may have impact on all three pillars (profit, people, and planet). Accordingly, such a thoughtful view about CSR practices could
assist organizations for accomplishment of organizational obligations to all
stakeholders including employees in a better way. However, an early research
focused on employees’ micro-level of CSR which was designed to understand the views of potential employees. Therefore, a number of empirical evidences
have examined and reached the similar conclusion that perception of potential
employees to organizational attractiveness and their intentions for job search are
influenced on the basis of their knowledge about the concerned organizations’ CSR practices (Albinger & Freeman, 2000; Rupp et al., 2013b; Gully et al.,
2013; Tsai et al., 2014).
In addition, current employees’ engagement in CSR activities experiences
a number of positive attitudes (Kim et al., 2010; Hofman & Newman, 2014). In
2010, Jones carried out a study and concluded that organizational participation
in CSR activities is associated to a strong intention to be attached with the firm. However, not in all findings of the studies which examined the impact of
perceived CSR has shown a uniform positive effect on employees’ attitudes and
behaviours. Similarly, De Roeck et al. (2014) concluded that employees’ perceptions towards organizational
CSR activities not only influenced by CSR practices related to external
stakeholders but also it has also influenced by the treatment that how the internal
stakeholders are being treated by the organizations. More specifically, this result shows that employees’ perceptions of CSR develop on the basis of degree of
social responsibility of a corporation’ internal and external CSR practices.
During the past decade, the research studies on CSR have increased and
some scholars suggested that impact of organizational related CSR activities
34
on employees’ perception and its effects on employees’ attitude and behaviours
has not been examined (Kim et al., 2010). Some scholars have viewed that employees’ perception of CSR generates psychological, attitudinal and
behavioural reactions which may be useful for the organizations (Rupp et al.,
2006). If employees perceive that their organization cares for social causes and
employees are involved in all such activities, resultantly they may be inclined towards motivation which may enhance their work performance. Bhattacharya
et al. (2008) carried out a study and it was supported; when participant’s
employer was involved in supporting social cause, in response employees felt motivated, encouraged to work hard and their job satisfaction level was found
high. Lee et al. (2012) identified that CSR may influence the employees’ attitude
about their organization by developing a perception that their organization is an
appropriate workplace.
Research studies carried out by Rupp et al., (2006), Hickman et al.,
(2005), Bhattacharya et al., (2008) concluded significant positive influence of employees’ perception of CSR on their outcomes. However, there is need to
undertake further research to examine the factors which may develop and
generate the employees’ perceptions which may have influence on their attitudes
and behaviours. The present study builds its argument on the basis of previous work which examined the effects of employees’ perception of CSR on their
outcomes at workplace (Bhattacharya et al., 2008; Kim et al., 2010; Jones, 2010;
Lee et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2013). The notion of CSR is normally related to
corporations and business firms. It has been considered since long time, that the goal of higher education institutions or universities is not making profit such as
the corporations. Rossi (2014) suggested that similar to business organizations,
universities are passing through fundamental changes and now students are considered as their customers. He further suggested that universities are
behaving like big businesses and this cultural shift has turned the perspective to
view the university as a private identity rather than a public identity. This shift
change in universities’ goal and objectives has taken place due to change in economy, size of the class, scope of the universities and salaries of the faculty,
these are the main factors which have changed the entire philosophy behind the
universities (Ellin, 2006). In order to meet financial requirements, mostly universities are adopting such policies and strategies through which they can
attract students, introducing new academic programs, selling research projects,
which reflects their corporate approach. The economy of Pakistan is considered
in developing nations which has different socioeconomic challenges (Memon et al., 2014), such as poverty, shortage of pure drinking water, shortage of
production of energy, lack of availability of educational and health facilities
particularly in rural areas. Hence, to retain talented and motivated workforce in organizations, understanding of CSR and its impact on employees’ perceptions
has become important because it can be utilized as a strategic and useful tool in
35
the institutions of higher learning. Although, some research studies have been
conducted on importance of perception of CSR and its relationship with employees’ attitudes and behaviours, but a few studies have examined effects of
perception of CSR in higher education sector (Nadeem & Kakakhel, 2012).
More specifically, organizational commitment, employee engagement and
organizational citizenship behaviour are hardly investigated constructs in higher education sector with intervening role of organizational trust, job satisfaction
and organizational identification with relationship perception of CSR in
developing economies like Pakistan. Through this study, an attempt is made to fill this research gap in the context of employees of higher education institutions
in Pakistan. Thus, the aim of this research study is to examine the impact of
faculty members’ perceptions of CSR activities in Pakistani universities on
faculty members’ level of organizational commitment, employee engagement and organizational citizenship behaviours.
2.1.4 The Shifting of Role of Universities - CSR and Universities
In order to fulfil the educational research and development needs of the
society universities have been engaged in performing specific functions as per the mandate given by the society. However, recent developments have
implicated broad changes in the role of the universities therefore, to come up
with the societal needs, universities have to be transformed to fulfil the
requirements of the society in the present time. Enders (2004), identify that in the past universities “have performed basic functions which result from the
particular combination of cultural and ideological, social and economic,
education and scientific roles that have been assigned to them” (p. 362).
In this context, Benneworth and Jongbloed (2010) argued that these
developments have influenced on social agreement between higher education
institutions (HEIs) and the society. In addition, Benneworth and Jongbloed (2010) also described that this discourse on the role of universities’ in society
has moved towards market oriented position which emphasis on
commercialization and re-defining of responsibilities of the university in broader context of stakeholders. Considering the current developments in the
21st century, it is safely said that the role of universities in society is changing.
In fact, in the modern era, the role of the universities has become more important
because universities are the most important academic and educational institutions. In the global world, scientists and faculty members are considered
the heart of the universities, their intelligence, knowledge and energies are the
main factors which differentiate them from their competitors. Moreover, according to some scholars “educational institutions have a special place in the
society they provide services related to the transfer of knowledge to their
36
customers– individuals, public, private organizations and the society in general”
(Gourova, Todorova & Gourov, 2009 p. 26).
The university’s social responsibility embodies its superstructure about
statutory responsibilities, in which the university managers and their staff
perform in a different way to not only fulfill the financial and social objectives of the university but they also provide facilitation to the stakeholders to meet
their expectations and objectives (including employees). Accordingly,
universities are recognizing their responsibilities and playing their role in national and international education systems, considering the interest of all
stakeholders, managing the multiple effects of their activities such as economic,
social and environmental, joining the business in community to address the
social needs. The aim of the social responsibility in a university is to support development of environment in a university, which will consequently develop
interest in its services which will reflect well on its economy. In case of
universities, the importance of the conception of social responsibility is because of their specific institutional characteristics and mission, distinctive in nature as
compare to other economic entities.
In this perspective, Nejati et al. (2011) carried out a study on top ten world universities in UK and examined their websites to understand how these
universities are involved in CSR practices. Findings of this study revealed that
all universities are emphasizing on issues like human rights, organizational
governance, environment, labour practices, fair workplace practices etc. In short, it can be believed that due to changing the role of universities in the
society after their traditional role of teaching, research and transfer of
knowledge “a greater weight is placed upon universities” commitment to community service in terms of providing training and research, investigation
and advice, as well as services as consultancies, technology transfer, lifelong
learning and continuing education” (Jongbloed et al., 2008, p. 312). Similarly,
Kaul and Smith (2012) emphasized the role of university in understanding and communicating CSR concept among students, employees and business leaders.
The above deliberated developments indicate, the success of universities is
evaluated by their key stakeholders i.e. international and local levels of scientific community (i.e. employees), industry, public sector and the public (Benneworth
& Jongbloed, 2010). In general perspective, key university stakeholders may
include all such entities and individuals who can affect the universities success
and future existence significantly which includes employees.
Although, in a university, the primary stakeholders are the students,
prospective students, the employees (faculty and non-faculty), regulatory bodies like higher education commission, funding agencies, associated industry,
owners, investors and community at large. Therefore, views of the employees
37
especially faculty members may be proactively listen and share information on
the status of the organization’s achievement of academic objectives. This may be done in different ways, hence, it has become important to ascertain and
examine such factors which can influence the attitudes and behaviours of faculty
members at their workplace. Idowu (2008) emphasized that universities having
central position to affect the acceptance and practice of CSR in society through their teaching and research activities. Researchers and scholars identified that
considerable research on CSR has focused in private business perspective
(Aguinis & Glavas, 2012; Smith, 2003). Thus, examining the involvement of universities employees in CSR practices is seemed important for society in
broader perspective.
2.2 REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE
In the literature, research evidences reveal that CSR is beneficial to organizations in many ways: it enhances the employee attitude and behaviour,
improves the productivity and eventually contributes the corporation’s
profitability. Yet, different empirical studies have so far been able to establish
association between perceptions of corporate social responsibility and financial performance of organizations (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Margolis & Walsh,
2003). Not many studies have been carried out to spotlight on employees'
discernment to CSR which identifies with fundamental stakeholder group which
is important for organizational performance and long term existence (Turker, 2009a; Jones, 2010). To explore the impact of perception of CSR on employees’
attitudes and behaviours, limited research has been carried out particularly in
two respects (Peterson, 2004; Brammer, Millington & Rayton, 2007; Turker, 2009a). Firstly, impact of CSR activities centered to employees’ attitudes i.e.
organizational commitment whereas other important employee’s outcomes
ignored like job satisfaction and turnover of employees (Peterson, 2004).
Secondly, just constrained components of external CSR have been focused in these studies without extending consideration towards internal CSR (Maignan
& Ferrell, 2001; Cornelius et al., 2008).
However, there is need to further explore the impact of employee’s
perceptions of CSR which underlying the psychological mechanism to drive
employees’ outcomes (Bhattacharya et al., 2009; Jones, 2010). Blau (1964)
indicated that individuals are engaged in exchange relations with other individuals in view of their expected benefits and loss. Thus, employees
contribute towards their organization in return to organizational support which
is provided in various forms like economic and socio-emotional (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). Therefore, one might expect that employees’ perception
38
towards organizational commitment to corporate social responsibility may
reciprocate with positive outcomes.
2.2.1 Theoretical Support of Employees’ Perceptions of CSR
As described by Freeman (1984), CSR is a concept which is based on a
phenomenon that corporations should be responsible for all its stakeholders in
their business processes for the well-being of the society. This responsibility is considered as ongoing apart from traditional obligations by fulfilling the legal
requirements and taking voluntary steps which provides overall positive impact
on the society. Guarnieri and Kao (2007) suggested that World Business Council
for Sustainable Development (2000) defined that “CSR is commitment by the business to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while
improving the quality of life of employees and their families and the society at
large” (p. 35). In OB literature, researchers have conducted a number of studies to view the CSR from different perspectives in order to understand the
effectiveness of CSR on different stakeholders including employees.
In order to understand why CSR affects stakeholders particularly employees need to further examine the theoretical foundation that why CSR
attracts different stakeholders. In last two decades, different theories have been
presumed to analyze that why CSR attract to individuals. Some of the theories
are explained below which already used to empirically test the proposed causal mechanisms. Therefore, perception of CSR is grounded on different theories
presented by various theorists and most of the frequently used theories including
signaling theory, organizational identification theory, cognitive categorization theory, relationship management theory, engagement theory, theory of justice,
social exchange theory and social identity theory. However, in present study, in
order to test suggested causal mechanism and to provide theoretical
underpinning, social exchange theory and social identity theory have been used. Both the theories have been debated in the following section.
Social Exchange Theory (SET) amalgamates finances, psychology and sociology to suggest that individuals participate in various types of exchange
relations on the basis of their evaluations of possible loss and benefit. Blau
(1964) states that exchange relationship with an individual or group, it is likely
that positive feelings are developed toward the second party which lead to emotional state of trust, commitment and common benefits. In addition, few
researchers also suggested two types of exchange relations in firms: economic
and social (Homans, 1958; Gouldner, 1960; Blau, 1964; Settoon et al., 1996). Economic exchange between the employees the firms is normally open and
contractual on certain terms and conditions with monetary rewards. However,
39
the social exchange has unclear obligations which have indirect exchange and
apprehensions (Blau, 1964; Deckop et al., 2003). Discretionary actions and extra role behaviours have direct relationship with social exchange (Organ, 1988). If
employees feel happy with their organization, it is likely they extend their
support as a mutual social exchange. Sometime employee may engage to
provide support in extra role behaviour on the basis of reciprocity (Moorman, 1993; Tepper & Taylor, 2003). The reason for positive response from employees
to firms’ voluntarily activities is that some employees respond positively in
return to the benefits they receive from the voluntarily programs.
In exchange relationship, employees who feel that they are benefitted by
the employer’s’ discretionary and benevolent action they normally feel obliged
and reciprocate. Cropanzano and Mitchell, (2005) indicate that relationship exchange take place on the basis of mutual trust and expectations which benefits
to both the parties over the time. Some research evidences show that employees
reciprocate the employers’ discretionary and voluntary activities which benefit them such as the activities which genuinely serve the purpose of welfare of the
employees (Eisenberger et al., 2001). However, employees differ in their
exchange ideologies or the extent they believe to reciprocate “that work effort
should depend on treatment by the organization” (Eisenberger et al., 1986, p. 503). In organizational context, a balanced exchanged process between firm and
employee likely leads to social exchange on long term basis which are
established on the basis of trust.
In literature, most of the research studies were grounded on social
exchange theory which examined and analyzed the social exchange by adopting
variables such as organizational identification, organizational trust and affective organizational commitment. In case of organization’s participation in CSR
activities, the main impact of organizational engagement is that it is perceived
as a socially responsible and trustworthy organization in the cognition of its
employees which lead towards enhanced employee’ identification, strong attachment and organizational commitment (Farooq et al., 2013). Findings of
some of previous studies also indicated that when firm provide economic
opportunities, social and physiological resources, the employees are expectedly respond with positive attitudes including organizational commitment (Al-bdour
et al., 2010; Blau, 1964). This theory also suggests that employees who believe
that they are benefitted from the voluntarily programs of the organization and
they value to these programs, they would feel obligated and they could reciprocate through such behaviours which can be benefitted to the firm.
However, the extra role behaviours from employees are highly voluntarily or
discretionary which provide an effective way to reciprocate (Organ, 1988).
40
More specifically, if the employees feel happy during their course of work
in their organization, it is likely they support their organization as a reciprocal social exchange process. Some researchers described that the employees
reciprocate the benefits which they receive from their firm, for example, when
their implicit promises are fulfilled by their organizations (Coyle- Shapiro,
Jacqueline & Neuman, 2004). For instance, employees may even contribute and support their organizations in their extra role behaviours in response to the
behaviour which they receive from their organizations (Organ, 1990). In
literature, some of the previous studies have also emphasized for the use of social exchange theory (SET) to explain and clarify the reciprocal relationship
between organizational CSR initiatives and employees’ attitudes and behaviours
(Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005; Loi, Hang-yue, & Foley, 2006). Hence, on the
basis of SET, a significant association between organizational CSR practices and employees’ attitudes and behaviours is anticipated.
Tajfel and Turner (1985) presented the Social Identity Theory (SIT), according to this theory, individuals categories or identify themselves as a
member of a specific class, group, political party or country and this particular
identification increases one’s self-esteem. Ashforth & Mael (1989), also argued
that this theory suggest that individuals made distinctive classifications or categorizations of themselves with others, and afterwards they use it to develop
and maintain their classification or their self- conceptualization. This self-
categorization of individuals permits them to distinguish and delimit other
individuals and to find themselves in social environment in society. Hogg (2011) describes that this theory explains the mechanism through which an individual
decides where he/she belongs to in comparison to members of in-group and out-
groups. It explains the impact of individual perception, group distinctiveness and social categorization on individuals’ attitudes and behaviours (Cinnirella,
1998). Further, Tajfel introduced self-conceptualization in intergroup
perspective to see how a person defines and creates his/her place which he/she
owned in the society, further the addition of social categorization element makes this theory more relevant (Hogg, 2001).
Although, organizations practicing in CSR activities are perceived as highly esteemed by their employees and they feel proud to work with socially
responsible organization which contributes for the well-being of the society.
Employees’ loyalty towards socially responsible organization increases which
develops social identity among the employees. Hence, the relationship between perceived CSR and identification is considered significant because the
employees may likely identify themselves with the firms which are involved in
socially responsible practices. The emotionally attached employees are most likely support their organizations to achieve its objectives concerning to CSR.
Although, the socially responsible practices of an organization are normally
41
open organizational practices which generates emotions of attachment and
affection among the public towards the organization and such emotions also generates the sense of pride among the employees (Maignan et al., 1999). This
theory was also applied in a study conducted by Glavas and Godwin (2013) and
examined the influence of CSR on employees’ identification. Organizations
having good reputation enhances employees’ self-esteem (Bashir, Hassan & Cheema, 2012) which in response create feelings of attachment or identification
with the organization. Lee et al. (2012) asserted that organizational CSR
practices may affect employees’ attitude towards the firm which may also create perception that the firm is good working place. In this study, employees as
individuals attain positive social identity because their perceptions of CSR
which may lead them to positive response to CSR practices of the organization
(O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986; Rodrigo & Arenas, 2008). Hence, individuals’ position themselves and other individuals into in groups or out groups, which as
a result expect perceptions about individuals’ attitudes and behaviours.
2.2.1.1 Perception of CSR: Theoretical Perspective
The following section covers the details about perception of CSR, in addition, it also discusses the theories and importance and which provide further
support to the concept of employees’ perceptions of CSR.
2.2.1.2 The Concept of Employees’ Perceptions of CSR
Carroll presented an early conceptualization and definition of CSR as “the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society has of
organizations at a given point in time” (1979, p. 500). Basically, the definition
presented by Carroll (1979) is the combination of different responsibilities which the firm has towards society. Though, Carroll’s definition of CSR is
mostly used conceptualization of CSR however, some other scholars have also
re-assessed CSR from their own perspective such as (Davis, 1973; Jones, 1980;
Wood, 1991; McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Waddock, 2004; Peloza, 2009).
CSR is a construct which has been studied across many areas as a field of
research and practice. Recently, Islam et al. (2016) concluded in their study that CSR has behavioural and psychological effect on employees’ outcome.
However, this is the question whether participation in CSR initiatives which
enhances need satisfaction, or mere something offered by the presence of CSR
not actual participation. Perception of CSR represents the individual cognition of the importance of CSR compliance and employees’ perception of CSR as part
of their cognitive processes may have different view point about their
organizational CSR programs. Further, both science and practice of CSR, there is need to consider the psychological impact of carrying out CSR activities by
employer from employees’ perspective. The employees’ perception of CSR is
42
based on the results of employees’ day to day operations and dealing on
workplace. Employees execute the socially responsible activities and witness all such activities which are performed inside the organization. Employees being
members of the organization observe, participate, contribute and respond to their
firms’ position on social responsibility.
Thus, in a firm, perception of CSR indicates the personal evaluation and
interpretation of organizations’ CSR practices at the individual level, however,
actual CSR refers to the CSR practices by a business firm. Similarly, some scholars define that perception of CSR distinguished from external perspective
of CSR which includes organizational image, organizational reputation etc.,
which are evaluated by the community outside the organization (Brammer,
Millington & Rayton, 2007). Therefore, employees’ perception of CSR can be defined that it is actually employees’ own internal cognition about their
organization, this cognition of employees about organizational involvement in
CSR activities serves the reference point of evaluation of organization by the employees. Moreover, Breckler (1984) and Crites et al. (1994) suggested that
the development of employees’ attitudes and behaviours is suggested to derive
from such cognition process. In addition, De Roeck et al. (2014) also suggested
that employee’ perception of CSR not only include perception of external CSR but also consider that how the firm look after its employees as internal
stakeholders.
2.2.2 Importance of Employees’ Perceptions of CSR
Some researchers suggested that employees, as a key stakeholder’ of an
organization are interested to contribute, evaluate and to respond to their organization’ CSR programs (Rupp et al., 2006). In addition, Aguinis and
Glavas, (2012) also asserted that employees’ responses are primarily based on
employees’ perceptions of CSR activities. Similarly, Rupp et al. (2013) emphasized on importance of employees’ perceptions of CSR that “although
employees’ perceptions of CSR may have more direct and strong impact on
employees’ subsequent reactions that actual organization’ behaviours towards
CSR activities which the employees may or may not be aware” (p. 897). In the literature, most of the previous studies were conducted to focus how potential
employees view the prospective employers. Findings of these studies indicated
positive perceptions of corporations’ CSR programs which enhance employees’
attraction towards the corporation (Albinger & Freeman, 2000; Sen et al., 2006; Tsai et al., 2014). However, it can be possible that a firms’ CSR programs
may be considered completed on fulfillment of set objectives but same may
not be accepted by the employees. Ellis (2009) describe the same situation that employees may view the situation as a waste of resources and other
43
may consider these initiatives to match their personal values. Hence, in this
study, CSR is examined as a psychological and perceptual phenomenon and a subjective measure is used to gauge the employees’ perceptions of CSR rather
than actual organizational CSR programs.
Theories based on organizational behaviour have suggested that CSR perception of employees effect their attitudes and behaviours and those
employees measure their actions towards CSR program based on essential
ethical authority of “normative treatment” (Folger, Cropanzano & Goldman, 2005). Extending the normative treatment theory in the context of CSR suggests
that if an employee’ perception is developed that his organization does not
behave in socially responsible way (such as do not care the environment; believe
on victimization and unfair treatment) he will likely exhibit the perceive that his firm is practicing high order of social responsible programs both negative
attitude and behaviour at his workplace. On the other hand, if an employee
inside and outside the organization, he has likely demonstrated positive attitudes towards the organization and contribute more effectively towards his/her
organization (Rupp et al., 2006; Hansen et al., 2011). In addition, some
researchers also suggested that normally employees’ responses are based on
employees’ perception of CSR activities which may be inaccurate if the organization do not behave socially as it perceives by the employees (Aguinis
& Glavas, 2012; Glavas & Godwin, 2013). However, in an organization, CSR
activities towards employees might be offered in different ways such as
flexibility in workplace, reasonable financial rewards, career growth opportunities and fair treatment (Turker, 2009a). If employees perceived that
their organization is meeting their needs and engaged in activities for the welfare
of employees. It is more likely that the level organizational attachment or identification is developed among the employees towards their organization.
However, some scholars concluded that employees’ perception of CSR
which may be positive or negative can influence the employees’ attitudes and behaviours (Turban & Greening, 1997; Rupp et al., 2006). In addition,
Lefkowitz (2013) suggested that in the field of organizational psychology, there
is still need to consider and examine how CSR influence the employees’ attitudes and behaviours towards organization. Therefore, it has been
established and well known phenomenon that CSR can affect the employees’
relationships at their workplace (Glavas & Piderit, 2009). Hence, relatively a
fewer number of research studies contributes to the literature to focus on individual level CSR, empirical evidences with less than 4% of the CSR
literature investigated on employees as unit of analysis (Aguinis & Glavas,
2012). Therefore, this dearth of research in CSR literature warrants further examination of the impact of perceived CSR on employees’ attitudes and
behaviours through which they can assess how employees might expect to be
44
treated in their organization. Therefore, in this study, CSR as a psychological
and perceptual phenomenon has been considered to further examine its impact on employees’ attitudes and behaviours at their workplace.
2.3 ORGANIZATIONAL TRUST (OT)
Scholars and researchers recognized the construct of organizational trust as
an important factor for maintaining relationship on long term basis (Dwyer et al., 1987; Morgan & Hunt, 1994; Berry, 1995). In perspective of organizational
behaviour, organizational trust is acknowledged as employees’ readiness to face
the risk and become vulnerable to the actions of the organization because they
assume that the decisions of the organization will be made and implement in consideration of the interest of employees. Some scholars suggested that the
construct of organizational trust is the key factor to promote cooperation in
organization which contribute to enhance behavioural performance outcomes (Kramer, 1999; Dirks & Ferrin, 2001) In the literature, some empirical evidences
supported that the construction of organizational trust not only influences the
relationship outcomes (e.g. organizational commitment), but it also influences the
relationship process i.e. cognitive process (Moorman et al., 1992).
2.3.1 Definitions of Organizational Trust
Schoorman et al. (2007) describes that organizational trust means trust in
an organization which involves willingness of employees to be vulnerable to the
organizations’ policies or actions. Similarly, Mayer et al. (1995) defines that “trust as one’s willingness to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based
on the expectation that the other party will perform a particular action important
to the trustor irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party” (p.
712). Dhanesh (2014) also described that trust shows the level of confidence which the concerning parties have in each other and their readiness to expose
themselves. Bhattacharya et al. (1998) also presented a definition of trust and
stated that as the “expectancy of positive (or non-negative) outcomes that one can receive based on the expected action of another party in an interaction
characterized by uncertainty” (p. 462). The construct of trust can be defined that
it is trustee’s ability relates to the trustor’s confidence on the capabilities of the
trustee’s and know-how in a specific field which ensures that trustee will be able to get desired and expected outcomes. Trustee’s integrity normally corresponds
to the confidence of the trustor’s in trustee’s honesty, fairness, sincerity and
consistency. Similarly, Mayer et al. (1995) and Bhattacharya et al. (2009) described that trustee’s benevolence associated to confidence of the trustor’s
that the trustee’s actions are not influenced by self-centered or personal motives.
45
2.3.2 Development of Construct of Organizational Trust
The construct of trust has a long history and all-encompassing application
in the study of OB. In the literature, it appears that organizational trust is a useful variable which can act as a social glue in long-term relationships among
organizations and employees which establish employee’s long term connections
with their organization. Previous empirical evidences indicate that construct of organizational trust globally recognized variables (e.g. organizational
commitment, work engagement, and intention to leave) which ultimately impact
the performance of the organization (Tan & Tan, 2000; Chughtai & Buckley,
2007). However, three dimensions of concept of trust have been identified at across level and different scholars presented their viewpoints in this context.
Rousseau et al. (1998) stated that “trust in a firm at the individual level refers to a psychological state involving readiness to accept vulnerability based
on positive expectations of an organization, and trust in an organization at the
group or team level refers towards a shared emotional state among group or team
members involving readiness to accept vulnerability on the basis of positive hopes of a firm” (p. 395). The organizational level of trust in an organization
refers a common psychological state among the members of an organization
involving readiness to receive vulnerability on the basis of positive expectations
of a firm. In organizational context, the level of trust is normally revealed by capacity of an organization to establish and maintain strong relationships with
organization’s stakeholders which in turn enhance inter and intra-organizational
cooperation and performance (Colquitt et al., 2007). In this perspective, trust can be regarded as stakeholders’ (e.g. employees) readiness to place
himself/herself to be vulnerable to actions of the firm because it assumes on their
part that the firm will decide and act on considering their interests and well-
being. However, some scholars viewed and explained the association between satisfaction and trust that “satisfaction influences trust, and not otherwise”
(Garbarino & Johnson, 1999; Bloemer & Odekerken-Schröder, 2002; Santos &
Rossi, 2002; Chen & Dhillon, 2003; Baptista, 2005; Veiga et al., 2014b).
2.3.3 Importance of Organizational Trust
For long-term stability of the corporation and employees’ welfare, the
element of trust between organization and their employees is important. In
literature, some empirical evidences show that organizational trust also has influence on international job constructs such as work engagement,
organizational commitment and intention to leave which have considerable
46
impact on entire organization (Tan & Tan, 2000; Chughtai & Buckley, 2007).
Similarly, highlighting the importance of trust, Tan and Tan (2000) signify that trust is the factor which may strongly affects employees’ behaviour. Although,
trust in an organization refers individual’s expectations and confidence towards
the actions of their organizations. More specifically, it reveals to the trustor’s
evaluation credibility of the exchange party, which also consists of the trustee’s integrity, benevolence and capability (Morgan & Hunt, 1994; Mayer et al., 1995;
Bhattacharya et al., 2009).
Recognizing the importance of the construct of trust, some researchers
suggested that trust has been acknowledged as an important element for
maintaining a long-term and successful relationship (Dwyer et al., 1987;
Morgan & Hunt, 1994; Berry, 1995). Supporting this view point, Chughtai and Buckley (2007) asserted that in organizational perspective, if the employees’
have trust in their organization then the organization can take competent
decisions, which in future can affect the feelings of the employees which also positively affect their willingness for their work engagement. Owing of the
factor of the organizational trust, it assumes that organization will discharge its
responsibilities as per its promise. If the employees’ feel that their organization
is unable to deliver as per its promise then it damages the organizational trust, which may lead towards disengagement of employees (Robinson, 1996).
A study conducted by Dhanesh (2014) showed that ethical engagement of
employees in organizations help to stimulate the trust of employees in their organizations. More recently, findings of a study conducted by Lee et al. (2015)
indicated positive and significant relationship between CSR and quality of work
life including organizational trust. This finding further reveals that the quality of work life (includes organizational trust) improves if internal practices of CSR
improves. Some researchers have also indicated that in order to promote
cooperation within organization, organizational trust as an important element
makes possible to improve employees’ outcomes related to behaviour and performance (Kramer, 1999; Dirks & Ferrin, 2001). Findings of some empirical
studies also provide evidences that organizational trust has positively associated
with employees’ connections and sense of belongingness to their organization (Hansen et al., 2011; Roeck & Delobbe, 2012; Lee et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2013).
This shows that CSR practices of an organization may have influence on
employees’ attitudes (Farooq et al., 2014; Lee et al., 2015) which also includes
organization trust, therefore, the construct of organizational trust was included in the proposed framework of this study to examine trust as mediator to know
the potential impact of employees’ perception of CSR on employees’ workplace
outcomes.
47
2.4 JOB SATISFACTION (JS)
In the entire organizational literature, the construct of JS has become most
extensively and widely-studied concept (Gruneberg, 1979; Currivan, 1999),
because it relates to the health (physical and emotional) of the employees
(Oshagbemi, 1999). Supporting this view, Lee et al. (2008) also states that in research of organizational behaviour, job satisfaction is the most commonly
investigated construct. Since, for a long time, the concept of job satisfaction has
been the topic of research of organizational psychology and this variable depends on multiple aspects of relationships between the employee and
workplace. Viteles (1932) suggested that the concept of job satisfaction is
originated from the notion of morale and later it is analyzed from different
perspectives to explore its antecedents and consequences.
2.4.1 Definitions of Job Satisfaction
Initially, Hoppock (1935) defined the construct of job satisfaction that
“job satisfaction is the combination of physiological, environmental and
psychological circumstances which enable employee to be satisfied with his/her job” (p. 47). However, Locke (1976) presented a commonly used definition of
job satisfaction, he defines that “it is a pleasurable or positive emotional state
resulting from the appraisal of one’s job experiences, this experience of job
satisfaction includes all characteristics of the job and workplace environment” (p. 1300). In addition, Cranny et al. (1992) also define job satisfaction and
considered it as an overall affective response to the set of work and work-related
factors by a person and feeling of workers towards the working environment and various dimensions of the work.
48
2.4.2 Development of Construct of Job Satisfaction
Essentially, it was considered that the construct of job satisfaction is
complex and it is divided into two dimensions i.e. intrinsic and extrinsic. The
intrinsic job satisfaction relates to factors such as recognition, achievements,
work itself and professional obligations. On the other hand, extrinsic job satisfaction relates to external job associated factors such as firm polices, salary,
financial reward, relationship with colleagues and supervisor etc. In this context,
Shabbir et al. (2011) suggested that job satisfaction is highly dependent upon factors like, pay-benefits, relationship with co-workers and working conditions.
Similarly, Robbinson et al. (2004) also asserted that the construct of job
satisfaction is supported on the basis of three theories such as (a) situational
theories (b) process theories (c) content theories. Content theories refer that fulfilments of basic needs of the individuals provide satisfaction and motivation
which motivate the employees. Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Need Theory” and
“Two Factor Theory” by Herzberg are categorized as content theories. However, porter and Lawler’s model and expectancy theory was presented by Vroom
which is categorized as process theory. Finally, goal setting theory by Locke,
equity theory and the concept of management through objective by Drucker are
considered as situational theories.
Schmidt (2007) suggested that there are several instruments which were
developed by researchers to measure the job satisfaction level of individuals
including Minnesota job satisfaction questionnaire, index for job description, survey for job satisfaction. Additionally, in order to measure the job satisfaction
level, five factors of job satisfaction were presented by Smith et al. (1983) which
includes supervisor, pay, promotion, colleagues and the work. In support of the previous work, Spector (1997) introduced nine factors for job satisfaction
including pay, supervisor, promotion, allied benefits, working environment,
communication, fair rewards, nature of work and colleagues. Further explaining
the nine factors, he also suggested that these nine factors are different keeping in view of the importance while considering the overall job satisfaction.
2.4.3 Importance of Job Satisfaction
In organizational psychology, the construct of job satisfaction has been
debated since long, however, it has been explored and examined in some other perspectives such as organizational performance and employees’ behaviours at
workplace (Koh & Boo, 2001; Valentine & Fleischman, 2008). The underlying
principle is that the activities of an organization have direct impact on attitudes and behaviours of its members, which includes employees and
other stakeholders who may response on the basis of their perception and
49
evaluation of their organization. Employee being the key stakeholder of the
organization care about the fulfilment of social obligations by his/her organization (Rodrigo & Arenas, 2008) which may lead to an influence on their
job attitudes and behaviours. Similarly, De Roeck et al. (2014) highlighted a
positive relationship between perceptions of employees towards organizational
involvement in socially responsible activities and job satisfaction, which is viewed as a significant predictor of employees’ behaviours and their job
performance.
This variable depends upon various aspects of employees’ relationship of
the employee and work. In this context, Brief (1998) explaining the importance
of job satisfaction and stated that if the employee’ job is interesting, he is being
paid fairly, he has sufficient promotional opportunities. His colleagues are friendly and his supervisor is supportive then this situation leads him to assume
he is satisfied with his job. In addition, Rupp et al. (2006) highlighting the
importance of job satisfaction noted that CSR can frame employee’ perception of fair treatment which stimulates emotional, attitudinal and behavioural
responses of the employee’ in the interest of the organization. The underlying
principle is that CSR take care not only the interest of the shareholders but also
the stakeholders. If an employee is treated fairly at his/her workplace, he or she feels positive towards his/her job. Leigh et al. (1988) highlighted the importance
of job satisfaction by asserting that this is the sense of justice at workplace,
which improve attitudinal response of employees which lead employees towards
positive job attitudes.
Supporting this view point, Rupp et al. (2006) further suggested that
employees are likely to respond positively to a fair act by the firm even if they are not themselves the beneficiary of this act. This shows that firm’ actions
towards both employees and external stakeholders are likely have impacts on
employees’ attitudes at their workplace. Similarly, Bauman and Skitka (2012)
concluded that CSR practices of a firm benefits to the firm by providing employees’ satisfaction, it fulfils the four psychological requirements of the
employees: security, belongingness, self-esteem and a meaningful presence.
Therefore, the importance of job satisfaction inspires the researchers to explore the construct time and again to have a thorough understanding of the concept
and to further examine its impact in the field of organizational behaviour,
specifically on employees’ attitudes and behaviours.
50
2.5 ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTITFICATION (OI)
Some scholars are of the view that employees’ perception of CSR
generate psychological, attitudinal and behavioural reactions which are
beneficial to the organizations (Rupp et al., 2006). The debate and argument
whether the perceptions of CSR can influence employees’ attitudes and behaviours has been started since long. Ashforth and Mael (1989) suggested in
their study that if the employees identify themselves with their organization their
feelings and beliefs are likely positive about their firm. In addition, some argued that organizational identity is considered on the basis of such characteristics
which members perceive as essential (i.e. fundamental) and exclusively
descriptive (i.e. distinct) to the firm and which continue over the time in the firm
(i.e. permanent) (Albert & Whetten, 1985).
2.5.1 Definitions of Organizational Identification
Cheney and Tompkins (1987) described identification that “it is the
appropriation of identity, either (a) by the individual or collective in question or
(b) by others, it includes the development and maintenance of an individual's or group's 'sameness' or 'substance' against a backdrop of change and 'outside'
elements". Debating this argument, organizational identification or something
else, this is an active process through which individuals associate themselves to
components in a social scene and the element of identifications provide support to make sense in the world and considerations which facilitating to make
decisions (Cheney, 1983). More specifically, some scholars identified the OI as
asset of a collective and to address the question ‘‘who are we as an organization?’’ the organizational identity has been considered as a construct of
organizational level (Ashforth & Mael, 1996; Gioia et al., 2013).
2.5.2 Development of the Construct of Organizational Identification
The construct of organizational identification is derived from the concept of social identity and theory of self-esteem presented by Tajfel and Turner
(1979) and Turner et al. (1987). The basic assumption is that people are inclined
to categorize themselves in terms of the groups, class, and organizations from
which they are attached or associated. In result of social categorization or identification, sense of psychological attachment develops with the organization
which can be an important factor and predictor to stimulate their behaviour
(Ellemers, 2001; Ellemers et al., 2004). Further debating, Ashforth and Mael (1989) suggested that although till the late 1980s, researchers did not have clear
understanding about organizational identification and mixed up this variable
51
with other relevant subjects (e.g. organizational commitment). For example,
Foote (1951) suggested that OI “is as the appropriation of and commitment to a particular identity or series of identities” (p. 17). He further noted that for
motivation of employees, identification was considered as the basic factor. He
advocated that only identified employees with their firm would feel motivated
and for the sake of improvement of their performance, they are ready to act on behalf of the firm. In order to establish differences between the organizational
commitment and organizational identification, empirical research studies have
been carried out to evaluate these two constructs. Some researchers including Bergami and Bagozzi (2000), Cheney (1983), Fuller et al. (2003), Gautam et al.
(2004), found that these constructs are correlated, whereas these constructs have
been well-defined distinctively. Contrarily, some scholars are of the views that
organizational identification comes first rather than organizational commitment, although others have proposed divergently. For example, some suggest that only
employee who identifies with the firm he/she is also committed to this firm.
More actively, some researchers accepted the challenge to re-conceptualize the variable and briefed that theoretically social identity theory which could
certainly re-establish the reliability of this construct and its application in the
domain of OB (Ashforth & Mael,1989).
During last two decades, the concept of organizational identity (OI) and
its related concept i.e organizational identification (OID) have become most
important notions from theoretical perspective. Both the concepts,
organizational identity (OI) and organizational identification (OID) have attained a central position in all such efforts which are made to understand firms
and their relations with the environment. In recent times, studies on different
issues such as climate change, global warming, economic crises, public savings, have frequently associated with the concepts of OI and OID which made both
the constructs key issues for the philosophers to theorize the concepts more
distinctively. The concept of organizational identification (OID) refers “the
mainstream conceptualization of this notion from social identity perspective” (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Haslam, 2004). In this context, Tajfel, (1978)
suggested that “an individual’s social identity refers to his/her knowledge of his
membership of a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership” (p. 63). Although, remarkable
theoretical and empirical advancement is taken place with regards to
organizational identity and organizational identification but still there is
substantial potential for future developments.
2.5.3 Importance of Organizational Identification
52
The construct of organizational identification (OI) is growing importance
as an area of research for scholars and an important topic for managers (Corley, et. al., 2006; Brown, 2006; Cheney, 1991). In literature, OI has an important
place because researchers have found that levels of identification of employees
have influence on effectiveness of an organization (Ashforth & Mael, 1989).
This construct is recognized as an important factor to understand decision-making (Riantoputra, 2010), strategic change (Ravasi & Phillips, 2011),
communication (Fombrun, 1996), internal conflicts (Humphreys & Brown,
2002), issues related to explanation and reaction (Dutton & Dukerich, 1991; Gioia & Thomas, 1996), and matters which are essential to theorize of the issues
related to legitimacy (Sillince & Brown, 2009; He & Baruch, 2010). However,
Albert, Ashforth, and Dutton (2000) suggested that “eventually, this consensus
is growing that identity is challenging- and has become critical that’ why the dynamics of identity need to be truly understood” (p. 14).
Similarly, some scholars suggest that HR practices should be utilized by
the organization which may lead to employees towards identification because
they would be committed to their work only through identification (Mir, Mir, &
Mosca, 2002). Supporting this point of view, Fuller et al. (2006) described that “HR practices such as recognition of work, opportunities for training &
development, involvement in decision making process and contribution in
problem solving, and reward for performance are best predictors of perceptions of internal status and organizational identification”. Above reviewed literature
provides the basis to build the present study and it proposes that employees may
show psychological attachment at different levels with their firm. Employees’
level of psychological attachment is categorized by level of identification. Employees are considered as identified with the corporation when they consider
that their beliefs and objectives are similar with the corporation (Kelman, 1958;
O ‘Reilly & Chatman, 1986; Angle & Perry, 1981). Among employees and organizations an emotional bond develops whom they identify with. As the
employee internalizes the organizational objective and belief, this bond becomes
stronger and he/she considers himself/herself in the position of the organization.
Thus, if the organization encourages and provides cooperative and
supportive working environment to its employees, then employees are more likely respond in the same manner and feel attachment with the organization.
Supporting this argument, Dutton et al., (1994) suggest that if a firm engages in
CSR related activities, employees of that firm are identified with the firm, and
they are likely to believe that their firm contributes toward social well-being. However, findings of some previous studies indicated that organizational CSR
activities have significant positive influence employees’ performance (Hickman
et al., 2005). Social identity theory provides theoretical support to this premise and suggest that individuals tend to categorize themselves in different groups
53
such as gender, politics, religious attachments and sports team (Tajfel & Turner,
1985). Ashforth and Mael (1989) claimed that “organizational identification is a specific category of social identity where the individuals categorize
themselves in terms of their membership in a specific group or organization”
(p.105). In addition, the academicians and managers also accepted their
framework which they developed for OI. In this context, Ashforth and Mael could able to clarify the applicability of this construct and offer a precise
definition by using social identity theory as a foundation for organizational
identification. In a research study, Farooq et al. (2014) suggested that CSR is a strong predictor of employees’ attitudes in terms of organizational
identification.
2.6 ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT (OC)
The construct of organizational commitment has become the emerging area for researchers since last two decades, it does not only relate to the
individuals’ performance, it also has impact on organizational performance
(Allen & Meyer, 1996; Mowday, 1998; Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001). Although,
it is a multidimensional construct and each of its dimensions has its different antecedents and consequences (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Supporting this view
point, they described that if an employee is committed with his organization, he
(a) has a firm belief in the goals and objectives of the organization (b) has a
strong desire to attach and keep continue relationship with the organization (c) willingness to make great contribution to the organization. Primarily,
organizational commitment is an attitudinal construct which indicates the
psychological attachment of employees to an organization (Meyer & Allen, 1997).
2.6.1 Definitions of Organizational Commitment
Porter et al. (1974) suggested that “organizational commitment is the
strength of an individual’s identification and involvement in a particular organization” (p. 604). In particular, three basic elements included in the
definition of organizational commitment i.e. (a) willingness to work for the firm
(b) bearing in mind the firm’ objectives important (c) willingness to work with
the firm (Allen & Meyer, 1990; Chen et al., 2002; Uygur, 2004). The model presented by Meyer and Allen (1991) assumed a multi-dimensional
approach and incorporated attitudinal and behavioural approach to define and
explain organizational commitment. This model proposed three different dimensions of OC (i.e. affective commitment, normative commitment and
continuance commitment), which so far generally considered as the best
54
model (Vandenberghe & Tremblay, 2008). All these three dimensions of
organizational commitment are viewed by Allen and Meyer (1990) as diverse psychological mechanisms and each category can be experienced by different
degrees. Snape et al. (2000) describe that organizational commitment denotes
three different levels named “affective, normative and continuance
commitment”. Employees’ commitment towards organization is the focus in the current study.
2.6.2 Development of Construct of Organizational Commitment
Since its origin in 1960, organizational commitment has been most
focused topic of the researchers as compare to other two categories of commitment. The construct of organizational commitment is normally
considered a psychological and emotional relationship between individual and
the firm due to which employee may not likely to leave the organization voluntarily. Similarly, Porter et al. (1974) categorized that “OC as psychological
state of mind and called it ‘affective dependence’ model rather an economic
construct”. They further explained that “the committed employee: (a) has firm
belief to accept the required organizational values and outcomes, (b) enthusiastic to exert effort to achieve these goals and (c) readiness to be associated with the
organization” (p. 604). In addition, Porter and his associates also able to develop
the questionnaire to measure the commitment. More specifically, findings of
early studies indicated that this construct is often conflicting, and extensively viewed uni-dimensional as work attitude as noted by O’Reilly & Chatman
(1986), Mayer & Schoorman (1992), Becker (1992) and Morrow (1993).
In addition, Meyer and Herscovitch (2001) have re-defined the construct
of organizational commitment “as a force that binds an individual to a course
of action that is of relevance to a particular target” (p. 301). Three-dimensional
model of organizational commitment which was presented by Allen and Meyer (1990) is frequently used to conceptualize the construct in academia and
business (Jaros, 2007; Macey & Schneider, 2008). According to this model,
affective commitment is “an employee’s connection through an emotional bond, linkage to and engagement with the organization”. However, normative
commitment is defined as “an employee’s sense of indebtedness towards the
relevant organization; accordingly, employees may feel obligated to stay at
their organization”. The third dimension is continuance commitment discusses the “employee’s observations of the benefits and advantages that
may be lost when one leaves the relevant organization” (Allen & Meyer,
1990, p. 21). Although, consistent efforts have been made by the researchers to refine the measurement of the construct and consequently some
conceptual changes have occurred in the study of organizational commitment.
55
For instance, (Allen & Meyer, 1990) presented a conceptual and measurement
work which has resulted in a three-dimensional model of commitment.
2.6.3 Importance of Organizational Commitment
During last few decades, the concept of organizational commitment has
become an important topic for researchers and managers, it has been placed in
central position in the study of work attitudes and behaviours (e.g. Meyer & Allen, 1991; Morrow, 1993). The importance of this construct is reflected from
the established association with two important variables in the field of
vocational behaviour i.e. turn over intentions and actual turnover. However,
some empirical evidences reveal that commitment is linked with other forms of work and non-work behaviours (e.g. Meyer et al., 1989; Wahn, 1993; Hackett,
Bycio & Hausdorf, 1994). Organizations which are perceived as socially
responsible citizen, provide resources to enhance employees’ self-concept. Employees who are benefited from the enhancement of self-concept are more
likely to develop greater organizational commitment.
Thus, it appears that employees’ perception of CSR and organizational commitment might be positively associated. Maignan and Ferrell (2000)
described that perceived CSR includes all such activities which are undertaken
to ensure the compliance of rules and regulations, reducing pollution and waste,
fair treatment with employees and other stakeholders and their engagement in community development. This line of argument suggests that if an organization
engage in CSR activities and it performs well, employees will feel pride on their
organization and will like to identify with the organization. This favorable attitude of employees will lead them positive job attitudes towards their
organization. Previous research evidences also reflect that organizational
commitment is higher in organizations that are ethical in their practices
(Eisenberger, Fasolo & Davis, 1990). Previous empirical evidences also contributed towards CSR and organizational commitment such as “the
contribution of CSR to organizational commitment is at least as great as job
satisfaction, corporate social responsibility is positively correlated with organizational commitment” (Brammer et al., 2007 p. 1701). The scholars and
researchers suggested that organizations make sure that the key stakeholder i.e
employees remain motivated and committed for corporate efficiency and
effectiveness (Tse, 2011). Moreover, findings of some studies indicate that employees who are involved in CSR strategies with the organization on their
workplace are found more satisfied, committed and remain attached with their
organizations (Viswesvaran et al., 2004; Aguilera et al., 2007).
56
However, previous research evidences indicated that normative
commitment may have some limitations in certain conditions and may not be effective as the dimension of affective commitment or continuance commitment
(e.g. blood donation) particularly in situations where business relationship are
involved (Fu et al., 2009; Tett & Meyer, 1993). Therefore, the use of two
dimensions of organizational commitment is theoretically appropriate for this study i.e. affective commitment and continuance commitment. This study
focuses to examine the employees’ level of organizational commitment which
may be effected by the CSR activities of the organization, which develop the employees’ perception towards CSR activities of the organization. Some
researchers argued that employees’ perceptions of CSR drive through the
process of organizational identification, which in turn enhance the levels of
organizational commitment (Kim et al., 2010). This value alignment between employees and their organization may lead towards affective commitment and
continuance commitment bond which in response leads towards attitudinal and
behavioural outcomes at their workplace. Therefore, it is most likely that employee’ attitude is positively influenced by employee perception of CSR. If
the organizations address the social issues, employees may likely to identify
with their organizations and their level of commitment towards the
organizations may also be enhanced.
2.7 EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT (EE)
William A. Kahn in 1990s first defined the term of “employee
engagement”. Kahn (1990) characterized and linked engagement with the role
being performed by the individual which shows the extent of psychological presence of an employee in a particular organizational role. Therefore, there are
two main roles of an employee being the member of an organization i.e. work
role of an employee and employee’ role as a member of an organization. He
defines that job engagement and organization engagement are different, moreover their scores are different and their relationship with their antecedent
and consequences are also distinctive. Similarly, some researchers argued that
employee engagement (EE) is involvement of employees with commitment, satisfaction in their work (Harter, Schmidt & Hayes, 2002). Moreover,
Robinson et al. (2004) defined that EE is a positive attitude of employees about
the firm and its value, goals and environment. In view of the importance of
employee engagement, several empirical studies grounded on interviewing and surveying by managers and employees across the world.
2.7.1 Definitions of Employee Engagement
57
In the literature, there is no commonly accepted definition of employees’
engagement available. Instead of academics, most of the literature on employee engagement comes from researcher and consultants (Sridevi & Markos, 2010).
In academic literature, engagement first defined by Kahn (1990), he states that
“personal engagement as the simultaneous employment and expression of a
person’s ‘preferred self’ in task behaviours that promote connections with work and with others, personal presence, and active full role performances” (p. 700).
Afterward some other scholars have also contributed to further clarify the
definition of employee engagement including Maslach et al. (2001), Harter et al. (2003), Saks (2006), and Czarnowsky (2008). Bakker et al., (2008) provided
a preferred definition of work engagement they state that it can be defined as a
positive fulfilment, effective motivational situation and work related well-being.
2.7.2 Development of Construct of Employee Engagement
In last 20 years, the notion of employee engagement has gained
considerable popularity however, inconsistent efforts made to define and little
rigorous academic research carried out (Shuck & Wollard, 2010). Gallup Group
first time introduced the employee engagement concept as cited by Dernovsek (2008), it is positive and emotional employees’ attachment and commitment
with the firm. Some scholars viewed that the construct of employee engagement
seems similar to other well defined constructs in literature such as
“organizational citizenship behaviours” and “organizational commitment” (Robinson, 2004; Kular et al., 2008). However, Robinson viewed that employee
engagement as “one steps up from commitment”. However, Rafferty, et al.,
(2005) made distinction in employee engagement from organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviours on the basis that
employee engagement is a reciprocal process which requires two-way
determination between employees and organizations (Sridevi & Markos, 2010).
Robinson asserted that “employee engagement involves some other elements of commitment and OCB but engagement has no match with either”. Moreover,
two features of engagement neither explained by commitment nor OCB, it has
two ways process or degree to which it is supposed to have business awareness in engaged employees (Kular et al., 2008).
Employee engagement is relatively a recent concept and two dimensions
of employee engagement have been characterized i.e. work engagement and organizational engagement. In this context, Saks (2006) differentiate between
these two dimensions of employee engagement. Mone and London (2010)
asserted that EE is a state of employee in which he feels complete involvement, commitment, passion with authority to exhibit these feelings in his behaviour at
workplace. Apart from theoretical backdrop, development and definition of the
58
construct of employee engagement, there are several studies which determined
the directions of development of the construct of employee engagement. Understanding the recent developments and characteristics which determined
employee engagement facilitated the researchers and managers for the better
understanding of the significance of the impact of CSR on employee
engagement.
