Influence Of Corporate Social Responsibility As Perceived By Salespeople On Their Ethical Behaviour, Attitudes And Their Turnover Intentions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ethical behavior of salespeople has become a tremendous challenge in the business world. While a great majority of big companies communicate about their Corporate Social Responsibility, this study shows for the first time that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has no influence upon the ethical behavior of salespeople. However, it demonstrates that a reputation associated with CSR can be a precious management tool that can be used to act upon salespeoples satisfaction, organizational commitment and turnover intentions. More specifically, CSR policies, as perceived by salespeople, increase their satisfaction level which, in turn, decreases their turnover intention. Likewise, CSR policies, as perceived by salespeople, increase their organizational commitment, which, in turn, contributes to decrease their turnover intention. In addition, this study provides avenues to explore regarding the tools influencing the ethical behavior of salespeople. The answers of 197 salespeople were collected using an innovative recruitment method with high potentialities - social networks.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".