Prior studies suggest that external corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices could lead to positive responses from employees, but little attention has been paid to its potential negative impacts on employees' responses. To have a comprehensive understanding of the relationship in question, we propose that there is a S‐curve relationship between external CSR and labor productivity. Found on samples of Chinese listed firms during the period from 2011 to 2017, we have drawn some conclusions as follows. First, there is a S‐curve relationship between external CSR practices and labor productivity, with labor productivity declining at low and high levels of external CSR but increasing at moderate level of external CSR. Second, internal CSR will moderate the relationship between external CSR and labor productivity that firms affiliated with high internal CSR are more likely to perform better in terms of labor productivity than firms with low internal CSR. However, the proposed negative moderating role of government subsidy on the relationship in question is not supported. It is the match between government subsidy and external CSR that may predict labor productivity.

Based on the behavioral theory of firm and prospect theory, we investigate how corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities will respond to underperformance in past and in future. Using samples of Chinese listed firms from 2011 to 2016, this paper found that CSR increases with the distance by which financial performance in the last year falls below goals and decreases with the distance by which expected financial performance will fall below targets. In addition, the future underperformance will weaken the effect of the past underperformance on CSR. Besides, the value of financial performance in the last year will weaken the impact of underperformance in the last year on CSR and strengthen the impact of underperformance in the next year on CSR. The findings suggest that future studies should take both value of financial performance and performance gaps into consideration to have a better understanding of organizational decisions and behaviors.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the influence of peers’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) on focal firms’ CSR from an integrated perspective. The current study aims to explore whether as peers’ CSR increases focal firms’ CSR would first decrease and then increase. Design/methodology/approach This study is based on a sample consisting of Chinese listed manufacturing firms from 2010 to 2016. Hypotheses are tested by generalized least squares method to minimum heterogeneity and autocorrelation concern. Findings The results show that focal firms’ CSR would first decrease and then increase with the increase in peers’ CSR. Furthermore, this paper found that corporate visibility would stress more value on CSR differentiation strategy and environmental uncertainty would stress more value on CSR conformity strategy, such that the U-shaped relationship would be more pronounced in high corporate visibility or low environmental uncertainty situation. Practical implications The findings may be of interest to the academic researchers and managers. For researchers, it is important to understand how focal firms would practice CSR in response to peers’ CSR, especially through an integrated perspective. For managers, the results show that the best way to invest in CSR activities in response to peers’ CSR follows a U-shaped curve, and corporate visibility and environmental uncertainty are important factors to be considered to make CSR decisions. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature by proposing and examining a U-shaped relationship between peers’ CSR and focal firms’ CSR, which stresses the conformity and differentiation value of CSR simultaneously. Besides, to fully map the effects of peers’ CSR and focal firms’ CSR, this paper considers the moderating roles of internal and external contingencies on this non-linear relationship between the peers’ CSR and focal firms’ CSR.

Purpose Consumers may boycott firms’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities, but little is known about when, why and how they would respond in this way. Based on psychological contract violation and discount principles, the purpose of this paper is to argue that timing and fit of CSR activities are the main dimensions of consumers’ psychological contract. It is posited that CSR activities would be boycotted if consumers perceived violation of their psychological contract, and their altruistic tendency would have a moderating effect on this mechanism. Design/methodology/approach This paper takes the form of an empirical study using a sample of 434 respondents through scene-questionnaire survey in central China. Findings It is found that (1) low fit or reactive CSR activities would induce consumers’ psychological contract violation, and the latter has a more significant influence; (2) perceived CSR is negatively related with consumers’ boycott behaviors, but CSR activities would be boycotted if consumers’ psychological contracts are violated; (3) the negative relationship between perceived CSR and consumers’ boycott behaviors would be strengthened by consumers’ altruistic tendency, and the positive relationship between consumers’ psychological contract violation and their boycott behaviors would also be strengthened by their altruistic tendency. Research limitations/implications This paper has significant theoretical implications, as it answers the question that when, why and how CSR activities would be boycotted. Besides, it contributes to literature on psychological contract for applying it to CSR research field. Furthermore, the double-edged effect of consumers’ altruistic tendency extends literature on pro-social behaviors. Social implications This paper is of interests to corporate management and academics who wish to understand when and why consumers would boycott CSR activities and the factors that would relax consumers’ negative responses. Originality/value This is the first paper that investigates when, why and how CSR activities would be boycotted from the perspective of consumers’ psychological contract violation.

No abstract