2.7.3 Importance of Employee Engagement
As a good business practice, organizations are realizing the importance of
the employee engagement; to achieve the high level of employee engagement
organizations are pushing the employees. In the recent years, researchers and managers have paid their great deal of attention on employee engagement. Some
suggests that employee outcomes, organization success and financial
performance are predicted by employee engagement (Bates, 2004; Richman, 2006; Kaur, 2016). Therefore, organizations are making investments to maintain
and stimulate level of employee engagement, this is the main factor that a
number of research studies started to explore and analyze the different
characteristics of this construct. This resulted involvement of wide ranging features in terms of employee engagement: the recent development of employee
engagement; among general workforce, the percentage of engaged and
disengaged employees in a certain organization; the benefits of high level of
engagement of employee and disadvantages of low level of engagement of employee; application of best practices for enhancement of the level of
engagement of employee; methods for measuring the level of employee
engagement (Kular et al., 2008).
Most significantly, different studies have been conducted to recognize the
top drivers for employee engagement such as a study conducted by Melcrum
(2008) which indicates that 81% of the companies have included the employee engagement on their agenda, whereas 54% firms have added as their philosophy
and incorporated in overall HR practices. An article published in Right
Management (2009) having title: “Employee Engagement: Maximizing Organizational Performance” which pointed out that level of employee
engagement varies from country to country. Findings of some of previous
studies indicated that organizational engagement in CSR programs contribute
an important role to increase employee level of engagement at their workplace (Ferreira & Oliveira, 2014; Zientara et al., 2015). In this context, Saks (2006)
suggested that employee engagement is one way for employee to respond to the
support of his organization through his engagement in work. If employees perceive that their firm is committed and involved in activities of social
59
responsibility, employees may respond high level of feeling of engagement to
their firm.
2.8 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOUR (OCB)
In the field of OBs, the topic of citizenship behaviour has been able to
draw attention of researchers since its origin. In recent times, it has emerged as
an important area of research in the field of OB. Some researchers are of the view that work performance is an outcome of employees’ in role and extra role
behaviours. Organ (1997) defined that organizational citizenship is the
behaviour of individuals which they demonstrate beyond their normal duties.
2.8.1 Definitions of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour
In the past decades, OCB as an extra role behaviour has received much
attention and this construct has been explored extensively. Organizational
Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) contributes to the performance of an organization,
these are extra-role behaviours of employees not in-role behaviours. Cha, Chang and Kim, (2013) defined OCB as the voluntary activity by an employee to
improve the performance, functioning and quality of settings of workplace. In
addition, OCB is also defined by Organ (1988) “as individual behaviour that is
discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization”
(p. 4). Some other scholars have also conceptualized and defined OCB as an
initiative started by an employee beyond his/her assigned job description which inspire for further success of their organization (Moorman, 1993; Van Dyne,
Cummings & Parks, 1995; Chen, Hui & Sego, 1998).
2.8.2 Development of Construct of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour
Katz (1964) asserted that in 1960s distinction was started between these two types of work performances. However, difference between in role and extra
role behaviours was not fully reflected in research studies in the past. Hence,
both the managers and the employees are confused with the concept of extra-
role behaviour and in-role behaviour. MacKenzie et al. (1998) argued that in previous studies both types of behaviours are intertwined and interrelated. Some
scholars argued that the boundary between both the extra-role and in-role
behaviours is not so much clear and it varies with respect to organizations, situations and cultures (Blakely, Blakely & Moorman, 1995; Paine & Organ,
2000). In addition, some researchers define that the out role or extra role
60
behaviour is an individual’ discretionary behaviour which is considered beyond
formal reward system and it promotes effectiveness of organization (Bateman & Organs, 1983; Van Dyne et al., 1994). It refers to employees’ undertaking of
unassigned activities out of needed task and symbolizes a sublet affiliation
between employee and the organization.
Researchers are agreed that OCB is a multi-dimensional construct, as
Williams and Anderson’s (1991) presents two-dimensions of the construct.
However, Organ (1988) presents that OCB denotes discretionary behaviour of employee which directly or indirectly is not accepted by the prescribed or formal
reward system, and collectively these behaviours encourage the effective
working of the organization. In addition, Organ (1988) briefly discussed the
construct of OCB and presented five dimensions of this construct, i.e. altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, and civic virtue which are
deliberated as: (a) Altruism is primarily corresponding with “employees’
discretionary behaviors that have an effect helping another specific person with an organizationally relevant task or a problem”
(b) Conscientiousness is mainly related to “discretionary behaviors on the part
of the employee that go well beyond the minimum role requirements of the
organization in the areas of attendance, obeying rules and regulations, taking breaks, and so on”. (c) Sportsmanship is corresponding to “willingness of the
employees to tolerate less-than-ideal circumstances without complaining to
avoid grumbling about petty grievances and railing against real or imagined
slights”. (d) Courtesy refers to “discretionary behavior on the part of an individual aimed at preventing work-related problems with others from
occurring”. (e) Civic virtue denotes that “behavior on the part of an individual
indicating that she or he responsibly participates in, is involved in, or is concerned about the life of the company” (p. 4).
Organ and Konovsky (1989) argued that OCB relates to the employees’
cognitive approach, if employees thought that equal and fair treatment is provided by their organization then level of OCB will enhance. This proves that
the construct of OCB is based on cognition, premediated and controlled
behaviour, which shows that the concept of OCB is relates to social exchange theory (Lee & Allen, 2002). After few years, Williams and Anderson (1991)
presented three dimensions of the construct of OCB i.e. In Role Behaviour (IRB,
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour related to Individuals (OCB-I) and
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour related to Organization (OCB-O), which may be explained as detailed below:
1. In Role Behaviour (IRB) denotes employees’ responsibilities towards his/her organization which demands fulfillment of rules &
61
regulations of the organization, accomplishment of assigned tasks
within given time frame and observing punctuality at workplace.
2. Organizational citizenship behaviour related to individuals (OCB-
I) addresses the behaviour which specifically relate to individuals
such as helping behaviour with other colleagues for accomplishment of their assignment or performing duties on behalf
of the absent employee. These individual behaviours are beneficial
to the organizations.
3. Organizational citizenship behaviour related to organization
(OCB-O) includes all such behaviours which are beneficial to the
organization such as to provide useful information to manager for the accomplishment of organizational objectives.
Followed by Williams and Anderson (1991), Organ (1997) also converted his five-dimensional model of OCB into two dimensions i.e. altruism and
courtesy are organizational citizenship behaviours related to individuals OCB-I
whereas civil virtue, conscientiousness and sportsmanship are organizational
citizenship behaviours related to organizations OCB-O. He did not consider In-role behaviours as OCB and excluded from the dimensions of organizational
citizenship behaviours (OCB) by considering that OCB are individuals’ extra
role behaviours rather in role behaviours. Literature pertaining to OCB indicates
that no uniformity or agreement exists about the dimensions of OCB. All types of OCB are derived from the model which was presented by Katz (1964), which
states five dimensions of OCB i.e. (i) self-training (ii) cooperation and with
others colleagues (iii) productive and constructive planning or ideas (iv) positive attitude towards organization and (v) defending attitude towards organization.
2.8.3 Importance of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour
In traditional economic perspective, in role behaviour is not a new topic,
it only emphasizes the achievements of organizational objectives. However, it has gained considerable attention of researchers to examine this construct
because of its relationship with extra-role behaviour. Morrison (1994) suggested
that the incentive to involve in-role behaviour is much better than that of extra-
role behaviour. The reason of motivation to employees for in role behaviour is higher than for extra-role behaviour because the in-role behaviour directly
relates to formal evaluation and reward system of employees. In the
organizational literature, employees’ perception of the work environment has drawn much attention of the researchers and the managers. Moorman (1991)
suggested that it is psychological explanation of organizational activities which
62
is considered as a predictor of performance of employee such as organizational
citizenship behaviour (OCB).
However, correlation between employees’ perception of CSR and
employees’ behavioural outcomes need to examine extensively. In this context,
Parker et al. (2003) suggested that individuals’ perceptions may have significant impact on individuals’ behaviours. Likewise, employees’ perceptions of CSR
are assumed to predict individual level outcomes such as work attitudes,
behaviours and work performance (organizational commitment, employee engagement, organizational citizenship behaviour). In addition, Hansen et al.
(2011) reported some benefits of employees’ related CSR policies among
corporations which also include enhanced organizational citizenship behaviour.
Moorman (1991) describes that if an employee has positive perception about an organization’s socially responsible activities, he may consider this organization
to be ethical and he may reciprocate by performing OCB.
In recent past, researchers have started to pay attention to investigate that
how perceived CSR influence employees’ outcomes at workplace. Some
empirical studies have also provided sufficient evidences which show
association between OCB and job satisfaction (Netemeyer et al., 1997; Alotaibi 2001; Gonzalez & Garazo, 2006). In this context, it is argued that perceived
CSR is likely to affect beyond individual’s attitudes (Wood, 1991). More
specifically, perception of CSR encourages behaviours to achieve the
organizational objective and goals, such encouraging behaviour which might be a formal role behaviour like job performance or informal role behaviour like
OCB.
2.9 DEVELOPMENT OF HYPOTHESES
The following section contains the details of hypotheses development of all the variables of interest of this study. In addition to, a comprehensive
examination of relationship between the perceived CSR as an independent
variable, other dependent and mediating variables are also presented.
2.9.1 Relationship between Employees’ Perception of CSR
and Organizational Trust
Stakeholders' trust is considered as one of the critical sources of an
organizational sustainability (Mostovicz, Kakabadse & Kakabadse, 2011). Stakeholder trust on those organizations to whom they perceive as fully
responsible regarding their actions (Gray et al., 1996). A firm's involvement in
63
CSR related activities reveal its sense of responsibility (Brown & Dacin, 1997).
For instance, following ethical standards by the organization while developing decision making strategies, build stakeholders’ trust (Hosmer, 1994) as they
believe it as a social performance of this organization. Continuing the debate,
Pivato et al. (2008) asserted that, firm's social performance consequent
stakeholders' trust and this considerably effect on stakeholders' work related outcomes in a positive manner (Osterhus, 1997). Organizations' involvement in
CSR activities is considered as their sense of responsibility to improve the
welfare and to protect the society.
Enhancing the understanding between organizational involvement in
CSR related activities and employees’ trust, Lee et al. (2012) simplified that
CSR positively impacts the employees’ perceptions and its economic and philanthropic dimensions enhances their level of trust on their organization.
Conversely, organization's involvement in internal CSR activities (i.e. related to
employees) not only promote a sense of being cared by their organization among employees, but also expectations of being treated the same in future (Robinson,
1996). Lee et al. (2013) argues that when employees of an organization perceive
that their organization is responsible towards others (i.e. society and
employees); they build trust in their organizations. In addition, Lee et al. (2012) also emphasized to examine the association between CSR and organizational
trust because CSR activities are important for achieving relationship
commitment between employee and organization. Based on above explained
arguments and followed by the research direction, this study proposes to examine the impact of employees’ perception of CSR activities on employees’
attitudes and behaviours in context of organizational trust. These arguments can
further be explained with the theoretical support of social exchange theory of Blau (1964) which explains that trust among parties is a basic factor for social
exchange of relations (Molm et al., 2000). Therefore, this study hypothesized
that:
H1: Employees’ perception of CSR activities of their organization is
positively associated to their Organizational Trust (OT).
64
Mediating role of organizational trust between the relationship of
employees’ perception of CSR and organizational commitment
Dirks and Ferrin (2001) described the characteristic of trust and suggested
that organizational trust is a readiness of employees to become at risk to the
actions of the organization. Rupp et al. (2006) supported this view by suggesting that organizational CSR activities transmitted important signals to its employees
towards the organizational ethical and social values and the level to which it can
be trusted. Comparably, some researchers also indicate that trust has indirect significant influence in relationship between employees and organizations
(Moorman et al., 1992). Whitener (2001) describes a similar situation by debating
on the context that how employee reciprocates organizational action by offering
commitment to their firm which results in mutual commitment between employee and organization. More specifically, trust has been widely investigated construct
and based on previous empirical evidences, it found a key mediator of other
antecedent-employee level outcome relationships including organizational citizenship behaviour (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002; Colquitt et al., 2007).
Considering the importance of trust, a number of empirical evidences
reflect positive influence of trust on different indicators of motivation of employees including organizational commitment (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002; Wat &
Shaffer, 2005). Recently, Vanhala et al. (2016) conducted a study reporting that
organizational trust mediates between employees’ perceptions of CSR and
employees’ attitudes and behaviours. These relationships are better studied by considering social exchange theory which suggests that trust might provide a
basic mechanism through which CSR initiatives of an organization affect
employees’ attitudes and behaviours including organizational commitment. Blau (1964) noted that establishing of exchange relationships among the parties
involving investments which constitutes commitment on the part of other party to
reciprocate. He further noted that this results in “a focal exchange by partner’s
(i.e. organization) fair treatment of the other initiates a social exchange relationship with that partner (i.e. employee)”.
Continuing the debate, there is a need to empirically investigate and analyze the frameworks, mechanisms and the psychological processes which
may provide guidance to employees about their attitudinal responses towards
CSR (Bhattacharya et al. 2009; Jones, 2010). Similarly, Lee et al., (2013)
suggesting to explore the role of CSR activities in forming the employees’ attitudes and behaviours with other variables including organizational
commitment (OC) and organizational citizenship behaviours (OCB) and these
may be considered for further examine in future studies. Similarly, Vanhala et al. (2016) suggested that further studies might be carried out to investigate the
constructs of organizational trust and organizational commitment in diverse
65
cultural perspective as the issues associated with the construct of trust may differ
significantly from country to country. Therefore, on the basis of above explained arguments and following the research directions of different researchers, this
study argues that there is need to further examine the potential mediating
mechanism by investigating the construct of organizational trust as a mediator
between perceived CSR and organizational commitment as faculty members’ outcome in the context of Pakistan. The social exchange theory provides
theoretical explanation for the predicted relationship between perception of CSR
and employees level of organizational commitment. Thus, following is hypothesized:
H2: Organizational Trust mediates the positive relationship between
employees’ perception of CSR and Organizational Commitment (OC).
Mediating role of trust between the relationship of employees’ perception
of CSR and employee engagement (EE)
Literature showed that the investigation of trust explains why some
employees effectively complete their tasks and perform beyond their call of duty
without any reward or financial incentive. As suggested by Ellis et al. (1999) that trust is related to profit, innovation, organizational survival and a number
of important employees’ perceptions and behaviours. Explaining further,
Schaufeli & Bakker (2010) describes that this behaviour of employees is close
to the concept of ‘employees going the extra-mile’ which is a specific feature of engaged employees, which logically concludes that trust and engagement are
related concepts. Some researchers explained the reason that why employees are
ready to perform jobs above and beyond their call of duty. Bakker & Demerouti (2007) and Mauno et al., (2010) described the reason that organizational support
and work environment are positively associated with employee engagement,
which might encourage the employees to show positive attitudes and
behaviours. Considering the importance of the construct of organizational trust, it has been studied with other constructs including job satisfaction, employee
engagement and organizational citizenship behaviour. For instance, Mayer et al.
(1995) and Griffith & Lusch (2007) highlighted the role and importance of organizational trust as a mediator between the organizational CSR related
activities and employees’ outcomes (e.g. employee engagement). Since
engagement behaviour by the employee with work is considered as a
relationship which evolves over a period of time on the basis of trust and mutual commitments (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). This shows that treatment of
organization sends implied signals and indications to employees about the level
to which they are valued, and ultimately determines their levels of trust (Alfes et al., 2013). Some other researchers also supported this argument by indicating
that employees’ CSR perceptions can predict employees’ engagement (Rupp
66
et al., 2006; Glavas & Piderit, 2009; Caligiuri et al., 2013; Rupp et al., 2013a)
and organizational citizenship behaviour (Jones, 2010; Lin 2010; Rupp et al., 2013b; Cha et al., 2013).
Theoretically, social exchange theory can be well explained the
relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and employee engagement. This theory is premised on the principle that social perspective of
the firm including the employee’ perceptions of CSR forms the relationship
which exists between employees and the organization. The element of trust is considered essential to maintain social exchange relationship between the
parties because trust creates sense of responsibility within employees to respond
the firm and employees can do this by exhibiting more engaged in their work.
Blau (1964) suggested that employees likely to reciprocate the organizational actions in a manner they perceive it to be fair. In this context, Ferreira & Oliveira
(2014) emphasized the need for further attention to investigate the construct of
employee engagement. In addition, Vanhala et al. (2016) noted that there is need to investigate the new notions including work engagement as a consequent of
trust. Based on above explained arguments and followed by the research
direction of various researchers, this study contends that perceived CSR may
have positive impact on employee engagement and trust mediates this relationship. Therefore, following is hypothesized:
H3: Organizational trust mediates the positive relationship between
employees’ perception of CSR and Employee Engagement (EE).
Mediating role of trust between the relationship of employees’ perception
of CSR and organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB)
Although, the construct of organizational trust has repeatedly been
examined showing positive correlation with employees’ organizational
citizenship behaviours (Dirks & Ferrin, 2001). More specifically, during recent years, researchers have focused to start examining how employees’ perceptions
of CSR influence their attitudes and behaviours such as organizational identity,
organizational commitment, extra role behaviours and employee engagement (Islam et al., 2016; Azim et al., 2016). In this context, explaining the relationship
between CSR and organizational trust, Balmer et al. (2007) suggested that
“organizational engagement in CSR related activities perform as ‘trustees’ in
the benefits of all stakeholders including employees” (p. 10). In addition, supporting this point of view, Pivato et al. (2008) also suggested that “trust is
the immediate or closest outcome of CSR activity such as attitude, behaviours,
however, the financial performance is more proximal CSR outcomes” (p. 3). More specifically, OB theories suggest that employees’ trust is a direct result of
organizational CSR perceptions which may form employee attitudes and
67
behaviours. In addition, some researchers concluded that organizational trust is
an important mediator between the antecedents and employee’ level outcomes (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002; Colquitt et al., 2007; Farooq et al., 2014). Employees,
when assumed of equal and fair treatment from their organization they might
show exchange relationship with their organization depicting more OCB.
Literature reveals some empirical evidences indicating a significant role of
trust and its impact on employees’ outcomes such as organizational citizenship
behaviours (Mayer & Gavin, 2005; Walumbwa et al., 2011). In this context, Hansen et al., (2011) suggested that if employees perceive about their
organization to be more socially responsible they are likely to engage in OCB,
and this relationship partially mediates by trust. Recently, Islam et al. (2016)
conducted a research in hotel industry of Malaysia using 486 employees’ data and positive relationship was found between CSR and OCB. In addition, Azim (2016)
conducted a research study in banking sector of Saudi Arabia using data of 266
employees depicting positive influence of CSR on OCB. The relationship between perception of CSR and employees’ attitude and behaviour including
OCB can be explained using social identity theory (Peterson, 2004; Brammer et
al., 2007; Turker, 2009). This theory suggests that employees develop self-
concept and through identification of themselves within a group in comparison with the other groups (Peterson, 2004). Moreover, Turker (2009) describes that
employees always prefer to have positive social identity in order to distinguish
themselves from other and firm is one of the social categories where employees
share their success and failures and exhibit their emotions. In particular, theoretically social identity theory can well explain the relationship between
perceived CSR and organizational citizenship behaviour. Previously, Hansen et
al., (2011) also noted that there is a need to investigate other possible mediating mechanisms (i.e. attitudes and perceptions etc.). In addition, Lee et al. (2013)
called for a future study and noted that there is need to incorporate more variables
to evaluate CSR effectiveness and efficiency. They further suggested that more
variables may be considered (e.g. organizational citizenship behaviours) to investigate the role of CSR in forming employees’ attitudes and behaviours.
Based on above explained arguments and followed by the research directions of
different researchers, this study contends that perceived CSR may have impact on employees’ level of OCB and trust mediates this relationship. Thus, following is
hypothesized:
H4: Organizational trust mediates the positive relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and organizational citizenship behaviour
(OCB).
68
2.9.2 Relationship between Employees’ Perception of CSR
and Job Satisfaction (JS)
Saari & Judge (2004) suggested that “although, employees have different
attitudes about various aspects of their jobs, careers and organization, the most
important attitude of employees’ is job satisfaction” (p. 346). In literature, a number of constructs as predictor of job satisfaction has been identified by the
researchers which can be explained with multiple job related characteristics
(Lowry et al., 2002; Schmidt, 2007; Pepe, 2010). Since, job satisfaction is most studied phenomena and it positively influences different employees’ work
related outcomes such as OC and OCB (Valentine & Fleischman, 2008; Shen &
Zhu, 2011). Considering the importance of job satisfaction, researchers
encourage to investigate the concept repeatedly. Koh and Boo (2001) emphasized that employees prefer that their organization promote ethical belief
and norms and expect that their organization adhere to the organizational ethics,
being an important dimension of CSR, through which organizations are likely to improve satisfaction of employees towards their job.
Some researchers supported this argument by reporting that employees’
job related experiences provide job satisfaction when they consider that their organization behave ethically (Vitell & Davis, 1990; Deshpande, 1996;
Singhapakdi et al., 1996; Viswesvaran et al., 1998). Supporting this argument,
Valentine and Fleischman (2008) viewed that by adopting CSR activities,
organization attempts to meet the stakeholders’ requirement by focusing society related issues which is a natural extension of organizational ethics. This is
because the activities of organization have impact on employees’ attitudes and
behaviours who may respond on the basis of their perception and assessment of the organization. Employees, being one of the key stakeholder groups of the
organization consider of organization’s social requirements which may
influence job attitudes at their workplace (Rodrigo & Arenas, 2008). More
specifically, CSR scholars such as Bhattacharya et al. (2009), Shen & Zhu (2011) indicated that CSR initiatives benefit and meet the needs of the
employees (e.g. work life balance, training and development, self-esteem and
participation at workplace, career growth and advancement) which ultimately impacts job satisfaction.
In this context, De Roeck et al. (2014) carried out a study on 181 hospital
employees in the context of Belgium. The findings of this study concluded that employee’ perception of CSR positively relates to job satisfaction level of
employees which appear to use CSR practices to evaluate their organization’
attractiveness and decide to identify with their organization. Similarly, Senasu and Virakul (2015) and Chepkwony et al. (2015) reported a significant positive
correlation between the relationship of employees’ perception of CSR and their
69
outcomes (e.g. job satisfaction), because workplace requirements are met which
can be influenced by employees’ perceptions of CSR. Recently, Suh (2016) conducted a study using a data set of 1,249 employees of 40 firms in the context
of Korea, results indicate significant positive effects of CSR on employees’ job
satisfaction. These findings further indicate that CSR has a positive influence on
employees’ attitudes, even in an Asian context, which suggests that CSR may be universally beneficial to firms. Based on above explained arguments and
followed by the research directions of different researchers such as Dhanesh
(2014) noted that future research may be initiated to make further assessment about the effects of CSR on employee - organization relationships. In addition,
Wong & Gao (2014) also called for the investigation of the potential effects of
macro-level variables on individual-level effects. This phenomenon is strongly
supported by social identity theory which explains the potential influence of employees’ perceptions of CSR on attitudes of employees (i.e. job satisfaction).
Hence, this study contends that perceived CSR have positive impact on
employees’ job satisfaction level at their workplace. Thus, it is hypothesized:
H5: Employees’ perception of CSR activities of their organization is
positively associated with their job satisfaction (JS).
Mediating role of job satisfaction between the relationship of employees’
perception of CSR and organizational commitment (OC)
Literature of organizational behaviour revealed that job satisfaction is
generally accepted as an affective variable showing a significant predictor of employees’ attitudes and behaviours including job performance, organizational
citizenship behaviour, absenteeism and turnover, (Wegge et al., 2007).
Considering the importance of organization commitment, some researchers emphasized that the construct of commitment has considered as an essential
construct in studying the employees work related attitudes and behaviours (e.g.
Meyer & Allen, 1991; Morrow, 1993; Reichers, 1985). In addition, some
scholars recognized that the construct of organizational commitment is employees’ psychological liking to an organization (Leong et al., 1996).
Based on theoretical support of social identity theory (SIT), some
researchers such as Turker (2009), Brammer, Millington and Rayton (2007)
examined the association between perceived CSR and organizational commitment. More specifically, Brammer et al. (2007) suggested that positive
relationship exist between CSR and OC. In addition, Peterson (2004) explains
that individuals have the inclination to classify themselves and others into different groups, and this classification influences the self-concept of the group
70
members. If employees, consider that their organization is better performing in
comparison to other organizations with regards to employees’ relationship. This recognition by the employees improve their self-esteem which has positive
influence on employees’ attitudes and behaviours towards their organization
(Smith et al., 2001).
Empirical evidences suggest that CSR indirectly foster employees’ level
of commitment (Maignan & Ferrell, 2001; Brammer et al., 2007; Turker,
2009b), because CSR might foster social forces of work which in turn increase employees’ feeling of association and attachment with their organization. For
instance, Aguinis & Glavas (2013) provided a supporting argument by reporting
the finding that organizations that cares and exhibit socially responsible
behavoiur, this experience considered fit as a value between employees’ and organizations, which may further lead towards positive work attitudes. Thus, if
an employee perceives that his organization is socially responsible, he may have
good feelings about his organization. In this perspective, Dhanesh (2014) proposed that CSR is a relationship maintenance strategy through which
relationship could be strengthen between employees and organizations in terms
of satisfaction, trust and commitment. Conversely, Zientara et al., (2015)
conducted a study using data set of 412 employees of polish hotel industry. The findings showed contrary to priori assumptions of the study and prior research,
it indicates that job satisfaction of employees in polish hotel industry is not a
predictor of commitment.
Although, research on CSR has been gaining attention and the key role of
employee as an important stakeholder (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001), however,
research addressing the influence of CSR on employees’ attitude and mediating influence has received little attention (Jones, 2010; Aguinis & Glavas, 2012; De
Roeck et al., 2014). In view of reviewed literature, explained arguments and
followed by the research directions of different researchers such as Lee et al.
(2013) noted that some other variables (e.g., organizational commitment) may be considered in future while exploring the role of CSR in forming employees’
attitudes and behaviours. Thus, the purpose of this predicted relationship
between perceived CSR and OC with mediating effect of JS is to examine how CSR may contribute positively towards employees’ attitudes by focusing
mediation effects of JS in the context of employees (i.e. faculty members) of
higher education institutions (HEIs). Therefore, this study contends that
perceived CSR may have impact on their level of commitment with their organization in presence of job satisfaction being mediator. Hence, following is
hypothesized:
H6: Job Satisfaction mediates the positive relationship between employees’
perception of CSR and their level of organizational commitment (OC).
71
Mediating role of job satisfaction between the relationship of employees’
perception of CSR and Employee Engagement (EE)
Employee engagement is considered as an emotional attachment and
commitment with the organization, it is a two-way relationship between employee and organization (Baumruk, 2004; Shaw, 2005; Richman, 2006).
More specifically, employees decided to engage in varying degrees responding
to the support they receive from their organization. In this perspective, Robinson et al., (2004) define that EE is a positive attitude of employees towards the
organization values, goals and work environment. This relationship
demonstrates strong engagement with work which develops over the time based
on trust, loyalty and mutual commitments. Employees valued CSR activities because all such activities are also related to the interest of the employees, and
these activities also meet the employees’ emotional needs which in turn serve
the interest of the organization.
Literature supported number of studies suggesting CSR activities provide
several benefits and outcomes to the organization, such as reputation of the
organization (Skudiene & Auruskeviciene, 2012), attraction and retention of employees (Brammer, Millington & Rayton, 2007; Ghosh & Gurunathan,
2013), financial growth (Keinert, 2008) and increased level of engagement
(Robertson-Smith & Markwick, 2009). To investigate the CSR influence on
employee engagement and specifically examination of impact of different forms of CSR on employee engagement, Ferreira and Oliveira, (2014) conducted a
study by using data of 236 middle managers of several major multiple private
sectors companies in Portugal, including finance, telecoms, food and beverages, and retailers. The findings of this study suggested that although engagement
level is generally high among respondents and there is no significant difference
between different forms of CSR (i.e internal and external). Similarly,
emphasizing the importance of CSR for organizations, Santhosh and Baral (2015) suggest that firms are making efforts to performing CSR but unable to
link their efforts to employees’ attitudes. They further emphasize that success of
firms lies in the changing patterns in the employees’ attitudes through CSR performance focusing both internal and external stakeholders of the firm.
In OB literature, job satisfaction is considered to be a key construct,
therefore, considering the importance of job satisfaction, Hallberg & Schaufeli (2006) argued that job satisfaction is an antecedent or predictor of organizational
commitment and work engagement. Peterson (2004) and Brammer et al. (2007)
suggested that the relationship between perceived CSR and employees’ attitudes and behaviours (e.g., employee engagement) can be examined by using social
identity theory. Based on the principle of SIT, employees classify and identify
72
themselves with a specific group or class. Moreover, employees always believe
in positive social identity to self-categorize themselves from other, share their success, failures and demonstrate their emotions towards their organization
because organization is one of the social categories (Turker, 2009). In literature,
findings of some previous empirical studies revealed that self-conceptualization
of employees is influenced by activities and policies of the organization (Kreiner & Ashforth, 2004). More specifically, self-concept of an employee is more
likely to be boosted in a firm engaging in CSR practices (Maignan, Ferrell &
Hult, 1999; Peterson, 2004).
Hence, as per SIT, if employees feel proud of their firms’ social
performance towards different stakeholders which may lead to positive attitudes
at workplace (Peterson, 2004; Turker, 2009). In particular, satisfied employees with their organization’s social performance may likely display positive
emotions, attitudes and behaviour, such as, engagement (Pivato, Misani &
Tencati, 2008; Rupp et al., 2006). On the basis of reviewed literature, explained argument and followed by future research direction by Albdour and Altarawneh
(2012) suggesting to examine the influence of CSR practices (i.e internal and
external) on attitudes and behaviours of employees including employee
engagement. In addition, Ferreira and Oliveira (2014) noted that it would be interesting to use a different approach to measure employees’ perception of their
organization’s CSR and its effects on employee engagement which is still need
to further examine. Moreover, best knowledge of the author, first ever in this
study, the role of job satisfaction as mediator between perceived CSR and employee engagement has been examined especially in the context of higher
education sector. Considering the research gap and call for study, the present
study contends that perceived CSR may have positive impact on employees’ attitudes including employee engagement and job satisfaction mediates this
relationship. Thus, it is hypothesized:
H7: Job Satisfaction mediates the positive relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and Employees’ Engagement (EE).
Mediating role of job satisfaction between the relationship of employees’
perception of CSR and organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB)
Job satisfaction is an important predictor of employees’ behaviours
(Organ & Ryan, 1995; Saari & Judge, 2004; Wegge et al., 2007). Specifically, Job satisfaction positively influence organizational commitment, organizational
citizenship behaviour (OCB) and reduce employees’ leave intentions to the
organization (Zeinabadi, 2010; Pepe, 2010; Calisir et al., 2011). The research in the field of organizational behaviour has changed the researchers’ intention
towards CSR that how it effect on employees work outcomes including in-role
73
and out-role behaviours (Gonzalez & Garazo, 2006; Islam et al. 2015). More
specifically, this shows organizational engagement in CSR may likely provide favorable working environment to employees at their workplace, which may
attach employees with their organization and enhance their level of job
satisfaction. Brammer et al. (2007) maintained above view by declaring job
satisfaction as a subsequent attitude from the contribution of organizational CSR.
In literature, some empirical evidences showed positive relationship between CSR and OCB such as Fu et al. (2014) conducted a study in hotel
industry in the context of China using data of 450 employees. The findings of
this study revealed that CSR influences OCB through mediating role of
organizational identification and commitment. For the sake of examination of the mediation role of job satisfaction between employees’ perception of CSR
and organizational citizenship behaviour, Islam et al. (2015) conducted a
research study in banking sector of Pakistan using data set of 380 employees. Results of this study indicated that employees’ perceptions of CSR towards their
organizations’ involvement in CSR activities positively influence their level of
job satisfaction and exhibit citizenship behaviour towards their organization.
Conversely, Newman et al. (2015) conducted a study in Chinese context using data of 184 supervisors and subordinate employees. Results of this study
indicated that employees’ perceptions of CSR concerning social and non-social
stakeholders strongly influenced their level of OCB.
This relationship can also be explained using theoretical underpinning of
social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), which states that exchange relationships
exist among the individuals. If employees receive something from organization, he tries to reciprocate with a similar way. When employees feel that their firm
is performing socially responsible activities, this action of their organization
make them satisfied and ultimately enhance their identity with their firm, in
return employees reciprocate by exhibiting positive attitudes (e.g. job satisfaction) and behaviours (e.g. organizational citizenship behaviour).
Based on reviewed literature, explained argument and followed by the call for future studies such as Barrantes (2012) noted that it can be possible that
“employees’ perceptions of CSR about their organizations’ CSR activities
towards society is better predictor of behavioural involvement rather than
employees’ cognitive awareness, there is a need to conduct more empirical studies related to organizations to examine the impact of CSR on employees’
extra role behaviours”. Additionally, Hansen et al (2011) reinforced that future
research might be considered and examined with other multiple mediators simultaneously (i.e. attitudes, perceptions, image, identity, etc.). Based on the
above argument and future calls, this study contends that employees’
74
perceptions towards organizational CSR activities enhance employees’ level of
job satisfaction which ultimately enhances their organizational citizenship behaviour towards organization. This predicted relationship is grounded on the
tenet of SET. Thus, following is hypothesized.
H8: Job Satisfaction mediates the positive relationship between perceived
CSR and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB).
2.9.3 Relationship between Employees’ Perception of CSR
and Organizational Identification
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become a globally accepted
societal norm and employees evaluate their organization by its contributions
towards stakeholder’s (e.g. employees) well-being. Bhattacharya and Sen
(2003) supported this view by asserting that CSR initiatives of an organization plays an important role in identification of stakeholders because organizations’
involvement in social activities builds its good reputation, image and prestige
that ultimately effect employees identification (Peterson, 2004). Additionally, considering this perspective, Riketta, (2005) suggests that organizational
identification (OI) has considered to be linked with a number of employee’s
workplace outcomes which reinforced the investigation of antecedents of
organizational identification as an important agenda. The association between identification and socially responsible activities is considered to be a key factor
because employees who are participating in socially responsible activities in
their organizations are more likely to identify with them (Peterson, 2004). Conversely, if organization builds its negative reputation in social performance,
as per social identity theory, an adverse impact is assumed on work related
attitudes of employees because their self-esteem may be unpleasantly affected
by their attachment with their firm (Peterson, 2004).
Although, recent empirical studies have started to increase research on
CSR context, however, less attention has been given to examine the possible impact of CSR activities on employees’ attitudes and behaviours (Kim et al.,
2010). However, in literature, some empirical evidences indicated positive
association between perceived CSR and employees’ identification with their
organization (Park & Levy, 2014; Glavas & Godwin, 2013; Brammer et al., 2015). More recently, De Roeck et al (2016) conducted a study using sample of
461 employees in European context. Findings of this empirical study indicated
the importance of perceptions of CSR and revealed that mere presence of CSR
(i.e. without actual participation) is sufficient for feelings of organizational pride and identification among employees which is based on its impact on perceived
external image and prestige. Similarly, Barrantes (2012) conducted a study
75
using sample of 515 employees of sport and non-sport organizations in the US
context. Findings of this study revealed that perceived CSR motivate employees which have further positive impact on employees’ organizational identification
with the organization.
Social identity theory explains the relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and its influence on employees’ identification with their
organization. The individuals’ self-enhancement guides them towards social
identification, individuals have a tendency to affiliate themselves to use social groups as a reference point such as nation, political party, organization and
country. Individuals consider their groups highly attractive and distinctive and
this feeling enhance their perception in a positive way which provide them
satisfaction and it fulfils their need for self-esteem (Bergami & Bagozzi, 2000; Smidts et al., 2001; Ashforth et al., 2008). Boons et al. (2015) suggested that if
employees feel proud of their organization because of the high status of their
organization and they being member of their organization is likely to enhance their self-concept. In this context, SIT suggest that CSR practices positively
influence the employees’ self-categorization process which integrate the
common attributes to strengthen their self-concept. It assumes that CSR
programs normally reflects firm values and norms and impact employees’ identity with the firm, which stimulate employees’ attitudes and behaviours
providing support to achieve the firms’ objectives including organizational
identity (e.g. Mael & Tetrick, 1992; Dutton et al., 1994).
Therefore, it is predicted that positive relationship may exist between
employees’ perception of CSR and employees’ organizational identification in
the context of higher education institutions of Pakistan. Hence, there is need to examine the mechanisms through which employees may understand and
respond to CSR initiatives of organizations in a way which strengthens
organizational identification of employees (Bhattacharya et al., 2009; Jones,
2010). Thus, on the basis of reviewed literature, explained arguments and followed by the future research direction by Park and Levy (2014) noted that in
order to improve understanding to examine the internal mechanisms of how
CSR activities work among employees. Thus, in future studies should examine potential relationships among other variables relevant to OI, in the contexts of
other service industry. In addition, Barrantes, (2012) also noted that in order to
examine the influence of employees’ perceptions of CSR, there is need to carry
out more research through which impact of CSR can examine on employees’ attitudes (e.g. organizational identity). Therefore, this study contends that
employees’ perception of CSR may have impact on employees’ attitudes and
behaviours including organizational identification. Hence, following is hypothesized:
76
H9: Employees’ perception of CSR activities of their organization is
positively associated with their Organizational Identification.
Mediating role of organizational identification between the relationship of
employees’ perception of CSR and organizational Commitment (OC)
In this competitive era, employees’ commitment towards their
organization has become important to retain human resource for the success of
the organization. In order to understand the factors which might contribute in enhancing commitment of employees, researchers have identified different
environmental and work related variables such as organizational climate,
working conditions, job satisfaction, training, justice, rewards, exchange
relations etc. (Islam et al., 2012; Najafi, et al., 2011; Ahmad & Bakar, 2003). The identified employees have a strong and long-term association with their
organizations because feeling of oneness is developed with their organizations
(O’Reilley & Chatman, 1986; Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Bhattacharya et al., 2009). Considering this perspective, van Dick et al. (2004) and van Dick et al.
(2006) suggested that normally identified employees exibit more positive
attitudes and behaviours at workplace including job satisfaction, organizational
commitment (Marique & Stinglhamber, 2011), organizational citizenship behaviours (Tyler & Blader, 2003). It is argued that perceived CSR enhances
employees’ identification because it sends signal to attract employees
distinctively and shared identified characteristics which strengthen their self-
concepts.
Although some previous empirical evidences indicated that CSR
activities can help employees to view their organization which share their moral values (Bhattacharya et al., 2009). In general, research demonstrates that CSR
has positively influence on different employees’ attitudes and behaviours,
including job satisfaction (Valentine & Fleischman, 2008), identification
(Berger et al., 2006), commitment (Carmeli, 2005; Collier & Esteban, 2007), trust (Vlachos et al., 2010; Hansen et al., 2011; Hillenbrand et al., 2013). More
specifically, Zheng (2010) concluded in their study that perceived CSR have
significant positive influence on employees’ attitudinal variable i.e., job satisfaction, organizational commitment in the context of China. Nejati and
Ghasemi (2013) also concluded and established a direct positive association
between employees’ perceptions of CSR and organizational commitment in the
context of Iran. Similalry, Farooq et al. (2014) conducted a study on 378 employees of local and multinational companies in South Asia and found a
significant stronger positive influence of organizational identification and
organizational trust as mediator between the relationship of perception of CSR and organizational commitment. More recently, Islam et al. (2016) conducted a
study on 486 employees of hotel industry of Malaysia and found a positive
77
significant influence of organizational identification as mediator. Thus, in this
study, it is assumed that perceived CSR may have positive impact on employees’ level of commitment and organizational identification mediates the relationship
between perceived CSR and OC.
The relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and organizational commitment with mediation effects of organizational
identification can be explained using Social identity theory. This theory suggests
that organizational activities related to CSR has direct impact on employees’ level of organizational identification. In this respect, Aberson et al. (2000)
suggests that individuals make efforts to achieve and maintain their positive
social identity, through which they can identify their distinctiveness from other
groups (Ashforth & Mael, 1989). In this context, Hogg & Terry (2000) suggested that membership of corporate firms may be considered as the most
important element among these groups. In the perspective of social identity,
organizational commitment is an important outcome which relates to identification. Allen and Meyer (1990) defined that ‘‘an employee’s emotional
attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the organization’’ (p. 1).
Although, identified and committed employee has psychological relationship
between the employees and the firm. The organizational identification is normally assumed as an antecedent of the organizational commitment.
Supporting this view, Pratt (1998) suggested that organizational identification is
a cognitive and perceptual variable which provides a source of attitudes such as
organizational commitment. Thus, CSR may affect organizational commitment through mediating effect of organizational identity, this proposed relationship
has supported from some of previous studies which revealed positive correlation
between OI and OC (Carmeli et al., 2007; Kim et al., 2010).
Based on reviewed literature, explained arguments and following the
future research direction of Farooq et al. (2014) noted that CSR may have
indirect influence on various employees’ attitudes and behaviours which may also include organizational commitment. Similarly, Park and Levy (2014)
supported that in order to enhance understanding related to internal mechanisms
of how CSR activities work among employees, therefore, future studies may examine the potential relationships among other variables relevant to
organizational identification. Hence, this study contends that faculty members’
perceptions of CSR may have impact on their level of commitment with
mediation effects of organizational identification. Therefore, it is hypothesized:
H10: Organizational Identification mediates the positive relationship between
perceived CSR and Organizational Commitment (OC).
78
Mediating role of Organizational Identification between the relationship of
employees’ perception of CSR and employee engagement (EE)
Employees feel proud of their organizations’ social responsibility towards
different stakeholders which lead positive work attitudes (Peterson, 2004;
Turker, 2009). Specifically, satisfied employees with their organization’s social responsibility will demonstrate positive attitudes such as engagement (Rupp et
al., 2006; Pivato et al., 2008), affective commitment (Grant et al., 2008; Hoeven
& Verhoeven, 2013) and OCB (Cha et al., 2013). In particular, working of employees for such organizations which participate in socially responsible
activities, they may feel more attracted to the organizations which improve their
self-esteem and fulfil their requirement of self-enhancement (Tajfel & Turner,
1985). Social Identity Theory (SIT) can explain the relationship between perceived CSR and employee engagement (Brammer et al., 2007; Turker, 2009).
In adition, Peterson (2004) suggests that individual develop self-
conceptualization by classifying themselves within a group and comparing themselves with other groups This theory also provides help to understand
individual employee perceptions of his engagement and to examine the concept
of self-conceptualization in the context of CSR. In organizational context,
employee always assume positive social identity to differentiate himself with others (Turker, 2009).
In organizations, employees share their success and failures and exhibit
their emotions because they consider it a one of social category (Turker, 2009). Accordingly, contented employees with their organization’ social responsibility
will display positive reactions, attitudes and behavoiur including employee
engagement (Pivato, Misani & Tencati, 2007; Rupp et al., 2006). In organizational perspective, supporting the importance of CSR, some researchers
suggested that according to Social Identity Theory (SIT), if organization is
performing its social responsibilities towards different stakeholders in a good
manner, employee feels proud of his/her firm which may lead to positive work attitudes (Peterson, 2004; Turker, 2009). In addition, Caldwell (2010) stated that
CSR is one of the factor which enhance the firm’ level of employee engagement
and its performance. More specifically, CSR is considered one of the top derivers of employee engagement (Perrin, n.d.; Right Management, 2009), this
indicates that CSR is associated with the interests of employees’ and it can
influence employees’ level of engagement.
CSR is argued to contribute to higher levels of employee engagement,
such as Glavas and Piderit (2009) evaluated and found a positive effect of
employees’ perceptions of CSR on work engagement. In this context, some studies investigated the association between CSR and employee engagement
such as Elmotaleb et al. (2015) examined this relationship and found significant
79
positive impact of perceived CSR (i.e., both internal and external practices of
CSR) on EE in presence of OI being an effective mediator. In addition, Azim (2016) reported in a study on banking sector of Saudi Arabia on 266 employees
and found significant positive relationship between perceived CSR and
organizational commitment, employee engagement and organizational
citizenship behaviour related to organization. More recently, Glavas (2016) conducted a study in a large professional service firm of USA using data of
15,184 employees. Findings of the study showed positive significant influence
of CSR on employee engagement. On the basis of above reviewed literature, explained arguments and answers the call of study of Aguinis and Glavas (2012)
noted that there is need to further micro level research on CSR and some other
models which may include multiple mediators. Therefore, this study argues that
employees’ perceptions of CSR may have a positive impact on employee engagement in the context of higher education in Pakistan. Thus, based on the
above discussions, following is hypothesized:
H11: Organizational Identification mediates the positive relationship between
perceived CSR and Employees’ Engagement (EE).
Mediating role of Organizational Identification between the relationship of
employees’ perception of CSR and organizational citizenship behaviour
(OCB)
The concept of organizational identification “is a type of social identification of employees which refers to the degree to which a member
defines himself- or herself by the same attributes that he or she believes define
the organization” (Dutton et al., 1994 p. 239). Similarly, Gautam et al. (2004) suggested that employees who identified themselves with their organizations
perform to achieve the goals, objectives and norms of the organization because
they have adopted as their values. Continuing this view, Ashforth and Mael
(1989) suggested that organizational identification develops when employees perceive feeling of cohesion or oneness with their organization and feel that they
belong to it. Specifically, Bartels et al. (2010) advocated this argument and
asserted that if increased level of organizational identification is developed in employees then they are more likely to take risks to help their co-workers.
Talking about the importance of employee identification with their organization.
Ashforth and Mael (1989) suggested that strongly identified employees are more
likely to show extra role behaviour for the interest of the firm, and make extra efforts (Amabile, 1996; Ryan & Deci, 2000). In this perspective, Koopmans et
al. (2011) argued that it is necessary for employees to perform beyond their
assigned tasks (i.e. OCB) and extend their support and cooperation to their co-workers specifically due to complications at their modern workplace. Some of
the OB theorists proposed that organizational involvement in CSR activities
80
transmits important signals to employees towards organizational ethics and
values (Rupp et al., 2006).
In the literature, few studies have examined the effects of employees’
perceptions of CSR on employees’ workplace attitudes and behaviours
including organizational identification and OCB (De Roeck & Delobbe, 2012), job performance and OCB (Rupp et al., 2013) and corporate social performance
and OCB (Zhang et al., 2014). Although, effectiveness of CSR is acknowledged
in providing social and financial benefits as well as its positive effect on employees work attitudes and behaviours, a limited research has been carried
out which can explicitly examine the mechanism that how CSR impacts these
work outcomes such as commitment, job engagement and OCB (Aguinis &
Glavas, 2012). For instance, Barrantes (2012) conducted a study on 515 employees of sports organizations in the context of US and found positive
impact of perceived CSR and organizational identity on OCB. Similarly, Zhang
et al. (2014) concluded a study in the context of China using data of 184 employees and found significant positive influence of employees’ perception of
CSR on their OCBs. Recently, Islam et al. (2015) conducted a study on 308
employees in the context of banking sector of Pakistan and results reveal that if
employees perceive that their firm is engaged in CSR programs they show more satisfaction and citizenship behaviour with respect to their firm.
The present study build its argument based on previous work and
examines the employees’ perceptions of CSR practices targeted the key stakeholder (i.e. employees). Social identity theory can be well explained the
relationship between perceived CSR and employee behaviours (e.g., OCB)
(Peterson, 2004; Brammer et al., 2007; Turker, 2009). Turker (2009) supported that employees prefer to have positive social identity to distinguish themselves
from others. Based on the above discussions, reviewed literature and followed
by research direction of Barrantes (2012) noted that “future studies could
consider examining the impact of employees’ perception of CSR on employees’ attitudes and behaviours” (p. 125). Therefore, this study argues and made the
effort to contribute in literature by examining the role that perceived CSR plays
in development of organizational citizenship behaviour with mediation effect of organizational identification in higher education sector. Thus, following is
hypothesized:
H12: Organizational Identification mediates the positive relationship between perceived CSR and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB).
81
2.9.4 Relationship between Employees’ Perception’ of CSR and
Organizational Commitment
Organizational commitment is one of the widely investigated construct
and most commonly evaluated forms of psychological attachment (Meyer &
Herscovitch, 2001). Supporting the importance of organizational commitment, Morrow (2011) and Rousseau (1998) commented that OC influence
organizations to make more efforts to increase employees’ loyalty, because
psychologically attached employees are more satisfied and more productive (Vandenberg & Lance, 1992; Hunter & Thatcher, 2007). Organizational
Commitment being a multi-dimensional approach by incorporating attitudinal
and behavioural dimensions i.e., affective commitment, normative commitment
and continuance commitment. Allen and Meyer, (1990, 1991) further explained that these dimensions of commitment are basically different psychological
components which can be experienced at different degrees. In addition, Tyler,
(1999) suggested that employees would likely to follow the organizations which can enhance their identification and it is likely that their high self-concept can
enhance employees’ commitment towards their organization. In this context,
Maignan et al., (1999) and Peterson, (2004) described that the self-concept of
an employee is more likely to be enhanced in an organization which involves in CSR activities.
To explain the relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and
organizational commitment, Social Identity Theory (SIT) provides the theoretical underpinning between perceived CSR and OC. This theory explains
that individuals need to classify and identify themselves within a social group
or class. It further elaborates that CSR is not only a social requirement but it also fulfills employee’s membership needs into a desirable group through
participation of organization in CSR activities. More specifically, supporting
this view, Turker (2009) described effects of CSR on OC based on the SIT and
declared that CSR (including social and non-social stakeholders, employees, and customers) declaring it as a key predictor of organizational commitment.
In literature empirical evidences indicated positive relationship between perceived CSR and organizational commitment level of employees such as
Brammer et al. (2007) tested that CSR contributes towards an organization.
Moreover, Closon et al. (2015) conducted a study on 621 employees of various
sectors in the context of Belgium and found significant positive influence of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’ affective organizational
commitment. Song et al. (2015) also carried out a study on 307 Casino
employees in the context of South Korea, results of this study revealed that economic, legal, and philanthropic dimensions of CSR had positive influence
on organizational commitment level of employees. However, insignificant
82
relationship was found between ethical dimension of CSR and OC which shows
that casino employees may less likely to perceive ethical effect as a basic factor of influencing OC. Conversely, Mory, Wirtz & Göttel (2016) conducted a study
on 386 employees of a German firm and examined how employees perceive
corporate social responsibility (CSR) within their organizations, and how
perception of CSR impacts their organizational commitment. Results of this study indicated that internal perceptions of CSR had strong impact on affective
organizational commitment and low effects on normative commitment. On the
other hand, Rahman, Rashid & Haque (2016) also conducted a research study on 502 employees and examined the relationship between employees’ CSR
attitudes and its effects on JS and OC in the banking sector of Bangladesh. The
findings of this study indicated positive relationship between CSR attitudes and
both JS and OC.
Based on reviewed literature, there is need to further examine the impact
of employees’ perception of CSR on employees’ level of organizational commitment which may likely have positive association with a unique
theoretical framework of this study because proposed mechanism of this study
is tested first ever in the context of higher education sector. Thus, based on
reviewed literature and following the research direction of Wong and Gao (2014) noted for a further research to explore the potential effects of macro-level
variables (e.g., perceived CSR) on individual-level effects (employees’ attitudes
i.e. organizational commitment). In addition, Lee et al., (2013) also noted that
in future by incorporating some additional important variables (e.g., organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviours), a more
comprehensive explanation of CSR activities' effectiveness and efficiency may
be achieved. Hence, this study contends that perceived CSR may have positive impact on employees’ level of commitment in higher education sector. Thus,
following is hypothesized:
H13: Employee’s Perception of CSR activities of their organization is positively associated to their Organizational Commitment (OC).
