MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390505025 · doi:10.1002/csr.2699

Employees' positive perceptions of corporate social responsibility create beneficial outcomes for firms and their employees: Organizational pride as a mediator

2024· article· en· W4390505025 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sarah Desirée Schaefer, Peggy Cunningham, Sandra Diehl, Ralf Terlutter

Bibliographic record

VenueCorporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate social responsibilityBusinessPrideLoyaltyPublic relationsPerceptionMeaning (existential)Job satisfactionMarketingPsychologySocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We studied employees' responses to the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) program implemented within the Canadian headquarters of a global consumer goods company. Our study is timely since recent studies indicate that employees place more importance on CSR activities when evaluating current or prospective employers. A novel theoretical contribution of our study is that we combine social identity theory and the theory of appraisal of emotions to better understand employee responses. We developed and tested a model that indicates that employees' evaluation and perceptions of the authenticity of their company's CSR efforts can create both firm‐beneficial (loyalty, trust in management, positive word‐of‐mouth) and employee‐beneficial outcomes (job satisfaction, emotional well‐being). The impact of CSR does not result directly—it is mediated by organizational pride. We also collected qualitative data that suggested that the company's CSR initiatives can contribute to employees' sense of meaning of their work. We discuss implications for researchers and managers, as well as limitations of the study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCorporate Social Responsibility and Environmental ManagementSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207