Do corporate social responsibility practices yield different business benefits in eastern and western contexts?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which societal culture has a moderating effect on the business benefits of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Design/methodology/approach – A cross-national research design was conducted using survey data collected from 164 firms in Taiwan and 196 firms in Canada. Findings – We found societal differences in the positive influence of CSR on corporate image and employee commitment. Specifically, we found that the relationships between CSR (customer-oriented and employee-oriented) and corporate image were stronger for Taiwanese firms than for Canadian firms. In addition, employee CSR was found to be more strongly associated with higher employee commitment in Taiwan than in Canada. While customer CSR was associated with enhanced customer loyalty, this relationship was similar for firms in both countries. Research limitations/implications – Multi-informants for data collection and longitudinal research design in future research would be required for further understanding of the relationships among the variables in this study. Practical implications – This paper suggests that the business benefits of customer and employee CSR practices may yield relatively greater competitive advantages in East Asian countries where CSR is not as established or taken for granted as in Western countries. Originality/value – This study draws on the strategic perspective to investigate the value of CSR practices yielding different business benefits in contrasting cultural contexts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".