2.9.5 Relationship between Employees’ Perception of CSR
and Employee Engagement
In the community of HR professionals, the construct of employee engagement has become contemporary, specifically since the 1890s
(Welbourne, 2007; Macey & Schneider, 2008). Emphasizing the importance of
employee engagement, Vazirani (2007) suggests that employee engagement indicates the degree of his commitment and involvement towards his/her
organization and its values. Although, organizations have realized and
83
understand the significance of employee engagement, however, it seems that lot
of steps are needed to be taken to enhance the level of employee engagement. Debating on this view, Bakker et al. (2011) suggested that “employee
engagement has become imperative for the organizations because when
employees perceive that their organization offers a supportive, involving, and
challenging working climate, they may likely to respond by investing time and energy and by being psychologically involved in the work of their organization”
(p. 13). Previous empirical evidences indicated that there are several antecedents
and drivers of employee engagement such as employee development, employee communication, reward and recognition of employees services and extended
employee care (Vazirani, 2007). In addition, Rich, Lepine and Crawford (2010)
also suggested antecedents of employee engagement i.e. value similarity,
perceived organizational support, and core self-evaluations. However, it is contended that CSR is a practical antecedent of employee engagement, depicting
CSR as a beneficial antecedent for providing opportunities for employees to be
engaged.
Despite of the significance of CSR with relation to employees, few studies
have examined the emerging concept of employee engagement with CSR. For
instance, Caldwell (2010) described that in order to strengthen the organizational level of employee engagement, CSR should also be one of the
factors. In this context, Ferreira & Oliveira (2014) also conducted a research
study and examined the influence of different forms of CSR on employee
engagement. Findings of this study indicated overall significant impact of CSR on employee engagement, however, no significant difference between various
forms of CSR (i.e. internal and external) was found on employee engagement.
Similarly, Lee at al. (2015) conducted a study on 259 employees in the context of Malaysia and found a significant and positive correlation between employees
focused CSR practices and employees’ quality of work life including job
satisfaction, organizational trust and employee engagement. Most recently,
Obeidat (2016) conducted a study on 350 employees of Jordanian mobile telecommunication companies, concluding that CSR (internal and external) has
positive significant influence on employee engagement.
The relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and employees’
attitudes and behaviours such as employee engagement may be well explained
by social identity theory (Peterson, 2004; Brammer et al., 2007). More
specifically, SIT have also been adopted by some scholars to explain employees’ identification with their companies, which in turn may have an impact on
employees’ attitudes behaviour at their workplace including employee
engagement (Dutton et al., 1994; Blader & Tyler, 2009). The above reviewed literature warrants to examine the employees’ perceptions of CSR which may
have positive impact on employee engagement. This study argues that there is
84
possibility that employees’ perceptions of CSR may have positive impact on
employees’ level of engagement under certain conditions. Thus, employee engagement is considered as desirable attitude of employees which needs more
investigation to identify its antecedents particularly its relation with perceived
CSR in the context of higher education sector. Albdour and Altarawneh (2012)
noted that studies in future could explore the effects of CSR on employees’ attitudes and behaviours such as employee engagement. In addition, Ferreira and
Oliveira (2014) also noted that there is a need to measure the employees’
perceptions of their firms’ CSR and its impact on their level of engagement. Based on above discussion, reviewed literature and followed by the research
direction, this study contends that employees’ perceptions of CSR may have
positive impact on employees’ attitudes including employee engagement in the
context of higher education institutions of Pakistan. Therefore, it is hypothesized:
H14: Employee’s perception of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) to their organization is positively associated with Employees’ Engagement
(EE).
2.9.6 Relationship of Employees’ Perceptions of CSR and Organizational
Citizenship Behaviour
An emerging body of research indicates positive relationship between organizational CSR initiatives and employees’ workplace outcomes.
Considering this perspective, some previous studies suggested that
organizational, social and environmental programs are acknowledged by the employees (Carmeli, 2005; Kim et al., 2010). The major reason behind this
relationship is the activities of firm which may have direct impact on the
behaviours of its employees who may respond on the basis of their perception
and assessment of the firm. More specifically, it is argued that perceived CSR may have influence on employees’ behaviours to achieve the organizational
goals. In support of this argument, Cha et al. (2013) suggested that employees
perceived that their organization is engaged in socially responsible activities for the well-being of its stakeholders (e.g., employees). It also encourages them to
respond citizenship behaviour towards their organization.
Nevertheless, the acknowledgment of CSR provides social and financial returns, a limited research has been carried out which explicitly examines the
mechanism that how CSR influences employees’ work outcomes including
OCB (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012). Previously, Hansen et al. (2011) noted that small number of research findings reveal positive influence of employees’
perception of CSR on their outcomes and organizational activities and
85
demonstrating OCB. Fu et al. (2014) reported this perspective by conducting a
study on 450 employees in the hotel industry of China and found significant positive correlation between CSR and OCB. Recently, Newman et al. (2015)
conducted a study on 184 employees/managers in the context of China revealing
a positive influence of employees’ perceptions of CSR (social & non-social
stakeholders) on their OCB. However, insignificant relationship was found among employees’ perceptions (toward employees, customers and government)
and their OCB.
Thus, above reviewed literature shows that there is need to examine how
CSR activities get transformed into positive behaviours of employees at their
workplace which could be beneficial for organizations in order to promote
desired attitudes and behaviours. The relationship between perceived CSR and employees’ behaviours including organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB)
can be explained by using social identity theory (SIT) (Peterson, 2004; Brammer
et al., 2007; Turker, 2009). Based on above discussion, reviewed literature and followed by research direction of Lee et al. (2013) noted that in future other
variables may also be considered (e.g. organizational citizenship behaviour) to
explore the role of CSR to influence employees’ attitudes and behaviours. In
addition, Gao (2014) called for a future research and emphasized to incorporate more variables which could help organizations to achieve competitive
advantages and good human resource. Hence, this study contends that
employees’ perceptions of CSR may have positive impact on employees
behaviours. Therefore, following is hypothesized:
H15: Employee’s perceptions of CSR to their organization is positively
associated with their Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB).
86
2.10 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY
The relevant literature indicates that there is a relationship between
employees’ perceptions of CSR and employee’ attitudes and behaviours.
However, there is still need to examine whether employees’ perception of CSR
is able to impact employees’ important outcomes significantly in higher education sector. Moreover, this study aims to identify the credibility of the
developed hypotheses and to examine what degree of employees’ perceptions
of CSR can impact employees’ attitudes and behaviours. After detailed review of CSR literature and relevant research on the topic, theoretical research
framework of the study is developed. The framework depicts how employees’
perceptions of CSR influence employees’ attitudes and behaviours through
intervening variables as mediators namely organizational trust, job satisfaction and organizational identification as shown in Figure-1.1.
In the model, employees’ perception of CSR is adopted as independent variable. In framework, it is suggested that employees’ perception of CSR affect
different dimensions of employees’ attitudes and behaviour which ultimately
affect employees’ outcomes. More specifically, the research objective of this
study is to hypothesize an integrative mechanism which explains how faculty members’ perceptions of CSR influence their attitudes and behaviours. The
developed model was tested which described the potential impact of employees’
perception of CSR on employees’ attitudes and behaviours in higher education
institutions in Pakistan. This is a pioneer empirical study in the context of higher education sector and its findings contribute significantly to gauge the effects of
perceived CSR and its impact on faculty members’ attitudes and behaviours at
their workplace. It was the first time that an integrated mechanism would be developed which explained the influence of perceived CSR on faculty members’
attitudes and behaviours.
Through this study an effort is made to explain that how CSR contributes
in higher education institutions in influencing and promoting faculty members’ attitudes and behaviours. In relevant domain of the literature, this study first time, hypothesized and considered the organizational trust, job satisfaction and organizational identification as mediators and examine their role between employees’ perceptions of CSR and employees’ outcomes. First ever, the perception of CSR as construct was clearly defined and tested in the context of higher education sector and its influence on faculty members’ attitudes and behaviours. The theoretical underpinnings of the model were based on two widely used theoretical frameworks in literature i.e. Social Exchange Theory and Social Identity Theory which basically underpins the theoretical contribution of the thesis. In following Figure 1.1 depicts the proposed relationships among the observed variables.
87
Figure 1.1: Theoretical Research Model
2.11 SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER
All the constructs used in the study were discussed extensively in the
current chapter including Perceived CSR, OT, JS, OI, OC, EE and OCB. These constructs were discussed as regard to their definitions, theoretical development and importance. Moreover, this chapter also focused hypotheses development, relationship of adopted constructs of the study with employees’ perceptions of CSR and proposed theoretical research model of the study. In the next chapter, details about research methodology and measuring instruments used for the present study will come under discussion.
88
CHAPTER 3:
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter is aimed at outlining the details of methodology and adopted procedures to address the research questions and further to test the developed
hypotheses of this study. It further outlines the discussion on research design,
research approach or methods, research strategy, sampling, instrumentation and
tools used for data analysis.
3.1 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY
Research philosophy is considered as an important element of research
methodology. In the area of management research, three views about research
philosophy are relevant i.e. positivism, interpretivism and realism (Cooke & Davies, 2000). Positivism is a philosophy which basis on highly structured
methodology, it enables to generalize, quantify the observations to analyze the
findings through statistical methods. This is a critical and objective based
method and this philosophy is generally used in natural science (Sundars, 2003). Interpretive Philosophy is based on the belief that the social world of business
and management is difficult because it formulates on the basis of theories and
laws similar to natural science. This philosophy indicates that “there are many truths and meaning of a simple fact and these are suitable for every situation and
for every research problem” (Johnson & Christensen, 2004). Realism
philosophy believes in the interdependency of human values, beliefs and focuses
on the principles that in environment reality exists. It considers that the humans not to take as stuffs to study or investigate as it is considered in natural science.
This view of research philosophy defines that how individual react to a real-time
situation or circumstance (Johnson & Christensen, 2004). In realism, it takes the view that people are likely to exchange their interpretations in the socially
constructed environment and it is to be used exclusively on human subjects. This
indicates that the realism is more relevant for business management research.
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN
Research design process basically starts from the hypotheses
development and it continues till to reach a valid conclusion of the study. In the
process of research design multiple stages are included such as research
approach, research strategy or research method to collect required information
89
from respondents to reach a valid conclusion (Gauri & Gronhaug, 2002). In a
similar way, Parahoo (1997) describes a research design as “a plan that describes how, when and where data are to be collected and analyzed” (p. 142). Thus, by
adopting the research design, the type of required evidence is identified, ways
how to gather it and how to interpret it to find the answer to the basic research
question that under which conditions the faculty members’ perception of CSR influence their attitudes and behaviours in higher education institutions.
Research design has a number of characteristics such as the descriptive,
explanatory and the exploratory.
Primarily, the descriptive research design relates to the experiences of
respondents of the study (Bryman, 2012). The purpose to select this research
design for use is to explain the features of a population being investigated. However, this research design does not address the questions about how, when
and why these characteristics are occurred. Although, it explains "what"
question (what are the characteristics of the population or situation being investigated?) (Shields et al., 2013). Hence, descriptive research design is
unable to describe the basis of a causal relationship, where a variable affects the
other(s).
Exploratory research is a study which conducted for a problem that has
not been well-defined, it often occurs before we know enough to make
conceptual distinctions or suggest an explanatory relationship” (Shields et al.,
2013). Similarly, Kotler and Armstrong (2006) asserted that the purpose of exploratory study is to collect initial information which helps in explaining the
problems and suggest hypotheses. In addition, Neuman (2003) argued that the
exploratory research design is usually used in order to invite researchers to conduct more research in the subject area.
Saunders et al. (2007) described that an explanatory research design
focuses that how effectively describe the characteristics of a social phenomenon or a population. Moreover, Brains et al. (2011) indicated that the explanatory
research study is carried out to test hypotheses and to understand the cause-and-
effect relationships. Therefore, if it is the purpose of explanatory research study to determine which variable might be causing a certain behaviour (i.e. whether
cause and effect relationship is existed between the variables). Thus, in order to
determine causality, it is important to hold the variable that is assumed to cause
the change in the other variable(s) constant and then measure the changes in the other variable(s).
In literature, there are different possible ways to consider and identify the research design for a study. Basically, the characterization of a research study is
made on the basis of set objectives of the study (what the researcher intends to
90
do) (Baxter & Jack, 2008). In explanatory research design, the basic purpose of
the researcher is to develop hypotheses on the basis of different theories which attempt to explain how to specific phenomena operates (Johnson & Christensen,
2004). The primary purpose and the question under investigation in this research
is examining the impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’
workplace outcomes which entirely deals with human attitudes and behaviours. Thus, explanatory research design is considered suitable to be used and this
study and it categorizes as an explanatory study. In order to develop hypotheses,
different theories were used which theoretically supported to explain the specific phenomenon (employees’ perceptions of CSR) how it functions (Johnson &
Christensen, 2004).
3.2.1 Research Approach
In literature, different types of research approaches have been defined such as qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approach. Fraenkel &
Wallen (2003) supported that the qualitative research approach is the best choice
to be used. Contrarily, Ary et al., (2002) supported to use the quantitative
research approach with certain statistical tools to address a research question. Similarly, May (2011) supported that the quantitative research approach is
effectively used for a large number of respondents to measure the data by using
quantitative techniques and statistical methods. In addition, mixed methods
approach is also used by collecting data qualitatively and quantitatively. The collected data is then integrated which further used for a specific design based
on philosophical assumptions and theoretical frameworks. The main purpose of
using this approach is to combine both approaches rather using either approach separately.
In present study, the purpose to use the quantitative research approach is
to effectively measure the observed constructs in quantitatively. Moreover, Terre-Blanche et al. (2006) prefer to use the quantitative approach due to its
ability to increase the generalizability of the findings. Similarly, Johnson and
Christensen (2008) emphasized to use quantitative approach to examine hypotheses, considering the cause and effect relationship to predict about future
outcomes based on past events. In addition, Ledgerwood and White (2006) also
suggested that the quantitative research approach determines the degree of
participants’ attitudes as well as to measure the extent of the attitudes. In literature, some research studies related to CSR and employees have already
used this research approach (Luo, 2014; Barcelos et al., 2015; Zientara et al.,
2015). Thus, in this study, quantitative research approach is used to examine the general phenomenon of impact of employees’ perception of CSR in a specific
perspective i.e. higher education sector in the context of Pakistan.
91
3.2.2 Research Strategy
Researcher plan is basically a research strategy which needs to decide to
carry out the research work (Saunders et al., 2007). In literature, few research strategies are identified such as experimental study, survey based study, case
study, grounded theory and action research etc. (Gill & Johnson, 2002; Saunders
et al., 2003; Yin, 2003). Researchers in the field of management have used survey based strategy to collect information from the respondents (Islam et al.,
2012). Furthermore, Salant and Dillman (1994) and Fraenkel and Wallen (2003)
argued that this strategy is commonly used to examine characteristics of a
certain population including its attitudes and behaviours. Some scholars are also suggested that it is beneficial because it gathers a wide range of information
from the population (Singleton & Straits, 2005). Thus, considering the above
arguments, this study used a survey based strategy and questionnaires were adapted from previous studies to get the responses (see section measuring
instruments).
3.2.3 Time Horizon of the Study
Time horizon refers to the timelines within which the study is intended to
be completed by the researcher (Saunders et al., 2007). In the literature, two types of time horizon are categorized, cross sectional and longitudinal (Bryman,
2012). Saunders et al., (2003) emphasized that before entering into the data
collection process, it is important to decide whether the aim of the research study is to examine a phenomenon in a specific time frame (cross sectional) or study
an ongoing phenomenon (longitudinal). Goddard and Melville (2004) refer that,
a longitudinal time frame for data collection signifies that data collection has
been made over an extended period of time and is used for research for examining change over time. However, in the cross-sectional time frame, the
study is normally carried out when the investigation is related to a particular
phenomenon at a specific time. According to the arguments of Gall, Gall and Brog (2007) in a cross sectional study, it is most appropriate way to collect
required data from the respondents at one point of time. Therefore, the current
study is carried out in a cross sectional timeframe and primary data is collected
from the faculty members of 177 higher education institutions, recognized by HEC of Pakistan.
92
3.2.4 Population & Sampling
Population is basically a total set of observations out of which the sample
is selected for analysis on the basis of certain sampling techniques. In sampling,
it is necessary that the samples are true representative of the entire population
(Narehan et al., 2014). In the literature, in order to select the sample from the target population, scholars identified two main strategies (i.e. probability and
non-probability). In probability sampling, all elements in the target population
have an equal opportunity of being selected, therefore, for the purpose of generalizability, probability sampling is of much importance (Ary et al., 2006).
Moreover, in case of a known population, probability sampling is best technique
(Sekaran, 2006).
This study considered faculty members of higher education institutions
(public & private) as the population. Kothari (2004, p.66) suggested that
“normally, multi-stage sampling is used in big inquires extending to a considerably large geographical area, say, the entire country”. He further
suggested that “it is easier to administer than single stage designs because
sampling frame in multi-stage sampling is divided into partial units”. Therefore,
keeping in view the objectives and population, multi-stage sampling is considered the best suited for this study.
Thus, at first stage, stratified sampling technique is applied, because this
describe each group in detail (Sekaran, 2006). In stratified sampling, the population categories in a number of distinct groups, the frame can be organized
into separate "strata,". Each stratum is then treated and sampled as an
independent sub-population, of which individual subjects can be randomly selected and every subject in a stratum has the same chance to be selected as
“element”. Further, Kothari, (2004, p.62) asserted that “in stratified sampling,
the population is divided into several sub-populations that are individually more
homogeneous than the total population which are called ‘strata’ and then items are selected from each stratum to constitute a sample”.
In order to determine the sample size, different researchers suggested different parameters to be considered. Roscoe (1975) presented the following
rules of thumb: (a) in most of the research, sample size larger than 30 and less
than 500 are appropriate; (b) if the sample are divided into sub samples or sub
groups, a minimum sample size of 30 for each category is necessary and (c) in multivariate research the sample size should be at least 10 times large as the
number of observed variables. Similarly, Hinkin (1995) suggested that
appropriate sample size should have an item to response ratios as low as 1:4 and as high as 1:10 for each set of scales. However, Sekaran (2003) suggested
that sample size is important to determine the representativeness of the
93
sample for the generalizability of the results. There are 177 universities or higher
education institutions (HEIs) recognized by Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan, of which 103 (58%) are public sector universities while, 74
(42%) are private sector universities (www.hec.gov.pk) (see Appendix-A).
Accordingly, at first stage of sampling, 177 universities were divided into two
strata i.e. public sector and private sector because HEC has categorized universities into two categories i.e. public and private sector. Hence, a total
sample of 30% of 177 (i.e. 54) universities were selected. Therefore, to
determine an appropriate sample size from each stratum, proportional allocation of random sampling was applied. Hence, 30% random sample of the public-
sector universities which was comprised of 58.0 % of 54 = 31, and 42.0% of 54
= 23 universities from private sector were selected (see Appendix-B & C).
The target population of this study was comprised of the faculty members
of both public and private sector HEIs recognized by higher education
commission of Pakistan. Total 34444, full time faculty members are serving in these universities, including 24340 in public and 10104 in private sector
(www.hec.gov.pk) (see Appendix-D). At the 2nd stage of sampling, faculty
members were selected on convenience basis from 31 public sectors and 23 from
private sector identified universities. Moreover, in order to determine an appropriate sample size and to make the study more reliable, strengthen and the
generalizability of the recommendations, the formula presented by Krejcie and
Morgan (1970) was applied which is considered true representative of a given
population. Considering each stratum of a sub group of population and based on above referred formula, the sample size of 379 faculty members from public
sector and 357 faculty members from private sector universities (i.e. 736 faculty
members) were considered sufficient to examine the impact of faculty members’ perceptions of CSR on their attitudes and behaviours (see Appendix-E).
Kothari (2004) suggested that “proportional allocation is considered most
efficient and an optimal design when the cost of selecting an item is equal for each stratum, there is no difference in within-stratum variances, and the purpose
of sampling happens to be to estimate the population value of some
characteristic” (p. 63). The selection of respondents in each university (public or private), is made on the basis of proportional allocation of respondents as per
the size of the faculty members in the respective university. For the purpose of
distribution of samples among strata, the Kumaisons (1997) formula was
adopted (Ekwere & Edem, 2014; Anigbogu et al., 2014). Below is the Kumaisons formula which states that:
nh NnNh
where
94
n = Total sample size
Nh = The number of units allocated to each stratum N = Population size
In this study:
n = Total sample size 736 (of each stratum i.e. 379 for public and
357 for private)
Nh = The number of items or units allocated to each university
(faculty members in each university in each stratum).
N = Population size from selected universities in each “stratum” i.e. 15525 for public (from 31 universities) and 4721 for private
(from 23 universities).
Such as for COMSATS Institute of Information Technology (CIIT):
=379 ∗ 2908
15525= 71
Accordingly, strata based on public sector universities comprised of total
15525 faculty members from 31 randomly selected universities (at first stage)
and minimum threshold of 379 respondents was suggested to be approached on convenience basis to seek responses (see Appendix-F). In a similar way,
minimum threshold for private sector universities’ stratum, 357 respondents
were suggested to be approached out of 4721 faculty members in the strata of
23 private sector universities (which makes 736 faculty members in total) (see Appendix-G). For this purpose, most of the universities were selected from main
cities of the country (i.e. Islamabad, Lahore, Karachi, Quetta, Peshawar and
Multan). In selected universities, faculty members come from across the country
and true representation of faculty members was considered at the time of selection of the universities from most of the main cities of the country.
3.2.5 Data Collection Method
Primarily, data can be separated into two types i.e. primary and
secondary. Primary data is derived from first-hand sources and it needs to collect first time and it needs to be processed or interpreted; whereas the data which has already been analyzed and taken is called secondary data. Burns (2000) suggested that research deign and data type is important because instrumentation such as data collection entirely depends upon them. This is a
95
quantitative research based study having a survey based research design, therefore, primary data on a survey based questionnaire is appropriate and best suited for this study.
3.2.6 Data Collection Procedures
In order to collect responses from the participants, data collection is executed through self-administered questionnaires. Some scholars support that a questionnaire is very useful when there is a need to gather data collection about beliefs, values, feelings, thoughts, perceptions, attitudes, personality, behaviours, intentions among others (Johnson & Christensen, 2004). Furthermore, Zikmund (2003) emphasized that data collection through questionnaire based survey is less expensive, a quick way to collect data, an efficient and accurate method to assess information about target population. In addition, some other scholars also supported survey based questionnaire and viewed that this is the best tool regarding data collection (Bonds-Raacke & Raacke, 2012). In this study, an effort is made to collect statistics about faculty members’ perceptions of CSR as well as its impact on their attitudes and behaviours, therefore, the use of a questionnaire is deemed more appropriate for data collection.
For data collection purpose, in each stratum, randomly selected
universities were contacted to seek permission from the concerned head of departments. A cover note was provided to the participants to inform them about the purpose of the study. More precisely, the selected faculty members were contacted on the basis of convenience. They were requested to specify the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with their statement concerning to their perceptions about CSR, their feeling towards their job and organization and their job behaviours at their workplace. In order to minimize the potential biases, at the end of the questionnaire, it was clearly mentioned that anonymity of the respondents was maintained in the survey, however, if the respondents(s) are interested to get the results of the study, it may be shared with them on their given email addresses.
3.2.7 Response Rate
As per sample frame of the study, 736 questionnaires were distributed among faculty members of 177 recognized universities or HEIs from HEC of
Pakistan out of which 595 faculty members responded the questionnaires and
the response rate was 80%. However, at the time of the data entry, 10
questionnaires found incomplete which were not considered for data entry and declared as redundant or rejected. However, rest of the questionnaires were used
96
for data entry and subsequently utilized for analysis, therefore, effective
response rate of the study was 79%. Ruane, (2005) indicates that in case of large population, 30% of response rate is considered in acceptable range. However,
the response rate in this study seems exceptional well, this is perhaps the reason
because the target population of this study is highly educated segment of the
society and faculty members are supposed to be well aware about the importance of a research study as compare to others. Recently, Haq, Kuchinke, and Iqbal
(2017) conducted a study in higher education sector of Pakistan and response
rate was found 95%.
3.3 MEASURING INSTRUMENTS
Researchers emphasized that the questionnaire should be based on well-
defined scale, biased free and right questions should be selected which increases
its reliability and validity (Peterson, 2000; Bonds-Raacke & Raacke, 2012). Ghauri and Gronhaug (2005) supported the use of a survey in research study. In
addition, they suggested to use adapted questionnaires because its reliability and
validity have already been tested. Thus, it’s preferably better to use adopted
questionnaire. Therefore, in order to get the responses, the present study has also used adapted questionnaire which comprised of multiple questions through
which an attempt is made to measure the variables of interests (i.e. CSR, OT,
JS, OI, OC, EE and OCB). The respondents were evaluated on a five points
Likert scale ranging from 1 - “strongly disagree” to 5 - “strongly agree”. Moreover, respondents were also requested to provide their demographical
information such as designation, age, gender, marital status, qualification, job
category etc. as such demographics may impact on the observed variables of the study. In questionnaire, questions pertaining to demographics were placed in the
beginning of the questionnaire however, rest of the questions related to observed
variables were given after demographic questions to avoid the respondents
fatigue (Johnson & Christensen, 2004) (see Appendix-H).
3.3.1 Pretest of the Questionnaire
The purpose of the pretest was to assess the reliability and validity of the
scales, although the items were tested in previous studies, but some
modifications and alterations in wording were incorporated which demands to conduct a pilot study. Therefore, a pilot testing for the present study was carried
out in the higher education institutions in Lahore, Pakistan. The experts
examined the proposed questionnaire to ensure content and face validity. The panel of the expert included seven PhD’s with at least five research publications
each in international journals of repute. The panel recommended some
97
suggestions to incorporate which were noted and the items revised accordingly.
In this pilot study, the revised questionnaire was used for pretest and 25 employees of higher educational institutions were participated. Some
researchers suggested that if rigorous statistical analysis is not involved, a
sample of even 20 participants can be considered sufficient (McMillan &
Schumacher, 1989). Hence, the questionnaire was tested for its reliability and all the measures were found to have reasonable reliability. In following lines,
detail of items which included in the questionnaire and adapted measures is
briefly given.
3.3.2 Measurement of Independent Variable of the Study
In this study, employees’ perceptions of CSR are used as an independent
variable. The details of the questionnaire of the construct of perceived CSR is:
3.3.2.1 Perceived CSR
In this study, in order to measure the construct of corporate social responsibility, 29 items scale initially developed by Maignan and Ferrell (2001)
was used and reported its reliability coefficient alpha value as 0.87. This
measure was also used in some of previous studies such as Lee et al. (2012) and
Fu et al. (2014) and its internal consistency was found 0.89 and 0.85 respectively. Thus, the adapted scale has generally having good to high
reliability coefficient alphas (ranging from 0.85 to 0.89), which are beyond the
levels recommended by Nunnally (1978) because he states that 0.70 and above is acceptable. A sample item included “My university tries to fulfill its social
responsibilities”.
3.3.2.2 Measurement of Mediating Variables of the Study
In this study, Organizational trust, Job satisfaction, and Organizational identification is used as the mediating variables. Details about the questionnaires
of these constructs are:
3.3.2.3 Organizational Trust
The respondents’ perceptions about organizational trust is measured using five items of a scale developed by Garbarino and Johnson (1999) and
reported its reliability coefficient alpha value as 0.73. This scale was also
98
adapted by Lee et al., (2012) and noted its reliability coefficient alpha value as
0.89. A sample item included, “My university tries to meet my expectations”.
3.3.2.4 Job Satisfaction
To measure the construct of job satisfaction, three items scale which was
developed by Cammann et al., (1983) was used and reported its alpha value as
0.73. This scale has been used in a number of other research studies (e.g. Valentine & Fleishman, 2008) and noted its reliability coefficient alpha value as
0.86. A sample item included “All in all, I am satisfied with my job”.
3.3.2.5 Organizational Identification
To measure the organizational identification, a five items scale was adapted from the study of Mael and Ashforth (1992) and its internal consistency
was reported 0.87. This scale was initially developed by Mael (1988) and
reported Cronbach alpha of 0.81. A sample item included “when someone
criticizes my university, it feels like a personal insult to me”. This scale was also used in some of previous studies such as Fu et al. (2014), De Roeck and Delobbe,
(2012) and noted the factor loading ranging from 0.83-0.86 respectively.
3.3.2.6 Measurement of Dependent Variables of the Study
In current study, the constructs organizational commitment, employee engagement and organizational citizenship behaviour are used as dependent
variables. Detail regarding the used scales for these construct is:
3.3.2.7 Organizational Commitment
In order to measure the construct of commitment, 8 items were adopted from a scale which was developed by Allen and Meyer (1990). Two dimensions
of this construct were concerned and relevant i.e. affective commitment and
continuance commitment and reported Cronbach alpha value as 0.87 and 0.75
respectively. Some researchers suggested that influence of normative commitment may be restricted to specific circumstances such as blood donation
and may not be effective as affective or continuance commitment particularly
where the business relationships are involved (Tett & Meyer, 1993). A sample item included for affective commitment “I feel like ‘part of the
family’ at this university” and similarly a sample item also included for
99
continuance commitment “It would be very hard for me to leave this university
right now, even if I wanted to”. These 8 items of this scale were also adopted in some of previous studies such as Lee et al. (2012) and reported Cronbach alpha
value as 0.85.
3.3.2.8 Employee Engagement
To measure the employee engagement, eleven-items scale of Saks (2006) was employed and its internal consistency was reported 0.78. However, to
measure employee engagement, a sample item included “I really “throw” myself
into my job/teaching”. This scale was also used in some of previous studies such
as Azim et al. (2014) and its reliability was noted as 0.81.
3.3.2.9 Organizational Citizenship Behaviour
The construct of OCB is measured using eight-items scale which was
originally developed by Lee and Allen (2002) and reported its reliability as 0.80.
A sample item for OCB included “willingly give your time to help others who have work-related problems”. This scale was also used in some of previous
studies such as Newman, Nielsen & Miao (2015) reported its Cronbach alpha
value as 0.90.
3.4 STATISTICAL DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
To ascertain and characterize the attributes of the sample of the study,
analytical methods were used such as examination of frequency distribution,
means, variation, and percentage distribution of attributes etc. The demographic
characteristics of the sample including job description, age, gender, marital status, educational qualification and job category were also analyzed.
3.4.1 Data Analysis Tools
Johnson and Christensen (2004) indicates that data analysis involves
different techniques which are used to convert the raw data into useful information, these techniques can be further applied to test and examine the
hypotheses and to infer the results. They also suggested that the use of data
analysis techniques depends on the adopted research design. In the present study, different quantitative techniques are used to examine the developed hypotheses.
Moreover, to test the hypotheses widely used software i.e. Statistical Package for
100
Social Sciences (SPSS) and Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS) were used.
Thus, SPSS 21.0 and AMOS 18.0 were used to test the developed hypotheses and to further examine the results. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is also used
for reliability analysis of the constructs, and to examine the hypothesized model.
SEM was also applied in a number of previous studies, therefore, in order to infer
the results, SEM was applied in this study (see Table 3.1).
Table 3.1
A View of Current Study’ Research Design in Comparison with Some of
Previous Studies
Author(s) Sample
Size Sampling
Technique Data Collection
Method Statistical
Tool
Newman et al.
(2011) 437 Simple random
Survey based
Questionnaire SEM
Ahmed et al.
(2014) 703 Multi Stage As above As above
Zientara et al.
(2015) 412 Convenience As above As above
Aprile & Talo
(2015) 172 Convenience As above As above
Newman et al. (2015)
306 Convenience As above As above
Present study 736 Multi-stage Sampling
As above As above
3.5 PRELIMINARY DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
After completion of the data collection from the respondents, at the initial
stage of data processing, data entry was made into SPSS. Chin and Lee (1996) suggested that in case of missing data, a subjective threshold can be defined by
the researcher and if the missing data is found above the defined threshold, it
can be considered missing, the questionnaires which contain missing data above the established threshold can be dropped from the process of analysis. In this
study, the 5% threshold was defined and all the questionnaires with more than
5% of missing data were considered as redundant (Ruane, 2005). However,
demographic questions were also considered in this threshold.
Moreover, all other tests related to data normality such as screening,
missing value treatment and outliers were conducted through SPSS. At first
stage, the Mean and Standard Deviations of all the variables of interest were analyzed and then reliability and correlation among the variables were assessed
and their overlapping multi-collinearity was also tested. It is argued that
101
correlation ranging from 0.20-0.35 is considered as week, ranging from 0.35-
0.65 is considered as moderate however above than 0.65 is considered as strong and above 0.85 is assumed as high (Cohen & Manion, 1994). In addition to
further analyze the collected data and to examine the hypotheses, AMOS
(Analysis of Moment Structure) was also utilized.
3.5.1 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
SEM is normally considered as a confirmatory technique rather than an
exploratory, it is normally used to analyze the relationships between latent
constructs, McDonald and Ho (2002) suggested that it is used to test the
relationship between different measures with single latent construct (McDonald & Ho, 2002). Rigdon (2012) explains that after obtaining the model parameters,
the hypothesized model is matched with the matrices of data based covariance.
However, if the matrices of hypothesized model are found consistent, it is assumed that SEM offers a possible justification for the causal relationship
between the variables. Moreover, SEM is also used for confirmatory factor
analysis, exploratory factor analysis, linear regression, covariance, estimating
variances and testing of hypotheses etc. Some researchers indicate that in today’s research SEM is used to assess the uni-dimensionality, reliability, validity and
model fitness. Further, Meyer et al. (2006) and Hair et al. (2006) suggested that
SEM has the ability to test the model fitness, it can also modify the model for best
fit. Accordingly, in view of the nature of this study, two-stage approach of SEM was applied to infer the results.
3.5.2 Two-Stage SEM Technique
Anderson and Gerbing (1988) suggested that for application of SEM,
there are two approaches i.e. one-stage approach and two-stage approach. During the application of one-stage approach, measurement model and
structural modelling is used at the same time. However, in two-stage approach,
first the measurement model used which follows the structural model. In present study, two-stage approach is used as it not only indicates about the reliability of
each of the variable, minimize the interactional effect, but also it is most
frequently used approach (Kline, 2005; Meyer et al., 2006).
102
Figure 3.1: Two-Stage SEM
3.5.3 Application of Stage-One (Measurement Model)
In stage-one, uni-dimensionality, validity and reliability estimations are
included. In following section, uni-dimensionality factor analysis, validity and reliability are discussed in detail.
3.5.3.1 Assessment of uni-dimensionality
During the application of SEM at the first stage, causal relationship is
examined among the items and the construct. In uni-dimensionality analysis, it
determines the construct’ reliability, but it also reflects factor loading of each item to be used to measure the construct. Highlighting the importance of uni-
dimensionality, Byrne (2010) emphasized that in order to authenticate the uni-
dimensionality of the construct, assessment of causal relationship (among the items and the constructs) is necessary. In addition, Kline, (2005) and Meyer et
al., (2006) emphasized that in uni-dimensional models, it predicts discriminant
and convergent validity of the measures. Hence, in view of the importance of
uni-dimensionality, this study also used this approach to analyze the reliability, factor loading of items and validity of the observed variables (i.e. perceived
CSR, organizational trust (OT), job satisfaction (JS), organizational
103
identification (OI), organizational commitment (OC), employee engagement
(EE) and organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB).
In literature, mainly two approaches i.e. confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) are recommended to perform uni-
dimensionality analysis. Anderson and Gerbing (1988) asserted that in case of non-availability of measurement scale or theoretical grounds in the study, EFA
is supposed to be used as the best approach. However, Hair et al. (2006) opined
that EFA only serve the purpose for estimating factor structure, it does not confirm the structure itself.
Figure 3.2: Uni-dimensionality Approaches
Contrary to EFA, uni-dimensionality of the measure is evaluated in CFA through identification of best possible model (Bollen, 1989; Holmes-Smith et
al., 2006; Byrne, 2010). Byrne (2010) described that the selection of a suitable
technique is normally based on the nature of the study. In present study, CFA
was applied to evaluate the uni-dimensionality of the constructs i.e. CSR, OT, JS, OI, OC, EE and OCB (see Chapter 4). In this study, all the measures are
adapted from the previous studies which have already been examined for factor
loading and were developed on the basis of relevant theories, therefore, CFA is preferred to be used in the present study (Byrne, 2010). Some of the researchers
have suggested 0.50 as cutoff value of factor loading (Haier et al., 2006).
However, other have suggested that all the items below the loading of 0.30 are
not acceptable (Brown, 2006). Considering both the arguments, this study considered 0.30 as cutoff value for factor loading. Uni-dimensionality
examination should be followed by reliability and validity of the constructs
(Meyer et al., 2006). The details of the reliability and validity is deliberated as under:
3.5.3.2 Assessment of Internal Reliability of the Measures
104
Johnson and Christensen (2004) suggested that the researchers try to
select measurement instruments which provide an accurate measure of the variables. Bonds-Raacke & Rackee (2012) suggested that reliability of an
instrument refers its ability to provide similar results over the period of time.
However, the researchers attempt to select an instrument which provides an
accurate measurement of the constructs. Similarly, Johnson and Christensen (2004) suggested that the reliability of instruments is considered its consistency
in its test scores. However, validity of instrument indicates the correctness of
the explanations or inferred results which are derived from the test score. Moreover, Burns (2000) indicated that in order to test the reliability, the adapted
questionnaires were evaluated to get unbiased and fair results.
In order o assess the reliability of the scale, multiple techniques are used (e.g. test-retest and split half reliability). Some researchers are of the view that
Cronbach’s alpha is mostly used method to test for internal consistency of the
instruments (Nunnally, 1978; Meyer et al., 2006). However, Ahmed (2014) indicates that different researchers have set different thresholds to determine the
suitable value of Cronbach’s alpha, however, 0.60 alpha value was considered
as minimum threshold (Kline, 1999; George & Mallery, 2003; Bagozzi & Yi,
1988). Therefore, for examining the internal consistency of the adopted instruments, Cronbach’s α (1951) alpha values was used during pretest in the
present study. During the internal consistency tests, if the Cronbach’s α value
found below 0.60 the scale was considered undesirable and not consistent
because it does not meet the minimum threshold requirement. Therefore, the instrument is considered reliable if its Cronbach’s alpha value exceeds 0.60.
Table 3.2
Represents the Value of Cronbach’s Alpha Value of the Scale
which meets the above Requirement
Scale Cronbach’s alpha
Perceived CSR 0.93
Organizational Trust (OT) 0.88
Job Satisfaction (JS) 0.85
Organizational Identitfication (OI) 0.84
Organizational Commitment (OC) 0.81
Employee Engagement (EE) 0.82
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) 0.85
Although, in order to test the internal consistency of the measure, the
Cronbach’s alpha is frequently used, but it has some limitations (Anderson &
105
Gerbing, 1988). Therefore, in parallel with Cronbach’s alpha method, an added
application of CFA is suggested to be used (Hair et al., 2006; Meyer et al., 2006). In addition, Hair et al. (2010) further suggested that SEM is used as a main
application for analysis which makes CFA obligatory to be used.
Similalry, Fornell and Larcker (1981) suggested that for the use of CFA, average
variance extracted (AVE) and composite reliability (CR) of the scale was used as a reference point. Some researchers also suggested that CR improves the
applicability on the basis of model parameters to assess the internal consistency
(Holmes-Smith et al. (2006). However, Hair et al. (2006) suggested that AVE indicates the extent of shared variance by the set of measures. Thus, CR and
AVE were applied for
measurement, using the minimum threshold values of 0.60 (for CR) and 0.50
(for AVE) respectively (Hair et al., 2010). Accordingly, the values concerning to CR and AVE are given in
Table 4.5.
3.5.3.3 Assessment of Validity of the Measures
In order to ensure the appropriateness of the measure, validity of the measure is important. In this context, Ghauri and Gronhaug (2002) asserted that
“validity is the scale’s ability to measure what it is supposed to measure” (p.
134). Nunnally and Berstein (1994) suggested that a valid scale has the ability
to represent constructs’ observable items which relates to other constructs, and having sufficient number of measures. In this study, for validity of the measures,
face and construct (convergent & discriminant) were used.
Ruane (2005) describes that “face validity of the measure is the assurance
of the contents quality of an instrument and its ability to measure a
phenomenon” (p. 136). In this study, for face validity of the used measures,
experts’ opinion was sought from a panel of experts including seven PhD’s with at least five publications of each in international journals of repute. In the light
of expert input from the panel about wording of the questions, the questionnaire
was revised accordingly.
“construct validity” is another important form of validity. Ruane (2005)
indicates that “validity is about what an instrument is measuring” (p. 137).
Therefore, “it is assurance of accuracy to measure and operationalize a construct” (Ahmed, 2014 p. 96). In this study, both discriminant and construct
validity were used. Hair et al., (2006) described that “discriminant validity
identifies that investigating variables are not highly correlated to each other, while correlation among the measure of the same construct are looked through
convergent validity”.
106
However, Kline (2005) suggested that in order to measure the discriminant and convergent validity, CFA is considered as the most desirable
application. Hair et al., (2006) suggested that in order to determine convergent
validity, the measure should have Average Variance Extracted (AVE) above
0.50. In present study, the AVE values of the measures indicate that used scales have convergent validity as shown in Table 4.5. Similarly, Fornell and Larcker
(1981), Kline (2005) proposed that for the sake of discriminant validity, the
value of correlation between the factors should be less than 0.85 or Average Variance Extracted of any two variables should be higher than square correlation
coefficient, the measures used in the present study meet both the requirements.
3.5.4 Stage-Two (Structural Model)
Byrne (2010) concluded that in order to examine the causal relationship among the observed variables, structural model is used. Some researchers
suggested that in the field of management science, graphical representation of
models through the use of paths is frequently used approach (Kline, 2011;
Hoyle, 1995). During application of structural modeling, path diagrams identify various relations among variables which may be examined simultaneously
(Meyer et al., 2006). In addition, Holmes-Smith et al. 2006) also supported the
use of structural modeling by emphasizing that path analysis can examine direct
and indirect effects simultaneously, thus the use of structural model is more important because it not only use to examines the relationship between variables
but also useful for mediations. In present study, for examination of hypotheses,
structural model approach was used. The hypothesized model which is used in the current study was composite in nature with large sample size, for which
model fitness is not easy (Kline, 2005). Byrne (2010) suggested that for this
purpose, model was bifurcated into small measurable models (see Section
4.4.2). In today’s research, the importance of SEM is vital as it not only tests the models, but it also suggest modifications for best fitness of model (Meyer et al.,
2006). Therefore, in order to path analysis and examining the direct and indirect
effects, the present study used structural model to test the developed hypotheses.
3.5.4.1 Assumptions for Using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
Islam (2014) suggested that “similar to other statistical techniques, SEM
also have some assumptions such as sample size, missing values in collected
data, data normality, multivariate outliers, theoretical grounds for relationship among variables and model specifications” (p. 95). A brief debate is presented
below on above mentioned assumptions.
107
3.5.4.2 Sample Size
For the application of SEM technique, an adequate sample size is
necessary. Some researchers suggested that if sample size is small than it can
influence on covariance and co-relational stability, hence appropriate sample size is necessary to apply SEM technique (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).
However, there is no agreement among the researchers about the appropriate
sample size for the use of SEM. For example, some researcher emphasized that SEM can be applied on a sample size of 50 which is appropriate (Anderson &
Gerbing, 1984). However, some advocated that sample size of 100 is
appropriate. Hair et al (2006) and Meyer et al. (2006) suggested 200 sample size
sufficient for application of SEM technique. However, some scholars are of the view that in case of using SEM the large number of sample size may be
problematic of model fit (Meyer et al., 2006; Byrne, 2010). Moreover, Kline
(2005) supported that sample size of 1150 is sufficient. However, in the present study, SEM is considered to be used on a sample size of 736.
3.5.4.3 Missing Values
Hair et al., (2010) commented that it is common to find missing values
during data collection process. Normally, the question for missing values in data
collection arises when subjects or respondents forgot to respond some questions (Meyer et al., 2006). However, Tabachnick and Fidell (2001) asserted that in
case of missing values in data collection, it is necessary and important to
understand the patterns of the missing data because randomly missing values in the data is not having any significant effect on the results. Additionally, Ruane
(2005) argued that 5% of missing data or less is in acceptable range for a specific
construct. In present study, missing values were found randomly with less than
5% which falls within acceptable range to use the SEM technique (see Section 4.3)
3.5.4.4 Data Normality
Data normality is one of the assumption to apply SEM technique (Kline,
2005). Some scholars asserted that to identify the normality of the data, Skewness and Kurtosis are the methods (Hair et al., 2006). To assess the data
normality, value of Skewness should be ranging from -3 to +3 and the value of
Kurtosis should be ranging from -10 to +10. Additionally, Hair et al., (2010) concluded that data normality for a large sample size should be assessed by
applying probability plots. Graverrer and Wallnau (2007) described that
108
normally distributed data has a bell-shaped curve. In present study, both
approaches i.e. Skewness, Kurtosis and probability plots used to assess the normality of the data (see Section 4.5).
3.5.4.5 Multivariate Outliers
In collected data, values which are higher or lower than the majority of
the values are considered outliers (Pallant, 2011). Tabachnick and Fidell, (2001)
stated that standard errors, parameters and the values of model fit are effected by multivariate outliers, hence before examining the data, it should be analyzed
for multivariate outliers. In literature, a number of approaches have been
identified through which outliers can be checked from the data such as 5 %
trimmed mean, but the Mahalanobis distance (MD) test at p < 0.001 used in the current study to identify the outliers from the data (Panatik, 2010). In the present
study, outliers were identified which was treated before conducting the final
analysis (see Section 4.4).
3.5.4.6 Theoretical Base for Causality
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is used to estimate the causality among the observed variables, but for this purpose, theoretical justification is
required (Byrne, 2010), because theoretical and logical background is required
to know the model fit or not to fit (Hair et al., 2010). In this study, the proposed model is based on logics and theories i.e. social exchange theory (SET) and
social identity theory (SIT) (as elaborated in Chapter 2).
3.5.4.7 Model Specification
To ascertain the values of model fitness, there is another criterion i.e.
judgement of model specification through values of model fitness. There are number of indices to judge the model fitness, but some researchers are not
agreed upon this view point. For instance, some recommended absolute indices
i.e. GFI, NNFI, SRMR and NFI (Kline (2005), while some other recommended
absolute indices for model fitness such as (i.e. GFI, RMSEA and X2), parsimonious such as (i.e. X2/df) and incremental dimensions such as (i.e.
AGFI, TLI, NFI and CFI) (Hair et al., 2006). However, model Fit indices as
suggested by Hair et al., (2006) were used in the present study (see Table 4.3).
3.5.5 Control Variables
Ahmed (2014) argued that some demographic characteristics have significant association with the variables and in that case, demographic
109
characteristics are treated as control variables. To test the control variables in
the current study, correlation analysis was applied and job description, age and qualification was found significant. However, no other demographical
characteristics were found associated and significant with other observed
variables. Therefore, job designation, age and qualification was considered as
control variables in this study (see Table 4.1).
3.6 CHAPTER SUMMARY
In this chapter, methodology based discussions were presented. This
chapter has not only concluded the discussions regarding preference of
quantitative study to qualitative study, it also deliberates the techniques used in this study. In addition, data analysis techniques with rationale are also came
under discussion. A short brief about preliminary data analysis and two stage
method which includes application of uni-dimensionality and measurement model have also been deliberated. However, application of techniques for data
analysis, two stage SEM approach including uni-dimensionality assessment and
measurement model is deliberated in detail in the next Chapter 4.
110
CHAPTER 4:
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
In this chapter, results of the study are presented and focus is made on the
data analysis which includes hypotheses testing. First, all basic steps and data normality analysis are performed such as data screening, data coding,
identification and treatment of missing values, multivariate outliers,
demographic profile of the respondents, descriptive and correlational statistics.
Moreover, reliability analysis of the constructs, testing of hypothesized model and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is applied. In addition, for examining
the uni-dimensionality, structural modeling and model fitness is also discussed.
For further analysis, Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS 21.0) and Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS 18.0) are used:
4.1 SCREENING OF DATA
Coakes (2006) and Zikmund (2003) suggested that data verification may
be ensured before its entry, for this purpose, data may be devided and corrected
or edited for incompleteness, missing values, normality and omission. As suggested by Sekaran (2000), incomplete responses were dealt and 75 percent
criterion was used to consider the responses valid. Accordingly, in this study, as
per this criterion, questionnaires on which at least 75% of the questions were answered were considered for further analysis.
4.2 IDENTIFICATION OF MISSING VALUES
In the process of data collection, sometimes respondents are unable to
complete questions and all these in complete responses are considered as missing values and this is common in the process of data collection (Coakes,
2006). In case of missing values, understanding of pattern of the missing data is
important because missing data for specific variables may disturb analysis, whereas randomly missing data has less impact on the analysis (Tabachnick &
Fidell, 2001). As suggested by Churchill, (1995), a threshold of five percent of
missing data against each variable was used and complete data was found within
this range. All the received responses fulfilled this requirement except 10 which were declared as rejected. Thus, a few of the unanswered questions were
considered as missing values. This might be reason that all the respondents were
from academia and researchers themselves, they are well aware about the pre-
111
requisites of a research study and they were careful at the time of filling of the
research questionnaires.
4.3 MULTIVARIATE OUTLIERS
Before analyzing different parametric statistics, multivariate outliers must
be removed from the dataset, because multivariate outliers have influence on
other parameters such as standard errors and the values of model fit (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). Normally, outliers are expected in large sample size, therefore,
careful handling of such datasets is required. In order to identify the multivariate
outliers, Mahalanobis distance test can be used, which is the distance of a data
point from the calculated centroid of the other cases where the centroid is calculated as the intersection of the mean of the variables being assessed.
Accordingly, Mahalanobis test was applied at distance p<0.001, 1.68 % of the
data was found to have multivariate outliers which becomes (N=10) therefore, 10 items were removed for further analysis. Thus, after treatment of 10
responses, remaining 585 responses were further analyzed.
4.4 DATA NORMALITY ANALYSIS
Data normality tests are used to determine whether the data is normally
distributed or not. Kline (2005) suggested that data normality is a basic assumption for the application structural equation modeling and factor analysis.
To ascertain whether the data is normal or not, there are several others methods,
but histogram and probability plots test were used in this study because this study has large sample size and it is best method to apply for a large sample size
(Hair et al., 2010). The main reason for developing the histogram is to
graphically explain the distribution of a data set. For testing the normality of a
data set, curve or normal probability plot is used. Chambers (1983), suggested that the normal probability plot or curve is a graphical tool to assess whether a
data set is approximately normally distributed. In probability plot, normal data
points are plotted and fall around a straight line which shows high positive correlation. In the normal probability plot, most of the responses fall near
straight line indicating that the data is normally distributed. Similarly, the
pragmatic distribution of a data set (in histogram) should be bell-shaped and
look like a normal distribution. The following Figure 4.1 shows the residual histogram for Job Satisfaction (JS) which also depicts curve as bell shaped and
majority of marks lies inside the bell-shaped curve. This reflects that data
distributed normally and not dispersed (Graverrer & Wallnau, 2007).
113
In Figure 4.2 (Plot for JS) indicates that in the data set, multivariate
outliers P-Plots extremely below or above the line residuals were checked as suggested by Hair et al. (2010). This figure also depicts that the variable’s
standards residual is normal. P-Plots and residual histogram of all variables of
this study are also presented in Appendix-H. In addition, in order to assess the
normality of the data set, it was further checked through Skewness and Kurtosis values. According to Hair et al. (2006) for data normality Skewness should be
ranging from <3 and >3, however the Kurtosis value should be ranging <10 and
>10 as shown in Appendix-I. This depicts that all values fall the acceptable rang and therefore meeting the data normality requirement, hence the data was found
in normal range.
