How Do Internal and External CSR Affect Employees' Organizational Identification? A Perspective from the Group Engagement Model

Abstract

The literature examines the impact of firms' corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities on employees' organizational identification without considering that such activities tend to have different targets. This study explores how perceived external CSR (efforts directed toward external stakeholders) and perceived internal CSR (efforts directed toward employees) activities influence employees' organizational identification. In so doing, it examines the alternative underlying mechanisms through which perceived external and internal CSR activities build employees' identification. Applying the taxonomy prescribed by the group engagement model, the study argues that the effects of perceived external and internal CSR flow through two competing mechanisms: perceived external prestige and perceived internal respect, respectively. Further, it is suggested that calling orientation (how employees see their work contributions) moderates the effects induced by these alternative forms of CSR. The model draws on survey data collected from a sample of 414 employees across five large multinationals in Pakistan. The results obtained using structural equation modeling support these hypotheses, reinforcing the notion that internal and external CSR operate through different mediating mechanisms and more interestingly employees' calling orientation moderates these relationships to a significant degree. Theoretical contributions and practical implications of results are discussed in detail.

When Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Meets Organizational Psychology: New Frontiers in Micro-CSR Research, and Fulfilling a Quid Pro Quo through Multilevel Insights

“…With respect to the diversity of conceptual and methodological approaches, these Research Topic articles include a commentary on the history of macro-, meso-, and micro-CSR research (Frederick, 2016), a literature review of micro-CSR theory and research (Glavas, 2016a), conceptually driven theoretical development (Voliotis et al, 2016), experimental research utilizing quantitative and qualitative data (Bridoux et al, 2016; Jones et al, 2016), an assessment of interview data (Seivwright and Unsworth, 2016), an intervention study (Russell et al, 2016), survey-based field research (Glavas, 2016b; Hameed et al, 2016; Jones, 2016; Unsworth et al, 2016), and a meta-analysis (Wiernik et al, 2016). …”

“…Most of the empirical studies among these Research Topic articles focus on employees as the focal stakeholder group, including studies of how employees conceptualize their employer’s responsible or irresponsible practices (Seivwright and Unsworth, 2016; Voliotis et al, 2016), how they respond to CSR practices (Glavas, 2016b; Hameed et al, 2016; Jones, 2016), and their work behaviors that contribute to their employer’s CSR initiatives (Russell et al, 2016; Seivwright and Unsworth, 2016; Wiernik et al, 2016). Other Research Topic articles focus on other individual-level stakeholders, including job seekers (Bridoux et al, 2016; Jones et al, 2016), customers (Bridoux et al, 2016), and members of the general public (Unsworth et al, 2016).…”

“…Some articles focus on the intersection of business practices and climate change (Unsworth et al, 2016) and companies’ environmental practices (Russell et al, 2016; Wiernik et al, 2016), whereas other articles focus on employee volunteerism (Jones, 2016) or both community involvement and environmentally sustainable business practices (Jones et al, 2016). Another article focuses on the distinction between internal vs. external CSR practices (Hameed et al, 2016), and other articles focus on multiple types of CSR practices examined separately (Bridoux et al, 2016; Seivwright and Unsworth, 2016) or together as a broader CSR concept or composite (Frederick, 2016; Glavas, 2016a,b; Voliotis et al, 2016). These Research Topic articles also include critical analyses and empirical tests of the veracity of beliefs and assumptions held by societal members and scholars alike (Jones, 2016; Wiernik et al, 2016), and explicit considerations of contexts in which stakeholders react negatively to well-intentioned CSR practices (Jones et al, 2016) and to social irresponsible practices (Voliotis et al, 2016).…”

“…In another survey-based field study, Hameed et al (2016) explore “new frontiers” that can meaningfully inform CSR theory and practice in their article titled How do internal and external CSR affect employees’ organizational identification? A perspective from the group engagement model.…”

The Impact of Perceived Internal Corporate Social Responsibility on Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Micro-Perspective Analysis

“…However, perception linked to internal corporate social responsibility is cognition for practices and polices related to the physiological and psychological wellbeing of employees (Hameed, Riaz, Arain, & Farooq, 2016;Azim, M. T., Diyab, & Al-Sabaan,, 2014). These practices have significant roles in employee behavior at work (Cable & Judge, 1996).…”