IMPACT OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ON FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE: MEDIATING ROLE OF QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the influence of perceived corporate social responsibility (CSR) on corporate financial performance (CFP). Based on win-win paradigm, this study uncovers the mediating role of Quality of Work Life (QWL) on CSR-CFP nexus. A questionnaire based cross-sectional survey was conducted to accumulate data from 355 employees working in public and private sector banks of Pakistan. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to examine the hypotheses. The results depict that CSR is positively related with CFP, and employee QWL partially mediates this relationship. According to our noesis, the review of previous literature regarding the association of CSR and CFP reveals that QWL has not been empirically tested as a mediator between these two variables. This study findings proposes that banks engaged in CSR activities are actually establishing a healthy work environment for their employees which ultimately helps the banks to improve their financial performance. This study highlights the importance of CSR activities for enhancing the CFP of the banking sector in the developing countries. Keywords: Corporate Social Responsibility, Quality of Work Life, Agency Theory, Financial Performance.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".