4.5 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
Descriptive statistics include the measurement of different features of the given population of the study (Bickel & Lehman, 1975). They describe the
summary of the characteristics of the sample population with its distinctive
measurement which includes means and median as measures of location, or the
inter-quartile and standard deviation range as measure of scale. Sekaran (2000) suggested that descriptive was analyzed by using the frequency and percentage
which is considered as an appropriate method. Moreover, results of survey items
of perceived CSR (i.e. independent variable), OT, JS and OI (i.e. mediating
variables) and OC, EE and OCB (i.e. dependent variables) were also analyzed to ascertain whether the results of different variables are similar and having a
clear pattern (Ferreira & Oliveira, 2014). In this study, measures are adopted
such as the mean, standard deviation and correlations of the variables which depicts the clear understanding of the attributes of demographics variables of
the study including job designation, age, gender, marital status, qualification and
job category.
4.6 CATEGORIZATION OF DEMOGRAPHICAL VARIABLES
In the literature on organizational behaviour and human resource,
importance of demographical variables is well acknowledged to understand and
explain the variances in work attitudes and theories (Cianni & Romberger, 1995;
Barak, Cherin, & Berkman, 1998). Demographic characteristics of employees are considered as the composition of a social entity in term of features of its
members (Pfeffer, 1983). In literature, considering the purpose of the study,
normally researchers used a variety of demographic characteristics. In this study, such demographic characteristics were used which may influence the
employee perceptions of CSR. In addition, these demographic characteristics
114
were also frequently referred in some of previous studies as control variables.
The used demographic variables include job designation, age, gender, marital status, qualification and job category. Job designation is categorized into six
categories (RA/TA, Lecturer, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor,
Professor and Other (if any). Age is classified into five categories (i.e. below 30,
31-40, 41-50, 51-60 and above 60 years). Marital status is characterized into two categories i.e. single and married. Qualification is categorized in into four
categories i.e. Master (having 16 years of education), MS (having 18 years of
education), PhD and Post-Doc. Job category is characterized into three categories i.e. permanent, contractual, and others such as tenure track system
(TTS).
4.7 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS
A description of personal information of the respondents is presented in the below mentioned table (Table 4.1). Faculty members were asked to pinpoint
their job designation in the organization than 11.5 percent (N=67) faculty
members reported their job designation as RA/TA, while 45.1 percent (N=264)
of them reported as Lecturer. Similarly, 30.4 percent (N=178) reported as Assistant Professor and 5.5 percent (N=32) responded as Associate Professor.
In addition, 3.1 percent (N=18) reported as Professor. Respondents were
inquired to specify their age group in which they fall and their average age was
calculated 44 years by using the midpoint of each category of age. Respondents were also categorized into genders i.e. male and female. Male participants were
62.1 percent (N=363) while female participants were 37.9 percent (N=222).
Marital status was inquired from the respondents and 56.2 percent (N=329) were responded as married, while 43.8 percent (N=256) were responded as single.
115
Table 4.1
Demographic Characteristics
Category Percentage Frequency
Age Group
Below 30 years
31- 40 years
41- 50 years
51- 60 years
Above 60 years
42.7% 39.5%
12.5%
4.1%
1.2%
250 231
73
24
07
Job Designation Research Associate / TA
Lecturer
Assistant Professor
Associate Professor
Professor
Other
11.5%
45.1%
30.4%
5.5% 3.1%
4.4%
67
264
178
32 18
26
Gender
Male
Female
62.1% 37.9%
363 222
Marital Status Single
Married
43.8%
56.2%
256
329
Qualification
Master
MS
PhD
Post-Doctorate
18.3%
54.0%
24.6% 3.1%
107
316 144
18
Job Category
Permanent
Contractual
Other
55.9%
38.1% 6.0%
327
223 35
University Status
Public
Private
60.7%
39.3%
355
230
Moreover, respondents were provided the option to specify their level of qualification: Master’s degree, Master of Science (MS), Doctorate degree, and
post-doc. The respondents’ qualification status had 100% (N=585), 18.3 percent
(N=107) respondents reported to have Master’s degree, while 54.0 percent
(N=316) reported to have Masters of Science degree, whereas 24.6 percent (N=144) reported to have PhD degree. Similarly, 3.1 percent (N=18) reported
to complete their Post-doc (See Table 4.1 to view the summary of the results).
Respondents were provided the option to specify their category of job in their
116
organization, 55.9 percent (N=327) respondents reported to have permanent job.
However, 38.1 percent (N=223) reported to have contractual jobs in their organization. In addition, 6.0 percent (N=35) reported to have others job status
in their organizations such as tenure track system (TTS). Respondents were also
inquired to specify the status of their Institution/University (i.e. public or private
sector), 60.7 percent (N=355) reported that they were serving the public-sector institutions whereas 39.3 percent (N=230) reported to belong to private sector
universities.
4.8 CORRELATION AMONG VARIABLES
In all demographic variables, job designation, age and qualification partially correlate with all other variables of the study i.e. CSR, OT, JS, OI, OC,
EE and OCB, however other demographic variables such as gender, marital
status and job category does not have correlation with other variables of the study. The findings of some previous research studies indicate that these
demographic variables influence the work attitudes and behaviours of the
individuals (Schappe, 1998; Peterson, 2004; Valentine & Fleischman, 2008). A
detailed discussion is presented in the following table about correlation among the variables of this study.
Results about descriptive statistics including mean, standard deviation
and correlation are also presented in Table 4.2. The mean value of CSR was found as, Mean=3.60 which implies that most of the respondents were agreed
with the statement. Job satisfaction was having the highest mean value (Mean=
3.98), which implies that the respondents are agreed with their job satisfaction. Similarly, the mean value of organizational trust was found (Mean=3.59) which
implies that most of the employees have trusted their organizations because
response of most of the employees fall between ranging from 3-4 i.e. “Neutral”
to “Agree”. The mean value of organizational commitment has found (Mean=3.54) which identifies that most of the respondents agreed to the survey
statement given in the questionnaire and they agreed to have organizational
commitment with their organizations. The mean value of organizational identity has found (Mean=3.68) which reflects that most of the respondents have feelings
of organizational identity with their organizations.
117
Table 4.2
Inter Correlation Matrix among Variables
Mea
n
S.D
.
CS
R
JS
OT
OC
OI
EE
OC
B
Jo
b
Desi
gn
ati
on
Ag
e
Gen
der
Ma
rit
al
Sta
tus
Qu
ali
fica
tio
n
Jo
b
Ca
teg
ory
Un
iversi
ty
Sta
tus
CSR 3.60 .554 1
JS 3.98 .748 .528** 1
OT 3.59 .791 .696** .594** 1
OC 3.54 .667 .548** .527** .600** 1
OI 3.68 .743 .513** .344** .444** .608** 1
EE 3.60 .543 .555** .447** .540** .599** .555** 1
OCB 3.76 .615 .534** .313** .411** .460** .519** .633** 1
Job Designation 2.58 .980 .091 .077 .132** .117* .090 .188** .182** 1
Age 1.91 .893 .062 .039 .093 .077 .079 .108** .139** .656** 1
Gender 1.35 .477 .046 -.017 -.031 -.022 -.082 -.057 -.067 -.201** -.191** 1
Marital Status 1.64 .479 -.033 -.009 -.008 .003 .006 -.005 .041 .410** .510** -.191** 1
Qualification 2.24 .742 .137** .088 .148** .144** .118* .221** .168** .507** .407** -.237** .306** 1
Job Category 1.41 .561 .098 .052 .083 .046 .031 .028 -.061 -.148** -.150** .163** -.159** .079 1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). CSR-Corporate Social
Responsibility OC-Organizational Commitment
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
(α). Parenthesises denotes the Alpha Co-effiecienct
OT-Organizational Trust
JS-Job Satisfaction
EE-Employee Engagement
OCB-Organizational Citizenship Behaviour
118
The mean value of employee engagement was found (Mean=3.60) which implies that most of the employees agreed with the statement given in the questionnaire ranging between “Neutral” to “Agree”. However, the mean value of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) have found (Mean=3.76) which identifies that most of the respondents “Agreed” with the statement given in the questionnaire from “Neutral” to “Agree”. In addition, the values of standard deviation were found less than “one”, which showed that no large dispersion was found in the data (Hair et al., 1995).
Additionally, to have a clear picture about the relationship between
demographic variables (i.e. job designation, age, gender, marital status, qualification, job category) and variables (i.e. perceived CSR, OT, JS, OI, OC, EE and OCB) correlation analysis was performed. The results of the correlation analysis reveal a partial relationship among some of demographic variables and observed variables of the study. Therefore, job designation, age and qualification are considered as control variables of this study. However, a significant correlation is exited among all other variables of interest of the study. For example, between CSR and OT highly significant correlation was observed (r = .694, p < .001), CSR and JS (r = .524, p < .001), CSR and OI (r = .513, p < .001) and CSR and OC (r = .548, p < .001), and CSR and EE (r = .555, p < .001) and CSR and OCB (r = .534, p < .001). 4.9 STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING (SEM)
Byrne (2010) suggested that in order to test measurements and structural
models, two stage SEM approach is used to reduce interactional effects of measurements and structural models (Byrne, 2010). Hair et al. (2010) further suggested that by using first stage, CFA was applied to examine the causal relationship and uni-dimensionality between the items and constructs. In addition, Byrne (2010) suggested that at the first stage of SEM further reliability analysis and validity of the constructs is assessed. By using SEM, in the second stage, endogenous variables (OC, EE and OCB) and exogenous variable (i.e. CSR) were examined through structural model. Furthermore, Tabachnick and Fidell (2001) advocated that at the second stage of SEM, it examines the set of independent variables (IV) with dependent variables (DV).
4.10 STAGE-FIRST-MEASUREMENT MODEL
Measurement model was examined using constructs’ validity and
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Arbuckle (2005) defined the measurement model as “a model that specifies how the observed variables depend on the latent, composite, and unobserved variables” (p. 89). In addition, Byrne (2010)
119
described that measurement model identifies the pattern by which each measure is loaded on a specific variable. Thus, each variable used in this study (i.e. Corporate Social responsibility (CSR), Organizational Trust (OT) Job Satisfaction (JS), Organizational Identification (OT), Organizational Commitment (OC), Employee Engagement (EE) and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) were separately examined. In some of previous studies such as (e.g. Byrne, 2010; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007) the model was re-visited because it was found inconsistent with the hypothesized model. In order to get the better fit, necessary modifications were made in the models. As a follow up, reliability and validity test of the variables were also conducted. Hence, the developed model was measured in two steps i.e. first through uni-dimensionality of the factors by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and second through validity and reliability analysis.
4.11 APPLICATION OF CFA-ASSESSMENT OF UNI-
DIMENSIONALITY
Schreiber et al. (2006) suggested that CFA is normally used to examine the validity of the observed variables in relationship with latent constructs. In order to check the uni-dimensionality of all the observed variables, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) approach was used in this study. Kline (2005) suggested that for model fit by using CFA, reasonable factor loading should have in the model and low correlation among the observed constructs. Brown (2006) described different minimum acceptable value for factor loading has been suggested by different researchers, however, in this study, standardized value of above 0.30 is considered as acceptable value. In confirmatory factor analysis, correlation value among the observed variables should be interrupted as it relates to discriminant validity. In this context, Kline (2005) argued that correlation value must not be less than 0.85 otherwise factors are not considered distinct. Thus, in this study, the values 0.85 (for correlation) and 0.30 (for factor leading) are considered as the base. In literature, normally used fit indices are the CMIN, NFI (Normal Fit Indexed), CFI (Comparative Fit Index), NNFI (Non-Normed Fit Index), TLI (Tucker-Lewis Index) and RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation) and these goodness-of-fit indexes are used to test the model. In addition, Hair et al. (2010) presented standard values for model fitness such as “The value of Comparative Fit Index (CFI) should be high for better model fit, the value of Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) and Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) should be equal or more than 0.90, the value of Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) should be less than 0.08, the value of Normed Fit Index (NFI) should be equal or greater than 0.90 and the value of x2/df should be less than 5” (see Table 4.3). Byrne (2010) argued that model fitness was evaluated through examination of value of normal residuals and modification indices. In addition, Hair at al. (2010) suggested that through normal residuals, difference
120
between observed and estimated correlation can be identified, on the other hand indices which are modified show the calculated results about such relations in the model which are not estimated. He further argued that chi-square (x2) is also influenced by modification indices if its value is greater than 3.84. however, the residual having value ± 2.58 reflects an error in the specification’ of the model. In this context, Holmes-Smith et al. (2006) recommended that estimates should be performed slowly and theoretical consideration should also be kept in mind.
Table 4.3
Standardized Values for Model Fit
Indices Standard Values
Comparative Fit Index (CFI) Must be ≥ than 0.90
Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) Must be ≥ than 0.90
Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) Must be ≥ than 0.90
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) Must be ≤ than 0.08
Normed Fit Index (NFI) Must be ≥ than 0.90
Chai Square / Degree of Freedom (x2/df) Must be ≤ than 5.00
Source: Hair et al., (2010) and Byrne, (2010)
4.12 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR)
The construct of CSR was measured by using 29 items of the scale. Initially, in comparison with the standard values, the values of standardized parameter were not found good as shown in the Table 4.3. The initial values were found i.e. x2 =1900.362, df=377, x2/df = 5.041, p = 0.00, NFI = 0.727, GFI = .795, AGFI = .763, CFI = .768, TLI = .750, RMSEA = 0.083. At the first stage, factor loading of all items of the scale were examined which were found higher from the standard value i.e. 0.30 (ranging from 0.34-0.67) except item 4 & 5. Therefore, item 4 & 5 which had factor loading values 0.25 and 0.29 respectively were removed from the measure to make the factor loading of items in acceptable range. Afterward modification indices and standardized residuals were examined in the model and some of the error terms found which were unacceptably highly in comparison to other error terms such as e28-e29 = 96.946; e26-e27 = 134.438; e25-e26 = 111.034; e22-e23=90.405 and so on. As suggested by Byrne (2010) all referred error terms were correlated one by one and model was tested repeatedly to get better model fit. After making each re-specification in the model, model fitness improved. The final model along with values of standardized parameter estimates are given in Figure 4.3.
121
Figure 4.3: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Measurement Model for CSR
Standardize Values of Model Fitness
x2 =722.046, df = 302, x2/df = 2.391, p = 0.000, NFI = 0.902, GFI = 0.915, AGFI = 0.905, CFI = 0.934, TLI = 0.923, RMSEA = 0.049.
122
4.12.1 Organizational Trust
Organizational Trust (OT) was measured by using five items scale. In
comparison with standard values, the standardized parameter estimates
preliminary values were found not good as shown in Table 4.3 such as x2
=109.477, df = 5, x2/df = 21.895, p = 0.00, NFI = 0.931, GFI = 0.924, AGFI = 0.773, CFI = 0.933, TLI = 0.867, RMSEA = 0.189. The factor loading of all
items were examined which found higher than the standard value of 0.30
(ranging from 0.71-0.85). Subsequently, the model was examined through modification indices and standardized residuals. Some error terms found related
with other error terms which were too highs such as e4-e5 = 68.786; e1-e2 =
31.548. As suggested by Byrne (2010) all referred error terms were correlated
one by one and model was tested repeatedly for better fit. After making each re-specification in the model, model fitness improved. The final model along with
values of standardized parameter estimates is presented in Figure 4.4.
Figure 4.4: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Measurement Model for OT
Standardize Values of Model Fitness
x2 =5.132, df = 3, x2/df = 1.711, p = 0.162, NFI = 0.997, GFI = 0.997, AGFI = 0.983, CFI = 0.999, TLI = 0.995, RMSEA = 0.035
4.12.2 Job Satisfaction
A three items scale was used to measure the construct of job satisfaction
(see Figure 4.5). Initially, standardized parameter estimates and values were
found good as compare to values presented in Table 4.3 e.g x2 = 8.137, df = 2, x2/df = 4.05, p = 0.016, NFI = 0.992, GFI = 0.993,
AGFI = 0.978, CFI = 0.994, TLI = 0.990, RMSEA = 0.063). Moreover, factor
loading values of all items were also found above the minimum standard value
123
of 0.30 (i.e. 0.76-0.85). Thus, without modification, the construct was found to
be good as depict in Figure 4.5.
Figure 4.5: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Measurement Model for JS
Standardize Values of Model Fitness
x2 =8.139, df = 2, x2/df = 4.07, p = 0.017, NFI = 0.992, GFI = 0.993,
AGFI = 0.978, CFI = 0.994, TLI = 0.990, RMSEA = 0.064
4.12.3 Organizational Identification
The construct of Organizational Identity (OI) was assessed using its five
items scale. The preliminary standardized parameter estimates or values were found good with respect to all standardized values as shown in Table 4.3 (i.e. x2
=14.506, df = 5, x2/df = 2.901, p = 0.013, NFI = 0.985, GFI = 0.990, AGFI =
0.969, CFI = 0.990, TLI = 0.980, RMSEA = 0.057). Furthermore, all the values of factor loading were also higher than the minimum standard value of 0.30 (i.e.
0.64-0.75). Thus, without any modification this construct was found to be good
as depicts in Figure 4.6.
124
Figure 4.6: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Measurement Model for OI
Standardize Values of Model Fitness
x2 =14.506, df = 5, x2/df = 2.901, p = 0.013, NFI = 0.985, GFI = 0.990,
AGFI = 0.969, CFI = 0.990, TLI = 0.980, RMSEA = 0.057
4.12.4 Organizational Commitment
Two dimensions of the construct of organizational commitment i.e.
affective commitment and continuance commitment was measured by using its 08 items scale. In comparison with the standard values as given in Table 4.3, the
preliminary standardized parameter estimates or values were not found good.
The initial standardized parameter estimates or values were found as x2 =114.867, df = 9, x2/df = 12.763, p = 0.00, NFI = 0.929, GFI = 0.939, AGFI =
0.858, CFI = 0.934, TLI = 0.890, RMSEA = 0.142. Initially, all the items were
examined which had factor loading (ranging from 0.34-0.85) above the standard
value of 0.30 except item 7 & 8. Therefore, item 7 & 8 which had factor loading values 0.12 and 0.21 respectively were removed from the measure to make the
factor loading of items in acceptable range. Subsequently, the model was
examined comparing the modification indices and standardized residuals. In the model, some error terms were found unsatisfactorily high related with other
error terms such as e6-e7 = 68.763; e5-e6 = 60.793; e5-e7=32.332 and
e1-e2=30.530. As suggested by Byrne (2010) all referred error terms were
correlated one by one and model was tested repeatedly for better fit. After making each re-specification in the model, model fitness improved. The final
model along with values of standardized parameter estimates are given in Table
4.7.
125
Figure 4.7: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Measurement Model for OC
Standardize Values of Model Fitness
(i.e. x2 =11.689, df = 7, x2/df = 1.670, p = 0.111, NFI = 0.993, GFI = 0.994, AGFI = 0.981, CFI = 0.997, TLI = 0.994, RMSEA = 0.034).
4.12.5 Employee Engagement
The construct of employee engagement was measured by using eleven
items scale. In comparison with standard values, the preliminary values
pertaining to standardized parameter estimates were found not good as shown
in Table 4.3 e.g. x2 = 477.886, df = 44, x2/df = 10.861, p = 0.00, NFI = 0.767, GFI = 0.852, AGFI = 0.778, CFI = 0.783, TLI = 0.728, RMSEA = 0.130. All
items were examined for their factor loading (ranging from 0.46-0.74) which
were found higher than the minimum standard value of 0.30 except item 4 & 8. Therefore, item 4 & 8 which had factor loading values 0.21 and 0.21
respectively were removed from the measure to make the factor loading of items
in acceptable range. Subsequently, the model was examined comparing the
modification indices and standardized residuals. In the model, some error terms were found significant high concerning with other error terms such as e2-
e3=95.677; e9-e10=83.923; e5-e9 = 43.510; e5-e3=41.216; e5-e10 = 28.005;
e1-e5=26.445; e7-e5=19.97. As recommended by Byrne (2010) all referred error terms were correlated one by one and model was tested repeatedly to get
better model fit. After making each re-specification in the model, model fitness
improved. The final model along with values of standardized parameter
estimates are presented in Figure 4.8.
126
Figure 4.8: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Measurement Model for EE
Standardize Values of Model Fitness
x2 =89.268, df = 20, x2/df = 4.463, p = .000, NFI = 0.953, GFI = 0.966,
AGFI = 0.924, CFI = 0.963, TLI = 0.934, RMSEA = 0.077.
4.12.6 Organizational Citizenship Behaviour
Two dimensions of the construct of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour
(OCB) i.e. organizational citizenship behaviour towards individual (OCBI) and
organizational citizenship behaviour towards organization (OCBO) was measured by using its two dimensions’ scale comprising of 8 items containing
4 items of each dimension. In comparison with the standard values, the
preliminary values of standardized parameter estimates were found not good as
depicted in Table 4.3 e.g. x2 =322.438, df = 20, x2/df = 16.122, p = 0.00, NFI = 0.807, GFI = 0.850, AGFI = 0.729, CFI = 0.816, TLI = 0.742, RMSEA = 0.161,
but for more fit, some re-specifications were made. For factor loading, all items
were examined and few of them were found higher than the minimum standard value of 0.30 (i.e. 0.46--0.77). Subsequently, the model was examined through
standardized residuals and application of modification indices. Some error terms
were found highly correlated with other error terms such as e1-e2=71.65; e2-e5
= 64.797; e1-e5 = 31.380. As per the recommendations by Byrne (2010) all referred error terms were correlated one by one and model was tested repeatedly
to get the best model fit. After making each re-specification in the model, model
fitness improved. The final model along with values of standardized parameter estimates are presented in Figure 4.9.
127
Figure 4.9: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Measurement Model for OCB
Standardize Values of Model Fitness
x2 =42.739, df = 14, x2/df = 3.053, p = 0.000, NFI = 0.974, GFI = 0.983, AGFI = 0.955, CFI = 0.983, TLI = 0.965, RMSEA = 0.059).
4.13 CONSTRUCTS RELIABILITY
In research process, the reliability of the instruments is considered as the most important element of the research process. Carmines and Zeller (1979) and
Bollen (1989) argued that reliability is characterized as an experiment or method
which provides the similar results repeatedly over different circumstances. Internal consistency of a scale is determined before application or performance
of a research test to ensure its validity; reliability indicates the amount of
measurement error in a test. One of the ways to determine the instrument's
internal consistency is through Cronbach Alpha values, it was first presented by Lee Cronbach in 1951.
Therefore, a pretest was conducted to examine whether the respondents of the study comprehend all the items of the scale which they are supposed to
respond (Brislin, 1980). This questionnaire was comprised of different measures
which were already used in some of previous studies and found reliable. For
determining the reliability of the tailored questionnaire, 25 questionnaires were distributed among the faculty members of an Institute. The participants
responded the questionnaires about their perceptions on CSR, their feelings
128
towards job, organization, and work behaviours. Reliability of test was
performed by using Cronbach alpha to determine the internal consistency of the tailored questionnaire and received results are given in the following Table 4.4.
Table 4.4 indicates the Cronbach’s Alpha value of each instrument
supposed to be used to measure the constructs of this study. This table show that all the values are above 0.7 which indicates that scales to be used in this study
to measure the constructs is good and highly reliable which also indicates the
inter-correlation matrix generated from the results. Cronbach’s coefficient alphas value for each variable is also given in the end of each row which has
been highlighted as bold in brackets.
Table 4.4
Reliability of Pretest of the Measures
Constructs No. of Items Cronbach Alpha
Perceived CSR 29 (0.93)
Organizational Trust 5 (0.88)
Job Satisfaction 3 (0.84)
Organizational Identitfication 5 (0.83)
Organizational Commitment 8 (0.81)
Employee Engagement 11 (0.81)
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour 8 (0.84)
Source: Developed for the research
The alpha value for CSR perceptions of employees’ is above 0.70 (i.e. 0.93), which is highly reliable, found on a high level of internal consistency
and hence achieved acceptable internal consistency of the measure. The alpha
values of adopted mediating variables (e.g. OT, JS and OI) are more than 0.80,
which also indicates a high level of reliability of the scales. The internal consistency of the dependent variables i.e. organizational commitment,
employee engagement and OCB all had alpha values of above 0.80 and all scales
have achieved acceptable to good internal consistency. Therefore, it concludes that the proposed survey questionnaire used in this study is a reliable instrument.
However, validity and reliability of the final questionnaire was tested through
confirmatory factor analysis as shown in Table 4.5
129
4.13.1 Assessment of Reliability and Validity
After assessment of uni-dimensionality of the observed variables of the
study i.e. CSR, OT, JS, OI, OC, EE and OCB, the constructs reliability and
validity were also examined (Byrne, 2010). In order to examine the reliability
and validity of the constructs, Cronbach’s Alpha, Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and Composite Reliability (CR) were applied. However, to test the
discriminant and convergence validity, measures of the constructs were used
(Kline, 2005). Moreover, the reliability of the used constructs was tested through the Cronbach Alpha value and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). George
and Mallery (2003) suggested rules of thumb that the value of Cronbach Alpha
“≥ 0.9 – Excellent, ≥ 0.8 – Good, ≥ 0.7 – Acceptable, ≥ 0.6 – Questionable,
≥ 0.5 – Poor, and ≤ 0.5 – Unacceptable”. In some of previous studies, Cronbach’s alpha was applied such as Al-bdour et al. (2010) and Cheruiyot and
Maru (2014). On the basis of above referred rules of thumb all the alpha values
of the constructs were found in “good” for CSR, OT, JS, OI, OC, EE, and OCB (see Table 4.5). A formula given by Fornell and Larcker (1981) was applied to
calculate the value of Average Variance Extracted (AVE), Composite
Reliability (CR). Hair et al., (2006) suggested that the value of AVE should be
≥ 0.50 and CR value should be ≥ 0.60. In addition, assessment of convergent and discriminant validity of the observed variables were made. In this context,
Holmes-Smith et al. (2006) recommended that loading of the construct could be
greater than 0.30 with significance value p < 0.001. Table 4.4 depicts the values
of the items of the constructs which shows that all the observed constructs are having convergent validity. Conversely, Kline (2005) concluded that for having
convergent validity, correlation and coefficients of the construct should not be
more than the value of 0.85. The scale used in this study was acceptable for discriminant validity because results of the study were found consistent with the
suggested values for correlation and coefficients. Model fitness values with
unstandardized parameter estimates may be seen at Appendix-J.
130
Table 4.5
Evaluation of Measurement Model
Item FL ∞ CR AVE Item FL ∞ CR AVE
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Job Satisfaction (JS) CSR1 .868
.932 .954 0.526
JS1 .847
.848 .905 .760 CSR2 .667 JS2 .898
CSR3 .711 JS3 .868
CSR6 0.63 Organizational Identity (OI)
CSR7 0.42 OI1 .801
.833 .876 .587
CSR8 .652 OI2 .758
CSR9 .505 OI3 0.74
CSR10 0.73 OI4 .799
CSR11 .661 OI5 .729
CSR12 .612 Organizational Commitment (OC) CSR13 0.58 OC1 .795
.810 .933 .639
CSR14 .583 OC2 .895
CSR15 .553 OC3 .854
CSR16 .597 OC4 .852
CSR17 .882 OC5 .648
CSR18 .516 OC6 .603
CSR19 .585 Employee Engagement (EE) CSR20 .638 EE1 .577
.819 .936 .576
CSR21 0.58 EE2 .822
CSR22 .806 EE3 .806
CSR23 .721 EE5 .775
CSR24 .711 EE6 .644
CSR25 .387 EE7 .741
CSR26 .418 EE9 .902
CSR27 .324 EE10 .873
CSR28 .837 EE11 .547
CSR29 .833 Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB)
Organizational Trust (OT) OCB1 .802
.848 .926 .614
OT1 .793
.881 .916 .685
OCB2 .872
OT2 .833 OCB3 0.83
OT3 .851 OCB4 .549
OT4 .837 OCB5 .848
OT5 .823 OCB6 .754
OCB7 .795
OCB8 .773
131
4.14 HYPOTHESES TESTING (SECOND STAGE-SEM
APPLICATION)
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is more important and well known
for hypotheses testing and inferential of data analysis. SEM is considered as
multipurpose and more diverse comparing other multivariate procedures, because it permits simultaneously to analyze various relationships between
dependent and independent variables. As suggested by Kline (2005), Hair et al.
(2006), Holmes-Smith et al. (2006) and Byrne (2010), at first stage of SEM application, model fitness and uni-dimensionality of the observed variables was
examined. In this study, structure model is defined at the second stage of SEM
application. Byrne (2010) suggested that at the second stage of SEM, structural
model identifies that “how latent variables are related”, it also specifies the direct and indirect relationship among the observed latent variables. In order to test the
existing relationship among the observed variables, structure model is used in the
study. To ascertain model fitness, structure model was examined as per model fitness indices as introduced by Hair et al. (2010). In this study, perceived CSR
is an independent variable, organizational commitment, employee engagement
and organizational citizenship behaviour are dependent variables, while
organizational trust, job satisfaction and organizational identification are hypothesized as mediating or intervening variables between CSR and dependent
variables i.e. OC, EE and OCB.
4.14.1 Structural Model-1
In second stage of SEM, first structural model is defined and relationship between the observed variables is also examined. In Figure 4.10 one independent
variable (i.e. CSR) and six dependent variables are shown (i.e. OT, JS, OI, OC,
EE, and OCB with sixty-five paths. At this stage, there is no need to correlate the
independent variable (i.e. CSR) with double headed arrow. All the possible causal paths are shown in relation with exogenous variable (i.e. CSR) and
endogenous variables (i.e. OT, JS, OI, OC, EE and OCB) through single headed
arrows. An error term relating to endogenous variables (i.e. JS and OCB) signifies the residual error because of systematic error.
132
Figure 4.10: Hypothesized Structural Model-1
Values of Model Fit: x2 =5540.620, df=1872, x /df =2.960, p=0.000,
NFI=0.725, GFI=0.745, IFI=0.799, AGFI=0.725, CFI=0.798, TLI=0.790, RMSEA=0.058, P-Close=1.000
133
In model fitness, standardized estimates along with the values are
presented in Figure 4.10. The model fit values (x2 =5540.620, df=1872, x2/df =2.960, p=0.000, NFI=0.725, GFI=0.745, IFI=0.799, AGFI=0.725,
CFI=0.798, TLI=0.790, RMSEA=0.058, P-Close=1.000) which shows that
model is closely fit as per standardized values, but it has some insignificant paths
which need to be modified to make the model as good fit (Hair et al., 2010). Table 4.6 depicts the results of hypotheses testing. The reflected values in the
table depicts that hypotheses H1, H5, H9, H15 are found statistically significant
and support the hypotheses. However, H13 and H14 are found statistically insignificant and do not support the predicted hypotheses (as hypothesized in
Chapter 3).
Table 4.6
Results of Hypotheses Testing
Hypotheses Paths Β C.R P Supported
H1 CSR-OT .785 11.551 .000 Yes
H5 CSR-JS .203 2.978 .000 Yes
H9 CSR-OI .303 3.946 .000 Yes
H13 CSR-OC -.069 -1.231 .218 No
H14 CSR-EE .116 1.898 .058 No
H15 CSR-OCB .353 4.538 .000 Yes
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OT = Organizational Trust,
JS = Job Satisfaction, OI = Organizational Identification,
OC = Organizational Commitment, EE = Employee Engagement and OCB = Organizational Citizenship Behaviour **p < .001, *p <.05.
4.14.2 Removal of Insignificant Paths and Fit Indices for Structural Model
As suggested by Byrne (2010), in view of better model fitness, all
insignificant paths were removed. Moreover, as suggested by Holmes-Smith et al. (2006) that one by one all the insignificant paths were removed. Furthermore,
first those paths removed which were having least standardized value because
removal of path accrues change in significance level and standardized weights
for the remaining paths. Table 4.7 depicts the details of all the removed paths with the values of model fitness.
134
Table 4.7
Indices of Structural Models
Structural
Model
Removed
Paths Model Fitness Indices
Model -1 -------
x2 =5540.620, df=1872, x2/df =2.960, p=0.000, NFI=0.725, GFI=0.745, IFI=0.799, AGFI=0.725,
CFI=0.798, TLI=0.790, RMSEA=0.058,
P-Close=1.000
Model -2 CSR-EE
x2 =5544.037, df=1873, x2/df =2.960, p=0.000,
NFI=0.725, GFI=0.745, IFI=0.799, AGFI=0.725, CFI=0.798, TLI=0.790, RMSEA=0.058,
P-Close=1.000
Model -3 OT-OI
x2 =5550.732, df=1874, x2/df =2.962, p=0.000,
NFI=0.724, GFI=0.744, IFI=0.799, AGFI=0.725,
CFI=0.798, TLI=0.789, RMSEA=0.058, P-Close=1.000
Model -4 CSR-OC
x2 =5554.111, df=1875, x2/df =2.962, p=0.000,
NFI=0.724, GFI=0.744, IFI=0.799, AGFI=0.725,
CFI=0.798, TLI=0.789, RMSEA=0.058,
P-Close=1.000
Model -5 JS-OCB
x2 =5554.179, df=1873, x2/df =2.961, p=0.000, NFI=0.724, GFI=0.744, IFI=0.799, AGFI=0.725,
CFI=0.798, TLI=0.789, RMSEA=0.058,
P-Close=1.000
Model -6 OT-OCB
x2 =5544.201, df=1877, x2/df =2.959, p=0.000,
NFI=0.724, GFI=0.744, IFI=0.799, AGFI=0.725, CFI=0.798, TLI=0.790, RMSEA=0.058,
P-Close=1.000
Model -7
Final -------
x2 =3725.177, df=1830, x2/df =2.036, p=0.000,
NFI=0.915, GFI=0.910, IFI=0.907, AGFI=0.921,
CFI=0.911, TLI=0.923, RMSEA=0.042, P-Close=1.000
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OT = Organizational Trust,
JS = Job Satisfaction, OI = Organizational Identification,
OC = Organizational Commitment, EE = Employee Engagement and OCB = Organizational Citizenship Behaviour **p < .001, *p < .05.
All the insignificant paths were removed one by one from the structural
model to identify the model fitness. In the fitness indices, not so much changes were observed from model 1-6 when insignificant paths were removed. For
instance, in case of change in insignificant paths or fitness indices no change
was observed in fitness indices such as NFI value i.e. 0.724 remained constant
135
and no changes was occurred. Moreover, values of other fit indices remained
the same i.e. IFI, CFI, TLI, RMSEA and P-close.
Figure 4.11: Hypothesized Structural Model 7 - Final
136
After removal of all the insignificant paths, the model was again adjusted
for standardized residuals and modification indices. For this purpose, less values paths were removed to get the high values of model fitness. This time the values
of model-7 were improved and found to be fit having fitness indices values as
suggested by Byrne (2010) and Hair et al. (2006) for better model fit. (see Figure
4.11) i.e. x2 =3725.177, df=1830, x2/df =2.036, p=0.000, NFI=0.915, GFI=0.910, IFI=0.907, AGFI=0.921, CFI=0.911, TLI=0.923, RMSEA=0.042,
P-Close=1.000. (see Appendix-K to see all the diagrams of structural model).
Hence, this model (Final model) was found as best structural model and it may be executed in the higher education sector of Pakistan in particular and world
across in general. However, in view of the cultural diversity, variation might be
observed in the results.
4.15 STRUCTURAL MODELS FOR MEDIATION ANALYSIS
Some scholars are of the view that in case a variable is considered
between the relationship of independent and dependent variable(s), it is
considered as a mediating variable (Baron & Kenny, 1986). In addition, Little
et al. (2007) argued that in complex models the role of mediating variable is important because mediating variables explains the mechanism through which
predictor influence the criterion. In order to check the mediation, different
methods are adopted, however, the causal step method introduced by Baron and
Kenny (1986) is commonly used and considered important. Moreover, Preacher and Hayes (2008) advocated that this step method shows better results in case
of large sample size. However, there are certain conditions which needs to be
fulfilled for a good mediation results such as:
1. There should be significant relationship existed between A and M (path-a).
2. There should also be significant relationship existed between M and B (path-b).
3. The direct path (i.e. c) should be less significant as compared to the indirect path (i.e. a × b).
137
Figure 4.12: Mediation Model
Note: In the current study, where A = CSR, M = OT, JS and OI, B = OC,
EE and OCB
Although this method is frequently used by the scholars, however, this
method is still debatable on account of following two reasons. First, as suggested by Preacher and Hayes, (2004), it does not have the feature to test the
significance of the indirect path. Second, as suggested by Mackinnon, (2008),
this method does not consider type II errors. Some researchers are of the view
that for measurement of mediation, indirect path is more suitable technique, because in this technique indirect path is calculated by increasing regression
weights of path “a” and “b” (see Figure 4.12) (Muthen, 2011; Sobel, 1982).
However, researchers advocated that the SEM is most appropriate statistical tool to analyze the indirect paths because it has the ability to evaluate the complex
models (Mackinnon et al., 2007; Preacher & Hayes, 2004; Little et al., 2007).
Thus, considering the complexity of the model and to test the significance, the
mediation was examined individually by dividing the model into small parts, therefore, in this study, SEM technique was used to test the mediation. In Figure
4.12 the mediation model is shown with direct variable (A), indirect variable (B)
and mediation variable (M) (i.e. A =CSR, M = OT, JS and OI and B = OC, EE
and OCB. Muthen (2011) and Mackinnon, (2000) supported that by using SEM technique these paths are divided into two paths i.e. indirect path and direct path.
Regression weight of variable A and B is considered the direct path, however,
multiplication of two regression paths i.e. regression weight of variables A and M, and regression weight of variables of M and B is considered indirect paths.
The model is considered fully mediated if the relationship between variables A
and B is fully explained by M. However, the model is considered partially
mediated if all the paths are found significant. In addition, as suggested by Mackinnon et al., (2002) if the non-significant relationship is found between
independent and mediating variable (A-M) or between mediating and dependent
variable (M-B) then there is no mediating relationship exists. The results of mediation relationships among variables are presented in Table 4.8. For
M
A B
a b
c
138
mediation models, as predicted mediations among the observed variables of the
study (see Appendix-L).
Table 4.8
Hypothesized Mediation Relations among Variables and its Results
Hypotheses Hypothesized Relation Mediation Results
H2 CSR-OT-OC Partial Mediation
H3 CSR-OT-EE Partial Mediation
H4 CSR-OT-OCB No Mediation
H6 CSR-JS-OC Partial Mediation
H7 CSR-JS-EE Partial Mediation
H8 CSR-JS-OCB No Mediation
H10 CSR-OI-OC Partial Mediation
H11 CSR-OI-EE Partial Mediation
H12 CSR-OI-OCB Partial Mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OT = Organizational Trust,
JS = Job Satisfaction, OI = Organizational Identification,
OC = Organizational Commitment, EE = Employee Engagement
and OCB = Organizational Citizenship Behaviour.
4.15.1 The Relationship between CSR, OT and OC
Figure 4.13 depicts the relational paths among CSR, OT and OC,
however, the Table 4.9 shows the direct and indirect paths. After analyzing all
the paths through SEM, the model fulfills all the parameters, requirements as suggested by Hair et al., (2006) it was found to be considered as fit. Model
fitness values were found to be as x2=1506.424, df=638, x2/df=2.361, p=0.000,
NFI=0.912, GFI=0.923, IFI=0.919, AGFI=0.905, CFI=0.918, TLI=0.910,
RMSEA= 0.048.
139
Model Fitness Values
x2=1506.424
x2/df=2.361
NFI=0.912
IFI=0.919
CFI=0.918
RMSEA= 0.048
df=638
p=0.000
GFI=0.923
AGFI=0.905
TLI=0.910
Figure 4.13: Mediation Analysis CSR-OT-OC
Table 4.9
Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OT-OC
Path Std.
Reg. P Effect
CSR-OT OT-OC
CSR-OC
.79
.61
.15
0.00 0.00
0.03
Direct Indirect Total Mediation
0.15** 0.48** 0.63 Partial
Mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OT = Organizational Trust, OC = Organizational Commitment
** P < .001 and * P < .05
After analyzing the mediation results, significant path was found between
CSR and OT (with values of β=.79, p =.000), similarly the path between OT
and OC was also found significant β=0.61, p =.000. Moreover, the indirect path
was found greater (β=.48) in comparison with direct path (β =.15). Thus, it is concluded that OT plays its role as a mediator between CSR
and OC and partially mediates the relationship between CSR and OC. Hence,
the results supported the H2.
4.15.2 The Relationship between CSR, OT and EE
Figure 4.14 shows the relational paths among CSR-OT-EE, furthermore
this Table 4.10 also depicts relationship between the variables which is reflected
through indirect and direct paths. Moreover, SEM was applied examine the paths for model fitness. Values of model fitness were found to be good (see
Table 4.4) i.e. x2=1640.185, df=747, x2/df=2.196, p=0.000, NFI=0.910,
GFI=0.923, IFI=0.918, AGFI=0.905, CFI=0.917, TLI=0.909, RMSEA= 0.045.
OT
CSR OC
β=.791,
p =.000
β=.614,
p =.000
β=0.152,
p =0.030
140
Model Fitness Values
x2=1640.185
x2/df=2.196
NFI=0.910
IFI=0.918
CFI=0.917
RMSEA= 0.045
df=747
p=0.000
GFI=0.923
AGFI=0.905
TLI=0.909
Figure 4.14: Mediation Analysis CSR-OT-EE
Table 4.10
Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OT-EE
Path Std.
Reg. P Effect
CSR-OT
OT-EE CSR-EE
.79
.37
.33
0.00
0.00 0.00
Direct Indirect Total Mediation
0.33* 0.29** 0.63 Partial
Mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OT = Organizational Trust, EE = Employee Engagement
** P < .001 and * P < .05
After examining the mediation results, significant path was found
between CSR and OT (with values of β=.79, p =.000), similarly the path
between OT and EE was also found significant β=0.37, p =.000. Moreover, the
indirect path was found lesser (β =0.29) in comparison with direct path (β =0.33). Thus, it is concluded that OT performs its role as a partial mediator
among CSR and EE. Hence, the results supported the H3.
4.15.3 The Relationship between CSR, OT and OCB
Figure 4.15 presents the relational paths among CSR-OT-OCB, in addition this Table 4.11 also identify relationship between the observed
variables which reflects through the indirect and direct paths. Moreover, for
examining the paths for model fitness, SEM was applied and standard values for model fitness was found to be good as suggested by Hair et al., (2010) (see Table
4.4) i.e. x2=1587.668, df=707, x2/df=2.246, p=0.000, NFI=0.923, GFI=0.909,
IFI=0.917, AGFI=0.905, CFI=0.916, TLI=0.907, RMSEA= 0.046.
OT
CSR EE
β=.794,
p =.000
β=.379,
p =.000
β=.335,
p =.000
141
Model Fitness Values
x2=1587.668
x2/df=2.246
NFI=0.923
IFI=0.917
CFI=0.916
RMSEA= 0.046
df=707
p=0.000
GFI=0.909
AGFI=0.905
TLI=0.907
Figure 4.15: Mediation Analysis CSR-OT-OCB
Table 4.11
Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OT-OCB
Path Std.
Reg. P Effect
CSR-OT
OT-OCB CSR-OCB
.79
.08
.52
0.00
0.31 0.00
Direct Indirect Total Mediation
0.52** 0.06 0.58 No
Mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OT = Organizational Trust,
OCB = Organizational Citizenship Behaviour ** P < .001 and * P < .05
After examining the mediation results, significant path was found between CSR and OT (with values of β=.79, p =.000), contrarily the path
between OT and OCB was found insignificant β=0.08, p =0.31. Moreover, the
indirect path was found lesser (β = 0.06) in comparison with direct path (β =.52).
Thus, it is concluded that OT does not perform its role as a mediator between the observed variables i.e. CSR and OCB. Hence, the results do not support the
H4.
4.15.4 The Relationship between CSR, JS and OC
Relational paths are shown in Figure 4.16 among variables i.e. CSR-JS-OC, in addition Table 4.12 also depicts the relationship between observed
variables which reflects through indirect and direct paths. Moreover, SEM was
applied to examine the paths for model fitness and standard values for model fitness was found to be good as suggested by Hair et al., (2010) (see Table 4.4)
i.e. x2=1014.146, df=544, x2/df=1.864, p=0.000, NFI=0.902, GFI=0.911,
IFI=0.951, AGFI=0.911, CFI=0.950, TLI=0.942, RMSEA= 0.038.
OT
CSR OCB
β=.794,
p =.000
β=0.083,
p =.317
β=0.525,
p =0.000
142
Model Fitness Values
x2=1014.146
x2/df=1.864
NFI=0.902
IFI=0.951
CFI=0.950
RMSEA=0.038
df=544
p=0.000
GFI=0.911
AGFI=0.853
TLI=0.942
Figure 4.16: Mediation Analysis CSR-JS-OC
Table 4.12
Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-JS-OC
Path Std.
Reg. P Effect
CSR-JS
JS-OC CSR-OC
.62
.47
.34
0.00
0.00 0.00
Direct Indirect Total Mediation
0.34** 0.29** 0.63 Partial
Mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, JS = Job Satisfaction, OC = Organizational Commitment
** P < .001 and * P < .05
After examining the mediation results, significant path was found
between CSR and JS (with values of β=.62, p =.000), similarly the path between
JS and OC was also found significant β=0.47, p =.000. Moreover, the indirect
path was found lesser (β=.29) in comparison with direct path (β =.34). Thus, it is concluded that JS performs its role as a mediator between
observed variables CSR and OC. Hence, the results support the H6.
4.15.5 The Relationship between CSR, JS and EE
In Figure 4.17 relational paths are shown among variables i.e. CSR-JS-EE, in addition, Table 4.13 also depicts the relationship between the observed
variables which reflects through indirect and direct paths. Moreover, in order to
examine the paths for model fitness SEM was applied. Values of model fitness were found to be good as suggested by Hair et al., (2010) (see Table 4.4) i.e.
x2=1363.204, df=663, x2/df=2.056, p=0.000, NFI=0.911, GFI=0.923,
IFI=0.928, AGFI=0.930, CFI=0.928, TLI=0.919, RMSEA= 0.043.
JS
CSR OC
β=.627,
p =.000
β=0.478,
p =.000
β=0.345,
p =0.000
143
Model Fitness Values
x2=1363.204
x2/df=2.056
NFI=0.911
IFI=0.928
CFI=0.928
RMSEA=0.043
df=663
p=0.000
GFI=0.923
AGFI=0.930
TLI=0.919
Figure 4.17: Mediation Analysis CSR-JS-EE
Table 4.13
Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-JS-EE
Path Std.
Reg. P Effect
CSR-JS
JS-EE CSR-EE
.62
.33
.42
0.00
0.00 0.00
Direct Indirect Total Mediation
0.42** 0.20** 0.62 Partial
mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, JS = Job Satisfaction, EE = Employee Engagement
** P < .001 and * P < .05
After examining the mediation results, significant path was found between
CSR and JS (with values of β=.62, p =.000), similarly the path between JS and
EE was also found significant β=0.33, p =.000. Moreover, the indirect path was
found lesser (β =0.20) in comparison with direct path (β =0.42). Thus, it is concluded that JS performs its role as a mediator between
observed variables i.e. CSR and EE. Hence, the results supported the H7.
4.15.6 The Relationship between CSR, JS and OCB
In Figure 4.18 relational paths are shown among variables i.e. CSR-JS-OCB, in addition, Table 4.14 also depicts the relationship between the
observed variables which reflects through indirect and direct paths. Moreover,
in order to examine the paths, SEM was applied for model fitness. Values of model fitness were found to be good as suggested
by Hair et al., (2010) (see Table 4.4) i.e. x2=1316.304, df=627, x2/df=2.099,
p=0.000, NFI=0.927, GFI=0.910, IFI=0.927, AGFI=0.930, CFI=0.926,
TLI=0.917, RMSEA= 0.043.
JS
CSR EE
β=.622,
p =.000
β=0.335,
p =.000
β=0.427,
p =0.000
144
Model Fitness Values
x2=1316.304
x2/df=2.099
NFI=0.927
IFI=0.927
CFI=0.926
RMSEA=0.043
df=627
p=0.000
GFI=0.910
AGFI=0.930
TLI=0.917
Figure 4.18: Mediation Analysis CSR-JS-OCB
Table 4.14
Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-JS-OCB
Path Std.
Reg. P Effect
CSR-JS JS-OCB
CSR-OCB
.62
.06
.54
0.00 0.30
0.00
Direct Indirect Total Mediation
0.54** 0.03 0.58 No
mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, JS = Job Satisfaction, OCB
= Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. ** P < .001 and * P < .05
After examining the mediation results, significant path was found
between CSR and JS (with values of β=.62, p =.000), contrary the mediating
path between JS and OCB was found insignificant β=0.06, p =0.30. Moreover,
the indirect path was found lesser (β= 0.03) in comparison with direct path (β = 0.54). Thus, it is concluded that JS does not perform its role as a mediator
between observed variables i.e. CSR and OCB. Hence, the results do not support
the H8.
4.15.7 The Relationship between CSR, OI and OC
Relational paths are shown in Figure 4.19 among variables i.e. CSR-OI-
OC, in addition, Table 4.15 also depicts the relationship between the observed
variables which reflects through indirect and direct paths. In addition, in order to examine the paths for model fitness, SEM was applied. Values of model
fitness were found to be good as suggested by Hair et al., (2010) (see Table 4.4)
i.e. x2=1220.792, df=631, x2/df=1.935, p=0.000, NFI=0.917, GFI=0.900,
IFI=0.939, AGFI=0.922, CFI=0.939, TLI=0.932, RMSEA= 0.40.
JS
CSR OCB
β=.621,
p =.000
β=0.061,
p =.304
β=0.543,
p =.000
145
Model Fitness Values
x2=1220.792
x2/df=1.935
NFI=0.917
IFI=0.939
CFI=0.939
RMSEA=0.40
df=631
p=0.000
GFI=0.900
AGFI=0.922
TLI=0.932
Figure 4.19: Mediation Analysis CSR-OI-OC
Table 4.15
Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OI-OC
Path Std.
Reg. P Effect
CSR-OI OI-OC
CSR-OC
.58
.52
.32
0.00 0.00
0.00
Direct Indirect Total Mediation
0.32** 0.30** 0.62 Partial
mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OI = Organizational Identity,
OC = Organizational Commitment
** P < .001 and * P < .05
After examining the mediation results, significant path was found
between CSR and OI having values of β=.58, p =.000), similarly the path
between OI and OC was also found significant β=0.52, p =0.000. Moreover, the indirect path was found lesser (β= 0.30) in comparison with direct path
(β = 0.32). Thus, it is concluded that OI performs its role as a mediating variable
between observed variables i.e. CSR and OC. Hence, the results of mediation analysis support the H10.
4.15.8 The Relationship between CSR, OI and EE
In Figure 4.20 relational paths are shown among variables i.e. CSR-OI-
EE, Moreover, Table 4.16 also depicts the relationship between the observed variables which reflects through indirect and direct paths. In order to examine
the paths for model fitness, SEM was applied. Values of model fitness were
found close to be good (see Table 4.4) i.e. x2=1595.849, df=749, x2/df=2.131,
OI
CSR OC
β=.585,
p =.000
β=0.524,
p =.000
β=0.327,
p =.000
146
p=.000, NFI=0.915, GFI=0.918, IFI=0.916, AGFI=0.923, CFI=0.915,
TLI=0.907, RMSEA= 0.44.
Model Fitness Values
x2=1595.849
x2/df=2.131
NFI=0.915
IFI=0.916
CFI=0.915
RMSEA=0.44
df=749
p=0.000
GFI=0.918
AGFI=0.923
TLI=0.907
Figure 4.20: Mediation Analysis CSR-OI-EE
Table 4.16
Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OI-EE
Path Std.
Reg. P Effect
CSR-OI
OI-EE
CSR-EE
.82
.44
.42
0.00
0.00
0.00
Direct Indirect Total Mediation
0.42** 0.36** 0.79 Partial
Mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OI = Organizational Identity, EE
= Employee Engagement ** P < .001 and * P < .05
After examining the mediation results, significant path was found
between CSR and OI having values of β=.82, p =.000), similarly the path between OI and EE was also found significant β=0.44, p =0.000. Moreover, the
indirect path was found lesser (β = 0.36) in comparison with direct path
(β = 0.42). Thus, it is concluded that OI performs its role as a mediating variable between observed variables i.e. CSR and EE. Hence, the results of mediation
analysis supported the H11.
4.15.9 The Relationship between CSR, OI and OCB
In Figure 4.21 relational paths are shown among variables i.e. CSR-OI-OCB, Moreover, Table 4.17 also reflects the relationship between the
observed variables which reflects through indirect and direct paths. In order to
examine the paths for model fitness, SEM was applied. Values of model fitness
values were found to be good as suggested by Hair et al., (2010) (see Table 4.4)
OI
CSR EE
β=.826,
p =.000
β=0.443,
p =.000
β=0.426,
p =0.000
147
i.e. x2=1405.106, df=704, x2/df=1.996, p=.000, NFI=0.918, GFI=0.923,
IFI=0.911, AGFI=0.917, CFI=0.927, TLI=0.919, RMSEA= 0.41.
Model Fitness Values
x2=1405.106
x2/df=1.996
NFI=0.918
IFI=0.911
CFI=0.927
RMSEA=0.41
df=704
p=0.000
GFI=0.923
AGFI=0.917
TLI=0.919
Figure 4.21: Mediation Analysis CSR-OI-OCB
Table 4.17
Path Analysis Outcomes for CSR-OI-EE
Path Std.
Reg. P Effect
CSR-OI OI-OCB
CSR-OCB
.60
.42
.34
0.00 0.00
0.00
Direct Indirect Total Mediation
0.34** 0.25** 0.59 Partial
Mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OI = Organizational Identity, OCB = Organizational Citizenship Behaviour
** P < .001 and * P < .05.
After examining the mediation results, significant path was found
between CSR and OI having values of β=.60, p =.000), similarly the path between OI and OCB was also found significant β=0.42, p =0.000. Moreover,
the indirect path was found lesser (β = 0.25) in comparison with direct path
(β = 0.34). Thus, it is concluded that OI performs its role as a mediating variable between observed variables i.e. CSR and OCB. Hence, the results of mediation
analysis support the H12.
4.16 RESULTS FOR HYPOTHESES TESTING
In current study, total 15 hypotheses were tested. In Table 4.18, all 15 developed hypotheses along with their results are shown. Table 4.18 reflected
that 04 hypotheses were not supported (H4, H8, H13 and H14). However, Table
4.18 also reflected that 11 hypotheses were supported (H1, H2, H3, H5, H6, H7,
H9, H10, H11, H12 and H15). Hence, the results of this study signify that employees’ perceptions of corporate social responsibility influence the faculty
members’ attitudes and behaviours on their workplace as number of hypotheses
have supported.
OI
CSR OCB
β=.603,
p =.000
β=0.427,
p =.000
β=0.342,
p =0.000
148
Table 4.18
Results of Hypotheses Testing
Hypotheses Paths Supported or Not Supported
H1 CSR-OT Supported
H2 CSR-OT-OC Supported
H3 CSR-OT-EE Supported
H4 CSR-OT-OCB Not Supported
H5 CS-JS Supported
H6 CSR-JS-OC Supported
H7 CSR-JS-EE Supported
H8 CSR-JS-OCB Not Supported
H9 CSR-OI Supported
H10 CSR-OI-OC Supported
H11 CSR-OI-EE Supported
H12 CSR-OI-OCB Supported
H13 CSR-OC Not Supported
H14 CSR-EE Not Supported
H15 CSR-OCB Supported
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OT = Organizational Trust,
JS = Job Satisfaction, OI = Organizational Identification, OC = Organizational Commitment, EE = Employee Engagement
and OCB = Organizational Citizenship Behaviour.
4.17 CHAPTER SUMMARY
In this chapter, all the analysis starting from data normality to hypotheses
testing were executed. In beginning, data normality was checked and then all
SEM assumptions were completed before conducting the analysis such as CFA and structural model. At second stage, data was analyzed through application of
SEM for testing of hypotheses and mediation analysis. Total 15 hypotheses were
developed out of which 11 were found to support the hypothesized relations,
however, 04 were found not to support the hypothesized relationships. The next chapter presents conclusive deliberations about the findings, implications and
limitations of the study.
149
CHAPTER 5:
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the main findings which are
observed on the basis of research objectives of the study. This chapter also aims to discuss the findings of this study in relation with previous empirical evidences
available in the literature. In this chapter, the interpretations, theoretical and
practical implications of the results are also presented. Moreover, on the basis
of the results of this study, limitations, future research directions and conclusion is also deliberated in this chapter.
5.1 SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS
The main stimulus factor to conduct this study started from the belief that
if a firm engages in CSR activities, its employees perceive it, and their perceptions might affect their cognition level which ultimately influences their
attitudes and behaviours at their workplace. In management research domain,
CSR has become an emerging topic and has been growing importance day by
day. In a competitive environment, it is imperative for the organizations to motivate their workforce to enhance their performance. Hence, it has become
important to understand and examine the impact of employees’ perceptions of
CSR on employees’ workplace outcomes. Employees play key role in their organizations and their perceptions of CSR may likely influence their work
attitudes and behaviours. The firm’ level of engagement in Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) activities might be able to influence employees to generate
positive workplace outcomes such as organizational commitment (OC), employee engagement (EE) and organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB).
The mediating role of organizational trust (OT), job satisfaction (JS) and
organizational identification (OI) is also tested to know that how these variables impact the relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and dependent
variables (OC, EE and OCB). Therefore, this study also considered the
attitudinal constructs which might have potential influence between the
relationship of employees’ perception of CSR and their attitude and behaviour.
In this study, the hypothesized framework is of great interest as there is hardly any empirical research study which has previously made attempt to
examine the relationship between impacts of employees’ (i.e faculty members)
perceptions of CSR and attitudes and behaviours i.e. OC, EE and OCB in higher
education sector. The examination of relationship among observed variables in this study may be helpful for higher education institutions in order to improve
performance of their employees by influencing their workplace attitudes and
150
behaviors at workplace through perceived CSR. This study has twofold
objectives: 1) to examine the relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and their workplace outcomes such as OC, EE and OCB; and 2) to evaluate
the potential mediation effects of employees’ attitudes (e.g. OT, JS and OI) in
relationship of employees’ perceptions of CSR and employees’ attitudes and
behaviours.
Although, the researchers and managers have started to focus on CSR,
and a small number of empirical research studies have been focused on the topic of CSR. However, the potential impact of CSR on employee’ perception has
been largely ignored (Bhattacharya et al., 2009; Kim et al., 2010; Jones, 2010;
Rupp et al., 2013; Morgeson et al., 2013). In this study, the researcher has made
an attempt to fill this gap. In order to develop a model which could be evaluated empirically, an extensive review of the literature was carried out. Moreover, to
test the proposed model, several statistical analyses were conducted. In last
chapter, the results of these tests were presented. In order to address the research objectives of the study, a quantitative survey based research design was
employed. To collect responses from the employees of the higher education
institutions, full consideration was paid towards the respondents. In this survey,
a total 595 respondents participated from across Pakistan. In addition, reliable measures were used to secure responses from the respondents (i.e. faculty
members of higher education institutions) from major cities of the four
provinces of Pakistan because of the multi ethnicity and generalizability of the
results.
In order to comprehend the concept of CSR, the results of this study
provided useful information, particularly in the perspective of higher education institutions. Results of this study, provide rich information to carry out future
research in the field of organizational behaviour and management sciences.
Firstly, mean values of all constructs were examined which were found to be
higher than 3.0 and fall between the range 3.0 to 4.0 which means respondents responses lie between neutral to agree in the given scale. The choice of answer
ranges from “1” (Strongly Disagree) to “5” (Strongly Agree), most of the data
collected ranges between “3” (Neutral) and “4” (Agree). Therefore, no large dispersion in data found and data was normally distributed (Hair et al., 1995).
Correlation analysis includes CSR, OT, JS, OI, OC, EE and OCB. The
independent variable i.e. CSR was found to correlate with mediating variables (i.e. OT, JS and OI) and dependent variables (i.e. OC, EE and OCB). The prime
objective of correlation analysis was to assess whether any of the demographic
variable positively associated with observed variables of the study (i.e. CSR, OT, JS, OI, OC, EE and OCB). In significant relationship was found among
demographical and observed variables except job designation, age and
151
qualification. Thus, job designation, age and qualification were used as the
controlled variables while conducting the analysis (Byrne, 2010).
In order to infer the results, SEM was applied in two stages. In the first-
stage, uni-dimensionality of the variables were examined and in the second stage
structural model was applied to remove the insignificant paths. Results indicated that CSR has no direct influence on OC and EE. However, results also indicated
that CSR has direct positive relationship with OCB. In addition, the role of OT,
JS and OI as mediators were found to have significant positive influence between employees’ perceptions of CSR and OC, EE and OCB. However, the
predicted mediating relationships of OT and JS were not found significant
between perceived CSR and OCB in faculty members of higher education
institutions.
A substantial and significant contribution is made by this empirical study
after testing the model of CSR with mediation effects of attitudes between perceptions of CSR and employees’ outcomes (i.e. attitudes and behaviours).
Based on the results of SEM using AMOS, it appears that the conceptual
research framework is largely applicable to CSR research and practice in
Pakistan in particular and world across in general. The proposed model received a strong statistical support and results supported the hypothesized framework
which provided rich and useful information for future studies. Moreover, in
future there is a need to put more focus on CSR research to further examine the
relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and their workplace outcomes.
5.2 DISCUSSION ON THE FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
This section is aimed to deliberate the four defined research objectives of
this research study (see chapter 2) and to discuss the research findings generated from the objectives of this study. The objectives of this study are documented
(from Section 5.2.1-5.2.4) below:
152
5.2.1 Employees’ Perceptions of CSR and its Outcomes (RO1)
The first research objective of the study is:
RO1 - To examine the impact of employees’ perception of CSR on
employees psychological, attitudinal and behavioural outcomes (e.g. Organizational Identification, Job Satisfaction, Organizational Trust,
Organizational Commitment, Employees Engagement and Organizational
Citizenship Behaviour) in higher education institutions of Pakistan.
The purpose of RO1 is to examine the direct impact of employees’
perception of CSR on their work-related outcomes (i.e. attitudinal and
behavioural outcomes including OC, EE and OCB). In addition, on the basis of research objective one, it was further divided into six hypotheses and six main
relations were developed for these six hypotheses (as depicts in Table 5.1) i.e.
the relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and organizational trust (H1); relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and job satisfaction
(H5); relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and organizational
identification (H9); relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and
organizational commitment (H13); relationship between employees’ perception of CSR and employee engagement (H14) and relationship between employees’
perception of CSR and organizational citizenship behaviour (H15).
Table 5.1
Hypothesized Associations of CSR
Hypotheses Relationship Supported or not
Supported
H1 CSR-OT Yes
H5 CSR-JS Yes
H9 CSR-OI Yes
H13 CSR-OC No
H14 CSR-EE No
H15 CSR-OCB Yes
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OT = Organizational Trust, JS= Job Satisfaction, OI = Organizational Identification,
OC= Organizational Commitment, EE = Employee
Engagement and OCB= Organizational Citizenship Behaviour
First, hypothesis 1 predicted that perceived CSR would be positively correlated with organizational trust level of employees. This was supported by
the result of this study and perceived CSR was found to have positive impact
153
on organizational trust level of employees of higher education institutions
(Path coefficient =.785, P < .001) and it supported the H1. This indicates that organizational trust is stemmed from the employees perceived treatment from
the activities of their organization. This further indicates that involvement of
higher education institutions in CSR related activities positively influence the
employees’ trust towards their organization. Higher education institutions which show socially responsible behaviour are likely to trigger the feeling of
their employees which ultimately influence their attitudes including
organizational trust. The main purpose of assumption of this hypothesis is to understand the relationship between perception of CSR and trust level of
employees in the higher education institutions of Pakistan. This result has
proven that significant and positive relationship is existed between employees’
perception of CSR and employees’ trust. In this context, Kramer (1999) also noted that “this interest has been fueled, at least in part, by accumulating
evidence that trust has a number of important benefits for organizations and
their members (p. 569)”. This shows the empirical support for the idea that trust has important benefits for organizations and their members. Similarly,
Datta et al. (2005) also suggested that CSR has significant impact on the job
related variables such as organizational commitment and motivation which are
considered important for the competitive advantage.
Social Exchange Theory (SET) provides the theoretical underpinning to
this assumption and explain this relationship between perceived CSR and OT.
In this context, Molm et al. (2000) suggested that employees’ perceptions concerning with fair, benevolent, and caring behaviour of their organization
induce the employees to reciprocate, results in organizational trust and this
relationship is explained by social exchange theory. This result also established a significant positive relationship of CSR activities with
organizational rust. The positive impact of CSR initiatives on organizational
trust further indicates that CSR initiatives towards development of society
including social welfare, and social assistance generate positive responses among employees, and perhaps among non-employees too. Therefore,
employees are interested not only with the generous support and benevolent
actions of the organizations towards employees but they also concerned with discretionary actions of the organization.
Thus, findings of this study support the assumption that perceived CSR
prompts indirect social exchange and employees reciprocate good and other-focused actions by their organization. The impact of employees’ perception of
CSR on employees’ outcomes including organizational trust also implies that
these activities reflect the organization’s character that how it is generous and concerned with the welfare and support of its employees. This result of this
study also contributes towards social exchange theory which provided
154
theoretical underpinning to explain the predicted relationship between
employees’ perception of CSR and its impact on employees’ level of organizational trust particularly in higher education institutions. Moreover, in
some of previous studies positive correlation was found between CSR and OT
e.g. Lee et al. (2012) conducted a study in the context of foodservice enterprises
in South Korea and a positive association was found between CSR and OT. Similarly, Lee et al. (2015) conducted a study in the context of Malaysian
service firms and a positive relationship was found between CSR and the quality
of work life including OT. Thus, the outcome of this study confirms that in higher education institutions, the employees’ perception of CSR influences the
employees’ level of organizational trust. Therefore, the academic managers may
enhance trust level of their employees by adopting CSR programs through which
they can improve their organizations performance. In addition, this result also suggested that through CSR activities, academic managers and executives may
indeed devise an effective strategy to be used for winning the “hearts and minds”
of the employees for better performance of the Institutions.
The hypothesis 5 was predicted with the aim to examine the direct
relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and job satisfaction. It is
assumed that the sense of care and socially responsible actions by the organization may likely influence, positively, the employees’ attitudes and
behaviours, because Locke (1976) identifies that job satisfaction is the
employees’ psychological state towards their work. It is supposed that it stems
from the employees perceived behaviour from the action of their organization. Social Identity Theory (SIT) provides the theoretical underpinning to this
hypothesized relationship which explains that employees’ perceptions towards
their organizations to be socially responsible citizen impact their attitudes and behaviours including job satisfaction. This theory assumes that the hypothesized
dyadic association remains intact till the time individual kept identify
himself/herself with their organization.
Little attention has been paid to explore the employees’ responses towards
CSR (Jones, 2010), despite of the significance of CSR and the important role of
employees as key internal stakeholders of the organizations (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001). In particular, employee is one of the key and most important
assets, because committed and motivated workforce is essentially needed for
long term organizational growth. In literature, empirical evidences are available
which suggest that CSR can contribute towards financial performance of an organization by promoting necessary intangible resources such as corporate
image building, corporate reputation etc. (e.g. Branco & Rodrigues, 2006;
Surroca et al., 2010; Ehsan & Kaleem, 2012). In order to understand, examine and predict the positive impact of CSR on employees’ workplace attitudes and
behaviours, there is need to have an in-depth understanding about the
155
psychological mechanisms which determine their response towards CSR
initiatives (Bhattacharya et al., 2009). In addition, they asserted that this relationship can be influenced by the organization by providing benefits to the
employees which encourage and induce employees to create strong and long-
term relationships with an organization (Bhattacharya et al., 2009).
This study would further contribute to enhance understanding that how CSR promotes human capital which would further enhance employees’
performance in different ways. The aim of this study was to examine the impact
of employees’ perceptions of CSR on their level of job satisfaction which also
highlights the essential mechanisms to explain these relationships. In this study, a similar manifestation is expected in elevation of job satisfaction due to
participation of organization in volunteering programs. The result of this study
indicated positive impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’ level of job satisfaction. Faculty members’ perception of CSR was found to have
influence on their job satisfaction level in higher education institutions (Path
coefficient = .203, P < .001) which supports the hypothesis H5. Similarly,
relationship has also been observed by researchers in some of previous studies which noted the positive relationship between CSR and job satisfaction, because
organization’ involvement in CSR programs enhance the image of the
organization before the employees and it further increase employees’ level of
job satisfaction (Galbreath, 2010). This finding confirms that when the faculty members found that their organization is a socially responsible citizen, their
level of job satisfaction became high, which reflects that faculty members’
perception of CSR had positive effect on their level of job satisfaction in higher education institutions.
The hypothesis 9 was developed for examining the relationship between
perceived CSR and organizational identification. It was predicted that perceived
CSR would be positively associated to organizational identification in higher education institutions. In this study, an attempt was made to examine the direct
impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’ level of organizational
identification in higher education institutions. It was argued that organizational
CSR program sends a positive signal to the employees which they respond to and feel attached with their organizations. Collier & Esteban (2007) described
that active involvement of an organization in CSR activities will consequently
be positively accepted by the employees which in result have stronger employee identification with the organization.
Employees’ strong feelings towards their organization leads them towards
psychological attachment with their organization and they feel themselves as a
distinctive group or class on the basis of organizational affiliation or identification. This hypothesis was grounded on social identity theory which
156
was based on this assumption that organizational identification links to a specific
type of social identification where feeling of oneness develops among the employees, or feelings of belongingness towards an organization (Ashforth &
Mael, 1989). This theory assumes that individuals themselves partially develop
self-concepts from social identities such as organization, political parties or
religious memberships to which they belong (Hogg and Abrams 1988). Thus, social identification discusses the psychological mechanism through which
individuals classify themselves into different social groups to enhance their self-
esteem and overall their self- concept (Hogg & Terry, 2001; Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Tajfel, 1981).
This result of H9 revealed significant relationship between employees’
perception of CSR and employees’ level of organizational identification. Thus, the result of this study (path coefficient = .303, P < .001) supported the H9. This
result is consistent with the proposition that CSR (internal together with the
external CSR activities), signals important organizational characteristics which induce individuals’ self-categorization process. Through this identification
process, individuals come to associate for their identity with their organizations
which have common attractive and mutual distinctive characteristics, which
provide supports to fulfil psychological needs for meaningful attachment and existence. This result further highlights the importance of having both internal
and external CSR programs in higher education institutions which can positively
influence the employees’ attitudes to achieve high level of organizational
identification of employees.
Some scholars emphasized that CSR has become a key priority area for
business leader around the globe (McWilliams, Siegel & Wright, 2006; Pfeffer, 2010; Porter & Kramer, 2011). Therefore, on the basis of the findings of this
study, it is essential for organizations to devise and implement appropriate CSR
policies and practices through which employees’ attitudes can influence
positively including organizational identification. In some of previous studies, positive association was found between employees’ perception of CSR and
organizational identification (i.e. Kim et al., 2010; De Roeck et al., 2014; Farooq
et al., 2014). Hence, it is important for scholars and managers to figure out appropriate tools like CSR which can be used to develop employees’
organizational identification.
It was assumed in hypothesis 13 that perceived CSR would have a significant and positive impact on employees’ level of organizational
commitment. It is likely that if employees have confidence that their
organization is a socially responsible citizen, then they believe that their organization is likely to treat them with responsibility. This perception is likely
to enhance employees’ psychological attachment and obligation toward the
157
organization, leading them to high level of commitment. This predicted
relationship between observed variables is based on a framework derived from social identity theory (SIT) which explains the association between the
organizational social responsibility and the employees’ work related attitudes
including organizational commitment. In this background, an organization is
considered as a social category, its perceived success, good image and reputation can take it as an improved sense of attachment and improved self-concepts of
employees (Smith et al., 2001; Brammer et al., 2005). Therefore, socially
responsible organizations can positively affect employee’s work related attitudes to start becoming a proud member of the organization (Dutton et al.,
1994; Maignan & Ferrell, 2001; Peterson, 2004; Brammer et al., 2005; Turker,
2009a).
The result of this study revealed insignificant direct impact of perception
of CSR on employees’ level of organizational commitment. This result indicated
that employees’ perceptions of CSR in higher education institutions had no significant direct influence on employees’ level of commitment. In this study
(path coefficient = -.069, P < .218) which did not support the H13. This result
may be explained in the specific context of collectivist cultural characteristics
of Pakistan. Triandis et al. (1988) suggested that primarily, individuals in collectivist culture have few in-groups and almost everybody else is supposed
to be in the out-group. They further suggested that their behaviours about the in-
group and the outgroup members are very different. In this context, they further
suggested that “in a collectivist culture, although people share and show harmony within in-groups, the total society may be characterized by much
disharmony and non-sharing’’ (Triandis et al., 1988, p. 326). It is assumed that
due to strong in-group apprehensions and concerns, individuals are least concerned about external CSR issues related to community, and it considers as
a matter related with the out-groups. Accordingly, external CSR activities may
not be considered as important and relevant. This could be the reason that impact
of CSR initiatives in higher education institutions may not have significant direct impact on faculty members level of commitment. Haq, Kuchinke and
Iqbal (2017) suggested that a number of studies relevant to CSR were conducted
in the context of developed economies and impact of CSR differs across nations.
In the literature, there are few empirical evidences, which shows
insignificant direct influence of CSR activities on commitment level of
employees in the organization. Similarly, Farooq et al., (2014) carried out a research study in context of South Asia and concluded that organizational
commitment is not directly influenced by CSR, it induces by organizational trust
and organizational identification. In addition, Albert et al. (2000) also concluded that trust and organizational identification are the basic constructs which induce
various other work-related attitudes and behaviours including OC. Similarly,
158
this result indicates that CSR initiatives of organizations may likely have
indirect positive impact on employees’ level of commitment through mediation mechanism of other variables rather direct influence.
CSR is considered as a management strategy and findings of this study
can be of prime interest of HR managers who are finding ways and tools to enhance employees’ level of commitment and their morale to effective control
their organizations. By improving commitment and morale of the workforce,
better productivity and efficiency can be obtained. Therefore, findings of this study may help scholars and managers to formulate effective and efficient
strategy which may help to enhance the employees’ level of commitment.
Therefore, this result of the study offering empirical support to the argument
that organization should be a socially responsible citizen and have an effective relationship maintenance strategy to influence employees’ level of commitment.
Thus, managers need to find mechanisms through which they can enhance their
employees’ level of OC to get better performance.
The hypothesis 14 was developed to examine the direct impact of
employees’ perception of CSR on employee engagement. It was predicted that
employees’ perceptions of CSR would have a significant and positive influence on employee engagement. Employee engagement may constitute through job
satisfaction, employee involvement into job, rewards and recognition and
commitment. Similarly, Ma (2011) identified six top drivers of employee
engagement which could determine the effect of CSR on employee engagement. Berry and Parasuraman (1992) viewed it: “a paycheck may keep a person on the
job physically, but it alone will not keep a person on the job emotionally” (p.
27). Therefore, it is likely that CSR has a direct influence on employee engagement. The result of this study indicated insignificant association between
employees’ perceptions of CSR and employee engagement which revealed that
employees’ perceptions of CSR had no significant direct impact on employee
engagement.
In this study (path coefficient =.116, P < .058) which did not support the
H14. More specifically, this result showed insignificant impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR, their level of engagement. In this study, it was assumed that
the relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and employee
engagement appeared to be in accordance with social identity theory (SIT). In
addition, Branco and Rodrigues (2006) asserted that CSR provides support through encouragement of workforce which can effectively carry out the
organizations’ business activities for improved business performance. There
could be some reasons for the rejection of this hypothesis which are:
159
There could be the case that in Pakistan the higher education institutions
might be functioning in successful manner by the management but employees’ level of engagement might not be affected because it could not provide any
support or facilitation to the employees. Therefore, if any support and care is not
provided by the organization then it could not enhance employees’ engagement
at their workplace. Thus, in order to enhance employee engagement in higher education institutions of Pakistan there is need to make all such arrangements
which could provide care and support to employees.
Similarly, uncorroborated relationship was found in some of previous
studies between CSR and employee engagement. Smith and Langford (2011)
concluded that in order to improve employee engagement, it would more
advantageous to invest in human resource practices rather to allocate resources to CSR practices in an organization. They further asserted that from employees’
perspective CSR may be considered a high order construct, which may include
HR practices such as fair employees reward system, providing development opportunities, and supporting employee welfare at their workplace.
This could also be the possibility that CSR activities of higher education
institutions might be considered as HR activities by the employees because some internal CSR activities are similar in nature and hardly any distinction could be
made between HR activities and CSR activities by the employees. If this would
be the case, the management of higher education institutions should have to
make arrangement for proper dissemination of CSR programs of the institutions so that a clear-cut distinction between these two concept should be made within
and outside the organization.
In developing countries like Pakistan, employees do not care about
environmental related activities and all such efforts of organizations are not
recognized by the employee as CSR program which consequently do not have
any impact on employee engagement. Similarly, Farooq et al. (2014) concluded a study in the context of South Asia and noted that employees may be less
concerned about the environmental issues and its impacts on corporate
operations. Therefore, it could be the reason that employees of higher education institution in Pakistan did not give any weightage to the environmental activities
of the institutions which may not affect their perceptions, consequently it might
not influence the faculty members’ level of engagement at their workplace.
The hypothesis 15 was developed to examine the direct relationship
between employees’ perceptions of CSR and organizational citizenship
behaviours (OCB). In this study an attempt was made to examine the impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’ level of OCB. It was argued that
if an organization undertook measures for the welfare of employees then the
160
employees reciprocate this gesture of their organization and are ready to perform
beyond their formal tasks which are not recognized by the normal reward system (i.e. citizenship behaviour). Lawrence et al. (2012) supported this notion and
argued that it is prime consideration of organizations to support their employees
for their own interests.
In this study (path coefficient = .353, P < .001) which supported the H15
and showed that faculty members of higher education institutions reciprocated
the gestures of their institutions which would be initiated for the welfare of employees and the community. The proposed framework developed on the
assumption that employees might perceive their organizational CSR activities
as positive gesture which might result in more positive attitudes and behaviours
by the employees. The theoretical underpinning to this relationship was provided by SET and it was assumed that employees’ perceptions of CSR
activities have positive impact on employees’ level of job satisfaction which
ultimately enhances their organizational citizenship behaviours towards organization.
The result of this study revealed that when employees of higher education
institutions perceive that their organization show concern towards employees and for overall society, they feel that their organization is caring about their
well-being and society. This caring behaviours of organization develops positive
feelings about their organization and they perceive that their organization is
engaging in CSR activities, they rely on the norm of reciprocity, they would respond in a positive way such as extra role behaviours (OCB) as a form of
mutual support. On account of norm of reciprocity, CSR develops positive
perception among employees and they would be willing to reciprocate support for their organizations (Gonzalez & Garazo, 2006; Santhosh & Baral, 2015).
Therefore, this result of the study also shows that if the higher education
institutions promote a supportive working environment among its employees,
employees will more likely show obliging behaviours. If a higher education institution engages and promote social responsible behaviours among the
employees, then employees may reciprocate through OCB. Organ et al. (2006)
indicated that employees’ organizational citizenship behaviours are not openly rewarded in the organization, but these behaviours are concerning to the
efficient and effective functioning of the organization. Therefore, organizations
should need to embed CSR practices into their operations to enhance employees’
OCBs. Thus, it is important for academic managers to identify-tools and strategies such as CSR which can be utilized as a way of developing OCB in
faculty members.
161
5.2.2 Mediating Role of OT between Employees’ Perceptions of CSR
and OC, EE and OCB
The second objective of the present study was:
RO2 - To examine the mediating role of Organizational Trust between employees’ perceptions of CSR and, employees’ level of Organizational
Commitment, Employees Engagement and Organizational Citizenship
Behaviour.
The main purpose of RO2 is to examine the mediating effect of
organizational trust (OT) between the relationship of employees’ perceptions of
CSR and employees’ attitudes and behaviours which includes OC, EE and OCB. According to Dirks and Ferrin (2002) and Colquitt et al. (2007), the construct of
trust has been mostly investigated as a mediator between internal organizational
antecedents and important consequences such as performance, turnover, and organizational commitment. In view of the hypothesized association among
these variables, this research objective was further divided into three hypotheses
(H2, H3 and H4 as depicted in Table 5.2). In the present study, mixed results
came out and hypotheses 2 & 3 are supported whereas hypothesis 4 is not supported.
RO2 predicted that employees’ perceptions of CSR would be positively
associated with employees’ attitudes and behaviours through mediation mechanism of organizational trust. This hypothesis was grounded on social
exchange theory which states that social behaviours are the result of an exchange
process (Blau, 1964). This theory further elaborates that within the exchange process, the important element is the primary motives and norm of reciprocity,
which is considered as the important factor. If employees feel happy with their
organization, it is likely they extend their support as a mutual social exchange.
Similarly, Jo and Joo (2011) advocating that social exchange theory (SET) recommends that extra role behaviors are consequences of exchange relations
between the parties.
162
Table 5.2
Hypothesized Mediation Relationship among Variables and its Results
Hypotheses Hypothesized Relation Mediation Results
H2 CSR-OT-OC Partial Mediation
H3 CSR-OT-EE Partial Mediation
H4 CSR-OT-OCB No Mediation
H6 CSR-JS-OC Partial Mediation
H7 CSR-JS-EE Partial Mediation
H8 CSR-JS-OCB No Mediation
H10 CSR-OI-OC Partial Mediation
H11 CSR-OI-EE Partial Mediation
H12 CSR-OI-OCB Partial Mediation
Note: CSR = Corporate Social Responsibility, OT = Organizational Trust, JS = Job Satisfaction, OI = Organizational Identification,
OC = Organizational Commitment, EE = Employee Engagement and
OCB = Organizational Citizenship Behaviour.
The hypothesis 2 was assumed that organizational trust performs its role
as mediator between perception of CSR and organizational commitment (H2).
In organizational perspective, the scholars and researchers highlighted that OC is a strength which binds an employee in a social and non-social objective
(i.e. organizations and work groups) (Bishop & Scott, 2000) as well as to jobs,
corporate objectives, and initiatives related to organizational change (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002). In view of these conceptual considerations, the
scholars have started to explore the impact of CSR on OC without considering
psychological variables (e.g. organizational trust) (Bauman & Skitka, 2012;
Aprile & Talò, 2014). In a present study, a new psychological based CSR model was presented in which psychological variable i.e. OT was considered to explain
the influence of CSR on organizational commitment level of faculty members
of higher education institutions. This psychological model is based on social exchange theory (SET). This theory suggested that individuals involves in
exchange relations with individuals, groups, political parties and country on the
basis of their evaluation of possible benefits and loss (Blau, 1964).
This hypothesized relationship was fully supported by the result of this
study therefore, result shows strong, positive, and significant linkages as
predicted in (H2) and employees’ perceptions had significant effect on trust
level of employees which had influence on employees’ level of commitment with their organizations. This result indicates that CSR first influences the trust
level of employees in the organization, which is considered as a stronger
antecedent of commitment of business professionals (Birch, 2003; van
163
Marrewijk, 2003, 2004). This also indicates that if the employees feel that their
perception about organizations’ corporate citizenship is low, consequently the trust level of employees is likely to be minimized in the organization and
employees’ commitment level is badly affected. More specifically, these
findings show that employees’ perceptions of CSR directly impact on
employees’ level of organizational commitment through the mediating influence of trust in higher education institutions. Thus, this study provides support to the
managers and practitioners in developing strategies, methods and tools to
enhance engagement of faculty members in CSR related activities. This result is also congruent with the findings of some of previous studies such as Lee et al.
(2012) and Lee et al. (2015).
It was also predicted in H3 that the relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and employee engagement is mediating by the
organizational trust. This hypothesis assumed that organizational trust performs
its role as mediator between the relationship of employees’ perceptions of CSR and employee engagement. Employees’ physical and psychological
involvement is considered necessary for employee engagement in their work
place, which also need their psychological attachment with their organization.
Some researcher emphasis that employees who have high levels of psychological attachment with an organization also have a stronger motivation
to perform well in their jobs (Meyer et al., 1989; Riketta, 2002; Colquitt et al.,
2007). Similarly, some researchers also argued that employees with a high level
of organizational trust are ready to response to their organizations despite of the risk factor which it might not follow through its own obligations (Mayer, Davis
& Schoorman, 1995). It deepens our understanding of the mechanisms which
address CSR based interactions between organizations and employees. It would therefore, contributes to determine the directionality of this important
relationship between perception of CSR and employee engagement in the
context of higher education sector. The theoretical framework for this
hypothesized relationship was supported by Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1985). In this context, individual belonging to a specific group, and
having common objectives, provide help to explain employees’ perceptions,
behaviours and feelings. Therefore, CSR as a common goal which can enhance engagement of employee at their workplace.
The result of this study supported this hypothesis and indicate that
organizational trust partially mediates between the relationship of employees’ perceptions of CSR and employee engagement in higher education institutions.
These findings further indicate that CSR has positive impact on employee
engagement through mediation of trust in higher education institutions, therefore, there is need to enhance CSR activities to positively influence trust
level of employees. These findings also reveal that the construct of trust is
164
important for the benefits of both i.e. employers and employees. Similarly,
Kramer (1999) argued that “this interest has been fueled, at least in part, by accumulating evidence that trust has a number of important benefits for
organizations and their members” (p. 569). This result further shows that if the
employees feel that their organization’s perception of CSR is low, consequently
the trust level of employees is likely to be minimized which badly affect the employees’ level engagement in their organization.
The findings of this study have significant implications since Bakker et al., (2011) suggested that “when employees perceive that their organization
provides a supportive, involving, and challenging climate, they are more likely
to respond by investing time and energy and by being psychologically involved
in the work of their organization” (p. 13). As the result of this study, several practical implications may take place for academic managers which is helpful
for them to reinforce the view point that implementation of CSR pays off to the
organizations in term of more committed and engaged workforce. This result also shows that the faculty members of higher education institutions give a
considerable weight to responsible attitudes at their workplace. Therefore, it
would be fair to say that higher education institutions should take and perceive
CSR in view of its importance and all such institutions which intend to enhance their competitiveness should implement CSR in its operations. Positive
association was found in some of previous studies between employees’
perceptions of CSR and employee engagement (Ferreira & Oliveira, 2014;
Zientara et al., 2015; Glavas, 2016).
The third relationship with OT was hypothesized (H4) that organizational
trust mediates the relationship between perceived CSR and Organizational Citizenship Behaviours (OCB). This hypothesis was grounded on the basis of
social exchange theory which explains that this relationship is established on the
norms of reciprocity. It is generally perceived that when employees perceive
that their organization is participating in CSR activities, it is most likely they show extra role behaviours to reciprocate the actions as a form of mutual
support. Employees with high level of organizational trust tend to rely on their
organization despite of the fact that element of risk which might not follow through on its responsibilities (Colquitt, Scott & LePine, 2007). Some
researchers are of the view that employees’ willingness to become vulnerable to
organizational actions is a defining characteristic of OT (Dirks & Ferrin, 2001;
McAllister, 1995). In addition, Williams (2001) suggested that due to involvement of risk factor at workplace, a high level of organizational trust
indicates an intense form of psychological attachment of employees with their
organization.
165
Conversely, the result of the present study rejected the hypothesized
mediating influence of organizational trust between employees’ perceptions of CSR and OCB (H4). It was assumed that employees’ work attitude (e.g.
organizational trust) would perform its role as mediator between perceived CSR
and OCB which failed to receive the support. The result of this study indicated
that employees did not respond meaningfully to CSR activities of their organization. Specifically, employees who perceived that their organization to
be more socially responsible were likely to engage in extra role behaviours
(OCB) and this relationship was not influenced by OT. More precisely, this result concludes that in higher education institutions, trust level of employees is
low which do not have significant influence between the relationship of
employees’ perceptions of CSR and OCB. Therefore, in order to get involved,
the faculty members in extra role behaviours (out role performance) towards organization, need to enhance their level of trust.
In congruence with the findings of this study, Corpanzano, et al., (1997) also concluded that CSR activity of an organization is considered as business
policy of an organization rather than a real concern about welfare of employees.
In addition, they also suggested that economic responsibility is considered its
responsibility for profit, discretionary obligations refer a larger range of responsibility toward society, therefore, all these responsibilities are not directly
concerned with employees’ welfare, and employees are less likely to be
influenced and consequently they may not show extra role support for their
organization. This might be one of the reasons that OT could not perform its role as a mediator between perceived CSR and OCB in hypothesized relationship in
higher education sector of Pakistan. Thus, this result of the study suggested that
the academic managers should evolve CSR programs as an effective strategy, not just to share it with stakeholders as a tool and to share values to strengthen
relationship between faculty members and the institutions.
5.2.3 Mediating Role of JS between Employees’ Perceptions of CSR
and OC, EE and OCB
RO3 - To examine the mediating role of Job Satisfaction between
employees’ perceptions of CSR and, employees level of Organizational
Commitment, Employees Engagement and Organizational Citizenship
Behaviours.
The RO3 was aimed to examine the mediating effects of JS between the
relationship of perceived CSR and employees’ outcomes which includes OC, EE and OCB. Lok and Crawford (2001) noted in their study that JS can play the
role of mediation between independent and dependent variables. Thus, it is
166
assumed that the impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’
attitudes and behaviours may be examined through mediation of JS. Moorman, Niehoff and Organ (1993) and Parker et al. (2003) advocated that employees’
perceptions of organizational CSR activities have impact on their behaviours
which could be mediated by attitudinal and psychological factors such as job
satisfaction and organizational commitment. In a recent study, it is concluded that a significant correlation exists between the relationship of employees’
perception of CSR and their level of job satisfaction, because firms’ orientation
towards CSR positively impacts the employees’ level of job satisfaction and work life (Senasu & Virakul, 2015). Thus, there is a strong possibility that job
satisfaction could mediates between the relationship of employees’ perceptions
of CSR on employees’ outcomes in higher education institutions of Pakistan. In
addition, this research question was divided into three hypotheses (see Table 5.2). The results of this study presented mixed and diversified results regarding
RO3.
In hypothesis 6, it was assumed that job satisfaction performs its role as
mediator between employees’ perceptions of CSR and employees’ level of
organizational commitment. The purpose of this hypothesized relationship is to
understand the mechanisms which can examine impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on their level of organizational commitment. Previous
studies supported that involvement of organizations in CSR activities boosts
their image before the employees and resulting the satisfaction of employees
(Galbreath, 2010). The result of this study partially supported the mediation effect of job satisfaction between employees’ perceptions of CSR and OC as
hypothesized in H6. This result of the study is congruent with the findings of
few of earlier studies which reveals that job satisfaction performs its role as mediator between the relationship of perceived CSR and OC. Similarly, Zientara
et al., (2015) found significant support of job satisfaction between the
relationship of CSR activities and employees’ workplace outcomes.
This shows that JS performs additional role to enhance employees’ level
of commitment in relationship with their perception of CSR and OC. In addition,
this result also indicates that the employees of higher education institutions consider the CSR as the most important factor to increase their level of
commitment. In higher education institutions, employees feel that the primary
purpose of these institutions is the improvement and progression of the society
and CSR activities are considered as mandatory feature for their organizations. This creates higher effect of CSR activities on commitment level of employees.
Hence, through practicing of CSR in organizations, employees’ level of job
satisfaction can be enhanced which may ultimately guide the management to improve their organizational performance. Therefore, it would be of interest to
organizations to maintain high level of job satisfaction of their employees to
167
achieve high level of commitment to get the desired performance. In higher
education institutions, in order to achieve the desired objectives, attention might be needed to enhance employees’ level of job satisfaction which in turn
enhances employees’ level of organizational commitment.
The hypothesis 7 suggested that job satisfaction mediates the positive relationship between perceived CSR and Employees’ Engagement (EE). It was
supposed that job satisfaction would perform the role of mediation between
employees’ perceptions of CSR and employee engagement. Some researchers asserted that the employees remain engaged with those organizations which are
highly involved in CSR activities and these activities have positive impact on
their attitude at workplace, resulting in a better level of organizational
belongingness and job satisfaction in employees (Bashir, Hassan & Cheema, 2012). In this study, relationship between perceived CSR and employee
engagement with mediation effect of job satisfaction was assumed on theoretical
underpinning of social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1985).
The result of this study supported that H7 and JS found to have partially
mediated the relationship between perceived CSR and employee engagement.
Hence, findings of this study provide the evidence that satisfied employees have strong inclination to be engaged rather than the other way around. In the
literature, this study first ever explores the underlying mechanisms between
employee perceptions of CSR and employee engagement in the context of
higher education sector. Moreover, a positive relationship was found between CSR and EE in some of the previous studies. Singh & Paithankar (2015)
conducted a study in IT and hospitality sector in India and a significant positive
influence of CSR was found on employees’ level of EE. Similarly, Glavas (2016) conducted a study on employees of a large professional service firm in
the USA and a positive association was found between CSR and EE. Moreover,
Zientara et al. (2015) also conducted a study on a polish hotel employees and
CSR experiences were found positively associated with employees’ work engagement along with JS and OC. Hence, considering the impact of job
satisfaction on employee engagement, it is fair to say that higher education
institutions could perceive and introduce CSR practices in term of strategic significance. In addition, higher education institutions which intend to retain a
satisfied and committed workforce should maintain and sustain CSR programs
to enhance their level of engagement. Thus, it reinforces the views that CSR
pays off: in term of retention of committed and engaged workforce which helps in achieving the objectives of the organization.
The study was continued by examining the role of JS as mediator between the relationship of perceived CSR and OCB, as it was hypothesized in H8 that
job satisfaction mediates the relationship between perceived CSR and OCB. It
168
was assumed on the basis of findings of previous studies, that positive
relationship was found between CSR and OCB (Islam et al., 2015; Newman et al., 2016). Theoretically, based on the notion of social exchange theory,
relationship between perceived CSR and OCB with mediating role of JS was
hypothesized. More specifically, exchange relations between giver (i.e. higher
education institution) and recipient (faculty member) is dyadic and these exchange relations continue till the time benefits are shared between both the
parties.
The result of this study did not support the H8 and identified that JS did
not perform its role as mediator between the relationship of perceived CSR and
OCB (i.e. mediating effect of job satisfaction between the two variables was not
established). This result of the present study contradicted the findings of some of previous studies and JS was found not performing its mediation role between
perceived CSR and OCB (Path coefficient β=0.06, p =0.304). This could be the
possibility that due to distinctive organizational culture of higher education institutions in Pakistan, JS may not have impact on the relationship between
faculty members’ perceptions of CSR and their extra role behaviours (OCB). In
this context, Memon et al. (2014) indicated that similar to other developing
countries, Pakistan has also some socioeconomic challenges and the concept of CSR is newer, therefore, there is need to create awareness of CSR practices in
organizations.
More specifically, result of this study indicates that in higher education institutions, the relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and extra
role behaviours have not found to be positively influenced by JS as mediator. In
this study, multiple mediators between the relationship of perceived CSR and employees’ outcomes including OCB were included. These multiple mediators
are hardly studied in CSR domain, but important to explore in order to
understand how different mechanisms effect employees (Jones et al., 2014).
Recently, a study was conducted by Akturan & Şevik (2016) they emphasized that the success of an organization is based on team working which demonstrates
OCB and this considers a key factor the success of a business. Thus,
organizational managers should be well aware about the importance of corporate reputation and they should take into account the impact of corporate programs
on employee attitudes and behaviours such as OCB. In addition, managers
should make efforts to create a positive corporate culture within and outside the
institutions which can affect job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviours of employees in a positive way. Hence, in view of the result of this
study, it is necessary that organizations should focus on corporate reputation or
corporate image building and management should make efforts to enhance job satisfaction level of employees to get involved employees in OCBs.
169
5.2.4 Mediating Role of OI between Perception of CSR and OC, EE and
OCB
RO4 - To examine the mediating role of Organizational Identification
between employees’ perceptions of CSR and, employees level of Organizational Commitment, Employees Engagement and Organizational Citizenship
Behaviours.
The RO4 was aimed to examine the mediating role of organizational
identification between the relationship of employees’ perception of CSR and
their outcomes which includes OC, EE and OCB. It is assumed that the impact
of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’ attitudes and behaviours may influence indirectly through organizational identification. This relationship
explains that how employees’ attitudes and behaviours can be influenced
through establishing and maintaining the relationship with their reference group (Kelman, 1958; O’Reilley & Chatman, 1986). Although through the concept of
organizational identification, a strong and lasting relationship is accepted by
employee with its organization and he/she develops a feeling of oneness with
organizational or its belongingness (O’Reilley & Chatman, 1986; Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Bhattacharya et al., 2009). Similarly, van Knippenberg and van
Schie (2000) and van Dick et al. (2006) noted that organizational identification
offers an important mechanism to influence employees’ attitudes and
behaviours such as job satisfaction. In addition, in literature, few of the empirical evidences demonstrated the mediating role of organizational identity in
employees’ responses e.g. job satisfaction and organizational citizenship
behaviours (Jones, 2010; De Roeck et al., 2014). Thus, it was predicted that impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR activities on their attitudes and
behaviours could be mediated by psychological & attitudinal factors such as
organizational identification. This research question was further divided into
three hypotheses (H10, H11 and H12) (see Table 5.2). The results of this study presented positive influence of OI on the relationships between perceptions of
CSR and OC, EE and OCB. In this study, mediation mechanisms were
highlighted by adopting various equations with mediation role of OI between perceptions of CSR and OC, EE and OCB.
It was predicted in H10 that organizational identification (OI) performs
the role of mediation between perceived CSR and OC. The main objective of this hypothesized relationship is to examine the impact of employees’
perceptions of CSR on employees’ level of OC, through the mediation of
organizational identification. Social identity theory provides the theoretical foundation to this hypothesized relationship and explains the association
between employee and organization. Researchers consider that organizational
170
identity has probability to influence a number of positive employees’ outcomes,
including employee performance (Cole & Bruch, 2006; Ashforth, et al., 2008). The result of the study supported the hypothesized relationship and partial
mediation of OI was established between perceived CSR and OC. Therefore,
positive impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’ level of
organizational commitment with mediation role of OI is supported by the result of this study. Some previous empirical evidences indicated positive association
between OI and OC (Marique & Stinglhamber, 2011). More specifically, this
result of the study provides guidance to the managers of the organizations that how they should tailor their CSR programs to enhance employees’ attitudes
positively, which ultimately returns on their investments on CSR. This finding
also demonstrated that the organizational investment on social issues enhances
employees’ attitudes such as organizational commitment. Hence, there is need to encourage and promote investments on social issues at organizational level,
it would increase the potential response of CSR activities in shape of positive
employees’ attitudes such as OC.
Using SEM, the result of this study concluded that employees’ perception
of CSR is a strong predictor of employees’ level of OC, through mediation of
OI which indicated that OC is not a direct outcome of CSR rather it is affected by identification, which itself is the direct consequences of CSR activities of an
organization (Farooq et al., 2014). In organizational studies, organizational
identification is a primary or root construct which induces some other
employees’ work place attitudes and behaviours, including commitment (Albert et al., 2000). Thus, result of this study suggests that CSR may have indirect
impact on several other employees’ attitudes including OC through
identification. Hence, academic manager needs to focus on enhancement of CSR activities to further improve the organizational commitment level of employees
in higher education institutions through mediation process of OI.
Hypothesis 11 predicted that organizational identification mediates the relationship between perceived CSR and Employees’ Engagement (EE). A
number of research studies have already explored the relationship between
employees’ attitudes and work engagement (Demerouti et al., 2001; Hallberg & Schaufeli, 2006), and findings of these empirical studies found influence and
inter-relationship of both the constructs. The review of literature has also
reflected that CSR activities are important and beneficial to both employees and
the employers, which may help to bring positive outcomes such as employee engagement and job satisfaction. Hypothetically, a socially responsible
organization which cares about its employees and provides support to enable
them to avail future opportunities for their career development. In return, employees perceive such care and support by their organizations emotionally
and intrinsically become more motivated and engaged in their work (Gao, 2014).
171
Hence, it was hypothesized that OI would mediates between the relationship of employees’ perceptions of CSR and employee engagement. This
result supported the H11 which reveals that if an organization implements CSR
programs, its employees feel identification with their organization and engage
themselves psychologically and physically in their work in the organization. A few research studies have also observed mediation effects of OI between the
relationship of CSR and EE such as Zientara et al., (2015) conducted a research
study on Polish hotel employees and found positive effect of employees’ CSR attitudes on employee engagement. The result of this study emphasized that
CSR activities of an organization pays off: more engaged workforce to the
employers if certain measures are adopted to enhance identification which in
turn increase positive firm-level outcomes.
Mirroring theoretical implications of this study, CSR should be embedded
in practice as much as possible in higher education institutions to further enhance engagement level of faculty members in their job and organization.
More specifically, the result of this study emphasized to understand and
determine that how CSR activities of institutions may indirectly impact the
employee engagement to improve organizational performance. Thus, CSR turned out as an important factor which indicates that if organization would
engage more in CSR programs, the more organizational support the employees
perceived to get. Therefore, at the same time the organizational support to
employees through CSR programs was a strong predicting factor for employee engagement.
In order to address the RO4, it was also predicted in hypothesis 12 that organizational identification mediates the positive relationship between
perceived CSR and organizational citizenship behaviours (OCB). Employees’
organizational identity is an important psychological mechanism which
mediates between the relationship of perceived CSR and employees’ extra role behaviours (OCB). This assumption provides theoretical support by social
identity theory which is also supported by some of previous empirical evidences
(Peterson, 2004; Turker, 2009a). For instance, Turker (2008) concluded that positive relationship was found between identification and employees’ work
related attitudes and behaviours.
The result of this study supported the H12 which indicates that organizations which are implemented the CSR programs, its employees having
good reputation in CSR programs perform activities which are beyond their
assigned tasks such as OCB. This result is congruent with the proposition that CSR programs of an organization signals important organizational
characteristics which facilitates employees’ self-categorization mechanism.
172
This process attracts employees to attach and identify themselves with their
organization and share their mutual identity traits, which provide supports to satisfy their psychological needs for belonging and significant existence.
Findings of some of previous studies found mediation effect of OI between the
relationship of CSR and OCB such as (Brammer et al., 2007; Turker, 2009a;
Jones, 2010).
This result shows that cooperative treatment, social practices and norms
perform the mediating role between perceived CSR and employees’ extra role helping behaviours. It also reveals that it is important for organizations to devise
and implement appropriate CSR policies and programs which can enhance
employees’ level of identification and more positive work behaviours. Hence,
findings of this study suggest several practical implications to higher education institutions to be considered to improve the faculty members’ extra role
behaviours through implementation of CSR program and policies. In addition,
this study indicates that all such policies which are adopted by the organizations towards their employees can be beneficial to higher education institutions as
well as employees in the context of Pakistan. This result further suggests that
focusing on CSR activities in higher education institutions could be supportive
to influence employees’ contribution towards their institution in extra role performance beyond their job requirements. Moreover, the managers and senior
leaders of the organization should consider and assess the CSR initiatives as a
feature of social and financial performance which effects on employees’
attitudes and behaviours.
5.3 IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY
In today’s competitive environment, one of the major challenge for the
organizations is to retain a motivated workforce and enhance their work attitudes
and behaviours. The formulated conceptual framework provides insights to managers to enhance positive employees’ attitudes and behaviours to improve
their performance through employees’ perceptions of CSR. However, limited
research exists to address, understand and to explore the phenomenon that how employees’ perception is established towards CSR (Wright, 2010) and how it
impacts on their work outcomes, specifically in a developing economy like
Pakistan. The main impetus for carrying out this study is based on the credence
that when an organization implement the CSR program, its employees perceive it positively, and this perception of employees might have positive impact on
their attitudes and behaviours at workplace. There is hardly any empirical study
which could previously evaluated and examined that how these mediating variables influence the relationship between perceived CSR and dependent
variables (OC, EE and OCB).
173
More specifically, this study was also aimed to fill the conceptual and
contextual gaps by adding OT, JS and OI as mediators. Hence, findings of the study have valuable practical implications for improving faculty members’
attitudes and behaviours to enhance their performance especially in the context
of higher education institutions of Pakistan. In Pakistan, higher education
institutions may be considered a key driver for CSR activities through which employees’ level of OC, EE and OCB can be developed and enhanced. Pakistan
is a developing country which has some socioeconomic challenges such as
poverty, shortage of energy and low GDP, therefore, through optimization of CSR, achievement is possible by developing best synergy between available
resources and need for higher education institutions. Scholars and practitioners
have been focusing on the topic CSR, however, CSR concerning activities and
its impact differs across the nations (Haq, Kuchinke & Iqbal, 2017). Most of the CSR related studies were conducted in the context of developed economies
however, Pakistan is a developing economy. The findings of this study not only
provide guidance for management to improve performance of their organizations through effective use of CSR programs but also to provide insights
for better understanding of CSR from a different perspective in developing
economies.
5.3.1 Theoretical Implications
The developed framework of this study shows that employees may perceive their organizational CSR programs as positive which may in result
enhance more positive attitudes and behaviours at workplace. This conceptual
framework significantly contributes theoretically and presents a practical model for organizations to enhance their employees’ performance. In this context, Kim
et al. (2010) noted that although, in recent years, organizations have initiated
more effective CSR activities, however, very few studies have focused to
examine the impact of CSR programs on employees’ attitudes and behaviours. The results of this study provide momentous understandings and contributions
to the literature in CSR domain.
First, in a present study, an effort has been made to fill the gap and
extended the previous studies by observing the unique mechanisms (i.e. OT, JS,
OI) through which impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’ attitudinal (i.e OC and EE) and behavioural (i.e. OCB) outcomes were
examined. Partial mediation influence of OT, JS and OI were observed, which
show that employees’ perceptions of CSR about their organizational involvement in CSR related activities enhances their feelings of care and fair
treatment by the organization. Consequently, when employees perceive that
their organizations’ action and decisions are more just, employees will more
likely engage in performing their work with more commitment and devotion
174
such as OC, EE and OCB. The results of this study are congruent with some of
previous empirical evidences which found that perceptions of justices (which may be caused by CSR practices) do in fact lead to positive workplace outcomes
(Colquitt et al., 2001).
Second, this study examines the impact of perceived CSR on faculty members’ attitudes and behaviours in higher education sector, whereas the
previous studies have focused banking professionals (Albdour & Altarawneh,
2012; Azim et al., 2014), employees from oil industry (De Roeck & Delobbe, 2012), employees from food service sector (Lee at al., 2012), employees from
Casino (Lee et al., 2013), employees of hotel industry (Fu et al., 2014),
employees of manufacturing industry (Santhosh & Baral, 2015), employees of
ICT (Choi, Ebrahim & Kwak, 2015). The findings of this study advanced the study of CSR and its impact on employees’ attitudinal and behavioural outcomes
particularly in a different sector i.e. higher education. In fact, a highly educated
class of a society is associated with this profession which has far reaching impact on society.
In this research, a sufficient number of samples composed of faculty
members of public and private sector institutions were used, the obtained results contribute to the advancement of the subject within the higher education realm.
Scholars and practitioners can use the findings of this study as a baseline and
apply this tested framework in other sectors and contexts, specifically in
developing countries. More specifically, organizations can develop better CSR strategies through establishing good reputation and relationship with all other
stakeholders, particularly employees.
Third, this study contributes in literature by suggesting that employees of
higher education institutions and corporate sector organizations are not in
different nature. This shows that CSR initiatives implemented by higher
education institutions has no difference at least from the perspective of this study and has influence on employees’ attitudes and behaviours. As suggested by
Hantrais (1995) also supported and suggested that organizational phenomena
may be described by the same causes or it does not differ by organizational perspective. The results of this study also indicate that perceived CSR has
impact on employees’ outcomes, generates desirable attitudes and behaviours in
employees which influence the feelings of the employees about their
organization and towards themselves. In most of the hypothesized combinations, partial mediation effects of OT, JS, and OI were observed,
indicating that when employee perceive CSR carried out by their organizations,
their level of OT, JS and OI influence their feelings which impacts their (attitudinal and behavioural) outcomes. Thus, findings of this study can be
helpful for top management of higher education institutions and other
175
organizations to use CSR strategies to attract and retain a talented workforce to
increase organizational performance which can also be helpful to attain competitive advantage.
Fourth, relationships among the observed variables is grounded on the
basis of social exchange theory (based on the principle of reciprocity) and social identity theory (based on the principle self-esteem or self-categorization in
groups or in classes). Organizations’ decisions and actions are perceived as more
justified; it is more likely that employee will engage in work performance and OCB and prefer to attach with the organization. Colquitt and colleagues (2001)
concluded that perceptions of justices (which may be triggered by the CSR
programs) would in fact lead to positive work outcomes. In addition, partial
mediation role of intervening variables i.e. OT, JS and OI were observed which indicates that through perception of CSR, employees are likely to develop high
level of self-esteem at workplace which influences feelings and develop
favorable work attitudes. All such actions lead them to exhibit improved performance and OCBs. Sims and Kroeck (1994) concluded that when
organizations are engaged in CSR programs which match with their desired
ethical work environment of their employees, their employees have greater level
satisfaction about their job and organizational commitment. In this study, employees’ perceptions of CSR were found to have direct impact on attitudes
and behaviours (i.e. OT, JS, OI, and OCB), except OC and EE, hence partial
mediation effects of OT, JS and OI were also observed on dependent variables.
Through the results of this study, three mediators (i.e. OT, JS and OI) having partial mediation effects have also been identified.
Fifth, although, this study significantly contributes to the relevant knowledge domain, however, mediation role of OT and JS between the
relationship of perceived CSR and OCB were not supported by the results.
However, overall results indicated that two mediators (i.e. OT and JS) were not
effecting the relationship between perceived CSR and OCB. This is probably the most interesting finding of this study, this could be the reason that working
environment in higher education institutions is distinctive culture in Pakistan. A
report published by CIA (2010), revealed that in South Asia, employees may be less concerned towards the environmental effects on organizational operations,
because 24 percent people live below the poverty line. There is possibility that
employees are more concerned about the economic issues than environmental
ones. Therefore, employees may not consider CSR actions pertaining to environment as very relevant and it may not to affect their level of OT and JS
which may have not any further impact on OCB.
Hence, CSR programs may also consider the traditional culture and social
norms of different countries in the world (Zheng, 2011). In addition,
176
Corpanzano et al. (1997) also supported that in case of employees’ perceptions
of CSR, they take it as the business strategies of the corporation rather than a matter of their benefits. Similarly, Organ et al. (2006) concluded that although
organizations does not reward the OCBs because they are considered relevant
to the efficient and effective function of the organization. Therefore, due to norm
of reciprocity, employees may not develop OCB towards their corporation. In literature, there are also few empirical evidences which consistent with the
results of this study such as Zheng (2011) concluded that insignificant
relationship was found between perceived CSR and OCB which was not mediated by employees’ work attitudes. More recently, Glavas (2016) carried a
study and concludes that although employees are affected positively by CSR
activities of an organization, however, they prefer that CSR does not demand
efforts above and beyond their assigned job (i.e. OCB). More precisely, the association between perceived CSR and employees’ outcomes (e.g. OC, EE and
OCB) mainly functions through a mechanism of OT, JS and OI.
Sixth, the results of this study further strengthen the social exchange
theory which describes that stakeholders’ well-being by the organizations
generates feeling of reciprocity among the employees’ which further develops
positive attitudes and behaviours in the employees towards their organizations. Moreover, previously hardly a study has attempted to adopt such model
holistically especially with the theoretical support of social identity theory and
social exchange theory in the context of higher education sector. Therefore, this
study also contributed to the SET and SIT both provided the theoretical underpinning to this study and concluded that employees’ perception of CSR
impacts on their work outcomes (e.g. OC, EE and OCB), further this relationship
mediates by psychological and attitudinal variables (e.g. OT, JS and OI).
5.3.2 Practical Implications
The developed framework of this study, provides a strong basis to
managers for their understanding that how an organization can attain its
effectiveness through CSR initiatives. Some organizations are involved in CSR activities but they fail to link their programs with employees’ attitudes and
behaviours because they do not have proven evidence before them to believe on
the effectiveness of CSR initiatives. In this competitive environment,
organizations are investing a lot of resources to enhance positive attitudes and behaviours of their employees. The current framework motivates managers to
understand and examine the relationship between CSR and employees’ attitudes
and behaviours and apply intelligently to focus and reinforce their CSR activities and channelize them in a proper way to get the real-time benefits.
177
This study found that employees’ perceptions of CSR have impact on
employees’ attitudes and behaviours which eventually affect their performance at workplace. Employees are considered as a key stakeholders having pivotal
role in their organizations. In this study, some predicted relationships were
found little bit different in comparison with the findings of previous empirical
evidences such as the correlation between CSR and OC, CSR and EE were found insignificant. This study examines the impact of employees’ perceptions
of CSR in context of Pakistan and employees’ perceptions of CSR and their
reactions are different from other countries because of the distinctive culture of Pakistan. In collectivist culture people have some in-groups and everybody else
is considered in the outgroup. Therefore, employees’ attitudes and behaviours
are different in-group and outgroup (Triandis et al., 1988). In addition, Triandis
et al. (1988) also explained that ‘‘although people share and show harmony within in-groups, the total society may be characterized by much disharmony
and non-sharing’’ (p. 326). It is assumed that due to strong in-group
considerations, employees are least concern about environmental issues, considering them as problems related to outgroups. Therefore, this may be the
reason that employees’ level of OC and EE may not be directly affected by CSR
activities in higher education institutions. Work outcomes of employees may be
significantly affected by employees related CSR activities than the other CSR initiatives of the organizations.
This indicates that managers can also consider the traditional culture and
social system of different countries during devising of CSR strategies in the organization. Thus, it is important and necessary for the manager and
researchers to understand and consider the cultural influence or effects on CSR
programs during evaluation of CSR impact on employees’ workplace outcomes. The results of this study supported the conception that organizational CSR
programs are perceived by the employees as a good and fair act of corporate
citizen, which in response enhances employees’ self-esteem in the workplace.
Therefore, it makes a sense and justification for corporations to develop CSR strategies and invest in CSR programs because in return it generates a strong
sense of fairness and enhance organization-based self-esteem in employees.
Moreover, CSR initiatives enhance the corporations’ reputation which in result helpful to motivate the employees which can be further helpful to retain talented
employees by adopting the mechanisms as supported in this study.
If employees have trust in reliability and integrity of the organizational CSR programs, such activities on the part of the organization influence the
employees’ perceptions about organizations’ objectives to engage in CSR.
Results of this study indicate that if employees perceive CSR initiatives as sincere effort to support the community, such employee’ perception contributes
to enhance identification and attachment level with the organization. This is
178
important for mangers because just assessing the economic and corporate image
of CSR, managers should also examine the positive impact of CSR on employees’ level of attachment and identification with the organization. Results
of this study also indicate that organizational identification has positively
influenced the relationship between perceived CSR and OC, EE and OCB.
Hence, it is important for mangers to identify all such tools and methods such as CSR which can be used to enhance employees’ level of OC, EE and OCB.
More specifically, there is need to focus on CSR activities which could also
enhance employees’ level of OC, EE and extra-role behaviours. Similarly, Newman et al., (2016) suggested that to enhance possible impact on OCB, there
is need to make efforts to communicate to employees that how social responsible
human resource management (SRHRM) practices are benefiting to employees
through other stakeholders and community at large. Therefore, to have a positive impact of CSR activities on employees’ attitudes and behaviours particularly on
OC and EE, mangers need to focus to realize the benefits of external and internal
CSR activities on employees which could positively influence employees’ attitudes and behaviours in organizations.
Practically, this study contributes and increases the awareness of
academic managers of higher education institutions on the interrelatedness of employees’ perceptions of CSR and employees’ attitudes and behaviours. In
order to enhance employees’ level of OC, EE and OCB, the managers should
implement CSR policies in their operations as all the CSR initiatives may affect
employees’ attitudes and behaviours. If organization, ensure that the working conditions of employees are safe and comfortable, it enhances the employees’
quality of work life which includes JS, OC and OT (Sageer et al., 2012). This
research delivers a business-like pathway that offers psychological based CSR model which theoretically converge multiple psychological and attitudinal
organizational constructs. In this way, the organization can impact and
positively influence employees’ attitudes and behaviours at their workplace and
enhance the performance of higher education institutions.
5.3.3 Recommendations for Organizations
This study was aimed to examine the impact of employees’ perceptions
of CSR on employees’ outcomes (including OC, EE and OCB) through
mediation effects of OT, JS and OI. This study contributes in relevant literature and theories as well as it has extended recommendations for organizations,
managers and HR practitioners. Employees are always ready to reciprocate the
actions of their organization, if they feel that their organization is taking care of them and other stakeholders, they share their experiences with their colleagues
and ready to help them. Therefore, in order to retain talented human resource,
179
organizations should have to take initiatives for the welfare of employees by
introducing CSR initiatives which impacts on employees’ perceptions, this ultimately enhance the employees’ level of OC, EE and OCB.
In order to engage employees, findings of this study indicate that job
satisfaction and commitment level of employees has to be enhanced, to win the support of the key stakeholders i.e employees, their attitudes and behaviours
may influence in different ways including implementation of CSR programs. If
CSR is meant to improve the well-being of others, then it enables the employees to find well-being through their work. Therefore, organizations have realized
that only human resource enables them to accomplish the tasks well in time and
it is the core asset of an organization. In order to provide support to the
employees, organizations should also consider the financial and non-financial aspects (i.e. implementation of CSR programs) during establishing the
organizational strategies.
It is important for organizations to invest in CSR programs, however,
there is need that employees have to perceive the CSR activities of the
organizations. Development of perception of CSR is required in consistency in
CSR actions by the organization, it is not that can be swift in, this need to be supported over the time. Thus, it is prime requirement that organizations should
implement CSR programs in their operations. This is the reason, that
Multinational Corporations (MNCs) are now focusing, emphasizing to look
after their employees and have started to sign the employers’ Pledge of Fair Employment Practices (Tan & Ho, 2011). In addition, such MNCs are also
emphasizing that their business partners follow the set of CSR parameters, and
through third party service contracts, even to ensure that workers are well taken care off. Therefore, organizations should have a separate and dedicated
department which specifically implement and maintain sustainable CSR policies
and programs.
5.3.4 Limitations of the Study
Primarily, this research study was designed to fill both theoretical and
empirical gap in the academic literature. However, several limitations need to
be addressed and acknowledge which could be overcome in future research.
There is possibility that there might be some other factors which may also have influence on the dependent variables (i.e. OC, EE and OCB). This study
considered perceptions of CSR and work attitudes (e.g. OT, JS and OI) as
antecedents and mediators. There may be some other mediators which may also have influence between the relationship of employees’ perception of CSR and
employees’ attitudes and behaviours.
180
The use of cross sectional data is another limitation of this study, as such data collection is taken place at one point of time (Johnson & Christensen,
2004). In cross sectional data, the collected information only reflects the sample
at a single point of time; and in that case, it is impossible for researcher to
distinguish more stable feeling, opinions, or perceptions from those which can be obtained temporarily (Yee & Niemeier, 1996). Moreover, in cross sectional
data, the assessment of direction of causality is difficult. This may be overcome
to collect future data with a time horizon condition, such as longitudinal data, or it may be addressed by using time series of cross sectional data, which deal with
different subjects and how they change over the time. Podsakoff et al. (2000)
suggested that the quality of responses is affected in such studies because there
is possibility that difference in one response may cause effect on other response. Therefore, the variation in the answers of the respondents over the time is not
considered and the results of the study cannot be considered as definite.
In this study, specific emphasizes was not given to the analysis regarding
the social and cultural characteristics specific to Pakistan. In other words, in
present study, the effects of cultural values were not considered, as claimed by
Meyer et al. (2002), cultural values have influence on the responses of the respondents. Therefore, in order to overcome such limitations, in future a
psychosocial CSR-based model from large firms may be evaluated (Aprile &
Talò, 2015). The survey was limited to 54 institutions spread all around the
single country, which may under question the generalizability of the findings.
The main objective of public sector institutions is to serve the society
whereas private sector institutions are established for making profit and normally do not involve in CSR activities without considering the factor element
of profit. Last but not the least, another limitation is the targeted population, only
the faculty members of higher education institutions were included as the target
population of this study. Primarily, the data was collected from higher education institutions located at different part of the country mostly from big cities i.e.
Lahore, Islamabad, Karachi, Quetta and Peshawar which is a relatively non-
representative of other institutions located in remaining part of the country. Yew (2010) concluded that the results differ according to the nature of the firm and
employees. Thus, the obtained results only limited to higher education
institutions and may not be applicable to other sectors or organizations such as
manufacturing industry.
5.3.5 Future Research Directions
181
This study expanded the base of the CSR research by examining the
impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’ attitudes and behaviours in higher education sector of Pakistan. This is the first ever empirical
study in the field of CSR which examines the impact of faculty members’
perception of CSR on their outcomes in higher education sector. However, some
suggestions have been made for future research:
The results of the study indicated mixed findings of the mediation role of
attitudes between the relationship of perception of CSR and employees’ outcomes. However, in future some other factors may also be considered as
mediator on which theoretical and empirical research may be grounded (e.g.
managerial or supervisor’ support, personality traits, leadership etc.). Moreover,
further studies may also be carried out to examine the impact of CSR activities on other stakeholders of the firm, because other stakeholders are also the integral
part of the firms’ environment (i.e customers, suppliers and the society).
This is a cross sectional study and in order to handle the problem of
common biased method, there is need to conduct a longitudinal study, because
longitudinal study provides better results as compared to cross sectional research
studies. In future, researchers may also conduct a longitudinal study, through this way, employees’ responses about implementation of CSR in different time
frame could be observed (Perks et al., 2013).
The present study noted that perceived CSR is not a good predictor of faculty members’ OC and EE, but social exchange theory suggests that CSR
activities of an organization positively influence the employees’ attitudes and
extra role behaviours. However, in literature empirical evidences showed positive effect of firm’s CSR activities on employees’ attitudes and behaviours
including OC and EE. For instance, Ho (2012) concluded that “organizations’
actions and decisions are perceived as more just, employees will more likely
engage in the performance of their work, OCBs and remain with the organization” (p. 86). In future, research may be conducted to examine CSR in
relation to other performance outcomes of employees, therefore, this study may
also be replicated in other sectors in other developing countries.
Thus, a cross regional study should also be carried out through collection
of data from other countries to have a more comprehensive study, which could
be a source to provide a wider generalizability of results (Mueller et al., 2012). The horizon of the present work should be expended to other geographic and
industrial settings across the countries and cultures. In this way, the findings
may be replicated in more developed Western economies where there is less impact of the factors of in-groups’/out-groups difference and CSR activities are
widespread as compare to Asian economies.
182
It is possible that heavy investment on CSR activities may displease the employees because there is possibility that they may perceive that their
organizations are investing huge investment on CSR initiatives and less amount
on its employees. Moreover, Ehsan, Kaleem and Anwar (2013) suggested that
it can be possible that high insider stock ownership (i.e. corporate managers) support the CSR initiatives and sometimes they oppose because of their personal
interests. This can have a negative impact on employees’ attachment level with
their organization and can affect the commitment and satisfaction level of employees. As it has been observed by Glavas (2016) that “by understanding
why, how, and when employees are positively and negatively affected by CSR,
more complete models of CSR can be built in which the positive effects of CSR
can be disentangled” (p. 7). Thus, in future there is need to examine this type of potential negative effects of CSR activities on employees’ attitudes and
behaviours.
There may be difference of perception and practice between private and
public sector institutions. In future, a study may be conducted to explore the
difference in perception and practice of CSR between private and public sector
institutions, there is possibility that it may bring significant change in results. More specifically, the ideas and findings of this study merit for further research
to understanding why, how, and when employees are positively influenced by
CSR to find out more complete models of CSR.
5.4 CONCLUSION
CSR has become a prominent area and emerging topic in the field of
management and organizational behaviour research. The main impetus to
conduct this study derives from the belief that when an organization performs
its CSR activities, its employees perceive it and this perception might influence employees’ attitudes and behaviours at their workplace. This engagement of
organization in CSR activities might be able to prompt employees to generate
positive outcomes such as OC, EE and OCB. In this study, the researcher attempted to enhance the understanding that how specifically the CSR impacts
the employees’ perceptions which affect employees’ attitudes and behaviours
with mediation effects of OT, JS and OI in the context of higher education sector
of Pakistan.
The role of CSR in influencing employees’ attitudes and behaviours has
received a growing attention. This study examined the impact of employees’ perceptions of CSR on their work attitudes i.e. organizational commitment (OC)
and employee engagement (EE) and behaviours i.e. extra-role behaviours
183
(OCB). The results of this empirical research supported the framework which
provided rich information for future studies in this domain. This study has contributed to the existing literature in several ways i.e. (i) behavioural and
attitudinal outcomes of perceptions of CSR (ii) indirect impact of perception of
CSR on OC, EE and OCB through mediation mechanism (iii) empirical
evidences of the model in higher education sector. The mediating effect of OT, JS and OI is of great interest as previously hardly an empirical study performed
to examine the impact of these constructs on the relationship between
employees’ perceptions of CSR and dependent variables i.e. OC, EE and OCB. In this study, an initial effort was made to provide information to the researchers
and managers about impact of perceptions of CSR and its potential positive
impact on employees’ attitudes and behaviours in higher education sector in
Pakistan.
This study was aimed to address the four research questions consisted of
fifteen hypotheses including main and sub hypotheses. The first research question includes that employees’ perception of CSR as an antecedent of
employees’ job related outcomes (RO1). RQ1 was further examined with six
hypotheses (H1-H6). The findings of this study indicate diversified results of
these hypotheses, only four hypotheses were accepted. Therefore, it was concluded that perceived CSR is an antecedent of OT, JS, OI and OCB but not
for OC and EE. RQ2 was aimed to examine the indirect impact of perceived
CSR on employees’ outcomes (OC, EE and OCB) through the mediation
relationship of OT. The RQ2 was further examined through three hypotheses (H7-H9). The results of these hypothesis indicated that OT was found to perform
the role as mediator between perceived CSR and OC, EE and not for OCB. RQ3
was aimed to examine the indirect effect of perceived CSR on employees’ outcomes (OC, EE and OCB) through mediation relationship of JS. This
question was further examined through three hypotheses (H10-H12). The results
of these hypotheses indicated that JS was found to perform its role as mediator
between OC and EE and not for OCB. The last RQ4 was aimed to examine the indirect influence of employees’ perceptions of CSR on employees’ outcomes
(OC, EE and OCB) through the mediation role of OI. This question was further
examined through three hypotheses (H13-H15). The results of these hypotheses indicated that OI was found to perform its role as mediator among all
hypothesized indirect relationships between independent variable (i.e. CSR) and
dependent variables (i.e. OC, EE and OCB).
The present study was designed and conducted on 177 higher education
institutions recognized by Higher Education Commission (HEC) Pakistan.
These higher education institutions are located all across Pakistan. The current regional distribution of higher education institutions (province wise) which may
be seen at (Appendix 5-A). Most of the higher education institutions located in
184
big cities of Pakistan (i.e. Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar, Quetta, Islamabad,
Faisalabad, and Multan etc.). All in all, this study presented a workable model for academic managers of higher education institutions through which they can
positively influence their employees’ attitudes and behaviours to enhance their
performance at workplace. This study identifies that through the perception of
CSR employees’ job attitudes (i.e. organizational trust, job satisfaction, organizational identification, organizational commitment and employee
engagement) and behaviours (i.e. citizenship behaviour) have impact on
employees’ outcomes and performance.
185
REFERENCES
1. Abd-Elmotaleb, M., Saha, S.K. and Hamoudahb, A.E.M. (2015).
Rethinking the Employees' Perceptions of Corporate Social
Responsibility. International Business Research, 8(3), 121-132.
2. Aberson, C.L., Healy, M. and Romero, V. (2000). Ingroup bias and self-
esteem: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
4(2), 157-173.
3. Aguilera, R., Rupp, D.E., Ganapathi, J. and Williams, C.A. (2006).
Justice and social responsibility: A social exchange model. Paper
presented at the Society for Industrial/Organizational Psychology Annual Meeting, Berlin.
4. Aguilera, R.V., Rupp, D.E., Williams, C.A. and 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.
5. Aguinis, H. and 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.
6. Aguinis, H. and Glavas, A. (2013). Embedded versus peripheral corporate social responsibility: Psychological foundations. Industrial
and Organizational Psychology, 6(4), 314-332.
7. Ahmad, J. (2012). Can a university act as a corporate social
responsibility (CSR) driver? An analysis. Soc. Responsib. J., 8(1), 77-86.
8. Ahmad, K.Z. and Bakar, R.A. (2003). The association between training
and organizational commitment among white‐collar workers in Malaysia. International Journal of Training and Development, 7(3),
166-185.
9. Ahmed, A. and Ahsan, H. (2011). Contribution of servicing sector in economy of Pakistan. PIDE working papers, 1-27.
186
10. Ahmed, I. (2014). Effects of exchange relations, perceived
organizational support and employee engagement in turnover intentions. Doctoral Thesis submitted to the faculty of Management,
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
11. Ahmed, I. and Islam, T. (2011). Decoding the Relationship between Employee’s Jobs Related Behaviours: A Study of Telecom Sector of
Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(8),
245-252.
12. Ahmad, R., Islam, T., & Saleem, S. S. (2017). Employee Engagement, Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction as consequent of
perceived CSR: A Mediation Model. Journal of the Research Society of
Pakistan, 54(1)
13. Akturan, A. and Sevik, N. (2016). The effect of corporation reputation
on organizational citizenship behaviour. International Journal of
Commerce and Finance, 2(1), 113-123.
14. Albdour, A.A. and Altarawneh, I.I. (2012). Corporate social
responsibility and employee engagement in Jordan. International
Journal of Business and Management, 7(16), 89-105.
15. Al-bdour, A.A., Nasruddin, E. and Lin, S.K. (2010). The relationship
between internal corporate social responsibility and organizational
commitment within the banking sector in Jordan. International Journal of Human and Social Sciences, 5(14), 932-951.
16. Albert, S., Ashforth, B.E. and Dutton, J.E. (2000). Organizational
identity and identification: Charting new waters and building new bridges. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 13-17.
17. Albinger, H.S. and Freeman. S.J. (2000). Corporate social performance
and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations.
Journal of Business Ethics, 28(3), 243-253.
18. Alfaro-Barrantes, P. (2012). Examining the Relationship Between
Employees' Perceptions of and Attitudes Toward Corporate Social
Responsibility and Organizational Identification. Theses, College of Education, The Folorida State University.
187
19. Alfes, K., Shantz, A.D., Truss, C. and Soane, E.C. (2013). The link
between perceived human resource management practices, engagement and employee behaviour: a moderated mediation model. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(2), 330-
351.
20. Ali, A.A., Nasruddin, E. and Lin, S.K. (2010). The Relationship
between internal corporate social responsibility and organizational
commitment within the banking sector in Jordan. International Journal
of Human and Social Sciences, 5(14), 932-952.
21. Ali, I., Rehman, K.U., Ali, S.I., Yousaf, J. and Zia, M. (2010).
Corporate social responsibility influences, employee commitment and
organizational performance. African Journal of Business Management, 4(13), 2796-2801.
22. Allen, N.J. and 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.
23. Allen, N.J. and Meyer, J.P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and
normative commitment to the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of vocational behaviour, 49(3), 252-276.
24. Alotaibi, G.A. (2001). Antecedent of Organizational Citizenship
Behaviour: A Study Public of Public Personnel in Kuwait. Public Personnel Management, 30(3), 363- 376.
25. Altbach P.G., Reisberg L. and Rumbley L.E. (2009). Trends in Global
Higher Education: Tracking an Academic Revolution a Report Prepared for the UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education.
26. Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to" the social
psychology of creativity. Westview press.
27. Anderson, J. and Gerbing, D.W. (1984). The effects of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions and goodness-of-fit indices for
maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49,
155-173.
28. Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988). Structural equation
modeling in practice: A review and recommended two–step approach.
Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.
188
29. Angle, H.L. and Perry, J.L. (1981). An empirical assessment of
organizational commitment and organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(1), 1-14.
30. Anigbogu, T.U., Onugu, C.U., Onyeugbo, B.N. and Okoli, M.I. (2014).
Determinants of Loan Repayment among Cooperative Farmers in Awka North Lga of Anambra State, Nigeria. European Scientific Journal,
10(22), 168-190.
31. Arasli, H., Daskin, M. and Saydam, S. (2014). Polychronicity and intrinsic motivation as dispositional determinants on hotel frontline
employees‟ job satisfaction: Do control variables make a difference?
Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 109(1), 1395-1405.
32. Arbuckle, J.L. (2005). Amos 6.0 User’s Guide, Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.
33. Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C. and Razavieh, A. (2002). Introduction to
Research in Education. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
34. Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., Razavieh, A. and Sorensen, C. (2006). Introduction to research in education (7th ed.). California: Thomson
Wadsworth.
35. Ashforth, B.E. and Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20-39.
36. Ashforth, B.E. and Mael, F.A. (1996). Oranizational Identity and Strategy as a Context for the Individual. Advances in Strategic
Management, 13, 19-64.
37. Ashforth, B.E., Harrison, S.H. and Corley, K.G. (2008). Identification
in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34(3), 325-374.
38. Asrar-ul-Haq, M. (2015). Human resource development in Pakistan:
evolution, trends and challenges. Hum. Resour. Dev. Int., 18(1), 97-104.
39. Asrar-ul-Haq, M., Kuchinke, K.P. and Iqbal, A. (2017). The
relationship between corporate social responsibility, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment: Case of Pakistani higher education.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2352-2363.
189
40. Atakan, M.S. and Eker, T. (2007). Corporate identity of a socially
responsible university–a case from the Turkish higher education sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(1), 55-68.
41. Aubé, C., Rousseau, V. and Morin, E.M. (2007). Perceived
organizational support and organizational commitment: The moderating effect of locus of control and work autonomy. Journal of
managerial Psychology, 22(5), 479-495.
42. Aupperle, K., Carroll, A., and Hatfield, J. (1985). An Empirical Examination of the Relationship between Corporate Social
Responsibility and Profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 28,
446-463.
43. Azim, M.T. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility and employee behaviour: mediating role of organizational commitment. Revista
Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 18(60), 207-225.
44. Azim, M.T., Diyab, A.A. and Al-Sabaan, S.A. (2014). CSR, Employee Job Attitude and Behaviour: Saudi Bank Experience. Transylvanian
Review of Administrative Sciences, 10(43), 25-47.
45. Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1),
74-94.
46. Bakker, A.B. and Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3),
309-328.
47. Bakker, A.B., Albrecht, S.L. and Leiter, M.P. (2011). Key questions regarding work engagement. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 20(1), 4-28.
48. Bakker, A.B., Schaufeli, W.B., Leiter, M.P. and Taris, T.W. (2008). Work engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health
psychology. Work & Stress, 22(3), 187-200.
49. Balmer, J.M., Fukukawa, K. and Gray, E.R. (2007). The nature and management of ethical corporate identity: A commentary on corporate
identity, corporate social responsibility and ethics. Journal of Business
Ethics, 76(1), 7-15.
190
50. Baptista, P.P. (2005). Lealdade do consumidor e os seus antecedentes:
um estudo aplicado ao setor varejista na internet. Tese de Doutorado. Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.
51. Barak, M.E.M., Cherin, D.A. and Berkman, S. (1998). Organizational
and personal dimensions in diversity climate ethnic and gender differences in employee perceptions. The Journal of Applied
Behavioural Science, 34(1), 82-104.
52. Barcelos, E.M.B., de Paula Baptista, P., Maffezzolli, E.C.F., da Silva, W.V., Zancan, R. and Marchetti, C.P.D.V. (2015). Relationship
Between an Organization Evaluated as Being Socially Responsible and
the Satisfaction, Trust and Loyalty of its Clients. Australian Journal of
Basic and Applied Sciences, 9(7), 429-438.
53. Barnett, M.L. (2014). Why stakeholders ignore firm misconduct: A
cognitive view. Journal of Management, 40(3), 676-702.
54. Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and
statistical considerations. Journal of Personal Social Psychology, 51,
1173-1182.
55. Bartels, J., Peters, O., de Jong, M., Pruyn, A. and van der Molen, M.
(2010). Horizontal and vertical communication as determinants of
professional and organisational identification. Personnel Review, 39(2), 210-226.
56. Bashir, R., Hassan, A. and Cheema, F.A. (2012). Impact of corporate
social responsibility activities over the employees of the organizations: an exploratory study. Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 8(2),
11-12.
57. Bateman, T.S. and Organ, D.W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good
soldier: The relationship between affect and employee “citizenship”. Academy of Management Journal, 26(4), 587-595.
58. Bates, S. (2004). Getting engaged. HR Magazine, 49(2), 44-51.
59. Bauman, C.W. and Skitka, L.J. (2012). Corporate social responsibility as a source of employee satisfaction. Research in Organizational
Behaviour, 32, 63-86.
191
60. Baumruk, R. (2004). The missing link: the role of employee
engagement in business success. Workspan, 47, 48-52.
61. Baxter, P. and Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology:
Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The
Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559.
62. Becker, T.E. (1992). Foci and bases of commitment: Are they
distinctions worth making? Academy of Management Journal, 35,
232-244.
63. Belcourt, M., Bohlander, G. and Snell, S. (2014). Managing Human
Resources. Sixth Canadian Edition. Toronto: Nelson, Education Ltd.
64. Bell, C.R. and Patterson, J.R. (2011). Wired and dangerous: how your customers have changed and what to do about it. Berrett-Koehler
Publishers.
65. Benneworth, P. and Jongbloed, B.W. (2010). Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social
sciences valorisation. Higher Education, 59(5), 567-588.
66. Bergami, M. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2000). Self‐categorization, affective
commitment and group self‐esteem as distinct aspects of social identity
in the organization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(4), 555-
577.
67. Berger, I.E., Cunningham, P.H. and Drumwright, M.E. (2006). Identity,
identification, and relationship through social alliances. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 128-137.
68. Berry, L.L. (1995). Relationship marketing of services—growing
interest, emerging perspectives. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 23(4), 236-245.
69. Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A.P. (1992). Services marketing starts
from within. Marketing Management, 1(1), 24-34.
70. Bhattacharya, C.B. and Sen, S. (2003). Consumer-Company Identification: A Framework for Understanding Consumers’
Relationship with Companies. Journal of Marketing, 67, 76-88.
192
71. Bhattacharya, C.B., Korschun, D. and Sen, S. (2009). Strengthening
stakeholder-company relationships through mutually beneficial corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics,
85(2), 257-272.
72. Bhattacharya, R., Devinney, T.M. and Pillutla, M.M. (1998). A formal model of trust based on outcomes. Academy of Management Review,
23(3), 459-472.
73. Bhattacharyya, S.S., Sahay, A., Arora, A.P. and Chaturvedi, A. (2007). Development of a CSR-Strategy-Framework. In Congress Papers
Corporate Responsibility Research Conference (pp. 7-9).
74. Bickel, P.J. and Lehman, E.L. (1975). Descriptive Statistics for Nonparametric Models. The Annals of Statistics, 3(5), 1038-1044.
75. Birch, D. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: some key theoretical
issues and concepts for new ways of doing business. Journal of New
Business Ideas and Trends, 1(1), 1-19.
76. Bishop, J.W. and Scoot, K.D. (2000). An examination of organizational
and team commitment in a self-directed team environment. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 85(3), 439-450.
77. Blader, S.L. and Tyler, T.R. (2009). Testing and extending the group
engagement model: linkages between social identity, procedural justice,
economic outcomes, and extrarole behaviour. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 445-464.
78. Blakely, G.L., Blakely, E.H. and Moorman, R.H. (1995). The
relationship between gender, personal experience, and perceptions of sexual harassment in the workplace. Employee Responsibilities and
Rights Journal, 8(4), 263-274.
79. Blau, P.M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.
80. Bloemer, J. and Odekerken-Schroder, G. (2002). Store satisfaction and
store loyalty explained by customer-and store-related factors. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behaviour,
15, 68-80.
193
81. Boddy, C.R., Ladyshewsky R.K. and Gavin, P. (2010). The Influence
of Corporate Psychopaths on Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Commitment to Employees. Journal of Business Ethics,
97(1), 1-19.
82. Boesso, G. and Michelon, G. (2010). The effects of stakeholder prioritization on corporate financial performance: an empirical
investigation. International Journal of Management, 27(3), 470-579.
83. Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
84. Bolton, L.E. and Mattila, A.S. (2015). How does Corporate Social
Responsibility affect consumer response to service failure in buyer-seller relationships? Journal of Retailing, 91(1), 140-153.
85. Bonds-Raacke, J. and Raacke, J. (2012). Research Methods: Are you
equipped? (1st Edition). New Jersey, Pearson Education Inc.
86. Boons, M., Stam, D.A. and Barkema, H.G. (2015). Feelings of pride and respect as drivers of ongoing member activity on crowdsourcing
platforms. Journal of Management Studies, 52, 717-741.
87. Bowen, H.R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper & Row.
88. Bowling, N.A. (2007). Is the job satisfaction-job performance relationship spurious? A meta-analytic examination. Journal of
Vocational Behaviour, 71(2), 167-185.
89. Brains, C., Willnat, L., Manheim, J. and Rich, R. (2011). Empirical
Political Analysis 8th Edition. Boston, MA: Longman. p.76.
90. Brammer, S., Brooks, C. and Pavelin, S. (2005). The stock performance
of America’s 100 Best corporate citizens. The Quarterly Review of
Economics and Finance, 49(3), 1065-1080.
91. Brammer, S., He, H. and Mellahi, K. (2015). Corporate Social
Responsibility, Employee Organizational Identification, and Creative
Effort; The Moderating Impact of Corporate Ability. Group & Organization Management, 40(3), 323-352.
194
92. Brammer, S., Millington, A. and Rayton, B. (2007). The contribution of
corporation social responsibility to organizational commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(10),
1701-1719.
93. Branco, M.C. and Rodrigues, L.L. (2006). Corporate social responsibility and resource-based perspectives. Journal of Business
Ethics, 69(2), 111-132.
94. Breckler, S.J. (1984). Empirical validation of affect, behaviour, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 47(6), 1191-1205.
95. Brief, A.P. (1998). Attitudes in and around organizations (Vol. 9). Sage.
96. Brislin, R.W. (1980). Cross-cultural research methods. In Environment
and Culture. Springer US.
97. Brown, T.A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: The Guilford Press.
98. Brown, T.J. and Dacin, P.A. (1997). The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. The Journal of
Marketing, 61(1), 68-84.
99. Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
100. Burns, R.B. (2000). Introduction to Research Methods (4th ed.).
London: Sage.
101. Byrne, B.M. (2010). Structural Equation Modeling with Amos: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
102. Caldwell, M. (2010). Uncovering the hidden value in corporate social responsibility. The Journal of the EDS Agility Alliance, 3(1), 69-75.
103. Caligiuri, P., Mencin, A. and Jiang, K. (2013). Win-win-win: the
influence of company-sponsored volunteerism programs on employees,
NGOs, and business units. Personal Psychology, 66, 825-860.
195
104. Calisir, F., Gumussoy, C.A. and Iskin, I. (2011). Factors affecting
intention to quit among IT professionals in Turkey. Personnel Review, 40(4), 514-533.
105. Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, Jr, G.D. and Klesh, J.R. (1983).
Assessing the attitudes and perceptions of organizational members. In S.E. Seashore, E.E. Lawler, P.H. Mirvis and C. Cammann (Eds.)
Assessing Organizational Change. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
106. Carmeli, A. (2005). Perceived external prestige, affective commitment, and citizenship behaviours. Organization Studies, 26(3), 443-464.
107. Carmeli, A., Gilat, G. and 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.
108. Carmines, E.G. and Zeller, R.A. (1979). Reliability and validity
assessment (Vol. 17). Sage publications.
109. Carroll, A.B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4),
497-505.
110. Carroll, A.B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business
Horizons, 34(4), 39-48.
111. Carroll, A.B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business and Society, 38(3), 268-295.
112. Carroll, A.B. and Buchholtz, A.K. (2014). Business and society: Ethics,
sustainability, and stakeholder management. Nelson Education.
113. Carroll, A.B. and 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.
114. Cha, J., Chang, Y.K. and Kim. T. (2013). Person- organization fit on
prosocial identity: Implications on employee outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 123, 57-69.
196
115. Chambers, J.M. (1983). Graphical methods for data analysis. New
York: Champman & Hall.
116. Chaudhary, A., Ahmad, M., Nayak, S., Kujur, S.S., Bhagat, V.,
Vandana, P. and Rao, P.H. (2015). In the Effect of CSR on Internal
Employee Motivation. Vishwakarma Business Review, 5(1), 19-30.
117. Chawak, S. and Dutta, D. (2014). Corporate Social Responsibility:
Trends and Challenges. Abhinav International Monthly Refereed
Journal of Research in Management and Technology, 3(4), 32-39.
118. Chen, S.C. and Dhillon, G.S. (2003). Interpreting dimensions of
consumer trust in e-commerce. Information Technology and
Management, 4(2-3), 303-318.
119. Chen, X.P., Hui, C. and Sego, D.J. (1998). The role of organizational
citizenship behaviour in turnover: Conceptualization and preliminary
tests of key hypotheses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(6),
922-931.
120. Chen, Y.C., Wang, W.C. and Chu, Y.C. (2010). Structural investigation
of the relationship between working satisfaction and employee
turnover. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, 6(1), 41-50.
121. Chen, Z.X., Tsui, A.S., Farh, J.L. (2002). Loyalty to supervisor vs.
organizational commitment: Relationships to employee performance in China. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75,
339-356.
122. Cheney, G. (1983). The rhetoric of identification and the study of organizational communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 69(2),
143-158.
123. Cheney, G. (1991). Rhetoric in an organizational society, managing multiple identities. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
124. Cheney, G. and Tompkins, P.K. (1987). Coming to terms with
organizational identification and commitment. Communication Studies, 38(1), 1-15.
197
125. Chepkwony, P., Kemboi, A. and Mutai, S.K. (2015). Effects of Internal
Corporate Social Responsibility Practices on Employee Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Commercial Banks in Kenya. International
Journal of Business and Management Review, 3(1),
24-40.
126. Chepkwony, P.K., Kemboi, A. and Muange, R.M. (2015). Moderating
effect of csr orientation on the relationship between internal CSR
practices and employee job satisfaction. Global Journal of Human
Resource Management, 3(3), 1-16.
127. Cheruiyot, T.K. and Maru, L.C. (2014). Corporate human rights social
responsibility and employee job outcomes in Kenya. International
Journal of Law and Management, 56(2), 152-168.
128. Chin, R. and Lee, B.Y. (1996). Principles and practice of clinical trial
medicine. Burlington, MA: Academic Press.
129. Choi, S.B., Ebrahim Ullah, S.M. and Kwak, W.J. (2015). Ethical leadership and followers' attitudes toward corporate social
responsibility: The role of perceived ethical work climate. Social
Behaviour and Personality, 43 (3), 353-366.
130. Christensen, H.K. (2010). Defining Customer Value as the Driver of
Competitive Advantage. Strategy & Leadership, 38(5), 20-25.
131. Chughtai, A.A. and Buckley, F. (2007). The relationship between work engagement and foci of trust: A conceptual analysis. In Proceedings of
the 13th Asia Pacific Management Conference, Melbourne, Australia
(pp. 73-85).
132. Churchill, G.A. Jr. (1995). Marketing research, Methodological
functions. The Draydu Press, G. Edition, New York, USA.
133. CIA 2010. The World Fact book: Pakistan-Population. http://www. theodora.com/wfb2011/pakistan/pakistan_people.html.
134. Cianni, M. and Romberger, B. (1995). Interactions with senior
managers: Perceived differences by race/ethnicity and by gender. Sex Roles, 32(5-6), 353-373.
198
135. Cinnirella, M. (1998). Manipulating stereotype rating tasks:
Understanding questionnaire context effects on measures of attitudes, social identity and stereotypes. Journal of Community and Applied
Social Psychology, 8, 345-362.
136. Closon, C., Leys, C. and Hellemans, C. (2015). Perceptions of corporate social responsibility, organizational commitment and job satisfaction.
Management Research: The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of
Management, 13(1), 31-54.
137. Coakes, S.J. (2006). SPSS: Analysis Without Anguish: Version 14.0 for Windows. Milton, Qld: John Wiley & Sons.
138. Cohen, B. and Greenfield, J. (1997). Double dip: How to run a value-led business and make money, too. New York, N.Y.: Simon & Schuster.
139. Cohen, L. and Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education
(4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
140. Cole, M.S. and Bruch, H. (2006). Organizational identity strength, identification, and commitment and their relationships to turnover
intention: Does organizational hierarchy matter? Journal of
Organizational Behaviour, 27, 585-605.
141. Collier, J. and Esteban, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and
employee commitment. Business ethics: A European Review, 16(1),
19-33.
142. Colquitt, J.A., Conlon, D.E., Wesson, M.J., Porter, C.O. and Ng, K.Y.
(2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years
of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425- 445.
143. Colquitt, J.A., Scott, B.A. and 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.
144. Cooke-Davies, T.J. (2000). The “real” success factors on projects. International Journal of Project Management, 20(3), 185-190.
199
145. Corley, K.G., Harquail, C.V., Pratt, M.G., Glynn, M.A., Fiol, C.M. and
Hatch, M.J. (2006). Guiding organizational identity through aged adolescence. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15, 85-99.
146. Cornelius, N., Todres, M., Janjuha-Jivraj, S., Woods, A. and Wallace,
J. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and the social enterprise. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(2), 355-370.
147. Coyle-Shapiro., Jacqueline, A.M. and Neuman, J.H. (2004). Individual
Dispositions and the Psychological Contract: The Moderating Effects of Exchange and Creditor Ideologies. Journal of Vocational Behaviour,
64(1), 150-164.
148. Crabtree, S. (2013). Worldwide, 13% of Employees are engaged at work. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/165269/worldwide-
employees-engaged-work.aspx.
149. Cranny, C.J., Smith, P.C. and Stone, E. (1992). Job satisfaction: How
people feel about their jobs. New York: Lexington Books.
150. Creswell, J. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and
evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
151. Crilly, D., Schneider, S.C. and Zollo, M. (2008). Psychological
antecedents to socially responsible behaviour. European Management
Review, 5(3), 175-190.
152. Crites, S.L., Fabrigar, L.R. and Petty, R.E. (1994). Measuring the
affective and cognitive properties of attitudes: Conceptual and
methodological issues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(6), 619-634.
153. Cronbach, L. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of
Tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
154. Cropanzano, R. and Mitchell, M.S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An
interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874-900.
155. Currivan, B. (1999). U.S. Patent No. 5,970,092. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
200
156. Czarnowsky, M. (2008). Learning’s role in employee engagement: An
ASTD research study. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development.
157. D’Aprile, G. and Talò, C. (2014). Measuring corporate social
responsibility as a psychosocial construct: a new multidimensional scale. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 26(3), 153-175.
158. D’Aprile, G. and Talò, C. (2015). How Corporate Social Responsibility
Influences Organizational Commitment: A Psychosocial Process Mediated by Organizational Sense of Community. Employee
Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 27(4), 241-269.
159. da Veiga, C.P., da Veiga, C.R.P., Catapan, A., Veiga, L.G.N., Kato, H.T., Tortato, U. and da Silva, W.V. (2014b). Assortment Planning as
a Strategic Tool in the South Region of the Brazilian Retail.
International Business Management, 8(3), 172-182.
160. Datta, D.K., Guthrie, J.P. and Wright, P.M. (2005). Human resource management and labor productivity: Does industry matter? Academy of
Management Journal, 48(1), 135-145.
161. Davidson, III., Wallace, N. and Worrell, D.L. (1988). The Impact of Announcements of Corporate Illegalities on Shareholder Returns.
Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 195-200.
162. Davis, J.H. (1973). Group decision and social interaction: a theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review, 80(2), 97-125.
163. Davis, K. (1960). Can business afford to ignore social responsibilities?
California Management Review, 2, 70-76.
164. Davis, K. (1967). Understanding the social responsibility puzzle: What
does the businessman owe to society? Business Horizons, 10, 45-50.
165. Davis, K. and Blomstrom, R.L. (1966). Business and its Environment. New York: McGraw Hill.
166. De Roeck, K. and 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.
201
167. De Roeck, K., El Akremi, A. and Swaen, V. (2016). Consistency
matters! how and when does corporate social responsibility affect employees' organizational identification? Journal of Management
Studies, 53(7), 1141-1168.
168. De Roeck, K., Marique, G., Stinglhamber, F. and Swaen, V. (2014). Understanding employees' responses to corporate social responsibility:
mediating roles of overall justice and organisational identification. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(1),
91-112.
169. Deckop, J.R., Cirka, C.C. and Andersson, L.M. (2003). Doing unto
others: The reciprocity of helping behaviour in organisations. Journal
of Business Ethics, 47(2), 101-113.
170. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A.B., Nachreiner, F. and Schaufeli, W.B.
(2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 86, 499-512.
171. Dernovsek, D. (2008). Engaged Employees. Credit Union Magazine,
74(5), 42-46.
172. Deshpande, S.P. (1996). The impact of ethical climate types on facets of job satisfaction: An empirical investigation. Journal of Business
Ethics, 15(6), 655-660.
173. Devinney, T.M. (2009). Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? The good, the bad, and the ugly of corporate social responsibility. The
Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(2),
44-56.
174. Dhanesh, G.S. (2010). The view from within: Internal publics and CSR.
Journal of Communication Management, 16(1), 39-58.
175. Dhanesh, G.S. (2014). CSR as Organization-Employee Relationship Management Strategy a Case Study of Socially Responsible
Information Technology Companies in India. Management
Communication Quarterly, 28(1), 130-149.
176. Dirks, K.T. and Ferrin, D.L. (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 12(4), 450-467.
202
177. Dirks, K.T. and Ferrin, D.L. (2002). Trust in Leadership: Meta-Analytic
Findings and Implications for Research and Practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611-628.
178. Donaldson, T. and Preston, L.E. (1995). The Stakeholder Theory of the
Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65-91.
179. Drucker, P. (1954). The principles of management. New York.
180. Drucker, P. (1997). Looking ahead: implications of the present-the future that has already begun. Harvard Business Review, 75(5), 18-32.
181. Drucker, P. (2001). The essential Drucker. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-
Heinemann.
182. Dutton, J.E. and Dukerich, J.M. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror:
Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of
Management Journal, 34(3), 517-554.
183. Dutton, J.E., Dukerich, J.M. and Harquail, C.V. (1994). Organizational
images and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly,
39(2), 239-263.
184. Dwyer, F.R., Schurr, P.H., Oh, S. (1987). Developing buyer-seller
relationships. Journal of Marketing, 51(2), 11-27.
185. Ebeid, A.Y. (2010). Corporate social responsibility and its relation to organizational commitment. Problems and Perspectives in
Management, 8(2), 76-82.
186. Ehsan, S., Kaleem, A. (2012). An Empirical investigation of the relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial
Performance: Evidence from Manufacturing Sector of Pakistan.
Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2(3), 2909-2922.
187. Ehsan, S., Kaleem, A. and Anwar, S. (2013). Insider stock ownership concentration and corporate social responsibility: a case from
manufacturing sector of Pakistan. Science International, 25(3),
667-672.
203
188. Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P.D. and Rhoades,
L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 42-51.
189. Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P. and Davis-LaMastro, V. (1990). Perceived
organizational support and employee diligence, commitment, and innovation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(1), 51-59.
190. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S. and Sowa, D. (1986).
Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500-507.
191. Ekwere, G.E. and Edem, I.D. (2014). Evaluation of Agricultural Credit
Facility in Agricultural Production and Rural Development. Global Journal of Human-Social Science Research, 14(3), 19-26.
192. Ellemers, N. (2001). Social identity, commitment, and work behaviour.
In: M.A. Hogg and D.J. Terry (Eds.). Social identity processes in
organizational contexts (101-114), Psychology Press.
193. Ellemers, N., De Gilder, D. and Haslam, S.A. (2004). Motivating
individuals and groups at work: A social identity perspective on
leadership and group performance. Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 459-478.
194. Ellin, J. (2006). Introduction: the entrepreneurial university. In: Ellin, J.
(Ed.), A Selection of Papers Presented at the WMU Emeriti Council Forum. Universities and Corporations, 6(2), 4-8.
195. Ellis, A.D. (2008). The impact of corporate social responsibility on
employees’ attitudes and behaviours. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University.
196. Ellis, A.D. (2009). The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on
Employee Attitudes and Behaviours. In G.T. Solomon (Ed.), Proceedings of the Sixty eighth Annual Meeting of the Academy of
Management.
197. Ellis, K. and Shockley-Zalabak, P. (1999). Communicating with management: Relating trust to job satisfaction and organizational
effectiveness. In National Communication Association Convention,
Chicago, IL.
204
198. Elving, W.J. and Kartal, D. (2012). Consistency in behaviour of the
CEO regarding corporate social responsibility. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 17(4), 449-461.
199. Enders, J. (2004). Higher education, internationalization, and the
nation-state: Recent developments and challenges to governance theory. Higher Education, 47(3), 361-382.
200. EU Commission. (2011). A renewed EU strategy 2011-14 for
Corporate Social Responsibility. Brussels, European Commission.
201. Farooq, M., Farooq, O. and Jasimuddin, S.M. (2014). Employees
response to corporate social responsibility: Exploring the role of
employees’ collectivist orientation. European Management Journal, 32(6), 916-927.
202. Farooq, O., Payaud, M., Merunka, D., Valette-Florence, P. (2013). The
impact of corporate social responsibility on organizational
commitment: exploring multiple mediation mechanisms. Journal of Business Ethics, 125, 563-580.
203. Ferreira, P. and Oliveira, E.R. (2014). Does corporate social
responsibility impact on employee engagement? Journal of Workplace Learning, 26(3/4), 232-247.
204. Fleming, J.H. and Asplund, J. (2007). Human sigma: Managing the
employee-customer encounter. Simon and Schuster.
205. Flick, U. (2011). Introducing Research Methodology: A Beginner's
Guide to Doing a Research Project. USA: SAGE.
206. Folger, R., Cropanzano, R. and Goldman, B. (2005). What is the relationship between justice and morality? In Handbook of
organizational justice, ed. J. Greenberg and J.A. Colquitt, 215-245.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
207. Fombrun, C. (1996). Reputation. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
208. Foote, N.N. (1951). Identification as the basis for a theory of
motivation. American Sociological Review, 16(1), 14-21.
205
209. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981). Structural equation models with
unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382-388.
210. Fraenkel, J.R. and Wallen, N.E. (2003). How to design and evaluate
research in education (5th Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Co.
211. Frederick, W. (2006). Corporation, be good! The story of corporate
social responsibility. Indianapolis: Dog Ear Publishing.
212. Frederick, W.C. (1960). The Growing Concern Over Business
Responsibility. California Management Review, 2, 54-61.
213. Freeman, E.R. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Boston, MA: Pitman.
214. Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and Freedom, Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
215. Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase
its profits. The New York Times Magazine.
216. Fu, F., Bolander, W., Jones, E. (2009). Managing the drivers of organizational commitment and salesperson effort: an application of
Meyer and Allen’s three component model. Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, 17(4), 335-350.
217. Fu, H., Ye, B.H. and Law, R. (2014). You do well and I do well? The
behavioural consequences of corporate social responsibility.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 40(1), 62-70.
218. Fuller, J.B., Barnett, T., Hester, K. and Relyea, C. (2003). A social identity perspective on the relationship between perceived
organizational support and organizational commitment. The Journal
of Social Psychology, 143(6), 789-791.
219. Fuller, J.B., Hester, K., Barnett, T., Frey, L., Relyea, C. and Beu, D.
(2006). Perceived external prestige and internal respect: New insights
into the organizational identification process. Human Relations, 59, 815-846.
206
220. Galbreath, J., 2010. How does corporate social responsibility benefit
Firms? Evidence from Australia. Eur. Bus. Rev., 22(4), 411-431.
221. Gall, M.D., Gall, J.P. and Borg, W.R. (2007). Educational research: An
introduction, 8th Edition. Pearson.
222. Gao, J.H. (2014). Relating Corporate Social Responsibility and Employee Engagement: The Mediating Role of Perceived
Organizational Support and Chinese Values. International Journal of
Asian Business and Information Management (IJABIM), 5(2), 12-22.
223. Garbarino, E. and Johnson, M.S. (1999). The different roles of
satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. The
Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 70-87.
224. Garriga, E. and Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility
theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1-2),
51-71.
225. Gautam, R. and Singh, A. (2010). Corporate Social Responsibility Practices in India: A Study of Top 500 Companies. Global Business and
Management Research, 2(1), 41-56.
226. Gautam, T., Van Dick, R. and Wagner, U. (2004). Organizational identification and organizational commitment: Distinct aspects of two
related concepts. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7(3), 301-315.
227. Gay, L.R. and Airasian, P. (2003). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice
Hall.
228. George, D. and Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
229. Geva, A. (2008). Three models of corporate social responsibility: interrelationships between theory, research, and practice. Business and
Society Review, 113(1), 1-41.
230. Ghauri, P.N. and Grønhaug, K. (2002). Research Methods in Business Studies. Harlow: Financial Times.
207
231. Ghauri, P.N. and Grønhaug, K. (2005). Research methods in business
studies: A practical guide. Pearson Education.
232. Ghosh, D. and Gurunathan, L. (2013). An empirical study on corporate
social responsibility, intention to quit and job embeddedness. Paper
presented at 3rd biennial conference of the Indian Academy of Management.
233. Gill, J. and Johnson, P. (2002), Research methods for managers, 3rd,
SAGE publication, London.
234. Gioia, D.A. and Thomas, J.B. (1996). Identity, image, and issue
interpretation: Sense making during strategic change in academia.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(3), 370-403.
235. Gioia, D.A., Patvardhan, S.D., Hamilton, A.L. and Corley, K.G. (2013).
Organizational identity formation and change. The Academy of
Management Annals, 7(1), 123-193.
236. Glavas, A. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility and Employee Engagement: Enabling Employees to Employ More of Their Whole
Selves at Work. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 796. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00796
237. Glavas, A. and Godwin, L.N. (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.
238. Glavas, A. and Piderit, S.K. (2009). How does doing good matter:
Corporate citizenship behaviours and their consequences within business. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 36, 51-70.
239. Goddard, W. and Melville, S. (2004). Research Methodology: An
Introduction. Juta and Company Ltd.
240. Gonzalez, J.V. and Garazo, T.G. (2006). Structural relationships
between organizational service orientation, contact employee job
satisfaction and citizenship behaviour. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 17(1), 23-50.
241. Gouldner A.W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A Preliminary
Statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161-178.
208
242. Gourova, E., Todorova, Y. and Gourov, N. (2009). Skills for future
engineers: challenges for universities in Bulgaria. WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics, 7(6), 385-399.
243. Grant, A.M., Dutton, J.E. and Rosso, B.D. (2008). Giving commitment:
Employee support programs and the prosocial sensemaking process. Academy of Management Journal, 51(5),
898-918.
244. Graverrer, F.J. and Wallnau, L.B. (2007). Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences (8 ed). USA: Wadsworth.
245. Gray, R.H., Owen, D.L. and Adams, C.A. (1996). Accounting and
Accountability: Changes and Challenges in Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting. Prentice Hall, Europe.
246. Greenfield, K. (2005). New principles for corporate law. Hastings
Business Law Journal, 1(1), 87-117.
247. Griffith, D.A. and Lusch, R.F. (2007). Getting marketers to invest in firm-specific capital. Journal of Marketing, 71(1), 129-145.
248. Gruneberg, M.M. (1979). Understanding job satisfaction. Springer.
249. Guarnieri, R. and Kao, T. (2007). Leadership and CSR - A perfect
match: How top companies for leaders utilize CSR as a competitive
advantage. People & Strategy, 31(3), 34-41.
250. Gully, S.M., Phillips, J.M., Castellano, W.G., Han, K. and Kim, A.
(2013). A mediated moderation model of recruiting socially and
environmentally responsible job applicants. Personal Psychology,
66(4), 935-973.
251. Gumport, P.J. (2000). Academic Restructuring: Organizational Change
and Institutional Imperatives. Higher Education, 39(1), 67-91.
252. Hackett, R.D., Bycio, P. and Hausdorf, P.A. (1994). Further assessments of Meyer and Allen's (1991) three-component model
of organizational commitment. Journal of applied Psychology, 79(1),
15-23.
209
253. Haden, S.S., Oyler, P.H. and Humphreys, J.H. (2009). Historical,
practical and theoretical perspectives on green management: An exploratory analysis. Management Journal, 47(7), 41-55.
254. Hair, J.F. Jr., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham,
R.L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. 6th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
255. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010).
Multivariate Data Analysis. Seventh Edition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
256. Hair, J.F., Jr., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1995).
Multivariate Data Analysis. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.
257. Hallberg, U.E. and Schaufeli, W.B. (2006). Same, same, but different”?
Can work engagement be empirically separated from job involvement
and organizational commitment? European Psychologist, 11, 119-127.
258. Hansen, S.D., Dunford, B.B., Boss, A.D., Boss, R.W. and Angermeier,
I. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and the benefits of employee
trust: A cross-disciplinary perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 29-45.
259. Hantrais, L. (1995). Social policy in the European Union. Hampshire,
Macmillan. International Journal of Social Welfare, 5(2), 113-116.
260. Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L. and Hayes, T.L. (2002). Business-unit-level
relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and
business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268-279.
261. Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L. and Keyes, C.L. (2003). Well-being in the
workplace and its relationship to business outcomes: A review of the Gallup studies. In Keyes, CLM and Haidt, J (Ed.). Flourishing: Positive
psychology and the life well-lived, (Chapter 9, pp: 205-224). American
Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
262. Haslam, S.A. (2004). Psychology in organizations. Sage.
210
263. He, H. and Baruch, Y. (2010). Organizational identity and legitimacy
under major environmental changes: Tales of two UK building societies. British Journal of Management, 21(1), 44-62.
264. Henderson, D. (2004). The role of business in the modern world:
Progress, pressures and prospects for the market economy. London, UK: Institute of Economic Affairs.
265. Henriques, I. and Sadorsky, P. (1999). The relationship between
environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance? Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 89-99.
266. Herscovitch, L. and Meyer, J.P. (2002). Commitment to organizational
change: Extension of a three component model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 474-487.
267. Hickman, T.M., Lawrence, K.E. and Ward, J.C., (2005). A social
identities perspective on the effects of corporate sport sponsorship on
employees. Sports Marketing Quarterly, 14, 148-157.
268. Hillenbrand, C., Money, K. and Ghobadian, A. (2013). Unpacking the
mechanism by which corporate responsibility impacts stakeholder
relationships. British Journal of Management, 24, 127-146.
269. Hinkin, T.R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the
study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967-988.
270. Ho, V.E.H. (2010). Enlightened Shareholder Value': Corporate Governance Beyond the Shareholder-Stakeholder Divide. Journal of
Corporation Law, 36(1), 59-112.
271. Hoeven, C.L. and Verhoeven, J.W.M. (2013). “Sharing is caring” Corporate social responsibility awareness explaining the relationship of
information flow with affective commitment. Corporate
Communications: An International Journal, 18(2), 264-279.
272. Hoffman, A.J. and Woody, J.G. (2008). Climate change? what’s your
business strategy? Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
211
273. Hofman, P.S. and Newman, A. (2014). The impact of perceived
corporate social responsibility on organizational commitment and the moderating role of collectivism and masculinity: evidence from China.
The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(5),
631-652.
274. Hogg, M.A. (1992). The social psychology of group cohesiveness:
From attraction to social identity. New York: New York University
Press.
275. Hogg, M.A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 184-200.
276. Hogg, M.A. (2011). Uncertainty-identity theory. In P.A.M. Van Lange, A.W. Kruglanski and E.T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of Theories of
Social Psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
277. Hogg, M.A. and Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social
psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. London: Routledge.
278. Hogg, M.A. and Terry, D.I. (2000). Social identity and self-
categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 121-140.
279. Hogg, M.A. and Terry, D.J. (2001). Social identity theory and
organizational processes. In M.A. Hogg & D.J. Terry (Eds.), Social identity processes in organizational contexts (pp. 1-12). Philadelphia:
Psychology Press.
280. Holland, P., Cooper, B.K. and Hecker, R. (2016). Use of social media at work: a new form of employee voice? The International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 27, 2621-2634.
281. Holmes-Smith, P., Cunningham, E. and Coote, L. (2006). Structural equation modeling: From the fundamentals to advanced topics.
Melbourne: Statsline.
282. Homans, G.C. (1958). Social behaviour as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63, 597-606.
283. Hopkins, M. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and international
development. London, U.K.: Earthscan.
212
284. Hoppock, R. (1935). Job satisfaction. Oxford, England.
285. Hosmer, L.T. (1994). Strategic planning as if ethics mattered. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 17-34.
286. Hoyle, R.H. (1995). Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues
and Applications. London: Sage.
287. Humphreys, M. and Brown, A.D. (2002). Narratives of organizational
identity and identification: A case study of hegemony and resistance.
Organization Studies, 23(3), 421-447.
288. Hunter, L.W. and Thatcher, S.M. (2007). Feeling the heat: Effects of
stress, commitment, and job experience on job performance. Academy
of Management Journal, 50(4), 953-968.
289. Idowu, S.O. (2008). An empirical study of what institutions of higher
education in the UK consider to be their corporate social responsibility.
WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 108, 263-273.
290. Isaac Mostovicz, E., Kakabadse, A. and Kakabadse, N.K. (2011). The
four pillars of corporate responsibility: ethics, leadership, personal
responsibility and trust. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 11(4), 489-500.
291. Islam, T., Ahmed, I., Ahmed, Z., Ahmed, A., Saeed, M. and
Muhammad, S.K. (2012). Does compensation and demographical variable influence on teacher’s commitment and job satisfaction? A
study of University of the Punjab, Pakistan. International Journal of
Business and Management, 7(4), 35-43.
292. Islam, T., Ahmed, I., Ali, G. and Sadiq, T. (2016). Behavioural and psychological consequences of corporate social responsibility: need of
the time. Social Responsibility Journal, 12(2), 307-320.
293. Islam, T., Ali, F.H., Aamir, M., Khalifah, Z., Ahmad, R. and Ahmad, U.N.U.B. (2015). Employees perception of CSR and Organizational
Citizenship Behaviour. Science International, 27(3), 2417-2419.
294. Islam, T., Khan, S., Ahmad, U.N.U., Ahmed, I. (2014). Exploring the relationship between POS, OLC, Job satisfaction and OCB. Procedia-
Social and Behavioural Sciences, 114, 164-169.
213
295. Jaros, S. (2007). Meyer and Allen model of organizational commitment:
Measurement issues. The Icfai Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 6(4), 7-25.
296. Jo, S. J., and Joo, B. (2011). Knowledge sharing: The influences of
learning organization culture, organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of leadership &
Organizational Culture, 18(3), 353-364.
297. Jo, S.J., and Joo, B. (2011). Knowledge sharing: The influences of learning organization culture, organizational commitment and
organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Culture, 18(3), 353-364.
298. Johnson, B. and Christensen, L. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (2nd ed.). Boston,
MA: Pearson Education Inc.
299. Johnson, B. and Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Sage.
300. 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.
301. Jones, D.A., Willness, C.R. and 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.
302. Jones, T.M. (1980). Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined.
California Management Review, 22(3), 59-67.
303. Jongbloed, B., Enders, J. and Salerno, C. (2008). Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research
agenda. Higher Education, 56, 303-324.
304. Joyner, B.E. and Payne, D. (2002). Evolution and Implementation: a study of values, business ethics and corporate social responsibility.
Journal of Business Ethics, 41, 297-311.
214
305. Kahn, W.A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement
and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692-724.
306. Kamalakanthan, P. (2013). Elite Universities Are Just Corporations,
Failing America's Poor Students. Policy Mic. Retrieved from: http://mic.com/articles/58753/elite-universities-are-just-corporations-
failing-america-s-poorstudents#.
307. Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behaviour. Behavioural Science, 9(2), 131-146.
308. Kaul, M. and Smith, J. (2012). Exploring the nature of responsibility
in Higher education. Journal of Global Responsibility, 3(1), 1-10.
309. Kaur, S. (2016). Disengaged or Highly Engaged Employees: Who
are the True Lawbreaker? Indian. Journal of Applied Research, 6(3),
540-543.
310. Keinert, C. (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility as an International Strategy. Physica-Verlag A Springer Company, Leipzig, Germany.
311. Kelman, H.C. (1958). Compliance, Identification, and Internalization: Three Processes of Attitude Change. Journal of Conflict Resolution,
2(1), 51-60.
312. Kermani, F. (2006). Why corporate social responsibility makes sense. Applied Clinical Trials, 15(5), 36-38.
313. Kim, E.E.K., Kang, J. and Mattila, A.S. (2012). The impact of
prevention versus promotion hope on CSR activities. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(1), 43-51.
314. Kim, H.R., Lee, M., Lee, H.T. and Kim, N.M. (2010). Corporate social
responsibility and employee-company identification. Journal of
Business Ethics, 95(4), 557-569.
315. Kim, S.Y. and Park, H. (2011). Corporate social responsibility as an
organizational attractiveness for prospective public relations
practitioners. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(4), 639-653.
316. Kiron, D., Prentice, P.K. and Ferguson, R.B. (2012). Innovating with
analytics. MIT Sloan Management Review, 54(1), 47-52.
215
317. Kline, R.B. (1999). Review of Psychometric theory, Nunnally and
Bernstein (1994). Journal of Psycho Educational Assessment, 17, 275-280.
318. Kline, R.B. (2005). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation
Modeling (2nd Edition ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
319. Kline, R.B. (2011). Convergence of structural equation modeling and
multilevel modeling. In M. Williams & W.P. Vogt (Eds.), Handbook of
Methodological Innovation (pp. 562-589). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
320. Knight, J.A. (2002). Performance and greed. The Journal of Business
Strategy, 23(4), 24-27.
321. Knippenberg, D. and Schie, E. (2000). Foci and correlates of organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 73(2), 137-147.
322. Koh, H.C. and Boo, E.H.Y. (2001). The link between organizational ethics and job satisfaction: A study of managers in Singapore. Journal
of Business Ethics, 29(4), 309-324.
323. Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C.M., Hildebrandt, V.H., Schaufeli, W.B., De Vet Henrica, C.W. and Van Der Beek, A.J. (2011). Conceptual
frameworks of individual work performance: a systematic review.
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 53(8),
856-866.
324. Kothari, C.R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques.
New Age International.
325. Kotler, P. and Armstrong, G. (2006). Principles of Marketing. 11th Edition, Pearson.
326. Kotler, P. and Lee, N. (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility: Doing
the Most Good for Your Company and Your Cause. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
327. Kramer, R.M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging
perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569-698.
216
328. Kreiner, G.E. and Ashforth, B.E. (2004). Evidence toward an expanded
model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 25(1), 1-27.
329. Krejcie, R.V. and Morgan, D.W. (1970). Table for determining sample
size from a given population. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610.
330. Kreps, D.M. (2003). Microeconomics for managers. New York, NY:
W.W. Norton.
331. Kular, S., Gatenby, M., Rees, C., Soane, E. and Truss, K. (2008).
Employee engagement: A literature review. Working Paper Series
No. 19, Kingston Business School, Kingston University.
332. Kunstler, B. (2006). The millennial university, then and now: from late
medieval origins to radical transformation. On the Horizon, 14(2),
62-69.
333. Lantos, G.P. (2001). The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 595-632.
334. Lawler, E.E. and Mohrman, S.A. (2003). Creating a strategic human resources organization: An assessment of trends and new directions.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
335. Lawrence, J., Ott, M. and Bell, A. (2012). Faculty organizational commitment and citizenship behaviour. Research Higher Education,
53, 325-352.
336. Ledgerwood, J. and White, V. (2006). Transforming microfinance
institutions: providing full financial services to the poor. World Bank Publications. 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA.
337. Ledgerwood, J.R. (2010). What Is Reasonable Compensation for S
Corporation Shareholder-Employees? The CPA Journal, 80(5), 38-41.
338. Lee, C.K., Song, H.J., Lee, H.M., Lee, S. and Bernhard, B.J. (2013).
The impact of CSR on casino employees organizational trust, job
satisfaction, and customer orientation: An empirical examination of responsible gambling strategies. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 33(1), 406-415.
217
339. Lee, K. and Allen, N.J. (2002). Organizational citizenship behaviour
and workplace deviance: the role of affect and cognitions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 131-142.
340. 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.
341. Lee, M.W., Song, G.R. and Kim, K.S. (2015). The Effect of CSR
Participation of Employee on Employee Attitudes and Behaviours: The Moderating Role of Conscientiousness. The SIJ Transactions on
Industrial, Financial & Business Management (IFBM), 3(3), 32-35.
342. Lee, T.H., Gerhart, B., Weller, I. and Trevor, C.O. (2008). Understanding voluntary turnover: Path-specific job satisfaction effects
and the importance of unsolicited job offers. Academy of Management
Journal, 51(4), 651-671.
343. Lee, Y.K., Kim, Y.S., Lee, K.H. and Li, D.X. (2012). The impact of CSR on relationship quality and relationship outcomes: A perspective
of service employees. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 31(3), 745-756.
344. Lefkowitz, J. (2013). The constancy of ethics amidst the changing
world of work. Human Resource Management Review, 16, 245-268.
345. Leigh, J.H., Lucas, G.H. and Woodman, R.W. (1988). Effects of perceived organizational factors on role stress-job attitude relationships.
Journal of Management, 14(1), 41-58.
346. Leong, C.S., Furnham, A. and Cooper, C.L. (1996). The moderating effect of organizational commitment on the occupational stress outcome
relationship. Human Relations, 49(10), 1345-1363.
347. Lin, C.P. (2010). Modeling corporate citizenship, organizational trust, and work engagement based on attachment theory. Journal of Business
Ethics, 94(4), 517-531.
348. Lindgreen, A., Swaen, V. and Johnston, W.J. (2009). Corporate social responsibility: An empirical investigation of US organizations. Journal
of Business Ethics, 85(2), 303-323.
218
349. Little, T.D., Card, N.A., Bovaird, J.A., Preacher, K.J. and Crandall, C.S.
(2007). Structural equation modeling of mediation and moderation with contextual factors. Modeling contextual effects in longitudinal studies,
pp: 207-230. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
350. 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, IL: Rand McNally.
351. Loi, R., Hang-Yue, N. and Foley, S. (2006). Linking Employees’ Justice Perceptions to Organizational Commitment and Intention to
Leave: The Mediating Role of Perceived Organizational Support.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(1),
101-120.
352. Lok, P. and Crawford, J. (2001). Antecedents of organizational
commitment and the mediating role of job satisfaction. Journal of
Management Psychology, 16(8), 594-613.
353. Lowry, D.S., Simon, A. and Kimberley, N. (2002). Toward improved
employment relations practices of casual employees in the New South
Wales registered clubs’ industry. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13(1), 53-70.
354. Luo, Y. (2014). The implication for corporate social responsibility
initiatives on employees’ perceived brand equity and their work engagement in true corporation public company limited. Theses, The
Graduate School of Bangkok University.
355. Ma, H. (2011). The effects of corporate social responsibility on employee engagement (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern
California).
356. Macey, W.H. and Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee
engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(1), 3-30.
357. MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M. and Ahearne, M. (1998). Some
possible antecedents and consequences of in-role and extra-role
salesperson performance. The Journal of Marketing, 62(3), 87-98.
219
358. MacKinnon, D.P. (2000). Contrasts in multiple mediator models. In
J.S., Rose, L. Chassin, C.C. Presson, S.J. Sherman (Ed). In Multivariate Applications in Substance Use Research: New Methods for New
Questions. pp. 141-60. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Publishers.
359. MacKinnon, D.P. (2008). Introduction to Statistical Mediation
Analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
360. MacKinnon, D.P., Fairchild, A.J. and Fritz, M.S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593-614.
361. MacKinnon, D.P., Lockwood, C.M., Hoffman, J.M., West, S.G. and
Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychology Methods, 7, 83-104.
362. Mael, F. and Ashforth, B.E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A
partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification.
Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 13(2), 103-123.
363. Mael, F.A. (1988). Organizational identification: Construct
redefinition and a field application with organizational alumni.
Unpublished Doctoral Theses, Wayne State University, Detroit.
364. Mael, F.A. and Tetrick, L.E. (1992). Identifying organizational
identification. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52(4),
813-824.
365. Maharaj, I. and Schlechter, A.F. (2007). Meaning in life and meaning
of work: Relationships with organizational citizenship behaviour,
commitment and job satisfaction. Management Dynamics, 16(3), 24-41.
366. Maignan, I. and Ferrell, O.C. (2000). Measuring corporate citizenship
in two countries: The case of the United States and France. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(3), 283-297.
367. Maignan, I. and Ferrell, O.C. (2001). Antecedents and benefits of
corporate citizenship: An investigation of French businesses. Journal of Business Research, 51(1), 37-51.
220
368. Maignan, I. and Ferrell, O.C. (2001). Corporate citizenship as a
marketing Instrument-Concepts, evidence and research directions. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 457-484.
369. Maignan, I., Ferrell, O.C. and Hult, G.T.M. (1999). Corporate
citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4), 455-469.
370. Margolis J. and Walsh, J.P. (2003). Misery loves companies:
Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative science quarterly, 48(2), 268-305.
371. Marique, G. and Stinglhamber, F. (2011). Identification to proximal
targets and affective organizational commitment: The mediating role of organizational identification. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10,
107-117.
372. Markos, S. and Sridevi, M.S. (2010). Employee engagement: The key
to improving performance. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(12), 89-96.
373. Marrewijk, M. Van. (2003). Concept and definitions of CSR and
corporate sustainability: between agency and communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2), 95-105.
374. Marrewijk, M. Van. (2004). The social dimension of organizations
recent experiences with great place to work. Journal of Business Ethics, 55(2), 135-146.
375. Maslach, C., Schaufelli, W.B. and Leiter, M.P. (2001). Job burnout.
Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397-422.
376. Mauno, S., Kinnunen, U., Mäkikangas, A. and Feldt, T. (2010). Job
demands and resources as antecedents of work engagement: a
qualitative review and directions for future research, in Albrecht, S.L. (Ed.), Handbook of Employee Engagement: Perspectives, Issues,
Research and Practice. pp. 111-128, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
Publishers.
377. Maxfield, S. (2008). Reconciling corporate citizenship and competitive strategy: Insights from economic theory. Journal of Business Ethics,
80(2), 367-377.
221
378. May, T. (2011). Social research: Issues, methods and research.
London: McGraw-Hill International.
379. Mayer, R.C. and Gavin, M.B. (2005). Trust in management and
performance: Who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss?
Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 874-888.
380. Mayer, R.C. and Schoorman, F.D. (1992). Predicting participation and
production outcomes through a two-dimensional model of
organizational commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 671-684.
381. Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H. and Schoorman, F.D. (1995). An integrative
model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734.
382. McAleer, S. (2003). Friedman's Stockholder Theory of Corporate
Moral Responsibility. Teaching Business Ethics, 7(4), 437-451.
383. McAllister, D.J. (1995). Affect and Cognitive-based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations. Academy
of Management Journal, 38(1), 24-59.
384. McDonald, R.P. and Ho, M.H.R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1),
64-82.
385. McGuire, J., Sundgren, A. and Schnrrweis, T. (1988). Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance. Academy of
Management Journal, 31, 854-872.
386. McGuire, J.W. (1963). Business and Society. New York: McGraw-Hill.
387. McLeary, C.N. and Cruise, P.A. (2015). A context-specific model of
organizational trust: An examination of cognitive and socio-affective
trust determinants in unique cultural settings. Cross Cultural Management, 22(2), 297-320.
388. McMillan, J.H. and Schumacher, S. (1989). Research in education: A
conceptual introduction. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.
222
389. McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility:
A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117-127.
390. McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D.S. (2011). Creating and capturing value:
Strategic corporate social responsibility, resource-based theory, and sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 37(5),
1480-1495.
391. McWilliams, A., Siegel, D.S. and Wright, P.M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: strategic implications. Journal of Management
Studies, 43(1), 1-18.
392. Melcrum (2008). Melcrum employee engagement survey 2007/08 - summary of findings”, available at: www.melcrum.com/offer/etee/
surveysummary.pdf.
393. Memon, Z.A., Wei, Y.-M., Robson, M.G. and Khattak, M.A.O. (2014).
Keeping track of “corporate social responsibility” as a business and management discipline: case of Pakistan. Journal of Cleaner
Production. 74, 27-34
394. Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1984). Testing the "side-bet theory" of organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(3), 372-378.
395. Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource
Management Review, 1(1), 61-89.
396. Meyer, J.P. and Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model. Human Resource Management Review, 11(3),
299-326.
397. Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J. and Allen, N.J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace. Sage Publications.
398. Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J. and Gellatly, I.R. (1990). Affective and
continuance commitment to the organization: Evaluation of measures and analysis of concurrent and time-lagged relations. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 75, 710-720.
223
399. Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J. and Smith, C.A. (1993). Commitment to
organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 538-551.
400. Meyer, J.P., Paunonen, S.V., Gellatly, I.R., Goffin, R.D. and Jackson,
D.N. (1989). Organizational commitment and job performance: It's the nature of the commitment that counts. Journal of Applied Psychology,
74, 152-156.
401. Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L. and Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization:
A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal
of Vocational Behaviour, 61(1), 20-52.
402. Meyers, L.S., Gamst, G. and Guarino, A.J. (2006). Applied Multivariate Research: Design and Interpretation, London, Sage.
403. Mir, A., Mir, R. and Mosca, J.B. (2002). The new age employee: An
exploration of changing employee-organization relations. Public Personnel Management, 31(2), 187-200.
404. Mishra, S. and Suar, D. (2010). Does corporate social responsibility
influence firm performance of Indian companies? Journal of Business Ethics, 95(4), 571-601.
405. Mohamedbhai, G. (2003). Globalization and its implications for
universities in developing countries. Universities and globalization: Private linkages, public trust. (pp. 153-162). In, G. Breton & M.
Lambert (Eds.), Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG.
406. Molm, L.D., Takahashi, N. and Peterson, G. (2000). Risk and trust in social exchange: An experimental test of a classical proposition.
American Journal of Sociology, 105(5), 1396-1427.
407. Molteni, M. (2006). The social-competitive innovation pyramid. Corporate Governance, 6(4), 516-526.
408. Mone, E.M. and London, M. (2014). Employee engagement through
effective performance management: A practical guide for managers. Routledge, New York, NY.
224
409. Moorman, C., Zaltman, G. and Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationships
between providers and users of market research: the dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research,
29(3), 314-328.
410. Moorman, R.H. (1993). The influence of cognitive and affective based job satisfaction on the relationship between satisfaction and
organizational citizenship behaviour. Human Relations, 46, 759-776.
411. Moorman, R.H., Niehoff, B.P. and Organ, D.W. (1993). Treating employees fairly and organizational citizenship behaviour: Sorting the
effects of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and procedural
justice. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 6, 209-225.
412. Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20-38.
413. Morgeson, F.P., Aguinis, H., Waldman, D.A. and Siegel, D.S. (2013).
Extending corporate social responsibility research to the human resource management and organizational behaviour domains: A look to
the future. Personnel Psychology, 66(4), 805-824.
414. Morrison, E.W. (1994). Role definitions and organizational citizenship behaviour: The importance of the employee's perspective. Academy of
Management Journal, 37(6), 1543-1567.
415. Morrow, P.C. (1993). The theory and measurement of work commitment. Jai Press.
416. Morrow, P.C. (2011). Managing organizational commitment: Insights
from longitudinal research. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 79(1), 18-35.
417. Mory, L., Wirtz, B.W. and Göttel, V. (2016). Factors of internal
corporate social responsibility and the effect on organizational commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 27(13), 1393-1425.
418. Moura-Leite, R.C. and Padgett, R.C. (2011). Historical background of corporate social responsibility. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(4),
528-539.
225
419. Mowday, R.I. (1998). U.S. Patent No. 5,828,304. Washington, DC:
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
420. Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M. and Porter, L.W. (1979). The measurement
of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 14(2),
224-247.
421. Mozes, M., Josman, Z. and Yaniv, E. (2011). Corporate social
responsibility organizational identification and motivation. Social
Responsibility Journal, 7(2), 310-325.
422. Mubarak, R.Z., Wahab, Z. and Khan, N.R. (2012). Faculty retention in
higher education institutions of Pakistan. Journal of Theories and
Research in Education, 7(2), 65-78.
423. Mueller, K., Hattrup, K., Spiess, S-O., Nick, L-H. (2012). The effects
of corporate social responsibility on employees' affective commitment:
A cross-cultural investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6),
1186-1200.
424. Mukherjee, A. and Chaturvedi, R. (2013). From CSR to MCSR: The
Journey towards Mandatory Corporate Social Responsibility in India.
Golden Research Thoughts, 3(2), 1-7.
425. Muthen, B. (2011). Applications of Causally Defined Direct and
Indirect Effects in Mediation Analy`sis using SEM in Mplus. Los
Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
426. Nadeem, A. and Kakakhel, J.K. (2012). An investigation into corporate
social responsibility (CSR) of public sector universities in KPK. Abasyn
Journal of Social Sciences, 5 (2), 14-27.
427. Najafi, S., Noruzy, A., Azar, H.K., Nazari-Shirkouhi, S. and Dalvand,
M.R. (2011). Investigating the relationship between organizational
justice, psychological empowerment, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviour: An empirical
model. African Journal of Business Management, 5(13), 5241-5248.
428. Namjoofard, N. (2014). An examination of factors of employee-centered corporate social responsibility and their relationship with the
employee's motivation toward generating innovation. Dissertations &
Theses, Argosy University/Chicago.
226
429. Narehan, H., Hairunnisa, M., Norfadzillah, R.A. and Freziamella, L.
(2014). The effect of quality of work life (QWL) programs on quality of life (QOL) among employees at multinational companies in
Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 112(1), 24-34.
430. Nejati, M. and Ghasemi, S. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and organizational commitment: Empirical findings from a developing
country. Journal of Global Responsibility, 4(2), 263-275.
431. Nejati, M., Shafaei, A., Salamzadeh, Y. and Daraei, M. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and universities: A study of top 10 world
universities’ websites. African Journal of Business Management, 5(2),
440-447.
432. Netemeyer, R.G., Boles, J.S., McKee, D.O. and McMurrian, R. (1997). An investigation into the antecedents of organizational citizenship
behaviours in a personal selling context. The Journal of Marketing,
61(3), 85-98.
433. Neuman, W.L. (2003). Social Research, Methods: Qualitative and
Quantitative Approaches. Fifth edition. Allyn and Bacon. Boston.
Massachusetts.
434. Newman, A., Miao, Q., Hofman, P.S. and Zhu, C.J. (2016). The impact
of socially responsible human resource management on employees'
organizational citizenship behaviour: the mediating role of organizational identification. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 27(4), 440-455.
435. Newman, A., Nielsen, I. and Miao, Q. (2015). The impact of employee perceptions of organizational corporate social responsibility practices
on job performance and organizational citizenship behaviour: Evidence
from the Chinese private sector. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 26(9), 1226-1242.
436. Newman, A., Thanacoody, R. and Hui, W. (2011). The effects of
perceived organizational support, perceived supervisor support and
intra-organizational network resources on turnover intentions: A study of Chinese employees in multinational enterprises. Personnel Review,
41(1), 56-72.
227
437. Nguni, S., Sleegers, P. and Denessen, E. (2006). Transformational and
transactional leadership effects on teachers' job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviour
in primary schools: The Tanzanian case. School Effectiveness and
School Improvement, 17(2), 145-177.
438. Niehoff, B.P. and Moorman, R.H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the
relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational
citizenship behaviour. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3),
527-556.
439. Nord, W.R. and Fuller, S.R. (2009). Increasing Corporate Social
Responsibility Through an Employee-centered Approach. Employee
Responsibilities & Rights Journal, 21, 279-290.
440. Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
441. Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I.H. (1994), Psychometric Theory (3rd ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill.
442. Obeidat, B.Y. (2016). Exploring the Relationship between Corporate
Social Responsibility, Employee Engagement, and Organizational Performance: The Case of Jordanian Mobile Telecommunication
Companies. International Journal of Communications, Network and
System Sciences, 9(09), 361-386.
443. OECD (2008). Tertiary Education for the Knowledge Society: OECD
Thematic Review. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development.
444. Oketch, M.O. (2004). The corporate stake in social cohesion. Corporate
Governance, 4(3), 5-19.
445. Ones, D.S. and Dilchert, S. (2012). Environmental sustainability at work: A call to action. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5(4),
444-466.
446. O'Reilly, C.A. and 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.
228
447. Organ, D.W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behaviour: The good
soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
448. Organ, D.W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational
citizenship behaviour. In B.M. Staw & L.L. Cummings (Eds.),
Research in organizational behaviour (Vol. 12, pp. 43-72). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
449. Organ, D.W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behaviour: It's
construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10(2), 85-97.
450. Organ, D.W. and Konovsky, M. (1989). Cognitive vs. affective
determinants of organizational citizenship behaviour, Journal of
Applied Psychology, 74, 157-164.
451. Organ, D.W. and Ryan, K. (1995). A meta‐analytic review of attitudinal
and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behaviour.
Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 775-802.
452. Organ, D.W., Podsakoff, P.M. and MacKenzie, S.B. (2006).
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour: Its Nature, Antecedents, and
Consequences. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
453. Oshagbemi, T. (1999). Overall job satisfaction: how good are single
versus multiple-item measures? Journal of Managerial Psychology,
14(5), 388-403.
454. Osterhus, T.L. (1997). Pro-social consumer influence strategies: when
and how do they work? The Journal of Marketing, 61(4), 16-29.
455. Paine, J.B. and Organ, D.W. (2000). The cultural matrix of organizational citizenship behaviour: Some preliminary conceptual and
empirical observations. Human resource Management Review, 10(1),
45-59.
456. Pallant, J.F. (2011). SPSS Survival Manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (4th ed.). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
457. Panatik, S.A. (2010). Impact of work design on psychological work reactions and job performance among technical workers: A
longitudinal study in Malaysia. Thesis, Doctor of Philosophy (PhD).
University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
229
458. Parahoo, K. (1997). Nursing research, principles, process and issues.
Macmillan.
459. Park, S.Y. and Levy, S.E. (2014). Corporate social responsibility:
perspectives of hotel frontline employees. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(3), 332-348.
460. Parker, C.P., Baltes, B.B., Young, S.A., Huff, J.W., Altmann, R.A.,
Lacost, H.A. and Roberts, J.E. (2003). Relationships between
psychological climate perceptions and work outcomes: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 24, 389-416.
461. Parsons, A. (2014). Literature review on social responsibility in higher
education. School of Public Administration, University of Victoria.
462. Peloza, J. (2009). The challenge of measuring financial impacts from
investments in corporate social performance. Journal of Management,
35(6), 1518-1541.
463. Pepe, M. (2010). The impact of extrinsic motivational dissatisfiers on employee level of job satisfaction and commitment resulting in the
intent to turnover. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 8(9),
99-107.
464. Perks, K.J., Farache, F., Shukla, P., Berry, A. (2013). Communicating
responsibility-practicing irresponsibility in CSR advertisements.
Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1881-1888.
465. Perrin, T. (2009). Employee engagement underpins business
transformation. Retrieved from
www.towersperrin.com/tp/getwebcachedoc?
466. Peterson, D.K. (2004). The relationship between perceptions of
corporate citizenship and organizational commitment. Business &
Society, 43(3), 296-319.
467. Peterson, R.A. (2000). Constructing Effective Questionnaires. London:
Sage.
468. Pfeffer, J. (1983). Organizational demography, In L.L. Cummings and B.M. Staw (eds.), Research in Organizational Behaviour (Vol. 5, pp.
299-357). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
230
469. Pfeffer, J. (2010). Power: Why some people have it and some people
don’t. HarperCollins Publishers, New York.
470. Pinkston, T. and Carroll, A. (1996). A retrospective examination of
CSR orientations. Have they changed? Journal of Business Ethics,
15(2), 199-207.
471. Pinnington, A., Macklin, R. and Campbell, T. (2007). Human Resource
Management: Ethics and Employment, Oxford University Press.
472. Pivato, S., Misani, N. and Tencati, A. (2008). The impact of corporate social responsibility on consumer trust: the case of organic food.
Business ethics: A European Review, 17(1), 3-12.
473. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B. and Bachrach, D.G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviours: A critical review of the
theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research.
Journal of Management, 26, 513-563.
474. Porter, L.W., Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T. and Boulian, P.V. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among
psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(5), 603-609.
475. Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility.
Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-92.
476. Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2011). Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62-77.
477. Post, J.E., Lawrence, A.T. and Weber, J. (2002). Business and society:
Corporate strategy, public, ethics (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
478. Pratt, M.G. (1998). To be or not to be”: Central question in
organizational identification. D.A. Whetten and P.C. Godfrey (Eds).
Identity in Organizations: Building Theory through Conversation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
479. Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for
estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 717-731.
231
480. Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2008). Contemporary approaches to
assessing mediation in communication research. In A.F. Hayes, M.D. Slater and L.B. Snyder (Eds.), The Sage sourcebook of advanced data
analysis methods for communication research. pp. 13-54, Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
481. Preston, L.E. (1975). Corporation and society: The search for a
paradigm. Journal of Economic Literature, 13(2), 434-453.
482. Quazi, A.M. and O'Brien, D. (2000). An empirical test of a cross-national model of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business
Ethics, 25(1), 33-51.
483. Rafferty A.M., Maben J., West E. and Robinson D. (2005). What makes a good employer? Issue Paper 3 for International Council of Nurses
Geneva.
484. Rahman, M.M, Rashid, M.M. and Haque, R.M. (2014). Corporate
Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: A Case Study of Jamuna Bank Limited, Bangladesh. Asian Journal of Finance &
Accounting, 6(2), 351-361.
485. Rapid Business Intelligence Success, (2012). Retrieved from http://www.rapid-business-intelligence-success.com/what-is-business-
intelligence.html.
486. Ravasi, D. and Phillips, N. (2011). Strategies of alignment organizational identity management and strategic change at Bang &
Olufsen. Strategic Organization, 9(2), 103-135.
487. Reichers, A.E. (1985). A review and reconceptualization of organizational commitment. Academy of Management Review, 10(3),
465-476.
488. Reilly, P. and Brown, D. (2008). Employee engagement: What is the relationship with reward management. World at Work Journal, 17(4),
37-49.
489. Reputation Institute (2010). Why CSR matters to corporate reputation. Reputation Intelligence, 2(1).
232
490. Rexhepi, G., Kurtishi, S. and Bexheti, G. (2013). Corporate social
responsibility (CSR) and innovation - The drivers of business growth? Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 75(1), 532-541.
491. Riantoputra, C.D. (2010). Know thyself: Examining factors that
influence the activation of organizational identity concepts in top managers' minds. Group & Organization Management, 35, 8-38.
492. Rich, B.L., Lepine, J.A. and Crawford, E.R. (2010). Job engagement:
Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617-635.
493. Richman, A. (2006). Everyone wants an engaged workforce how can
you create it?’ Workspan, 49, 36-39.
494. Rigdon, E.E. (2012). Rethinking partial least squares path modeling: in
praise of simple methods. Long Range Planning, 45(5-6), 341-358.
495. Riketta, M. (2002). Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: a meta analysis. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 23,
257-266.
496. Riketta, M. (2005). Organizational identification: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 66(2), 358-384.
497. Riordan, C.M., Gatewood, R.D. and Bill, J.B. (1997). Corporate image:
Employee reactions and implications for managing corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(4), 401-412.
498. Robertson-Smith, G. and Markwick, C. (2009). Employee Engagement
A review of current thinking, Institute for Employment Studies,
University of Sussex Campus Brighton, UK.
499. Robinson, D., Perryman, S. and Hayday, S. (2004). The drivers of
employee engagement. Report-Institute for Employment Studies.
500. Robinson, S.L. (1996). Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 574-599.
501. Rodrigo, P. and 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.
233
502. Rogers, B. (2013). Too many feelings and not enough facts in CSR
strategy. Forbes,
503. Roscoe, J.T. (1975). Fundamental Research Statistics for the
Behavioural Sciences. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.
504. Rossi, A., (2014). How American Universities Turned into Corporations. Time. Retrieved from: http://time.com/108311/how-
american-universities-areripping- off-your-education.
505. Rousseau, D.M., Sitkin, S.B., Burt, R.S. and Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of
Management Review, 23(3), 393-404.
506. Ruane, J.M. (2005). Essentials of Research Methods: A guide to social sciences research. London: Blackwell Publishing.
507. 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.
Personal Psychology, 66(4), 895-933.
508. Rupp D.E., Wright P.M., Aryee S. and Luo Y. (2011). Special issue on ‘behavioural ethics, organizational justice, and social responsibility
across contexts’. Management and Organization Review, 7, 185-186.
509. Rupp, D.E. and Mallory, D.B. (2015). Corporate Social Responsibility: Psychological, Person-Centric, and Progressing. Annual Review of
Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behaviour, 2(1), 211-
236.
510. Rupp, D.E., Baldwin, A.M. and Bashshur, M.R. (2006). Using developmental assessment centers to foster workplace fairness.
Psychologist-Manager Journal, 9, 145-170.
511. Rupp, D.E., Ganapathi, J., Aguilera, R.V. and Williams, C.A. (2006). Employee reactions to corporate social responsibility: An
organizational justice framework. Journal of organizational Behaviour,
27(4), 537-543.
234
512. Rupp, D.E., Skarlicki, D. and Shao, R. (2013). The Psychology of
Corporate Social Responsibility and Humanitarian Work: A Person‐Centric Perspective. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6(4),
361-368.
513. Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 25(1), 54-67.
514. Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.
American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
515. Saari, L. and Judge, T. (2004). Employee attitudes and job satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 43(4), 395-407.
516. Sageer, A., Rafat, S., Agarwal, P. (2012). Identification of Variables
Affecting Employee Satisfaction and their Impact on the Organization. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 5(1), 32-39.
517. Saks, A.M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee
engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(7), 600-619.
518. Salant, P. and Dillman, D.A. (1994). How to conduct your own survey.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
519. Saleh, M. (2009). Corporate social responsibility disclosure in an emerging market: A longitudinal analysis approach. International
Business Research, 2(1), 131-141.
520. Samy, M., Odemilin, G. and Bampton, R. (2010). Corporate social responsibility: a strategy for sustainable business success. An analysis
of 20 selected British companies. Corporate Governance: The
International Journal of Business in Society, 10(2), 203-217.
521. Santhosh, M. and Baral, R. (2015). A Conceptual Framework for Exploring the Impacts of Corporate Social Responsibility on Employee
Attitudes and Behaviour. Journal of Human Values, 21(2), 127-136.
522. Santos, C.P. and Rossi, C.A.V. (2002). The impact of complaint handling on consumer's trust and loyalty in the context of relational
services exchanges. Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy
Conference, Braga, Portugal, 31.
235
523. Saunders, M. (2003). Research Methods for Business Students. South
Africa: Pearson Education
524. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2003). Research methods for
business students, 3rd, Pearson Education, England.
525. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2007) Research Methods for Business Students (4th edn). Harlow: FT Prentice Hall.
526. Schappe, S.P. (1998). The influences of job satisfaction and
organizational commitment and fairness perception on organizational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Psychology, 132(3), 277-290.
527. Schaufeli, W.B. and Bakker, A.B. (2010). Defining and measuring
work engagement: Bringing clarity to the concept. Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research, 10-24. New York, NY,
US: Psychology Press, viii, 209 pp.
528. Scherer, A.G. and Smid, M. (2000). The downward spiral and the U.S. model business principles - Why MNEs should take responsibility for
improvement of worldwide social and environmental conditions.
Management International Review, 40, 351-371.
529. Schmidt, S.W. (2007). The relationship between satisfaction with workplace training and overall job satisfaction. Human Resource
Development Quarterly, 18(4), 481-498.
530. Schoorman, F.D., Mayer, R.C. and Davis, J.H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of
Management Review, 32(2), 344-354.
531. Schreiber, J.B., Nora, A., Stage, F.K., Barlow, E.A. and King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor
analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6),
323-338.
532. Sekaran, U. (2000). Research Methods for Business: A Skill -Building
Approach. (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
533. Sekaran, U. (2003). Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach. 4th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
236
534. Sekaran, U. (2006). Research methods for business: A skill building
approach. John Wiley & Sons.
535. Senasu, K. and Virakul, B. (2015). The Effects of Perceived CSR and
Implemented CSR on Job-related Outcomes: An HR Perspective.
Journal of East-West Business, 21(1), 41-66.
536. Sethi, S.P. (1975). Dimensions of Corporate Social Responsibility.
California Management Review, 17(3), 58-64.
537. Settoon, R.P., Bennett, N. and Liden, R.C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: perceived organizational support: Leader-member
exchange and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology,
81(3), 219-227.
538. Shabbir, M.S., Ahmed, K., Lawler, J.J. and Shahbaz, M. (2011). Affect
of working environment on job satisfaction in Pakistan. World Review
of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 7(1),
52-61.
539. Shaffer, J. (2004). Measurable payoff: How employee engagement can
boost performance and profits. Communications World, 21(4), 22-27.
540. Shaw, K. (2005). An engagement strategy process for communicators. Strategic Communication Management, 9(3), 26-29.
541. Sheldon, O. (1923). The Philosophy of Management. Pitman Publishing Corp., London.
542. Shen, J. and Jiuhua Zhu, C. (2011). Effects of socially responsible
human resource management on employee organizational commitment.
The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(15), 3020-3035.
543. Shields, P.M. and Rangarajan, N. (2013). A playbook for research
methods: Integrating conceptual frameworks and project management. New Forums Press.
544. Shuck, B. and Wollard, K. (2010). Employee engagement and HRD: A
seminal review of the foundations. Human Resource Development Review, 9(1), 89-110.
237
545. Shuck, M.B., Rocco, T.S. and Albornoz, C.A. (2011). Exploring
employee engagement from the employee perspective: implications for HRD. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35(4), 300-325.
546. Siddique, M. (2014). CSR Practices and Competitive Advantages:
A Descriptive Study. American Journal of Trade and Policy, 1(3), 109-116.
547. Sillince, J.A. and Brown, A.D. (2009). Multiple organizational
identities and legitimacy: The rhetoric of police websites. Human Relations, 62(12), 1829-1856.
548. Silverman, D. (2013). What counts as qualitative research? Some
cautionary comments. Qualitative Sociology Review, 9(2), 48-55.
549. Sims, R.L. and Kroeck, K.G. (1995). The influence of ethical fit on
employee satisfaction, commitment and turnover. Journal of Business
Ethics, 13(12), 939-947.
550. Singh, A.P. and Paithankar, S. (2015). Analysis of the effects of corporate social responsibility activities on employee satisfaction and
commitment. SIMS Journal of Management Research, 1, 34-40.
551. Singhapakdi, A., Lee, D.J., Sirgy, M.J. and Senasu, K. (2015). The impact of incongruity between an organization's CSR orientation and
its employees' CSR orientation on employees' quality of work life.
Journal of Business Research, 68(1), 60-66.
552. Singhapakdi, A., Vitell, S.J. and Kraft, K.L. (1996). Moral intensity and
ethical decision-making of marketing professionals. Journal of
Business Research, 36(3), 245-255.
553. Singleton, R.A. and Straits, B.C. (2005). Approaches to social research
(4th Ed.). Oxford University Press.
554. Skudiene, V. and Auruskeviciene, V. (2012). The contribution of corporate social responsibility to internal employee motivation. Baltic
Journal of Management, 7(1), 49-67.
555. Smidts, A., Pruyn, A.T.H. and Van Riel, C.B. (2001). The impact of employee communication and perceived external prestige on
organizational identification. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5),
1051-1062.
238
556. Smith, A.D. (2007). Making the Case for the Competitive Advantage
of Corporate Social Responsibility. Business Strategy Series, 8(3), 186-195.
557. Smith, C. (2003). Corporate Social Responsibility: Whether or How?
California Management Review, 45(4), 52-76.
558. Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W. and Near, J.P. (1983). Organizational
citizenship behaviour: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 68(4), 655-663.
559. Smith, P.A.C. and Sharicz, C. (2011). The shift needed for
sustainability, The Learning Organization, 18(1), 73-86.
560. Smith, V. and Langford, P. (2011). Responsible or redundant? Engaging the workforce through corporate social responsibility.
Australian Journal of Management, 36(3), 425-447.
561. Smith, W.J., Wokutch, R.E., Harrington, K.V. and Dennis B.S. (2001). An examination of the influence of diversity and stakeholder role on
corporate social orientation. Business and Society, 40,
266-294.
562. Snape, E., Redman, T. and Chen, A.W. (2000). Commitment to the union: a survey of research and the implications for industrial relations
and trade unions. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2(3),
205-230.
563. Sobel, M.E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects
in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290-312.
564. Song, H.J., Lee, H.M., Lee, C.K. and Song, S.J. (2015). The Role of CSR and Responsible Gambling in Casino Employees' Organizational
Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Customer Orientation. Asia Pacific
Journal of Tourism Research, 20(4), 455-471.
565. Spector, P.E. (1997). Job Satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes,
and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
566. Stensaker, B. (2007). The relationship between branding and organisational change. Higher Education Management and Policy,
19(1), 1-17.
239
567. Story, J. and Neves, P. (2015). When corporate social responsibility
(CSR) increases performance: exploring the role of intrinsic and extrinsic CSR attribution. Business Ethics: A European Review, 24(2),
111-124.
568. Suh, Y.J. (2016). The Role of Relational Social Capital and Communication in the Relationship between CSR and Employee
Attitudes a Multilevel Analysis. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 23(4), 410-423.
569. Sullivan, W.M. (2003). The University as Citizen: Institutional Identity and Social Responsibility, A Special Report. The Civic Arts Review,
16(1), 1-14.
570. Surroca, J., Tribo, J.A. and Waddock, S. (2010). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible
resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 463-490.
571. Suter, W.N. (2006). Introduction to educational research: a critical thinking approach, SAGE Publications.
572. Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics
(4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
573. Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics.
Pearson.
574. Tahseen, N. and Akhtar, M.S. (2016). Impact of Organizational Justice on Citizenship Behaviour: Mediating Role of Faculty Trust. Pakistan
Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 10(1), 104-121.
575. Tajfel, H. (1972). Social categorization. English manuscript of ‘La catégorisationsociale.’ In S. Moscovici (Ed.), Introduction à la
Psychologie Sociale (pp. 272-302). Paris: Larousse.
576. Tajfel, H. (1978). Interindividual behaviour and intergroup behaviour. Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology
of intergroup relations, European monographs in social psychology,
(14), London: Academic Press.
577. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories: Studies in
social psychology. Cambridge University Press Archive.
240
578. Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup
conflict. In W.G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations, (pp, 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
579. Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1985). The social identity theory of
intergroup behaviour. In Worchel, S. andAustin, W.G. (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations (7-24). Nelson Hall, Chicago, IL.
580. Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1986). The social identity theory of
intergroup behaviour. In S. Worchel& W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
581. Tan, H.H. and Tan, C.S. (2000). Toward the differentiation of trust in
supervisor and trust in organization. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 126(2), 241-260.
582. Tepper, B.J. and Taylor, E.C. (2003). Relationships among supervisors'
and subordinates' procedural justice perceptions and organizational
citizenship behaviours. Academy of Management Journal, 46(1), 97-105.
583. Terre- Blanche, M., Durrheim, K. and Painter, D. (2006). Research in
practice: Applied methods for the social sciences. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
584. Tett, R.P. and Meyer, J.P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational
commitment, turnover intention, and turnover: path analyses based on
meta‐analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46(2), 259-293.
585. Thomas, G. and Nowak, M. (2006): Corporate Social Responsibility: A
definition. Graduate School of Business, Curtin University of Technology, Working Paper Series, December 2006, No. 62, 1-20.
586. Trevino, L.K. and Nelson, K.A. (2011). Managing Business Ethics:
Straight Talk about How to Do It Right, 4th ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY. Trials, 15(5), 36-38.
587. Triandis, H.C., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M.J., Asai, M. and Lucca, N.
(1988). Individualism and collectivism: cross-cultural perspectives on self-in group relationships. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 54, 323-338.
241
588. Tsai, Y.H., Joe, S.W., Lin, C.P., Wang, R.T. (2014). Modeling job
pursuit intention: moderating mechanisms of socio-environmental consciousness. The Journal of Business Ethics, 125, 287-298.
589. Tse, T. (2011). Shareholder and stakeholder theory: After the financial
crisis. Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, 3(1), 51-63.
590. Turban, D.B. and Greening, D.W. (1997). Corporate Social
Performance and Organizational Attractiveness to Prospective
Employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 658-672.
591. Turker, D. (2008). Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility: a scale
development study. Journal of Business Ethics, 85 (4), 411-427.
592. Turker, D. (2009). How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(2),
189-204.
593. Turner, J.C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behaviour. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in
group processes: Theory and research (pp. 7-122). Greenwich, CT:
JAI.
594. Turner, J.C., Hogg, M.A., Oakes, P.J., Reicher, S.D. and Wetherell, M.S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization
theory. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
595. Tyler, T.R. (1999). Why people cooperate with organizations: An identity-based perspective. Sutton, Robert I. (Ed); Staw, Barry M. (Ed).
(1999). Research in organizational behaviour, Vol. 21, (pp. 201-246).
US: Elsevier Science/JAI Press, xii, 331 pp.
596. Tyler, T.R. and Blader, S.L. (2003). The group engagement model:
Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behaviour.
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(4), 349-361.
597. Tziner, A. (2013). Corporative social responsibility (CSR) activities in
the workplace: A comment on Aguinis and Glavas (2013). Journal of
Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(2), 91-93.
242
598. Tziner, A., Bar, Y., Oren, L. and Kadosh, G. (2011). Corporate social
responsibility, organizational justice and job satisfaction: How do they interrelate, if at all? Revista de Psicología del Trabajoy de las
Organizaciones, 27(1), 67-72.
599. UNESCO (1991). The Role of Higher Education in Society: Quality and Pertinence. 2nd UNESCO- Non-Governmental Organizations
Collective Consultation on Higher Education.
600. Uygur, A. (2004). Örgütsel Bağlılık ve Đşgören Performansı, Türkiye Vakıflar Bankası Ankara, Đstanbul, Đzmir Đli Şubelerine Yönelik Alan
Araştırması, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Doktora Tezi, Ankara.
601. Valentine, S. and Fleischman, G. (2008). Ethics programs, perceived corporate social responsibility and job satisfaction. Journal of Business
Ethics, 77(2), 159-172.
602. Van Dick, R., Christ, O., Stellmacher, J., Wagner, U., Ahlswede, O.,
Grubba, C. and Tissington, P.A. (2004). Should I stay or should I go? Explaining turnover intentions with organizational identification and
job satisfaction. British Journal of Management, 15(4), 351-360.
603. Van Dick, R., Grojean, M.W., Christ, O. and Wieseke, J. (2006). Identity and the extra mile: Relationships between organizational
identification and organizational citizenship behaviour. British Journal
of Management, 17(4), 283-301.
604. Van Dick, R., Ullrich, J., Tissington, P. A. (2006). Working under a
black cloud: How to sustain an organizational identification after a
Merger. British Journal of Management, 17, 69-79.
605. Van Dick, R., Wagner, R.U. and Lemmer, G. (2004). Research note:
The winds of change: Multi Identifications in the case of organizational
merger. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,
13(2), 121-138.
606. Van Dyne, L., Graham, J.W. and Dienesch, R.M. (1994).
Organizational citizenship behaviour: Construct redefinition,
measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 765-802.
243
607. Van Knippenberg, D. and Van Schie, E.C.M. (2000). Foci and
correlates of organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 137-147.
608. Vandenberg, R.J. and Lance, C.E. (1992). Examining the causal order
of job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of Management, 18(1), 153-167.
609. Vandenberghe, C. and Tremblay, M. (2008). The role of pay
satisfaction and organizational commitment in turnover intentions: A two-sample study. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22(3),
275-286.
610. Vandyne, L., Cummings, L.L. and Parks, J.M. (1995). Extra-role behaviours-in pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (a bridge over
muddied waters). Research in Organizational Behaviour: An Annual
Series of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews, 17, 215-285.
611. Vanhala, M. and Ritala, P. (2016). HRM practices, impersonal trust and organizational innovativeness. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
31(1), 95-109.
612. Vazirani, N. (2007). Employee engagement. SIES College of Management Studies, Working Paper Series.
613. Vilanova, M., Lozano, J.M. and Arenas, D. (2008) Exploring the nature
of the relationship between CSR and competitiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 57-69.
614. Viswesvaran, C., Deshpande, S.P. and Joseph, J. (1998). Job
satisfaction as a function of top management support for ethical behaviour: A study of Indian managers. Journal of Business Ethics,
17(4), 365-371.
615. Viswesvaran, C., Deshpande, S.P. and Milman, C. (2004). The effect of corporate social responsibility on employee counterproductive
behaviour. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal,
5(4), 5-12.
616. Viteles, M.S. (1932). The Industrial psychology. New York: Norton.
244
617. Vitell, S.J. and Davis, D.L. (1990). The relationship between ethics and
job satisfaction: An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(6), 489-494.
618. Vlachos P.A., Panagopoulos N.G. and Rapp A.A. (2013). Feeling good
by doing good: employee CSR-induced attributions, job satisfaction, and the role of charismatic leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 118,
577-588.
619. Vlachos, P.A., Panagopoulos, N.G. and Rapp, A.A. (2014). Employee judgments of and behaviours toward corporate social responsibility: A
multi‐study investigation of direct, cascading, and moderating effects.
Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 35(7), 990-1017.
620. Vlachos, P.A., Theotokis, A. and 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.
621. Waddock, S. (2004). Creating corporate accountability: Foundational
principles to make corporate citizenship real. Journal of Business
Ethics, 50(4), 313-327.
622. Waddock, S.A. and Graves, S.B. (1997). The corporate social
performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management
Journal, 18(4), 303-319.
623. Wahn, J. (1993). Organizational dependence and the likelihood of
complying with organizational pressures to behave unethically. Journal
of Business Ethics, 12(3), 245-251.
624. Walumbwa, F.O., Luthans, F., Avey, J.B. and Oke, A. (2011).
Retracted: Authentically leading groups: The mediating role of
collective psychological capital and trust. Journal of organizational behaviour, 32(1), 4-24.
625. Wang, Y.J., Tsai, Y.H. and Lin, C.P. (2013). Modeling the relationship
between perceived corporate citizenship and organizational commitment considering organizational trust as a moderator. Business
Ethics: A European Review, 22(2), 218-233.
245
626. Wartick, S.L. and Cochran, P.L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate
social performance model. Academy of management review, 10(4), 758-769.
627. Wat, D. and Shaffer, M.A. (2005). Equity and relationship quality
influences on organizational citizenship behaviours: The mediating role of trust in the supervisor and empowerment. Personnel Review, 34(4),
406-422.
628. WBCSD (2000). Corporate Social Responsibility: Making good business sense. World Business Council for Sustainable
Development. ISBN. 2-94-024007-8.
629. WBCSD (2002). Corporate Social Responsibility. World Business Council for Sustainable Business Development, Geneva.
630. Weber, M. (2008). The Business Case for Corporate Social
Responsibility: A Company-Level Measurement Approach for CSR.
European Management Journal, 26, 247-261.
631. Wegge, J., Schmidt, K.H., Parkes, C. and Dick, R. (2007). Taking a
sickie: Job satisfaction and job involvement as interactive predictors of
absenteeism in a public organization. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80(1), 77-89.
632. Welbourne, T.M. (2007). Employee Engagement: Beyond the Fad and
into the Executive Suite. Leader to Leader, 44, 45-51.
633. Weymans, W. (2010). Democracy, knowledge and critique: rethinking
European universities beyond tradition and the market. London Review
of Education, 8(2), 117-126.
634. Whitaker, D. and Wilson, L. (2007). Human capital measurement: From
insight to action. Organization Development Journal, 25(3),
59-64.
635. Whitener, E.M. (2001). Do ‘‘high-commitment’’ human resource
practices affect employee commitment? A cross-level analysis
using hierarchical linear modelling. Journal of Management, 27(5), 515-535.
246
636. Williams, L.J. and Anderson, S.E. (1991). Job satisfaction and
organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviours. Journal of Management, 17(3), 601-617.
637. Williams, M. (2001). In whom we trust: Group membership as an
affective context for trust development. Academy of Management Review, 26, 377-396.
638. Windsor, D. (2001). The future of corporate responsibility.
International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(3), 225-256.
639. Wong, I.A. and Gao, J.H. (2014). Exploring the direct and indirect
effects of CSR on organizational commitment The mediating role of
corporate culture. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(4), 500-525.
640. Wood, D.J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of
Management Review, 16, 691-718.
641. Wood, D.J. and Jones, R.E. (1995). Stakeholder mismatching: A theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social
performance. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3,
229-267.
642. Wright, T. (2010). University presidents' conceptualizations of
sustainability in higher education. International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, 11(1), 61-73.
643. Yee, J.L. and Niemeier, D. (1996). Advantages and disadvantages:
longitudinal vs. repeated cross-section surveys. Project Battelle, 94,
16-22.
644. Yin, K. (2003). Case study research: design and methods, 3rd, SAGE
publications, Inc., California.
645. You, C.S., Huang, C.C., Wang, H.B., Liu, K.N., Un, C.H. and Tseng, J.S. (2013). The relationship between corporate social Responsibility,
job satisfaction and Organizational commitment. International Journal
of Organizational Innovation, 5(4), 65-77.
646. Zajac, E.J. and Westphal, J.D. (2004). The social construction of market
value: Institutionalization and learning perspectives on stock market
re-actions. American Sociological Review, 69(3), 433-457.
247
647. Zeinabadi, H. (2010). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment
as antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) of teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 5, 998-1003.
648. Zhang, M., Di Fan, D. and Zhu, C.J. (2014). High-performance work
systems, corporate social performance and employee outcomes: Exploring the missing links. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(3),
423-435.
649. Zheng, D. (2010). The Impact of Employees' Perception of Corporate Social Responsibility on Job Attitudes and Behaviours: A Study in
China. Doctoral dissertation, Singapore Management University.
650. Zheng, R. (2011). Does Social Responsible Investment Really Work? An Empirical Study on Chinese Case. Working Paper.
651. Zientara, P., Kujawski, L. and Bohdanowicz-Godfrey, P. (2015).
Corporate social responsibility and employee attitudes: evidence from
a study of Polish hotel employees. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(6), 859-880.
652. Zikmund, W.G. (2003). Exploring Marketing Research. Cincinnati,
Ohio: Thomson/South Western.
248
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Dear Sir/Madam!
I am a PhD scholar, working on a PhD research titled “The Impact of Employees’
Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility on Employees’ Outcomes”. This
questionnaire is designed to elicit your responses regarding various job aspects. Your true and
fair responses will assist me in moving a step further. You are kindly requested to answer all
the questions carefully. It is to declare that your anonymity will be ensured by keeping your
responses confidential and using them for research purpose only.
Thanking you in anticipation for your co-operation and precious time.
Rashid Ahmad
Research Scholar,
National College of Business Administration & Economics
Lahore
Contact: [email protected]
Job Designation RA/TA Lecturer Assistant Professor
Associate Professor Professor Other (if any)
Age (Years) Below 30 31-40 41-50 51-60 Above 60
Gender Male Female
Marital Status Single Married
Qualification Master MS PhD PostDoc
Job Category Permanent Contractual Other (Please specify)……………
Organization Name
Email/Contact (optional)
249
Please read the following before giving answers.
Please try to be realistic in your answer.
Use the following rating scale to answer the questions given below
1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree
Please encircle only one number from 1-5 that indicates
your disagreement or agreement
Str
on
gly
Dis
ag
ree
Dis
ag
ree
Ne
utr
al
Ag
ree
Str
on
gly
Ag
ree
1.a) My university has a procedure in place to respond to
every student’s complaint. 1 2 3 4 5
b) My university continually improves the quality of
education. 1 2 3 4 5
c) My university use student’s satisfaction as an
indicator of university’ performance. 1 2 3 4 5
d) University has been successful in maximizing its
profits. 1 2 3 4 5
e) My university strives to lower its operating costs. 1 2 3 4 5
f) My University closely monitors teachers'
productivity. 1 2 3 4 5
g) Top management establishes long-term strategies
for the university. 1 2 3 4 5
2.a) Faculty members are informed about relevant
environmental laws. 1 2 3 4 5
b) All our academic degree programs meet legal
standards given by HEC. 1 2 3 4 5
c) All the contractual obligations are always honored
by my university. 1 2 3 4 5
d) The management of my university trys to comply
with the law. 1 2 3 4 5
e) My university seeks to comply with all laws
regulating to hiring and employee benefits. 1 2 3 4 5
f) We have programs that encourage the diversity of
our workplace (in terms of age, gender, or race). 1 2 3 4 5
g)
Internal policies of my university prevent
discrimination in employees’ compensation and
promotion.
1 2 3 4 5
3.a) My university has a comprehensive code of conduct
including students and employees. 1 2 3 4 5
b) Faculty members of my universiy follow
professional standards. 1 2 3 4 5
c)
Top management of my university monitors the
potential negative impacts of our activities on our
community.
1 2 3 4 5
d) We are recognized as a trustworthy University. 1 2 3 4 5
e)
Fairness toward co-workers and business partners is
an integral part of our university's employee
evaluation process.
1 2 3 4 5
250
Please encircle only one number from 1-5 that indicates
your disagreement or agreement
Str
on
gly
Dis
ag
ree
Dis
ag
ree
Ne
utr
al
Ag
ree
Str
on
gly
Ag
ree
f)
My university has a confidential procedure in place
for employees to report any misconduct at work (such
as stealing or sexual harassment).
1 2 3 4 5
g) Our teachers and all other employees are required to
provide full and accurate information to students. 1 2 3 4 5
4.a) My university tries to improve the image of its
graduates. 1 2 3 4 5
b) My university tries to improve perception of its
business conduct. 1 2 3 4 5
c) My university tries to improve its educational
image. 1 2 3 4 5
d) My university tries to help the poors. 1 2 3 4 5
e) My university tries to contribute toward betterment
of the local community. 1 2 3 4 5
f) My university tries to fulfill its social
responsibilities. 1 2 3 4 5
g) The university tries to accommodate governmental
requests. 1 2 3 4 5
h) The university tries to accommodate requests for
NGOs. 1 2 3 4 5
5.a) All in all, I am satisfied with my job. 1 2 3 4 5
b) In general, I like working at my university. 1 2 3 4 5
c) In general, I like my job. 1 2 3 4 5
6.a) My university tries to meet my expectations. 1 2 3 4 5
b) My university is committed to the use of proper
management practices. 1 2 3 4 5
c) My university is committed to understand
employees. 1 2 3 4 5
d) Overall, my university is a responsible
organization. 1 2 3 4 5
e) I trust my university. 1 2 3 4 5
7.a) I feel like ‘part of the family’ at this university. 1 2 3 4 5
b) I feel ‘emotionally attached’ to this university. 1 2 3 4 5
c) This university has a great deal of personal meaning
for me. 1 2 3 4 5
d) I feel a strong sense of belonging to this university. 1 2 3 4 5
251
Please encircle only one number from 1-5 that indicates
your disagreement or agreement
Str
on
gly
Dis
ag
ree
Dis
ag
ree
Ne
utr
al
Ag
ree
Str
on
gly
Ag
ree
e) It would be very hard for me to leave this university
right now, even if I wanted to. 1 2 3 4 5
f) Right now, staying with this university is a matter of
necessary as much as desired. 1 2 3 4 5
g) I feel that I have too few options to consider leaving
this university. 1 2 3 4 5
h)
One of the few serious consequences of leaving this
university would be the scarcity of available
employment alternatives.
1 2 3 4 5
8. a) When someone criticizes my university, it feels like
a personal insult to me. 1 2 3 4 5
b) I am very interested in what others think about my
university. 1 2 3 4 5
c) When I talk about my university, I usually say ‘we’
rather than ‘they’. 1 2 3 4 5
d) When someone praises this university, I feel like a
personal compliment. 1 2 3 4 5
e) If a story in the media criticized this university, I
would feel embarrassed. 1 2 3 4 51
9.a) I really “throw” myself into my job/teaching. 1 2 3 4 5
b) Sometimes, I am so into my job/work that I lose
track of time. 1 2 3 4 5
c) This job is all consuming; I am totally into it. 1 2 3 4 5
d) My mind often wanders and I think of other things
when doing my job/teaching. 1 2 3 4 5
e) I am highly engaged in my job. 1 2 3 4 5
10.a) Being a member of this university is very
captivating/attractive. 1 2 3 4 5
b) One of the most exciting things for me is getting
involved with things happening in this university. 1 2 3 4 5
c) I am really not into the “goings-on” in this
university. 1 2 3 4 5
d) Being a member of this university makes/keeps me
“alive.” 1 2 3 4 5
e) Being a member of this organization is
exhilarating/exciting for me. 1 2 3 4 5
f) I am highly engaged in this university. 1 2 3 4 5
11.a) I willingly give my time to help others who have
work-related problems. 1 2 3 4 5
b) I adjust my work schedule to accommodate other
employees’ requests for time off. 1 2 3 4 5
252
Please encircle only one number from 1-5 that indicates
your disagreement or agreement
Str
on
gly
Dis
ag
ree
Dis
ag
ree
Ne
utr
al
Ag
ree
Str
on
gly
Ag
ree
c) I give up time to help others who have work or non-
work problems. 1 2 3 4 5
d) I assist others with their duties. 1 2 3 4 5
12. a) I attend functions that are not compulsary but that
help boosting university’ image. 1 2 3 4 5
b) I offer ideas to improve the functioning of my
university. 1 2 3 4 5
c) I take action to protect the university from potential
problems. 1 2 3 4 5
d) I defend my university when other employees
criticize it. 1 2 3 4 5
Thank You for Your Precious Time
253
APPENDIX-A:
177- HEC RECOGNIZED UNIVERSITIES AND
DEGREE AWARDING INSTITUTIONS
PUBLIC SECTOR UNIVERSITIES/DEGREE AWARDING INSTITUTIONS
Universities/DAIs chartered by the Government of Pakistan
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Air University, Islamabad Islamabad www.au.edu.pk
2 Allama Iqbal Open University,
Islamabad (AIOU) Islamabad www.aiou.edu.pk
3 Bahria University, Islamabad Islamabad www.bahria.edu.pk
4 COMSATS Institute of Information
Technology, Islamabad Islamabad www.ciit.edu.pk
5 Dawood University of Engineering &
Technology, Karachi Karachi www.dcet.edu.pk
6 Federal Urdu University of Arts, Sciences
& Technology, Islamabad Islamabad www.fuuast.edu.pk
7 Institute of Space Technology,
Islamabad (IST) Islamabad www.ist.edu.pk
8 International Islamic University,
Islamabad Islamabad www.iiu.edu.pk
9 Karakurum International University,
Gilgit, Gilgit Baltistan Gilgit www.kiu.edu.pk
10 National College of Arts,
Lahore (NCA) Lahore www.nca.edu.pk
11 National Defense University,
Islamabad (NDU) Islamabad www.ndu.edu.pk
12 National Textile University,
Faisalabad Faisalabad www.ntu.edu.pk
13 National University of Modern
Languages, Islamabad (NUML) Islamabad www.numl.edu.pk
14
National University of Sciences &
Technology, Rawalpindi/ Islamabad
(NUST)
Islamabad www.nust.edu.pk
15 National University of Medical Sciences,
Islamabad Islamabad under construction
16 NFC Institute of Engineering &
Technology, Multan Multan www.nfciet.edu.pk
17 Pakistan Institute of Development
Economics (PIDE), Islamabad Islamabad www.pide.org.pk
254
18 Pakistan Institute of Engineering &
Applied Sciences, Islamabad (PIEAS) Islamabad www.pieas.edu.pk
19 Pakistan Institute of Fashion and Design,
Lahore Lahore www.pifd.edu.pk
20 Pakistan Military Academy,
Abbottabad (PMA) Abbottabad Not Available
21 Pakistan Naval Academy, Karachi Karachi www.paknavy.gov.pk
22 Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Medical
University, Islamabad Islamabad
23 Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad Islamabad www.qau.edu.pk
24 University of FATA, Kohat Kohat
25 Virtual University of Pakistan, Lahore Lahore www.vu.edu.pk
Universities/DAIs chartered by Government of the Punjab
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan Multan www.bzu.edu.pk
2 Fatima Jinnah Women University,
Rawalpindi Rawalpindi www.fjwu.edu.pk
3 Government College University,
Faisalabad Faisalabad www.gcuf.edu.pk
4 Government College University, Lahore Lahore www.gcu.edu.pk
5 Government College for Women
University, Faisalabad Faisalabad www.gcuf.edu.pk
6 Ghazi University, Dera Ghazi Khan Dera Ghazi
Khan www.gudgk.edu.pk
7 Government College for Women
University, Sialkot Sialkot www.gcwus.edu.pk/
8 Government Sadiq College Women
University, Bahawalpur Bahawalpur www.gscwu.edu.pk
9 Islamia University, Bahawalpur Bahawalpur www.iub.edu.pk
10 Information Technology University of the
Punjab, Lahore Lahore www.itu.edu.pk
11 King Edward Medical University, Lahore Lahore www.kemu.edu.pk
12 Kinnaird College for Women, Lahore Lahore www.kinnaird.edu.pk
13
Khawaja Freed University of Engineering
& Information Technology, Rahim Yar
Khan
Rahim Yar
Khan Under Construction
255
14 Lahore College for Women University,
Lahore Lahore www.lcwu.edu.pk
15 Muhammad Nawaz Shareef University of
Agriculture, Multan Multan www.mnsuam.edu.pk
16 Pir Mehr Ali Shah Arid Agriculture,
University Rawalpindi Rawalpindi www.uaar.edu.pk
17 University of Agriculture, Faisalabad Faisalabad www.uaf.edu.pk
18 University of Education, Lahore Lahore www.ue.edu.pk
19 University of Engineering & Technology,
Lahore Lahore www.uet.edu.pk
20 University of Engineering & Technology,
Taxila Taxila www.uettaxila.edu.pk
21 University of Gujrat, Gujrat Gujrat www.uog.edu.pk
22 University of Health Sciences, Lahore Lahore www.uhs.edu.pk
23 University of Sargodha, Sargodha Sargodha www.uos.edu.pk
24 University of the Punjab, Lahore Lahore www.pu.edu.pk
25 University of Veterinary & Animal
Sciences, Lahore Lahore www.uvas.edu.pk
26 The Women University, Multan Multan www.wum.edu.pk
27 Muhammad Nawaz Sharif University of
Engineering & Technology, Multan Multan www.uet.edu.pk/mns
Universities/DAIs chartered by Government of Sindh
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Benazir Bhutto Shaheed University Lyari,
Karachi Karachi www.bbsul.edu.pk
2 DOW University of Health Sciences,
Karachi Karachi www.duhs.edu.pk
3 Gambat Institute of Medical Sciences,
Khairpur Khairpur Under construction
4 Institute of Business Administration,
Karachi Karachi www.iba.edu.pk
5 Jinnah Sindh Medical University Karachi www.jsmu.edu.pk
6 Liaquat University of Medical and Health
Sciences, Jamshoro Sindh. Jamshoro www.lumhs.edu.pk
7 Mehran University of Engineering &
Technology, Jamshoro Jamshoro www.muet.edu.pk
8 NED University of Engineering &
Technology, Karachi Karachi www.neduet.edu.pk
256
9
Peoples University of Medical and Health
Sciences for Women, Nawabshah
(Shaheed Benazirabad)
Nawabshah www.pumhs.edu.pk
10 Quaid-e-Awam University of Engineering,
Sciences & Technology, Nawabshah Nawabshah www.quest.edu.pk
11 Shah Abdul Latif University, Khairpur Khairpur www.salu.edu.pk
12 Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto
Medical University, Larkana Larkana www.smbbmu.edu.pk
13 Sindh Agriculture University, Tandojam Tandojam www.sau.edu.pk
14 Sukkur Institute of Business
Administration, Sukkur Sukkur www.iba-suk.edu.pk
15 Sindh Madresatul Islam University,
Karachi Karachi www.smiu.edu.pk
16 Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University
Shaheed Benazirabad Nawabshah www.sbbusba.edu.pk
17 Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto University of
Law, Karachi Karachi www.szabul.edu.pk
18 University of Karachi, Karachi Karachi www.uok.edu.pk
19 University of Sindh, Jamshoro Jamshoro www.usindh.edu.pk
20 Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University of
Veterinary And Animal Sciences Sakrand Sakrand www.sbbuvas.edu.pk
Universities/DAIs chartered by Government of Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Abdul Wali Khan University, Mardan Mardan www.awkum.edu.pk
2 Bacha Khan University, Charsadda Charsadda www.bkuc.edu.pk/
3 Frontier Women University, Peshawar Peshawar www.fwu.edu.pk
4 Gomal University, D.I. Khan D.I.Khan www.gu.edu.pk/
5 Hazara University, Dodhial, Mansehra Manshera www.hu.edu.pk/
6 Institute of Management Science,
Peshawar (IMS) Peshawar www.imsciences.edu.pk
7 Islamia College University, Peshawar Peshawar www.icp.edu.pk
8 Khyber Medical University, Peshawar Peshawar www.kmu.edu.pk
9 Kohat University of Science and
Technology, Kohat Kohat www.kust.edu.pk
257
10 Khushal Khan Khattak University, Karak Karak Under construction
11 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agricultural
University, Peshawar Peshawar www.aup.edu.pk
12 University of Engineering & Technology,
Peshawar Peshawar www.uetpeshawar.edu.pk
13 Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University,
Sheringal, Dir Dir www.sbbu.edu.pk
14 University of Malakand, Chakdara, Dir,
Malakand Malakand www.uom.edu.pk
15 University of Peshawar, Peshawar Peshawar www.upesh.edu.pk
16 University of Science & Technology,
Bannu Bannu www.ustb.edu.pk
17 University of Swat, Swat Swat www.swatuniversity.edu.p
k/
18 University of Haripur, Haripur Haripur www.uoh.edu.pk/
19 University of Swabi Swabi www.uoswabi.edu.pk/
Universities/DAIs chartered by Government of Balochistan
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Balochistan University of Engineering &
Technology, Khuzdar Khuzdar buetk.edu.pk
2
Balochistan University of Information
Technology & Management Sciences,
Quetta
Quetta www.buitms.edu.pk
3 Lasbela University of Agriculture, Water
and Marine Sciences Lasbela www.luawms.edu.pk
4 Sardar Bahadur Khan Women University,
Quetta Quetta www.sbkwu.edu.pk
5 University of Balochistan, Quetta Quetta www.uob.edu.pk
6 University of Turbat, Turbat Turbat www.uot.edu.pk
7 University of Loralai, Loralai Loralai http://www.uoli.edu.pk/
258
Universities/DAIs chartered by Government of Azad Jammu & Kashmir
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Mirpur University of Science and
Technology (MUST), AJ&K Mirpur www.must.edu.pk
2
University of Azad Jammu & Kashmir,
Muzaffarabad, Azad Kashmir,
Muzaffarabad
Muzaffarabad www.ajku.edu.pk
3 University of Poonch, Rawalakot Rawalakot www.upr.edu.pk
4 Women University of Azad Jammu and
Kashmir Bagh Bagh under construction
5 University of Management Sciences and
Information Technology, Kotli Kotli under construction
PRIVATE SECTOR UNIVERSITIES/DEGREE AWARDING INSTITUTIONS
Universities/DAIs chartered by the Government of Pakistan
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Aga Khan University, Karachi Karachi www.aku.edu
2 Capital University of Science and
Technology, Islamabad Islamabad www.cust.edu.pk
3 Foundation University, Islamabad Islamabad www.fui.edu.pk
4 Lahore University of Management
Sciences (LUMS), Lahore Lahore www.lums.edu.pk
5 MY University, Islamabad Islamabad www.myu.edu.pk
6 National University of Computer and
Emerging Sciences, Islamabad Islamabad www.nu.edu.pk
7 Riphah International University,
Islamabad Islamabad www.riphah.edu.pk
8 Shifa Tameer-e-Millat University,
Islamabad Islamabad www.stmu.edu.pk
Universities/DAIs chartered by Government of the Punjab
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Ali Institute of Education Lahore www.aie.edu.pk
2 Beaconhouse National University, Lahore Lahore www.bnu.edu.pk
259
3 Forman Christian College, Lahore
(university status) Lahore www.fccollege.edu.pk
4 Global Institute, Lahore Lahore www.global.edu.pk
5 Hajvery University, Lahore Lahore www.hajvery.edu.pk
6 HITEC University, Taxila Taxila www.hitecuni.edu.pk
7 Imperial College of Business Studies,
Lahore Lahore www.imperial.edu.pk
8 Institute of Management Sciences, Lahore Lahore www.pakaims.edu.pk
9 Institute of Southern Punjab, Multan Multan www.usp.edu.pk
10 Lahore Leads University, Lahore Lahore www.leads.edu.pk
11 Lahore School of Economics, Lahore Lahore www.lahoreschoolofecono
mics.edu.pk
12 Lahore Garrison University, Lahore Lahore lgu.edu.pk/
13 Minhaj University, Lahore Lahore www.mul.edu.pk
14 National College of Business
Administration & Economics, Lahore Lahore www.ncbae.edu.pk
15 Nur International University, Lahore Lahore Under construction
16 Qarshi University Lahore www.qu.edu.pk
17 The GIFT University, Gujranwala Gujranwala www.gift.edu.pk
18 The Superior College, Lahore Lahore www.superior.edu.pk
19 The University of Faisalabad, Faisalabad Faisalabad www.tuf.edu.pk
20 University of Central Punjab, Lahore Lahore www.ucp.edu.pk
21 University of Lahore, Lahore Lahore www.uol.edu.pk
22 University of Management & Technology,
Lahore Lahore www.umt.edu.pk
23 University of South Asia, Lahore Lahore www.usa.edu.pk
24 University of Wah, Wah Wah www.uw.edu.pk
260
Universities/DAIs chartered by Government of Sindh
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Baqai Medical University, Karachi Karachi www.baqai.edu.pk
2 Commecs Institute of Business &
Emerging Sciences, Karachi Karachi
www.commecsinstitute.
edu.pk
3 Dadabhoy Institute of Higher
Education,Karachi Karachi www.dadabhoy.edu.pk
4 DHA Suffa University, Karachi Karachi www.dsu.edu.pk
5 Greenwich University, Karachi Karachi www.greenwichuniversity.
edu.pk
6 Hamdard University, Karachi Karachi www.hamdard.edu.pk
7 Habib University, Karachi Karachi www.habib.edu.pk
8 Indus University, Karachi Karachi www.indus.edu.pk
9 Indus Valley School of Art and
Architecture, Karachi Karachi www.indusvalley.edu.pk
10 Institute of Business Management,
Karachi Karachi www.iobm.edu.pk
11 Institute of Business and Technology,
Karachi Karachi www.biztek.edu.pk
12 Iqra University, Karachi Karachi www.iqra.edu.pk
13 Isra University, Hyderabad Hyderabad www.isra.edu.pk
14 Jinnah University for Women, Karachi Karachi www.juw.edu.pk
15 Karachi Institute of Economics &
Technology, Karachi Karachi www.pafkiet.edu.pk
16 KASB Institute of Technology, Karachi Karachi www.kasbit.edu.pk
17 Karachi School for Business & Leadership Karachi www.ksbl.edu.pk
18 Muhammad Ali Jinnah University,
Karachi Karachi www.jinnah.edu
19 Newport Institute of Communications &
Economics, Karachi Karachi www.newports.edu.pk
20 Preston Institute of Management, Science
and Technology, Karachi Karachi pimsat-khi.edu.pk
21 Preston University, Karachi Karachi www.preston.edu.pk
22 Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Institute of
Sc. & Technology (SZABIST), Karachi Karachi www.szabist.edu.pk
261
23 Shaheed Benazir Bhutto City University,
Karachi Karachi www.sbbcu.edu.pk
24 Sir Syed University of Engg. &
Technology, Karachi Karachi www.ssuet.edu.pk
25 Sindh Institute of Medical Sciences,
Karachi Karachi www.siut.org
26 Textile Institute of Pakistan, Karachi Karachi www.tip.edu.pk
27 The Nazeer Hussian University, Karachi Karachi www.nhu.edu.pk
28 Zia-ud-Din University, Karachi Karachi www.zu.edu.pk
29 Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Dewan
University, Karachi Karachi Under Construction
Universities/DAIs chartered by Government of Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Abasyn University, Peshawar Peshawar www.abasyn.edu.pk
2
CECOS University of Information
Technology and Emerging Sciences,
Peshawar
Peshawar www.cecos.edu.pk
3 City University of Science and
Information Technology, Peshawar Peshawar www.cityuniversity.edu.pk
4 Gandhara University, Peshawar Peshawar www.gandhara.edu.pk
5 Ghulam Ishaq Khan Institute of
Engineering Sciences & Technology, Topi Topi www.giki.edu.pk
6 Iqra National University, Peshawar Peshawar www.iqrapsh.edu.pk
7 Northern University, Nowshera Nowshera www.northern.edu.pk
8 Preston University, Kohat Kohat www.preston.edu.pk
9 Qurtaba University of Science and
Information Technology, D.I. Khan D.I.Khan www.qurtuba.edu.pk
10 Sarhad University of Science and
Information Technology, Peshawar Peshawar www.suit.edu.pk
262
Universities/DAIs chartered by Government of Balochistan
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1 Al-Hamd Islamic University, Quetta Quetta http://www.aiu.edu.pk
Universities/DAIs chartered by Government of Azad Jammu & Kashmir
S.
No University/DAI Name
Main
Campus Website Address
1
Al-Khair University, AJ&K
(The University is restricted for
MS/M.Phil/PhD admissions/programs and
can only offer admissions upto Masters’
level at its Bhimber campus, AJK, from
Fall 2014)
Bhimber www.alkhair.edu.pk
2 Mohi-ud-Din Islamic University, AJK Nerain Sharif http://www.miu.edu.pk
Source:
www.hec.gov.pk/english/universities/Pages/DAIs/HEC-Recognized-Universities.aspx,
(as on 14.04. 2015)
263
APPENDIX-B:
HEC RECOGNIZED 103 PUBLIC SECTOR UNIVERSITIES
S# University/DAI Name
1 COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Islamabad
2 Karakurum International University, Gilgit, Gilgit Baltistan
3 National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad (NUML)
4 National University of Sciences & Technology, Rawalpindi/ Islamabad (NUST)
5 Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad
6 Virtual University of Pakistan, Lahore
7 Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan
8 Government College University, Faisalabad
9 Government College University, Lahore
10 Ghazi University, Dera Ghazi Khan
11 Government Sadiq College Women University, Bahawalpur
12 Government College for Women University, Sialkot
13 Islamia University, Bahawalpur
14 Information Technology University of the Punjab, Lahore
15 Lahore College for Women University, Lahore
16 Muhammad Nawaz Shareef University of Agriculture, Multan
17 University of Education, Lahore
18 University of Engineering & Technology, Lahore
19 University of Gujrat, Gujrat
20 University of Sargodha, Sargodha
21 University of the Punjab, Lahore
22 The Women University, Multan
23 Sukkur Institute of Business Administration
24 University of Engineering & Technology, Peshawar
25 University of Peshawar, Peshawar
26 Hazara University, Mansehra
27 University of Science & Technology, Bannu
28 University of Swabi
29 Balochistan University of Information Technology & Management Sciences,
Quetta
30 Sardar Bahadur Khan Women University, Quetta
31 University of Balochistan, Quetta
264
APPENDIX-C:
HEC RECOGNIZED 74 PRIVATE SECTOR UNIVERSITIES
S# University/DAI Name
1 Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS), Lahore
2 National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences, Islamabad
3 Riphah International University, Islamabad
4 Foundation University, Islamabad
5 Global Institute, Lahore
6 Beaconhouse National University, Lahore
7 Forman Christian College, Lahore
8 Imperial College of Business Studies, Lahore
9 Institute of Southern Punjab, Multan
10 Lahore School of Economics, Lahore
11 Lahore Garrison University, Lahore
12 Minhaj University, Lahore
13 National College of Business Administration & Economics, Lahore
14 The Superior College, Lahore
15 University of Central Punjab, Lahore
16 University of Lahore, Lahore
17 University of Management & Technology, Lahore
18 University of South Asia, Lahore
19 Hamdard University, Karachi
20 Iqra University, Karachi
21 Muhammad Ali Jinnah University, Karachi
22 Ghulam Ishaq Khan Institute of Engineering Sciences & Technology, Topi,
KPK
23 Preston University, Kohat, KPK
265
APPENDIX-D:
DETAIL OF FULL TIME FACULTY MEMBERS IN HEIS
Year-2012-13 Faculty %age
of PhD
Faculty PhD Non-PhD Total
Public 7449 16891 24340 30.60
Private 1804 8300 10104 17.85
Overall 9253 25191 34444 26.86
Source: HEC annual report for the year 2012-13
266
APPENDIX-E:
DETERMINING SAMPLE SIZE FOR FINITE POPULATION
Sample size for finite population (known target population) can also be determined with the
help of Krejcie and Morgan Table of determining sample size for finite population.
267
APPENDIX-F:
HEC RECOGNIZED 74 PRIVATE SECTOR UNIVERSITIES
Universities/DAIs chartered by the Government of Pakistan
S.
No University/DAI Name
Total
Faculty Strength
No. of
Respondents Approached
No. of
Response Received
1 Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS), Lahore
390 15 11
2 National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences, Islamabad
289 20 15
3 Riphah International University, Islamabad 356 15 13
4 Foundation University, Islamabad 332 15 09
5 Capital University of Science & Technology 150 10 07
Universities chartered by Government of the Punjab
6 Global Institute, Lahore 50 5 02
7 Beaconhouse National University, Lahore 85 20 16
8 Forman Christian College, Lahore 225 20 12
9 Imperial College of Business Studies, Lahore 39 10 08
10 Institute of Southern Punjab, Multan 250 15 15
11 Lahore School of Economics, Lahore 200 15 15
12 Lahore Garrison University, Lahore 172 20 16
13 Minhaj University, Lahore 91 12 10
14 National College of Business Administration & Economics, Lahore
75 15 13
15 The Superior College, Lahore 154 10 05
16 University of Central Punjab, Lahore 250 15 07
17 University of Lahore, Lahore 496 35 14
18 University of Management & Technology,
Lahore 372 10 10
19 University of South Asia, Lahore 75 05 04
Universities chartered by Government of Sindh
20 Hamdard University, Karachi 250 20 07
21 Iqra University, Karachi 170 20 12
22 Muhammad Ali Jinnah University, Karachi 150 20 07
Universities chartered by Government of Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa
23 Ghulam Ishaq Khan Institute of Engineering
Sciences & Technology, Topi 100 15 07
Total 4721 357 235
268
APPENDIX-G:
STRATA BASED ON HEC RECOGNIZED
PUBLIC SECTOR UNIVERSITIES Universities chartered by Federal Government
S.
No University/DAI Name
Total
Faculty Strength
No. of
Respondents Approached
No. of
Response Received
1 COMSATS Institute of Information
Technology, Islamabad 2908 60 57
2 Karakurum International University, Gilgit,
Gilgit Baltistan 150 03 03
3 National University of Modern Languages,
Islamabad (NUML) 585 12 12
4 National University of Sciences &
Technology, Rawalpindi/ Islamabad (NUST) 774 15 15
5 Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad 342 08 07
6 Virtual University of Pakistan, Lahore 270 10 09
7 Bahria University, Islamabad 436 12 12
Universities chartered by Government of the Punjab
8 Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan 490 12 12
9 Government College University, Faisalabad 708 15 15
10 Ghazi University, Dera Ghazi Khan 210 08 08
11 Government Sadiq College Women
University, Bahawalpur 200 10 09
12 Government College for Women University,
Sialkot 150 08 08
13 Islamia University, Bahawalpur 505 13 13
14 Information Technology University of the
Punjab, Lahore 40 02 01
15 Lahore College for Women University, Lahore 438 12 12
16 Muhammad Nawaz Shareef University of
Agriculture, Multan 150 05 05
17 University of Education, Lahore 350 08 07
18 University of Engineering & Technology,
Lahore 796 15 15
19 University of Gujrat, Gujrat 690 20 19
20 University of Sargodha, Sargodha 650 15 13
21 University of the Punjab, Lahore 1485 32 32
22 The Women University, Multan 250 10 09
269
Universities chartered by Government of Sindh
S.
No University/DAI Name
Total
Faculty Strength
No. of
Respondents Approached
No. of
Response Received
23 Sukkur Institute of Business Administration 175 05 04
Universities chartered by Government of Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa
24 University of Engineering & Technology,
Peshawar 400 08 08
25 University of Peshawar, Peshawar 670 15 14
26 Hazara University, Mansehra 382 10 10
27 University of Science & Technology, Bannu 125 04 03
28 University of Swabi 100 04 03
Universities chartered by Government of Balochistan
29 Balochistan University of Information
Technology & Management Sciences, Quetta 467 10 09
30 Sardar Bahadur Khan Women University,
Quetta 150 08 06
31 University of Balochistan, Quetta 479 10 10
Total 15525 379 360
272
APPENDIX-I:
SKEWNESS AND KURTOSIS VALUES FOR DATA NORMALITY
CSR and EE CSR and OCB
Item Skewness Kurtosis Item Skewness Kurtosis
CSR1 -.614 -.080 OT4 -.718 .348
CSR2 -.655 .454 OT5 -.759 .438
CSR3 -.504 -.201 OC1 -.592 -.195
CSR4 -.604 .158 OC2 -.569 -.123
CSR5 -.344 .013 OC3 -.464 -.044
CSR6 -.709 .169 OC4 -.646 .241
CSR7 -.383 -.331 OC5 -.342 -.654
CSR8 -.285 -.715 OC6 -.476 -.181
CSR9 -.866 .708 OC7 -.185 -.682
CSR10 -.528 .301 OC8 -.101 -.506
CSR11 -.665 .508 OI1 -.510 -.222
CSR12 -.429 -.159 OI2 -.604 .215
CSR13 -.466 -.055 OI3 -.652 .075
CSR14 -.357 -.298 OI4 -.688 .298
CSR15 -.464 -.050 OI5 -.522 -.069
CSR16 -.610 .077 EE1 -.696 .438
CSR17 -.326 -.278 EE2 -.420 -.089
CSR18 -.706 .386 EE3 -.403 -.025
CSR19 -.397 .003 EE4 -.136 -.685
CSR20 -.492 -.139 EE5 -.697 .863
CSR21 -.711 .242 EE6 -.660 .439
CSR22 -.800 .583 EE7 -.549 .231
CSR23 -.599 .568 EE8 -.201 -.093
CSR24 -.908 .893 EE9 -.584 .326
CSR25 -.424 -.307 EE10 -.560 .356
CSR26 -.284 -.444 EE11 -.517 .140
CSR27 -.378 -.288 OCB1 -.746 .764
CSR28 -.372 .270 OCB2 -.523 .323
CSR29 -.227 .459 OCB3 -.655 .561
JS1 -.819 .805 OCB4 -.697 .639
JS2 -.820 .812 OCB5 -.573 .049
JS3 -.958 1.294 OCB6 -.680 .648
OT1 -.345 -.233 OCB7 -.697 .691
OT2 -.365 -.208 OCB8 -.799 .570
OT3 -.250 -.529
273
APPENDIX-J:
CFA MEASUREMENT MODEL
CFA Measurement Models for CSR
Initial Values of Standardized Parameter Estimates:
x2 =1900.362, df =377, x2/df = 5.041, p = 0.00, NFI = 0.727, GFI = .795,
AGFI = .763, CFI = .768, TLI = .750, RMSEA = 0.083
CFA Measurement Model for OT
274
Initial Values of Standardized Parameter Estimates:
x2 =109.477, df = 5, x2/df = 21.895, p = 0.00, NFI = 0.931, GFI = 1.924,
AGFI = 0.773, CFI = 0.933, TLI = 0.867, RMSEA = 0.189.
CFA Measurement Model for JS
Initial Values of Standardized Parameter Estimates:
x2 =8.139, df = 2, x2/df = 4.07, p = 0.017, NFI = 0.992, GFI = 0.993,
AGFI = 0.978, CFI = 0.994, TLI = 0.991, RMSEA = 0.064
CFA Measurement Model for OI
Initial Values of Standardized Parameter Estimates:
x2 =14.506, df = 5, x2/df = 2.901, p = 0.013, NFI = 0.985, GFI = 0.990,
AGFI = 0.969, CFI = 0.990, TLI = 0.980, RMSEA = 0.057
275
CFA Measurement Model for OC
Initial Values of Standardized Parameter Estimates:
x2 =114.867, df = 9, x2/df = 12..763, p = 0.00, NFI = 0.929, GFI = 0.939,
AGFI = 0.858, CFI = 0.934, TLI = 0.890, RMSEA = 0.142.
CFA Measurement Model for EE
Initial Values of Standardized Parameter Estimates:
x2 = 477.886, df = 44, x2/df = 10.861, p = 0.00, NFI = 0.767, GFI = 0.852,
AGFI = 0.778, CFI = 0.783, TLI = 0.728, RMSEA = 0.130.
CFA Measurement Model for OCB
Initial Values of Standardized Parameter Estimates:
x2 =322.438, df = 20, x2/df = 16.122, p = 0.00, NFI = 0.807, GFI = 0.850,
AGFI = 0.729, CFI = 0.816, TLI = 0.742, RMSEA = 0.161